# Untitled Document

Motovilov, Alexander K.

Removal of the Resolvent-like Dependence on the Spectral Parameter   
from Perturbations<sup>1</sup><sup>1</sup>1Published in Proceedings of the International Congress on Industrial and Applied Mathematics (Hamburg, July 1995), Zeitschrift für Angewandte Mathematik und Mechanik (ZAMM), Special Issue 2 (ISBN 3-05-501745-5), 229–232 (1996). LANL E-print math.SP/9810044. 

The spectral problem $`(A+V(z))\psi =z\psi `$ is considered with $`A`$, a self-adjoint operator. The perturbation $`V(z)`$ is assumed to depend on the spectral parameter $`z`$ as resolvent of another self-adjoint operator $`A^{}:`$ $`V(z)=`$ $`B(A^{}z)^1B^{}`$. It is supposed that the operator $`B`$ has a finite Hilbert-Schmidt norm and spectra of the operators $`A`$ and $`A^{}`$ are separated. Conditions are formulated when the perturbation $`V(z)`$ may be replaced with a “potential” $`W`$ independent of $`z`$ and such that the operator $`H=A+W`$ has the same spectrum and the same eigenfunctions (more precisely, a part of spectrum and a respective part of eigenfunctions system) as the initial spectral problem. The operator $`H`$ is constructed as a solution of the non–linear operator equation $`H=A+V(H)`$ with a specially chosen operator–valued function $`V(H)`$. In the case if the initial spectral problem corresponds to a two–channel variant of the Friedrichs model, a basis property of the eigenfunction system of the operator $`H`$ is proved. A scattering theory is developed for $`H`$ in the case where the operator $`A`$ has continuous spectrum.

1.  Introduction 

Perturbations, depending on the spectral parameter (usually energy of system) arise in a lot of quantum–mechanical problems typically (see e.g. Ref. ) as a result of dividing the Hilbert space $``$ of physical system in two subspaces, $`=_1_2`$. The first one, say $`_1`$, is interpreted as a space of some “external” degrees of freedom. The second one, $`_2`$, is associated with an “internal” structure of the system. The Hamiltonian $`𝐇`$ of the system looks as a matrix,

$$𝐇=\left[\begin{array}{cc}A_1& B_{12}\\ B_{21}& A_2\end{array}\right]$$
(1)   
with $`A_\alpha `$, $`\alpha =1,2`$, the channel Hamiltonians (self-adjoint operators in $`_\alpha `$) and $`B_{12}`$, $`B_{21}=B_{12}^{}`$, the coupling operators. Reducing the spectral problem $`𝐇U=zU`$ , $`U=\{u_1,u_2\}`$ to the channel $`\alpha `$ only one gets the spectral problem

$$[A_\alpha +V_\alpha (z)]u_\alpha =zu_\alpha ,\alpha =1,2,$$
(2)   
where the perturbation

$$V_\alpha (z)=B_{\alpha \beta }(A_\beta zI_\beta )^1B_{\beta \alpha },\beta \alpha ,$$
(3)   
depends on the spectral parameter $`z`$ as the resolvent $`(A_\beta zI_\beta )^1`$ of the Hamiltonian $`A_\beta `$. Here, by $`I_\beta `$ we understand the identity operator in $`_\beta `$.   
The present paper is a summary of the author’s works — considering a possibility to “remove” the energy dependence from perturbations of the type (3). Namely, in — we search for such a new perturbation (“potential”) $`W_\alpha `$ not depending on $`z`$ that spectrum of the Hamiltonian $`H_\alpha =A_\alpha +W_\alpha `$ is (a part of) the spectrum of the problem (2). At the same time, the respective eigenvectors of $`H_\alpha `$ become also those for (2). An interest to the problem of such a removal of dependence on the spectral parameter from perturbations is stimulated in particular by a rather conceptual question (see for instance Ref. ) concerning a use of the two–body energy–dependent potentials in few–body nonrelativistic scattering problems. Since the energies of pair subsystems are not fixed in the N–body (N$`3`$) system, a direct embedding of such potentials into the few–body Hamiltonian is impossible. Thus, the replacements of the type (3) energy–dependent potentials with the respective new potentials $`W_\alpha `$ could be considered as a way to overcome this difficulty (see Ref.  for discussion).   
The Hamiltonians $`H_\alpha `$ are found in — as solutions of the non-linear operator equations (first appeared in Ref. )

$$H_\alpha =A_\alpha +V_\alpha (H_\alpha ).$$
(4)   
The operator-value function $`V_\alpha (Y)`$ of the operator variable $`Y`$, $`Y:_\alpha _\alpha ,`$ is defined by us in such a way \[see formula (5)\] that eigenfunctions $`\psi `$ of $`Y`$, $`Y\psi =z\psi `$, become automatically those for $`V_\alpha (Y)`$ and $`V_\alpha (Y)\psi =V_\alpha (z)\psi .`$ We have proved a solvability of Eq. (4) in the case where the Hilbert–Schmidt norm $`B_{\alpha \beta }_2`$ of the operators $`B_{\alpha \beta }`$ satisfies the condition $`B_{\alpha \beta }_2<\frac{1}{2}\mathrm{dist}\{\sigma (A_1),\sigma (A_2)\}`$ in supposition that spectra $`\sigma (A_\alpha )`$ of the operators $`A_\alpha `$ are separated, $`\mathrm{dist}\{\sigma (A_1),\sigma (A_2)\}>0`$ (see Theorem 1).   
In Ref. , the problem of the removal of energy dependence from the type (3) perturbations was considered in details when one of the operators $`A_\alpha `$ is the Schrödinger operator in $`L_2(\mathrm{I}\mathrm{R}^n)`$ and another one has a discrete spectrum only. The report  announces the results concerning the equations (4) and properties of their solutions $`H_\alpha `$ in a rather more general situation where the Hamiltonian $`𝐇`$ may be rewritten in terms of a two-channel variant of the Friedrichs model investigated by O.A.Ladyzhenskaya and L.D.Faddeev . In particular in  and  a scattering problem is studied for $`H_\alpha `$ in the case if $`A_\alpha `$ has continuous spectrum and the basis property of the eigenfunction system of the operator $`H_\alpha `$ is shown.   
In the paper , we specify the assertions from  and give proofs for them. Also, we pay attention to an important circumstance disclosing a nature of solutions of the basic equations (4). Thing is that the operators $`W_\alpha =V_\alpha (H_\alpha )`$ may be present in the form $`W_\alpha =B_{\alpha \beta }Q_{\beta \alpha }`$ with $`Q_{\beta \alpha }`$ satisfying the stationary Riccati equations (7). Exactly the same equations always arise if one makes a block diagonalization of the type (1) operator matrices in the way described below in Lemma 1, so that the solutions $`H_\alpha `$, $`\alpha =1,2,`$ of Eqs. (4) determine in fact parts of the operator $`𝐇`$ in respective invariant subspaces. The idea of such a diagonalization was applied already by S.Okubo  to some quantum–mechanical Hamiltonians. It was used later by V.A.Malyshev and R.A.Minlos  in a method of construction of invariant subspaces for a class of self–adjoint operators in statistical physics. This idea was used also in the recent paper  by V.M.Adamjan and H.Langer who studied spectral properties of a class of the type (2) spectral problems and in particular, a possibility to choose among their solutions a Riesz basis in $`_\alpha `$.

2.  Construction of the operators $`H_\alpha `$ 

We study the spectral problem (2) with perturbation $`V_\alpha (z)`$ given by (3). We suppose that $`B_{\beta \alpha }`$ is a linear operator from $`_\alpha `$ to $`_\beta `$ with a finite Hilbert–Schmidt norm $`B_{\beta \alpha }_2`$, $`B_{\beta \alpha }_2<\mathrm{}`$. A goal of the work is a construction of such an operator $`H_\alpha `$ that its each eigenfunction $`u_\alpha ,H_\alpha u_\alpha =zu_\alpha `$, together with eigenvalue $`z`$, satisfies Eq. (2). The operator $`H_\alpha `$ is searched for as a solution of the non-linear operator equation (4). To obtain this equation we introduce the following operator-value function $`V_\alpha (Y)`$ of the operator variable $`Y:`$

$$V_\alpha (Y)=B_{\alpha \beta }\underset{\sigma _\beta }{}E_\beta (d\mu )B_{\beta \alpha }(Y\mu I_\alpha )^1,$$
(5)   
$`Y:`$ $`_\alpha _\alpha `$ . Here, $`\sigma _\beta `$ is the spectrum and $`E_\beta `$, the spectral measure of the operator $`A_\beta `$. The integral over $`E_\beta `$ in (5) for $`Y`$ such that $`\underset{\mu \sigma _\beta }{sup}(Y\mu I_\alpha )^1<\mathrm{}`$ may be constructed in the same way as the usual integrals of scalar functions over spectral measure. For $`B_{\beta \alpha }_2<\mathrm{}`$, the existence of this integral as a bounded operator from $`_\alpha `$ to $`_\beta `$ is proved in . We notice that if $`\varphi `$ is an eigenfunction of $`Y`$, $`Y\varphi =z\varphi `$, then automatically $`V_\alpha (Y)\varphi =B_{\alpha \beta }\underset{\sigma _\beta }{}E_\beta (d\mu )B_{\beta \alpha }(z\mu )^1\varphi =B_{\alpha \beta }(zA_\beta )^1B_{\beta \alpha }\varphi =V_\alpha (z)\varphi .`$ This means that $`H_\alpha `$ satisfies with its eigenfunctions $`\psi _\alpha `$ the relation $`H_\alpha \psi _\alpha =(A_\alpha +V_\alpha (H_\alpha ))\psi _\alpha `$ and one can spread this relation over all the linear combinations of the eigenfunctions. Supposing that the eigenfunctions system of $`H_\alpha `$ is dense in $`_\alpha `$ one spreads this equation over all the domain $`𝒟(A_\alpha )`$. As a result we come to the desired basic equation (4) for $`H_\alpha `$ (see also — and Refs. therein). Eq. (4) means that the construction of the operator $`H_\alpha `$ is reduced to the searching for the operator $`Q_{\beta \alpha }=\underset{\sigma _\beta }{}E_\beta (d\mu )B_{\beta \alpha }(H_\alpha \mu I_\alpha )^1.`$ Since $`H_\alpha =A_\alpha +B_{\alpha \beta }Q_{\beta \alpha }`$, we have

$$Q_{\beta \alpha }=\underset{\sigma _\beta }{}E_\beta (d\mu )B_{\beta \alpha }(A_\alpha +B_{\alpha \beta }Q_{\beta \alpha }\mu I_\alpha )^1,\beta \alpha .$$
(6)   
We restrict ourselves to a study of Eq. (6) solvability only in the case where spectra $`\sigma _1`$ and $`\sigma _2`$ are separated, $`d_0=\mathrm{dist}(\sigma _1,\sigma _2)>0.`$ Applying to Eq. (6) the contracting mapping theorem, one comes to the following:

T h e o r e m

1. Let $`M_{\beta \alpha }(\delta )`$ be a set of bounded operators $`X,`$ $`X:`$ $`_\alpha _\beta `$, satisfying the inequality $`X`$ $`\delta `$ with $`\delta >0`$. If this $`\delta `$ and the norm $`B_{\alpha \beta }_2`$ satisfy the condition $`B_{\alpha \beta }_2<d_0min\{\frac{1}{1+\delta },\frac{\delta }{1+\delta ^2}\}`$, then Eq. (6) is uniquely solvable in $`M_{\beta \alpha }(\delta )`$. In particular the equation (6) is uniquely solvable in the unit ball $`M_{\beta \alpha }(1)`$ for any $`B_{\alpha \beta }`$ such that $`B_{\alpha \beta }_2<\frac{1}{2}d_0.`$

Eq. (6) can be rewritten (see , ) also in symmetric form as a stationary Riccati equation,

$$Q_{\beta \alpha }A_\alpha A_\beta Q_{\beta \alpha }+Q_{\beta \alpha }B_{\alpha \beta }Q_{\beta \alpha }=B_{\beta \alpha }.$$
(7)   
One finds immediately from Eqs. (7), $`\alpha =1,2`$, that if $`Q_{\beta \alpha }`$ gives a solution $`H_\alpha =A_\alpha +B_{\alpha \beta }Q_{\beta \alpha }`$ of the problem (4) in the channel $`\alpha `$ then $`Q_{\alpha \beta }=Q_{\beta \alpha }^{}=\underset{\sigma _\alpha }{}(H_\alpha ^{}\mu I_\alpha )^1B_{\alpha \beta }E_\beta (d\mu )`$ gives an analogous solution $`H_\beta =A_\beta +B_{\beta \alpha }Q_{\alpha \beta }`$ in the channel $`\beta `$.

L e m m a

1. Let $`Q_{\beta \alpha }`$ and $`Q_{\alpha \beta }=Q_{\beta \alpha }^{}`$ be solutions of Eqs. (7). Then the transform $`𝐇^{}=𝒬^1𝐇𝒬`$ with $`𝒬=\left[\begin{array}{cc}I_1\hfill & \hfill Q_{12}\\ Q_{21}\hfill & \hfill I_2\end{array}\right]`$ reduces the operator $`𝐇`$ to the block–diagonal form, $`𝐇^{}=\mathrm{diag}\{H_1,H_2\}`$ with $`H_\alpha =A_\alpha +B_{\alpha \beta }Q_{\beta \alpha }.`$

One can find assertions analogous to Lemma 1 in Refs.  and . A solvability (for sufficiently small $`B_{\alpha \beta }`$) of the equation (7) was proved in ,  for different situations and by rather different methods but also in the supposition $`\mathrm{dist}\{\sigma (A_1),\sigma (A_2)\}>0`$.

R e m a r k

1. Let $`X_\alpha =I_\alpha Q_{\alpha \beta }Q_{\beta \alpha }=I_\alpha +Q_{\alpha \beta }Q_{\alpha \beta }^{}`$. It follows from Lemma 1 that the operator $`\stackrel{~}{𝒬}=𝒬X^{1/2}`$ with $`X=\mathrm{diag}\{X_1,X_2\}`$ is unitary. Thus, the operator $`𝐇^{\prime \prime }=\stackrel{~}{𝒬}^{}𝐇\stackrel{~}{𝒬}=X^{1/2}𝐇^{}X^{1/2}`$ becomes self-adjoint in $``$. Since $`𝐇^{\prime \prime }=\mathrm{diag}\{H_1^{\prime \prime },H_1^{\prime \prime }\}`$ with $`H_\alpha ^{\prime \prime }=X_\alpha ^{1/2}H_\alpha X_\alpha ^{1/2}`$, the operators $`H_\alpha ^{\prime \prime }`$, $`\alpha =1,2,`$ are self-adjoint on $`𝒟(A_\alpha )`$ in $`_\alpha `$. Moreover, the operators $`𝐇^{(\alpha )}=\stackrel{~}{𝒬}\mathrm{diag}\{H_\alpha ^{\prime \prime },0\}\stackrel{~}{𝒬}^{}=`$ $`𝒬\mathrm{diag}\{H_\alpha ,0\}𝒬^1`$ represent parts of the Hamiltonian $`𝐇`$ in the corresponding invariant subspaces $`^{(\alpha )}=\{f:f=\{f_\alpha ,f_\beta \},f_\alpha _\alpha ,f_\beta =Q_{\beta \alpha }f_\alpha \}`$ (see also Refs. , ).

3.  Spectra of the Hamiltonians $`H_\alpha `$ and basis properties of their eigenfunctions 

Let us suppose that $`Q_{\beta \alpha }`$ and $`Q_{\alpha \beta }=Q_{\beta \alpha }^{}`$ are solutions of Eqs. (6) and (7) which are spoken about in Theorem 1. Since we take $`B_{\alpha \beta }`$ with $`B_{\alpha \beta }B_{\alpha \beta }_2<d_0/2`$ and $`Q_{\beta \alpha }<1`$, the spectra $`\sigma (H_1)`$ and $`\sigma (H_2)`$ do not intersect (actually, when these spectra are discussed in Refs. , , a more general case is also considered where not necessary $`Q_{\beta \alpha }<1`$). By Lemma 1, the operator $`𝐇^{}=\mathrm{diag}\{H_1,H_2\}`$ is connected with the (self-adjoint) operator $`𝐇`$ by a similarity transform. Thus, the spectra $`\sigma (H_1)`$ and $`\sigma (H_2)`$ of the operators $`H_\alpha `$, $`\alpha =1,2`$, are real and $`\sigma (H_1)\sigma (H_2)=\sigma (𝐇)`$. Continuous spectrum $`\sigma _c(H_\alpha )`$ of every $`H_\alpha `$ coincides with that, $`\sigma _\alpha ^c`$, of the operator $`A_\alpha `$, $`\sigma _c(H_\alpha )=\sigma _\alpha ^c`$, since due to $`B_{\alpha \beta }_2<+\mathrm{}`$, the potential $`W_\alpha =B_{\alpha \beta }Q_{\beta \alpha }`$ is a compact operator.   
For more concrete statements concerning the spectra of the operators $`H_\alpha `$ we accept some presuppositions restricting us as regards $`𝐇`$ to the case of a two–channel variant of the Friedrichs model in the form  reproducing often encountered quantum–mechanical situations. At first, we assume that the operator $`𝐇`$ is defined in that representation where the operators $`A_\alpha ,`$ $`\alpha =1,2,`$ are diagonal. We suppose that the continuous spectra $`\sigma _\alpha ^c`$ are absolutely continuous and consist of a finite number of finite (and may be one or two infinite) intervals. At second, we suppose that discrete spectra $`\sigma _\alpha ^d`$ of the operators $`A_\alpha `$, $`\alpha =1,2,`$ do not intersect with $`\sigma _\alpha ^c`$, $`\sigma _\alpha ^d\sigma _\alpha ^c=\mathrm{}`$, and consist of a finite number of points with finite multiplicity. The coupling operators $`B_{\alpha \beta }`$ are supposed to be the integral ones with sufficiently quickly decreasing (in the case of unbounded $`\sigma _\alpha ^c`$) kernels being smooth in the Hölder sense (see Refs. ,  for details).   
With these presuppositions the continuous spectrum $`\sigma _c(𝐇)=\sigma _1^c\sigma _2^c`$ of the operator $`𝐇`$ is absolutely continuous and its part $`𝐇^c`$ acting in respective invariant subspace, is unitary equivalent to the operator $`𝐇_0=A_1^{(0)}A_2^{(0)}`$ with $`A_\alpha ^{(0)},`$ $`\alpha =1,2,`$ the part of $`A_\alpha `$ acting in the invariant subspace $`_\alpha ^c`$ corresponding to $`\sigma _\alpha ^c`$. Namely, there exist the wave operators $`U^{(+)}`$ and $`U^{()},`$ $`U^{(\pm )}=\left(\begin{array}{cc}u_{11}^{(\pm )}\hfill & \hfill u_{12}^{(\pm )}\\ u_{21}^{(\pm )}\hfill & \hfill u_{22}^{(\pm )}\end{array}\right)=`$ $`s\underset{t\mathrm{}}{lim}\mathrm{e}^{i𝐇t}\mathrm{e}^{i𝐇_0t},`$ with the properties: $`𝐇U^{(\pm )}=U^{(\pm )}𝐇_0,`$ $`U^{(\pm )}U^{(\pm )}=I,`$ $`U^{(\pm )}U^{(\pm )}=IP_d.`$ Here, by $`P_d`$ we understand the orthogonal projector on the subspace corresponding to the discrete spectrum $`\sigma _d(𝐇)`$ of $`𝐇`$. The kernel $`u_{\alpha \alpha }^{(\pm )}(\lambda ,\lambda ^{})`$ of the component $`u_{\alpha \alpha }^{(\pm )},\alpha =1,2,`$ represents a (generalized) eigenfunction of continuous spectrum of the problem (2) for $`z=\lambda ^{}\pm i0,`$ $`\lambda ^{}\sigma _\alpha ^c`$. At the same time $`u_{\alpha \beta }^{(\pm )}(\lambda ,\lambda ^{})`$ is the problem (2) eigenfunction corresponding to $`\lambda ^{}\sigma _\beta ^c`$.   
By $`U_j,`$ $`j=1,2,\mathrm{}`$, we denote eigenvectors, $`U_j=\{u_1^{(j)},u_2^{(j)}\},`$ $`U_j=1,`$ and by $`z_j,`$ $`z_j\mathrm{I}\mathrm{R}`$, the respective eigenvalues of $`\sigma _d(𝐇)`$. We assume that in the case of multiple discrete eigenvalues, certain $`z_j`$ may be repeated in the numeration. The component $`u_\alpha ^{(j)}`$ of the vector $`U_j`$ is a solution of Eq. (2) for $`z=z_j`$.   
Let us return, with the presuppositions above, to the operators $`H_\alpha `$. First, let us assume $`\sigma _d(H_\alpha )\mathrm{}`$. Then, it follows from the construction of the function (5) that if $`z\sigma _d(H_\alpha )`$ then this $`z`$ becomes automatically a point of the discrete spectrum of the initial spectral problem (2). At the same time $`\psi _\alpha `$ becomes its eigenfunction. We shall denote the eigenfunctions of the $`H_\alpha `$ by $`\psi _\alpha ^{(j)},`$ $`\psi _\alpha ^{(j)}=u_\alpha ^{(j)}`$, keeping for them the same numeration as for the eigenvectors $`U_j`$, $`U_j=\{u_\alpha ^{(j)},u_\beta ^{(j)}\},`$ of the Hamiltonian $`𝐇`$, $`𝐇U_j=z_jU_j`$, $`z_j\sigma _d(𝐇).`$ Respective eigenvectors of the adjoint operator $`H_\alpha ^{}`$, $`H_\alpha ^{}=A_\alpha +Q_{\beta \alpha }^{}B_{\beta \alpha },`$ are $`\stackrel{~}{\psi }_\alpha ^{(j)}=\psi _\alpha ^{(j)}Q_{\alpha \beta }u_\beta ^{(j)}`$. Due to Lemma 1, $`\sigma _d(𝐇)=\sigma _d(H_1)\sigma _d(H_2).`$ Since in conditions of Theorem 1 $`\sigma (H_1)\sigma (H_2)=\mathrm{}`$, we have also $`\sigma _d(H_1)\sigma _d(H_2)=\mathrm{}`$.   
Dealing with the continuous spectrum of $`H_\alpha `$ we take into account the fact that the solutions $`Q_{\beta \alpha }`$ and $`Q_{\alpha \beta }=Q_{\beta \alpha }^{}`$ of Eqs. (6) and (7) corresponding to the operators $`B_{\alpha \beta }`$ with Hölder kernels, have the Hölder kernels themselves. The same is true as well for $`W_\alpha =B_{\alpha \beta }Q_{\beta \alpha }`$. Then we can prove ,  that the operators $`\mathrm{\Psi }_\alpha ^{(\pm )}=u_{\alpha \alpha }^{(\pm )}`$ turn out to be the wave operators between $`H_\alpha `$ and $`A_\alpha ^{(0)}`$: $`\mathrm{\Psi }_\alpha ^{(\pm )}=s\underset{t\mathrm{}}{lim}\mathrm{exp}(iH_\alpha t)\mathrm{exp}(iA_\alpha ^{(0)}t)`$ and $`H_\alpha \mathrm{\Psi }^{(\pm )}=\mathrm{\Psi }_\alpha ^{(\pm )}A_\alpha ^{(0)}`$. At the same time the operators $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Psi }}_\alpha ^{(\pm )}=\mathrm{\Psi }_\alpha ^{(\pm )}Q_{\alpha \beta }u_{\beta \alpha }^{(\pm )}`$ become those ones for $`H_\alpha ^{}`$.

T h e o r e m

2. The following orthogonality relations take place: $`\psi _\alpha ^{(j)},\stackrel{~}{\psi }_\alpha ^{(k)}=\delta _{jk},`$ $`\mathrm{\Psi }_\alpha ^{(\pm )}\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Psi }}_\alpha ^{(\pm )}=I_\alpha |_{_\alpha ^c},`$ $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Psi }}_\alpha ^{(\pm )}\psi _\alpha ^{(j)}=0`$ and $`\mathrm{\Psi }_\alpha ^{(\pm )}\stackrel{~}{\psi }_\alpha ^{(j)}=0.`$ Also, the completeness relations are valid, $`{\displaystyle \underset{j:H_\alpha u_\alpha ^{(j)}=z_ju_\alpha ^{(j)}}{}}\psi _\alpha ^{(j)},\stackrel{~}{\psi }_\alpha ^{(j)}+\mathrm{\Psi }_\alpha ^{(\pm )}\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Psi }}_\alpha ^{(\pm )}=I_\alpha ,\alpha =1,2.`$ For all this $`S^{(\alpha )}=`$ $`\mathrm{\Psi }_\alpha ^{()1}\mathrm{\Psi }_\alpha ^{(+)}=`$ $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Psi }}_\alpha ^{()}\mathrm{\Psi }_\alpha ^{(+)}=`$ $`\mathrm{\Psi }_\alpha ^{()}X_\alpha \mathrm{\Psi }_\alpha ^{(+)}`$ represents a scattering operator for a system described by the Hamiltonian $`H_\alpha `$. In fact, this operator coincides with the component $`S_{\alpha \alpha }`$ of the scattering operator $`S`$, $`S=U^{()}U^{(+)}`$, for a system described by the two–channel Hamiltonian $`𝐇`$.

Acknowledgements   
The author is thankful to Prof. R.Mennicken for his interest to this work and to Professors V.M.Adamjan, H.Langer, R.A.Minlos and A.A.Shkalikov for valuable discussions. Especially, the author is grateful to Prof. B.S.Pavlov and Dr. K.A.Makarov for useful remarks and stimulating support. 

4.  References 

* R.L.Jaffe, R.L., Low, F.E.: Connection between quark–model eigenstates and low–energy scattering; Phys. Rev. D19 (1979), 2105–2118; Simonov, Yu.A.: Hadron–hadron interaction in the compound–bag model; Yadernaya Fiz. 36 (1982), 722–731 \[Russian\].
* Motovilov, A.K.: The removal of an energy dependence from the interaction in two–body systems; J.Math.Phys. 32 (1991), 3509–3518.
* Motovilov, A.K.: Potentials appearing after the removal of an energy dependence and scattering by them; Proc. Intern. Workshop “Mathematical Aspects of the Scattering Theory and Applications” (St.Petersburg, 1991), 101–108.
* Motovilov, A.K.: Removal of the energy dependence from the resolvent–like energy–dependent interactions; Preprint JINR E5–94–259 \[nucl–th/9505030\] (available via e–mail from Los–Alamos e–print database by sending the empty message to e–address nucl-th@xxx.lanl.gov with Subject: get 9505030); to appear in Teor. Mat. Fiz. 104 (1995).
* McKellar, B.H.J., McKay C.M.: Formal scattering theory for energy–dependent potentials; Aust.J.Phys.36 (1983)., 607–616; Schmid, E.W.: The problem of using energy–dependent nucleon–nucleon potentials in nuclear physics; Helv. Phys.Acta 60 (1987), 394–397.
* Braun, M.A.: On relation between quasipotential equation and Schrödinger equation; Teor. Mat. Fiz. 72 (1987), 394–402 \[Russian\].
* Ladyzhenskaya, O.A., Faddeev, L.D.: On perturbation theory of continuous spectrum; Doklady AN SSSR 120 (1958), 1187–1190 \[Russian\]; Faddeev, L.D.: On the Friedrichs model in perturbation theory of continuous spectrum; Trudy Mat. In-ta AN SSSR 73 (1964), 292–313 \[Russian\].
* Okubo, S.: Diagonalization of Hamiltonian and Tamm–Dancoff equation; Progr. Theor. Phys. 12 (1954), 603–622.
* Malyshev, V.A., Minlos, R.A.: Invariant subspaces of clustering operators. I., J. Stat. Phys. 21 (1979), 231–242; Invariant subspaces of clustering operators. II., Comm. Math. Phys. 82 (1981), 211–226.
* Adamjan, V.M., Langer, H.: Spectral properties of a class of rational operator-value functions; to appear in J.Operator Theory.

Addresses:  Dr. A.K.Motovilov, Laboratory of Theoretical Physics, JINR, 141980 Dubna, Moscow region, Russia E–address: motovilv@thsun1.jinr.dubna.su