Deterministic potential with a pure point spectrum (Q2277640)

The paper is devoted to the proof of Theorem 1. Let \(H^{\theta}\) be the Schrödinger operator on the semi-axis \([0,\infty)\) with the boundary condition \(\psi (0)\cos \theta -\psi '(0)\sin \theta =0.\) Assume that the potential v(x) has the form \(v(x)=\sum^{\infty}_{n=1}h_ n\chi_ 1(x-a_ n),\) where \(\chi_ 1(t)\) is the indicator of [0,1], \(a_ n>0\), \(0<a_ n-a_{n-1}-1\equiv L_ n\to \infty,\) \(0<h_ n\to \infty\) and \(\sum^{\infty}_{1}h_ n^{-1/2}<\infty\), \(\limsup_{n\to \infty}\sqrt{L_{n+1}L_ n^{-1}} \exp (-\sqrt{h_ n})<1.\) Then for almost all \(\theta\in [0,\pi)\) the spectrum of \(H^{\theta}\) is pure point, dense on \([0,\infty)\), and the respective eigenfunctions \(y_{k,\theta}(x)\) for positive eigenvalues admit the bound \(y^ 2_{k,\theta}+y^{'2}_{k,\theta})^{1/2}\leq c_{k,\theta} \exp (- \sum_{a_ n\leq x-1}h_ n^{1/2}).\) The author discusses also several similar results. In particular, for the discrete analogue \(h^{\theta}\) of \(H^{\theta}\) with the potential \(v(j)=\sum^{\infty}_{n=1}h_ n\delta (j-j_ n)\), \(2\leq j_ n- j_{n-1}\equiv L_ n\), sup \(L_ n=\infty\), \(| h_ n| \to \infty\), and for some sequence \(R_ n\) \((R_{n+1}\geq R_ n\geq c\sqrt{L_ n}\), \(c>0)\) with \(\sum^{\infty}_{n=1}| h_ n|^{-1}R_{n+1}/R_ n<\infty\) the spectrum of \(h^{\theta}\) is pure point and dense in [-2,2], and the respective eigenfunctions admit the bound \([y^ 2_{k,\theta}(j)+y^ 2_{k,\theta}(j+1)]^{1/2}\leq C(k,\theta,M)M^ nR_{n+1}\) for \(j\geq j_ n.\) The proofs are based on the detailed analysis of the behaviour of the phase of the Cauchy solutions of the corresponding differential or finite-difference equation. This paper is closely connected with the recent paper by \textit{W. Kirsch}, \textit{S. A. Molchanov} and the reviewer [Funct. Anal. Appl. 24, No.3, 176-186 (1990); translation from Funkts. Anal. Prilozh. 24, No.3, 14-25 (1990)] in which in particular it is proved that if in the discrete case the potential is bounded below by the potential of mentioned form, then the same assertion is valid.