In the context of Quantum Field Theory we put restrictions on the potentials we can use. One argument is boundedness. If the potential is unbounded, for example $V(\phi) = \phi^3$, then `the field can always decrease its energy further' by becoming more negative. This results in the no ground state and no bound states.
The analogous argument in the context of Quantum Mechanics is more confusing to me. Consider the example of the hydrogen atom. The potential is not bounded from below and yet we have a discrete spectrum with a unique finite energy ground state.
Another example where boundedness arguments come up is perturbation theory (in Quantum Mechanics). Consider a finite well for a single particle $$V(x)=\Big{\{} \begin{matrix}V_0 \ \ |x| >a \\ 0\ \ \text{otherwise} \end{matrix} $$
If we apply a linear perturbation $\delta V = \lambda x$ then we say that perturbation theory can't converge because the hamiltonian is unbounded and hence has no bound states. And it follows that (this is the point I am not sure if it's true) the corrections to the energy must diverge to $-\infty$. I am not sure what this statement is saying. Is it that the spectrum is just $-\infty$ or is it saying the hamiltonian just doesn't have a spectrum at all (whether thats continuous and/or discrete).
I guess what I'm asking for is a more mathmatical statement about when a single particle hamiltonian has a spectrum.