Stuck deriving the Hylleraas variational method

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the derivation of the Hylleraas variational method for calculating the ground state of Helium, specifically focusing on the transition from Equation (5) to Equation (6) in the original 1929 paper. The user successfully parameterizes the wavefunction using electron-nuclear and electron-electron distances but struggles with the derivation of the variational problem. The key equations involve the self-adjoint nature of the Hamiltonian and the normalization condition, which are essential for applying the variational principle effectively. The user seeks clarification on the transformation of derivatives into squared terms within the variational framework.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of quantum mechanics, particularly the variational principle.
  • Familiarity with the calculus of variations and Euler-Lagrange equations.
  • Knowledge of wavefunction parameterization in quantum systems.
  • Experience with Hamiltonian mechanics and self-adjoint operators.
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the derivation of the Euler-Lagrange equation in the context of variational problems.
  • Review the calculus of variations, focusing on applications in quantum mechanics.
  • Examine the original Hylleraas paper for deeper insights into the derivation process.
  • Explore Bethe's "Quantum Mechanics of One and Two-Electron Atoms" for additional context on similar derivations.
USEFUL FOR

Quantum physicists, researchers in computational chemistry, and students studying advanced quantum mechanics who are interested in variational methods and the historical context of quantum calculations.

alxm
Science Advisor
Messages
1,848
Reaction score
9
Hi, first post here.
I've been trying (out of personal interest, not homework) to re-derive http://www.springerlink.com/content/mm61h49j78656107/" relatively famous calculation on the ground state of Helium from 1929. And I'm stuck at one point.

What Hylleraas did, was to parametricize the wavefunction in terms of r_1,r_2,r_{12} - the scalar electron-nuclear and electron-electron distances, which works since it's spherically symmetrical in the ground state. You insert these into the electronic Hamiltonian, do a little work with the chain rule, etc, and arrive at:
\frac{\partial^2\psi}{\partial r_1^2}+\frac{2}{r_1}\frac{\partial\psi}{\partial r_1}+\frac{\partial^2\psi}{\partial r_2^2}+\frac{2}{r_1}\frac{\partial\psi}{\partial r_2}+2\frac{\partial^2\psi}{\partial r_{12}^2}+\frac{4}{r_{12}}\frac{\partial\psi}{\partial r_{12}}+\frac{r_1^2-r_2^2+r_{12}^2}{r_1r_{12}}\frac{\partial^2\psi}{\partial r_1\partial r_{12}}+\frac{r_2^2-r_1^2+r_{12}^2}{r_1r_{12}}\frac{\partial^2\psi}{\partial r_1\partial r_{12}}<br /> +(\frac{1}{r_1}+\frac{1}{r_2}-\frac{1}{2r_{12}})\psi=-\frac{\lambda}{4}\psi<br />
Equation (5) in the original paper. Where lambda is the energy (Hylleraas used units of R*h=half a Hartree). So far, I'm all good. It's the next step is where I run into trouble. To quote the text (translated):

"This equation is self-adjoint after multiplying with the density function r_1r_2r_{12} and is the Euler equation of a variational problem. This variational problem is:"

<br /> \int^\infty_0dr_1\int^\infty_0dr_2\int^{r_2+r_1}_{|r_2-r_1|}dr_{12}<br /> \{r_1r_2r_{12}<br /> [(\frac{\partial\psi}{\partial r_1})^2+(\frac{\partial\psi}{\partial r_2})^2+<br /> 2(\frac{\partial\psi}{\partial r_{12}})^2]<br /> +r_2(r_1^2-r_2^2+r^2_{12})\frac{\partial\psi}{\partial r_1}\frac{\partial\psi}{\partial r_{12}}+<br /> r_1(r_2^2-r_1^2+r^2_{12})\frac{\partial\psi}{\partial r_2}\frac{\partial\psi}{\partial r_{12}}\\<br /> -[r_{12}(r_1+r_2)-\frac{r_1r_2}{2}]\psi^2\}=\lambda<br />
With the normalization condition:
<br /> \frac{1}{4}\int^\infty_0dr_1\int^\infty_0dr_2\int^{r_2+r_1}_{|r_2-r_1|}dr_{12}r_1r_2r_{12}\psi^2=1.<br />

Equation (6) in the original paper. So, both sides are multiplied with psi and r1r2r12 and integrated so that the normalization condition can be applied to the right side, giving the energy. (The later problem to is to fit the basis-function parameters to minimize the left side; the integrals can be manually evaluated for the basis used)

My problem here is that I still don't quite follow how he got from (5) to (6). The potential terms are easy, but the first ones..? E.g. How did \frac{\partial^2\psi}{\partial r_1^2} turn into (\frac{\partial\psi}{\partial r_1})^2 etc? I've looked around quite a bit for a more detailed derivation, but I can't find one. (Closest thing was in Bethe's "QM of one and two-electron atoms" which after a hand-waving reference to using Green's theorem, skipped to the final result)

So. Can anyone give me a clue here? I've stared at this thing so long it's probably something really simple...
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 23 ·
Replies
23
Views
2K
Replies
6
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
29
Views
2K