Classical/empirical potential for electron-ion interactions

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter feynman1
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Interactions Potential
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the quest for a classical or empirical potential that accurately describes electron-ion interactions, distinct from the Coulomb potential. Participants highlight the need for a potential that captures the shielding effect of the nucleus on valence electrons, which are unbound and do not follow classical mechanics. The conversation references the Hartree-Fock method and density functional theory as potential frameworks for understanding these interactions, emphasizing the limitations of classical mechanics in atomic physics.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of empirical potentials in atomic physics
  • Familiarity with Coulomb potential and its limitations
  • Knowledge of quantum mechanics, particularly the Schrödinger equation
  • Basic concepts of mean field theory, including Hartree-Fock
NEXT STEPS
  • Research the Hartree-Fock method for electron interactions
  • Explore density functional theory (DFT) and its applications
  • Study the concept of shielding in atomic potentials
  • Investigate empirical potentials used in classical mechanics for atomic systems
USEFUL FOR

Physicists, chemists, and researchers in atomic and molecular physics seeking to understand electron-ion interactions and the limitations of classical models in describing quantum behavior.

feynman1
Messages
435
Reaction score
29
LJ potential is an empirical potential function used between 2 neutral atoms. Is there any classical/empirical potential for electron-ion interactions as well? Different from Coulomb potential, this one if any should be able to capture the mechanism of a valence electron leaving an atom and of preventing a valence electron from hitting a nucleus.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
This should simply be the shielded potential of the nucleus, as the electron is unbound and the direct potential term will dominate.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: feynman1
Thanks. How is shielded potential of the nucleus expressed?
 
feynman1 said:
Thanks. How is shielded potential of the nucleus expressed?
Why should the electron be prevented from "hitting" the nucleus?
 
nasu said:
Why should the electron be prevented from "hitting" the nucleus?
A valence one can at most stay on the outermost layer let alone hitting the centre.
 
feynman1 said:
A valence one can at most stay on the outermost layer let alone hitting the centre.
Have you ever seen an image of probability distribution for s-type orbitals? Electrons in atoms are described by quantum mechanics. They don't sit on layers like books in the library.
 
nasu said:
Have you ever seen an image of probability distribution for s-type orbitals? Electrons in atoms are described by quantum mechanics. They don't sit on layers like books in the library.
Yes. Any emperical potential (well) able to describe such s type 'bonding' between an electron and ion?
 
mfb said:
Thanks but I didn't find any help from there talking about any potential function
 
  • #10
feynman1 said:
Yes. Any emperical potential (well) able to describe such s type 'bonding' between an electron and ion?
These are obtained by solving Schroedinger equation with Coulomb potential. Is done (for hydrogen atom) in introductory QM courses.
 
  • #11
nasu said:
These are obtained by solving Schroedinger equation with Coulomb potential. Is done (for hydrogen atom) in introductory QM courses.
OK, I actually was looking for a potential that works in classical mechanics, namely some potential+'F=ma'
 
  • #12
feynman1 said:
You do understand that it wasa atomic OK, I actually was looking for a potential that works in classical mechanics, namely some potential+'F=ma'
God luck with that...
You do understand that it was problems with atomic physics that precipitated the invention of Quantum Mechanics? The best you can do is some sort of mean firld theory (which is Hartree-Fock as I recall)
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Vanadium 50 and vanhees71
  • #13
hutchphd said:
God luck with that...
You do understand that it was problems with atomic physics that precipitated the invention of Quantum Mechanics? The best you can do is some sort of mean firld theory (which is Hartree-Fock as I recall)
Yes I knew thanks. Wasn't looking for any precise QM theory.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: hutchphd

Similar threads

  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
4K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K