Construct an ONB for a triatomic molecule

  • Thread starter Thread starter rogeralms
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Molecule
rogeralms
Messages
19
Reaction score
0
Consider a triatomic molecule with three identical atoms that are bound together with each atom at its own corner of an equilateral triangle of edge length a. An added electron on the molecule can be put in an identical atomic orbital on any of the three atoms. Denote the atomic states in which the electron is on atom i as |i>, and assume that these three states {|1>, |2>, and |3>}, form an orthonormal set. Let the mean energy associated with such a state be the same value ε0=<i|H|i> for each state |i>. Suppose also that the electron on an atom can move to either of its neighbors, with an amplitude <i|H|j>=V0 i≠j

a) Construct a 3X3 matrix [H] that represents the Hamiltonian within the subspace spanned by these 3 atomic states, using the states {\|i>} as an ONB for the subspace. Find the trace of this matrix.

[H] =
$$\begin{pmatrix}
ε_0 & V_0 & V_0\\
V_0 & ε_0 & V_0\\
V_0 & V_0 & ε_0
\end{pmatrix}$$

Tr[H] = 3ε0

b) Find the energy eigenvalues and the degeneracies of the molecule with an added electron.

det(H-ε)=
| ε0-ε V0 V0 |
| V0 ε0-ε V0 |
| V0 V0 ε0-ε |

= (ε0-ε) [(ε0-ε)(ε0-ε) - V0]
- V0 [ V00-ε) - V02 ]
+ V0 [ V02 - V00-ε) ]

= (ε0-ε)3 - 3V020-ε) +2V03=0

ε10-V0
ε20-V0
ε30-2V0

c) Construct an ONB of eigenstates {|εn> |n=1,2,3} of the system, as linear combinations of the atomic states.

I could not get Latex to work according to the directions on this site. I apologize for the crude look to the matrices, etc.

I am stuck on part c as follows. Could someone please help me with this part? I get the following which make no sense to me:

(H-ε1) |χ1>=(H-ε0+V0) |χ1>=

V0 V0 V0
V0 V0 V01>
V0 V0 V0

(H-ε3) |χ1>=(H-ε0+2V0) |χ1>=

2V0 V0 V0
V0 2V0 V01>
V0 V0 2V0
 

Attachments

Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
Your post had broken (unpaired) [sub]-tags, that made it hard to read. I fixed those.

What did you do to get those equations for (c)?
 
mfb said:
Your post had broken (unpaired) [sub]-tags, that made it hard to read. I fixed those.

What did you do to get those equations for (c)?

I took the solutions for the eigenvalues from part b (two of which are degenerate) and subtracted them from the Hamiltonian matrix.

These are supposed to be the eigenvalue equations where the chi's should be the eigenvectors.
 
Okay, so ##(H-Iε_1) ~|\chi_1\!>~ = 0## right?
Something that won't have a unique solution as your eigenspace has dimension 2.

I'm a bit surprised by the signs in your eigenvalues, shouldn't their sum be equal to the trace of the Hamiltonian?
 
You are correct. I wrote down the third eigenvalue incorrectly. It is correct on the attachment but the matrix is incorrect.

The third eigenvalue should be ε3=ε0+2V0

The third matrix should be

-2V0 V0 V0
V0 -2V0 V0 |χ1> = 0
V0 V0 -2V0
 
I can see a non-trivial solution for this equation.
 
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. In her YouTube video Bell’s Theorem Experiments on Entangled Photons, Dr. Fugate shows how polarization-entangled photons violate Bell’s inequality. In this Insight, I will use quantum information theory to explain why such entangled photon-polarization qubits violate the version of Bell’s inequality due to John Clauser, Michael Horne, Abner Shimony, and Richard Holt known as the...
Not an expert in QM. AFAIK, Schrödinger's equation is quite different from the classical wave equation. The former is an equation for the dynamics of the state of a (quantum?) system, the latter is an equation for the dynamics of a (classical) degree of freedom. As a matter of fact, Schrödinger's equation is first order in time derivatives, while the classical wave equation is second order. But, AFAIK, Schrödinger's equation is a wave equation; only its interpretation makes it non-classical...
I asked a question related to a table levitating but I am going to try to be specific about my question after one of the forum mentors stated I should make my question more specific (although I'm still not sure why one couldn't have asked if a table levitating is possible according to physics). Specifically, I am interested in knowing how much justification we have for an extreme low probability thermal fluctuation that results in a "miraculous" event compared to, say, a dice roll. Does a...
Back
Top