Determining Ground State Configuration in 2D Square Well with Aufbau Process

  • Thread starter Thread starter zsefvbjil1
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    2d Box Particle
AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on determining the ground state electronic configuration for a 2D square well containing four electrons using the Aufbau process. It notes that the system has two degenerate states, which implies a multiplicity of 2. Participants express confusion about how to derive the electronic configuration from the particle in a box model, questioning whether it should start with p orbitals instead of s orbitals due to the nature of the model. The conversation also touches on the energy levels, indicating that the ground state can accommodate two electrons, while the next energy level can hold four. Ultimately, the thread seeks clarity on the energy of the system and whether it is diamagnetic or paramagnetic.
zsefvbjil1
Messages
1
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


use the Aufbau process to determine the ground state electronic configuration for the 2D sqare well if it contains 4 electrons. what is the multiplicity of the ground state electronic configuration? what is the energy of this 2 D 4 electrons system? and is the system diamagnetic or paramagnetic?

Homework Equations



the questions posted above are the second part of the questions, in the first part, the answer tells me that it is a 2D box with 2 degeneracy states nx=1, ny=2 or nx=2, ny=1.

The Attempt at a Solution


2 denerate state means multiplicity of 2? i have no idea of the other questions tho, how do you draw electronic configuration from particle in a box model? plus i thought particle in a box model only predicts pi bonds because they are delocalised? so should the ground state configuration exclude s orbitals and starts with p?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I multiplied the values first without the error limit. Got 19.38. rounded it off to 2 significant figures since the given data has 2 significant figures. So = 19. For error I used the above formula. It comes out about 1.48. Now my question is. Should I write the answer as 19±1.5 (rounding 1.48 to 2 significant figures) OR should I write it as 19±1. So in short, should the error have same number of significant figures as the mean value or should it have the same number of decimal places as...
Thread 'A cylinder connected to a hanging mass'
Let's declare that for the cylinder, mass = M = 10 kg Radius = R = 4 m For the wall and the floor, Friction coeff = ##\mu## = 0.5 For the hanging mass, mass = m = 11 kg First, we divide the force according to their respective plane (x and y thing, correct me if I'm wrong) and according to which, cylinder or the hanging mass, they're working on. Force on the hanging mass $$mg - T = ma$$ Force(Cylinder) on y $$N_f + f_w - Mg = 0$$ Force(Cylinder) on x $$T + f_f - N_w = Ma$$ There's also...
Back
Top