How Do Basis Vectors Represent Orbitals in Quantum Chemistry?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Niles
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Quantum
AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around the interpretation of basis vectors in quantum chemistry, specifically in relation to orbitals and the Schrödinger equation. The user questions how the six orbitals represented by orthonormal basis vectors can be understood, as they do not appear to correspond to stationary states with eigenenergies. It is highlighted that while these basis vectors span the Hilbert space, a linear combination of them should not yield an eigenenergy if they are not stationary states. The user seeks clarification on this concept and requests the thread to be moved to a more appropriate forum section for advanced physics homework help. Overall, the inquiry emphasizes the need for a deeper understanding of the relationship between orbitals and eigenstates in quantum systems.
Niles
Messages
1,834
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


Hi all.

This post is about quantum chemistry, but my question arises when looking at the problem from a physical point of view.

The Schrödinger equation gives us the stationary states of a system, and let's say that we are looking at a system with two stationary states (Dirac notation - but the LaTeX does not work, so bear with me) |1> and |2> with an associated eigenenergy. These two orthonormal states span the Hilbert space we are working in.Now here's my question: I am looking at a figure of a molecule with six orbitals, and now each orbital is represented by an orthonormal basis |1>, |2>, |3>, |4>, ..., |6>. An eigenstate is then a linear combination of these basis-vectors (orbitals) with an associated energy.

Question: How am I do interpret these basis-vectors |1>, |2>, |3>, |4>, ..., |6>? They surely cannot represent stationary states (i.e. solutions to the time-independent Schrödinger equation), because then a linear combination of them would not have an eigenenergy.

Thanks in advance. Any help will be greatly appreciated, since I cannot get help from anywhere else at the moment.Niles.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Can I get a moderator to move this thread to the "Advanced Physics Homework Help"? I think it belongs there more than in this section.

Thanks in advance.
 
I don't get how to argue it. i can prove: evolution is the ability to adapt, whether it's progression or regression from some point of view, so if evolution is not constant then animal generations couldn`t stay alive for a big amount of time because when climate is changing this generations die. but they dont. so evolution is constant. but its not an argument, right? how to fing arguments when i only prove it.. analytically, i guess it called that (this is indirectly related to biology, im...
Back
Top