How Does the Hartree Model Account for the Pauli Exclusion Principle?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Auwings2006
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Approximation
Auwings2006
Messages
1
Reaction score
0
My understanding of the Hartree approximation is that the product wavefunction is symmetric rather than antisymmetric, therefore the Hartree approximation effectively ignores the Pauli exclusion principle.

So how does the Pauli-exclusion principle get taken account of in the Hartree model?

Any clarification would be great appreciated.
Auwings2006
 
Physics news on Phys.org
it gets taken into account to some degree because the occupied orbitals are all different.
 
hartree approx. when considers the pauli exclusion principle then it becomes hatree jock approximation .hatree jock approx. also provides antisymmetric function
 
hafsa said:
hartree approx. when considers the pauli exclusion principle then it becomes hatree jock approximation .hatree jock approx. also provides antisymmetric function

Fock, not jock.
 
yes.it was typing mistake
 
Auwings2006 said:
My understanding of the Hartree approximation is that the product wavefunction is symmetric rather than antisymmetric, therefore the Hartree approximation effectively ignores the Pauli exclusion principle.

So how does the Pauli-exclusion principle get taken account of in the Hartree model?

Any clarification would be great appreciated.
Auwings2006

In the hartree approximation the wavefunction is neither symmetric nor anti-symmetric.
 
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...
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. Towards the end of the first lecture for the Qiskit Global Summer School 2025, Foundations of Quantum Mechanics, Olivia Lanes (Global Lead, Content and Education IBM) stated... Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/quantum-entanglement-is-a-kinematic-fact-not-a-dynamical-effect/ by @RUTA
Is it possible, and fruitful, to use certain conceptual and technical tools from effective field theory (coarse-graining/integrating-out, power-counting, matching, RG) to think about the relationship between the fundamental (quantum) and the emergent (classical), both to account for the quasi-autonomy of the classical level and to quantify residual quantum corrections? By “emergent,” I mean the following: after integrating out fast/irrelevant quantum degrees of freedom (high-energy modes...

Similar threads

Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
15
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
12
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
8
Views
2K
Replies
6
Views
2K
Back
Top