Separability of vibrational and rotational motion for diatomics

tomothy
Messages
20
Reaction score
0
I'd like some help justifying the approximation that the vibrational and rotational motion of a diatomic molecule is separable.
For two atoms of masses m1 and m2 the full hamiltonian is
H=-\hbar ^2 /2m_1 \nabla _1 ^2 - \hbar^2 /2m_2 \nabla _2 ^2 + V(r-r_0)
Where V(r-r0) is the potential energy function, r0 is the equilibrium bond length and r is the atomic separation r=|\textbf{x} _1- \textbf{x} _2|. This is seperable into a centre of mass hamiltonian and one in terms of the reduced mass, in the molecular frame. The hamiltonian in the molecular frame is
H_\mu = -\hbar ^2 /2\mu \nabla ^2 - V(|\textbf{x}|-r_0)
From this point, I'm not sure how to show that the hamiltonian is approximately separable. I tried writing it in terms of the equilibrium displacement x=r-r_0 and then by saying in the approximation that x>>r_0 , x/r_0 \approx 0 so in the hamiltonian r^2=r_0^2(1+x/r_0)^2\approx r_0^2 but since r=x+r_0 is a variable and not a constant of motion, this seems like a dodgy approximation. Any help would be valued greatly!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I would try to split the last term into two terms.
 
This hamiltonian commutes with J^2 so it is separable into an angular part (the spherical harmonics) and an equation in r. The equation will only in general be solvable for j=0, if it is something like a harmonic potential or a morse potential. So the only way to get the rotational energy out is to throw use first order perturbation theory. So the rotational energy is a first order perturbation or vibrational energy?
 
Throw away the mathematics for 5 seconds and ask yourself what are the relative transition energies. This is the same reason that we can typically decouple vibrational and electronic transitions through the Born-Oppenheimer approx. Of course there can be ro-vibrational coupling in the same way that B-O fails at conical intersections, but for the most part the two transitions are at such different energy scales that they have low coupling strengths.
 
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
If we release an electron around a positively charged sphere, the initial state of electron is a linear combination of Hydrogen-like states. According to quantum mechanics, evolution of time would not change this initial state because the potential is time independent. However, classically we expect the electron to collide with the sphere. So, it seems that the quantum and classics predict different behaviours!
According to recent podcast between Jacob Barandes and Sean Carroll, Barandes claims that putting a sensitive qubit near one of the slits of a double slit interference experiment is sufficient to break the interference pattern. Here are his words from the official transcript: Is that true? Caveats I see: The qubit is a quantum object, so if the particle was in a superposition of up and down, the qubit can be in a superposition too. Measuring the qubit in an orthogonal direction might...
Back
Top