Spectroscopic term of ground state electron configuration of Carbon atom

boyu
Messages
20
Reaction score
0
The ground state electron configuration of Carbon atom is 1s^{2}2s^{2}2p^{2}

For the electrons, 1s^{2}2s^{2}, L=0, S=0

So only consider electrons of 2p^{2}, and

s_{1}=s_{2}=1/2 ---> S=0,1
l_{1}=l_{2}=1 ---> L=0,1,2

For S=0, L=0; J=0, so we have ^{1}S_{0}
For S=0, L=1; J=1, so ^{1}P_{1}
For S=0, L=2; J=2, so ^{1}D_{2}

For S=1, L=0; J=1, so ^{3}S_{1}
For S=1, L=1; J=0,1,2, so ^{3}P_{0}, ^{3}P_{1}, ^{3}P_{2}
For S=1, L=2; J=1,2,3, so ^{3}D_{1}, ^{3}D_{2}, ^{3}D_{3}

The above is based on my derivation. However, the correct answer is actually:
^{1}S_{0}, ^{1}D_{2}, ^{3}P_{0}, ^{3}P_{1}, ^{3}P_{2}

My question is: where are all the other possible terms? Where is wrong in my derivation:
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Not all the states you are constructing are compartible with the Pauli principle.
Namely you have six p-type spin orbitals and there are 15 (2 out of 6) possibilities.
Counting the multiplicities of the correct states you should also get 15.
The total number of states of your approach is 36 which would result from filling up the p orbitals with hypothetically distinguishable electrons.
 
How to get 15 from counting the multiplicities from correct states? The spin multiplicities are 1, 1, 3, 3 & 3.
 
You have to count the multiplicities of J not of S or L. The multiplicities of S and L are dispersed over states with different J.
 
Many thanks! ^_^
 
From the BCS theory of superconductivity is well known that the superfluid density smoothly decreases with increasing temperature. Annihilated superfluid carriers become normal and lose their momenta on lattice atoms. So if we induce a persistent supercurrent in a ring below Tc and after that slowly increase the temperature, we must observe a decrease in the actual supercurrent, because the density of electron pairs and total supercurrent momentum decrease. However, this supercurrent...
Hi. I have got question as in title. How can idea of instantaneous dipole moment for atoms like, for example hydrogen be consistent with idea of orbitals? At my level of knowledge London dispersion forces are derived taking into account Bohr model of atom. But we know today that this model is not correct. If it would be correct I understand that at each time electron is at some point at radius at some angle and there is dipole moment at this time from nucleus to electron at orbit. But how...

Similar threads

Back
Top