The meaning (and validity) of fractional occupations in QM

  • Thread starter Thread starter Einstein Mcfly
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    fractional Qm
Einstein Mcfly
Messages
161
Reaction score
3
Hello all. As I understand it, there's somewhat of a divide in the scientific community (basically between chemists and physicist) around the topic of solutions to the SE (or KS eqn) that give fractional occupations of molecular or KS orbitals. I myself see no physical reason why probability can't be allowed to leak into a number of orbitals in quantities less than one, particularly if it gives a lower energy solution. Is there anything that I should understand in this regard (ie, that these solutions violate some key property of QM such as <S**2> not being a good quantum #)?

Thanks for your thoughts.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I'm a quantum chemist, and this is the first I've ever heard of such a thing. (Or indeed any kind of fundamental disagreement between chemists and physicists.)

You'll have to elaborate on what you mean; I don't see the problem. On the contrary, I don't know why anyone would expect integer occupancies for an interacting Hamiltonian in a single-particle basis.
 
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!
Back
Top