I The “philosophical cornerstone” of the Moller-Plesset perturbation theory

AI Thread Summary
In quantum chemistry, the convergence behavior of Moller-Plesset perturbation theory (MP2, MP3, MP4) can vary significantly, with some cases leading to divergence, such as in the CeI4 molecule. The discussion raises a philosophical question about the foundational principles of perturbation theory and whether they can be illustrated through specific mathematical examples. Two equations were analyzed to demonstrate convergence, with differing iteration behaviors leading to debates on their relevance to perturbation theory. Some participants argue that the second example better reflects the theory's principles, while others contend that both examples may not accurately represent perturbation theory. The conversation emphasizes the importance of understanding convergence rates and the nature of approximations in quantum chemistry.
Spathi
Gold Member
Messages
102
Reaction score
10
TL;DR Summary
Simple analogies as illustrations to the Moller-Plesset perturbation theory.
In quantum chemistry, the MP rows (MP2, MP3, MP4, etc) can converge both quickly and slowly, and for some cases (e.g. CeI4 molecule) they even diverge instead of converging.
My question is quite philosophic: what is the “mathematical cornerstone”, or “philosophical cornerstone” of the perturbation theory, and whether it can be shown with some simple samples. If yes, maybe this information will help us predict whether in quantum chemistry the MP rows will diverge for some molecule not yet investigated.

I have asked this question on some web forums, and got some answers. Let’s consider the salvation of two equations:

1)
x+sin(x)=3000
If we write the following:

x=3000-sin(x)

We can set x0=0 and get the following iterations:

0
3000
2999,78081002572
2999,5739029766
2999,39713977695
2999,26623684759
2999,18383222963
2999,13904100976

This series converge after 40 iterations.

2)
6000=(x−1)(x−3000)+sin(x)

We transform this equation into the following:

x=(6000-sin(x))/(x-3000)+1

Choosing x0=0 we get the following convergence:

0
-1
-0,999613952344155
-0,999614140048658
-0,999614139957402
-0,999614139957447
-0,999614139957447
-0,999614139957447

So, this series converges within 6 iterations.

Some people said that the second example illustrates the cornerstone of the perturbation theory, while the first one does not. Some other people said that both these examples are not really attributed to the perturbation theory. Can you suggest your opinion?
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
"Converges within x iterations" isn't a thing. Apart from some corner cases you just get increasingly accurate approximations no matter how many iterations you take. You can study how fast that convergence is. Do you e.g. get a fixed number of additional digits per iteration? Does it grow quadratic?
 
Suppose ,instead of the usual x,y coordinate system with an I basis vector along the x -axis and a corresponding j basis vector along the y-axis we instead have a different pair of basis vectors ,call them e and f along their respective axes. I have seen that this is an important subject in maths My question is what physical applications does such a model apply to? I am asking here because I have devoted quite a lot of time in the past to understanding convectors and the dual...
Fermat's Last Theorem has long been one of the most famous mathematical problems, and is now one of the most famous theorems. It simply states that the equation $$ a^n+b^n=c^n $$ has no solutions with positive integers if ##n>2.## It was named after Pierre de Fermat (1607-1665). The problem itself stems from the book Arithmetica by Diophantus of Alexandria. It gained popularity because Fermat noted in his copy "Cubum autem in duos cubos, aut quadratoquadratum in duos quadratoquadratos, et...
Thread 'Imaginary Pythagorus'
I posted this in the Lame Math thread, but it's got me thinking. Is there any validity to this? Or is it really just a mathematical trick? Naively, I see that i2 + plus 12 does equal zero2. But does this have a meaning? I know one can treat the imaginary number line as just another axis like the reals, but does that mean this does represent a triangle in the complex plane with a hypotenuse of length zero? Ibix offered a rendering of the diagram using what I assume is matrix* notation...
Back
Top