Why Is Spin-Orbit Coupling Selective in Phosphorescence Transitions?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Gavroy
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary
Phosphorescence involves transitions between singlet and triplet states, specifically from S1 to T0, which requires both spin-orbit coupling and vibronic coupling. The transition from T0 to S0 also necessitates spin-orbit coupling but additionally involves coupling to the radiation field. The inefficiency of vibronic coupling between S0 and T0 is attributed to the large energy gap, as explained by Kasha's rule. Therefore, spin-orbit coupling is selective and does not apply uniformly across all states. Understanding these interactions is crucial for comprehending phosphorescence mechanisms.
Gavroy
Messages
232
Reaction score
0
hi

i have still some troubles to understand phosphorescence:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phosphorescence"

wikipedia has a diagram, where an electron in an exicted state that is a singulet state falls on a second level that is a triplet state.

my problem is, that this first transition is explained by spin-orbit coupling. but is it no so, that the ground state and this triplet state should have spin-orbit coupling either?- but in this case, the transition from the triplet state to the ground state should also be possible.

so it is possible to have this coupling just between some states?

sorry about my english.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org


does nobody have an idea or is there anything wrong with my question?
 


Of course there is also spin orbit (SO) coupling between S0 and T0, if not you would not observe phosphorescence.
The point is rather that for the transition from S1 to T0 you need both SO coupling and vibronic coupling while for the transition from T0 to S0 you need both SO coupling and coupling to the radiation field.
As in the case of fluorescence, the vibronic coupling between S0 and T0 is rather inefficient due to the large energy gap (Kasha's rule: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kasha's_rule )
 
Time reversal invariant Hamiltonians must satisfy ##[H,\Theta]=0## where ##\Theta## is time reversal operator. However, in some texts (for example see Many-body Quantum Theory in Condensed Matter Physics an introduction, HENRIK BRUUS and KARSTEN FLENSBERG, Corrected version: 14 January 2016, section 7.1.4) the time reversal invariant condition is introduced as ##H=H^*##. How these two conditions are identical?

Similar threads

  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
5K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
802
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K