Visualisation of H2 molecule wavefuctions needed

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Ulysees
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Molecule Visualisation
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the visualization of wavefunctions for the H2 molecule at 0 K, emphasizing the need for understanding the equations governing these wavefunctions. Participants clarify that at absolute zero, the H2 molecule does not exist in a conventional sense, as wavefunctions spread out and can form a Bose-Einstein Condensate. The conversation also addresses the balance of forces between protons and electrons, explaining that the repulsive Coulomb force between protons is countered by the attractive forces from electrons, thus maintaining stability in the bond. Participants seek visualizations and deeper explanations of wavefunction interactions and their implications in molecular bonding.

PREREQUISITES
  • Quantum Mechanics fundamentals
  • Understanding of wavefunctions and their properties
  • Coulomb's Law and electromagnetic forces
  • Basic principles of molecular orbital theory
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the Schrödinger equation and its applications in molecular bonding
  • Explore visualizations of wavefunctions in quantum chemistry
  • Research Bose-Einstein Condensates and their formation
  • Learn about molecular orbital theory and its implications for H2 bonding
USEFUL FOR

Students and researchers in quantum chemistry, physicists interested in molecular interactions, and anyone seeking to understand the fundamental principles of chemical bonding in diatomic molecules like H2.

  • #31
Per, are you also missing the force between the protons, it should play a role in determining the optimal distance a.

Also, how do we work out energy from charge distribution/probability density function/wave function? Is it just like in classical physics?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #32
Well if you give a trial wave function, like the one I have given in previous post, (with c1=c2=1) you could formally get the total energy as:

E=\frac{e^2}{4\pi \epsilon a}+\frac{<\Psi\mid\hat{H}\mid\Psi>}{<\Psi\mid\Psi >}

where the Hamiltonian (a differential operator) is:

\hat{H}=-\frac{\hbar^2}{2m}\left(\nabla_1^2+\nabla_2^2\right)-\frac{e^2}{4\pi \epsilon}\sum_{j=1}^{2}\left(\frac{1}{\mid\vec{r}_j-a\hat{z}/2\mid}+\frac{1}{\mid\vec{r}_j+a\hat{z}/2\mid}\right)<br /> +\frac{e^2}{4\pi \epsilon\mid\vec{r_1}-\vec{r_2}\mid}
 
  • #33
per.sundqvist said:
Well if you give a trial wave function, like the one I have given in previous post, (with c1=c2=1) you could formally get the total energy as:

E=\frac{e^2}{4\pi \epsilon a}+\frac{&lt;\Psi\mid\hat{H}\mid\Psi&gt;}{&lt;\Psi\mid\Psi &gt;}

where the Hamiltonian (a differential operator) is:

\hat{H}=-\frac{\hbar^2}{2m}\left(\nabla_1^2+\nabla_2^2\right)-\frac{e^2}{4\pi \epsilon}\sum_{j=1}^{2}\left(\frac{1}{\mid\vec{r}_j-a\hat{z}/2\mid}+\frac{1}{\mid\vec{r}_j+a\hat{z}/2\mid}\right)<br /> +\frac{e^2}{4\pi \epsilon\mid\vec{r_1}-\vec{r_2}\mid}

How do you do the first "|" here? < psi | H | psi >

Also, previously ri was the variable of a function psi(ri). But now you seem to be giving a formula for energy like this:

energy = E(r1,r2)

Aren't we integrating over r?
 
  • #34
Ok here is the definition:

&lt;\Psi\mid\hat{H}\mid\Psi&gt;=\int d^3r_1\int d^3r_2 \Psi(r_1,r_2)\hat{H}\Psi(r_1,r_2)

The integration is simplified by the fact Psi is a product of independent wave function phi(r1)*phi(r2) etc.

Hope it helps,
Per
 
  • #35
So it looks like potential energy for each possible pair of charges, infinitesimal or not.

No kinetic energy?

No other form of E/M energy?
 
  • #36
the kinetic energy is T=-\int\Psi\nabla^2\Psi d^3r

Here is a picture of H2 molecule i played with now (just 1 electron though,
but with two protons). I solved it by the package comsol/femlab in 3D:

Per
 

Attachments

  • H2mol.jpg
    H2mol.jpg
    16.2 KB · Views: 430
  • #37
Hmm, I missed the hbar^2/2m factor in the kinetic term and it is for 1 particle only, i.e., Psi=Psi(r_1)

\nabla^2\Psi=d^2\Psi/dx^2+d^2\Psi/dy^2+d^2\Psi/dz^2

here is a better picture which is symmeric and without noicy "cut-surface":

/Per
 

Attachments

  • H2mol1.jpg
    H2mol1.jpg
    14.1 KB · Views: 481
  • #38
nuclear action happens bewteen all atoms, just not at the scale big enough to cause any effects... and i wasnt aware that a coulomb had anything to do with the H2 molecule
 
  • #39
sorry if this has been addressed before, but part of the reason a covalent bond forms is that the two electrons want to be closer to each other due to a quantum mechanical effect, bosons like to be closer to each other and electrons in certain orbitals become bosons (when their in certain orbitals their spin adds to an integer) and so those electrons can bind in molecules, of course this is only part of how a molecule forms with E&M forces also playing a role.

it begins to get sketchy whenever you're talking about forces in QM as QM doesn't understand the concept of a force, except in the classical limit
 
  • #40
per.sundqvist said:
Ok here is the definition:

&lt;\Psi\mid\hat{H}\mid\Psi&gt;=\int d^3r_1\int d^3r_2 \Psi(r_1,r_2)\hat{H}\Psi(r_1,r_2)

You forgot a "*" in the first Psi.
 
  • #41
The quantum mechanical exchange force from the overlap of wavefunctions establishes the covalent bond.

The expectation value of the square of the separation distance between two particles for identical particles is different than distinguishable particles.

Identical particles can have an expectation value greater or less than that of distinguishable particles depending on their symmetry.

Symmetric spatial wavefunction:

p --> 2e <-- p

Antisymmetric spatial wavefunction:

e <--p p-->e

When considering the full wavefunction we have to include spin. Thus, to get covalent bonding, the electrons have to be in the antisymmetric spin singlet state to make the full wavefunction antisymmetric for fermions with the symmetric spatial wavefunction causing the charge density to be greater between the protons.
 
  • #42
"You forgot a "*" in the first Psi."

Yes you are right, but the anzats I gave in a previous post was all real wave functions, so the complex conjugate is not necessary.

About electronic bosons it is formally correct that 2 pair of electrons could be seen as bosons, but is not clear if this is something you in practice really use?

\Psi(\vec{x}_1,\vec{x}_2,\vec{x}_3,\vec{x}_4)=+\Psi(\vec{x}_3,\vec{x}_4,\vec{x}_1,\vec{x}_2),


Per
 
  • #43
per.sundqvist said:
> "You forgot a "*" in the first Psi."

Yes you are right, but the anzats I gave in a previous post was all real wave functions, so the complex conjugate is not necessary.
Are you sure that formula is for real wave functions?

I thought we avoided the actual complex wave function (lowercase psi) by using the probability density function instead (uppercase psi = magnitude(psi)^2).
 
  • #44
Uppercase psi, which is the full wavefunction, including the spinor, is symmetric when your dealing with bosons.

Cooper pairs are coupled electrons that form a boson state. Covalent bonding is not Cooper pairing but the exchange force.
 
  • #45
XVX said:
Uppercase psi, which is the full wavefunction, including the spinor, is symmetric when your dealing with bosons.

Cooper pairs are coupled electrons that form a boson state. Covalent bonding is not Cooper pairing but the exchange force.

Any examples of the maths that go with these would be appreciated.

The function that Per as given as uppercase psi looks like probability density function to me (or charge density).
 
  • #46
Here's Per's function again:

\Psi(\vec{r})=c_1e^{-\sqrt{x^2+y^2+(z-a)^2}/a_B}+c_2e^{-\sqrt{x^2+y^2+(z+a)^2}/a_B}

He said it's the approximate 1s solution. Looks like the sum of 2 independent atoms. Anyone got the exact solution for the molecule?
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 43 ·
2
Replies
43
Views
9K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
4K