What is the role of zeta in atomic shells and its connection to quantum physics?

sryzdn
Messages
7
Reaction score
0
Hi,

Simply, what is "zeta" in atomic shells and what is its relationship with orbital angular momentum (L)?
How is it used in quantum physics?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
You need to provide context to your question, it is hard to guess what you mean. In quantum chemistry the exponents in atomic basis functions are sometimes called zeta, but the only semi-consistent use of that term I am aware of is in terms like "double zeta", "triple zeta", etc, which simply denote the number of shells of basis functions used for the valence atomic orbitals[*].
 
yes, my question exactly points out to what you have already mentioned.
What does "exponents in atomic basis function" mean?

And how does these triple and double zeta thing relate to quantum numbers?
 
The basis functions which are used almost exclusively are Gauss-type-orbitals. These have the form of some solid harmonic prefactor (effectively, a polynomial in the distance-to-the-atom-coordinates) multiplied with a Gaussian:
\mu(\vec r) = S^l_m(\vec r - \vec A) \exp(-\zeta(\vec r - \vec A)^2).
Here r is the electron coordinate and A the coordinate of the point the basis function is placed on. The exponent is the \zeta (but often also called other things, and some functions are normally set into fixed linear combinations to form atomic orbitals).

Zeta, by itself, has no relationship to quantum numbers. But the double-zeta, triple-zeta etc. sets are designed such that the polarization and correlation of valence electrons can be described in a consistent and systematic quantitative way (you might want to read the first atomic natural orbital papers, or Dunning's first cc-pVnZ paper to get a clearer picture of how those sets are designed). Effectively, the only important point about this denomination is that a (n+1)-zeta basis set is a systematic improvement over a n-zeta basis set, by including in the larger set such functions of higher and the same angular momentum that they all produce similar energy improvements.
 
I read Hanbury Brown and Twiss's experiment is using one beam but split into two to test their correlation. It said the traditional correlation test were using two beams........ This confused me, sorry. All the correlation tests I learnt such as Stern-Gerlash are using one beam? (Sorry if I am wrong) I was also told traditional interferometers are concerning about amplitude but Hanbury Brown and Twiss were concerning about intensity? Isn't the square of amplitude is the intensity? Please...
I am not sure if this belongs in the biology section, but it appears more of a quantum physics question. Mike Wiest, Associate Professor of Neuroscience at Wellesley College in the US. In 2024 he published the results of an experiment on anaesthesia which purported to point to a role of quantum processes in consciousness; here is a popular exposition: https://neurosciencenews.com/quantum-process-consciousness-27624/ As my expertise in neuroscience doesn't reach up to an ant's ear...
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
Back
Top