Why are there multiple Slater determinants for the same number of electrons?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers on the nature of wave functions for bosonic systems, particularly focusing on the existence of multiple Slater determinants for the same number of electrons. Participants explore the implications of symmetry in wave functions, the construction of these functions, and the differences between single and multiple Slater determinants in the context of quantum mechanics.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants assert that for multibosonic systems, the wave function must be symmetric, while for fermionic systems, it must be antisymmetric.
  • One participant proposes a specific wave function for three particles that appears symmetric but is challenged on the grounds that it only describes two particles at a time.
  • Another participant argues that the proposed wave function does include all three particles' wavefunctions, questioning the assertion of a contradiction.
  • It is noted that a single permanent wave function is not the general bosonic wave function, and that general bosonic wave functions can be expressed as linear combinations of permanents.
  • Participants discuss the Slater determinant as a method to construct wave functions for fermions, emphasizing that multiple Slater determinants can be formed using different one-electron wave functions.
  • One participant highlights that the real n-electron wave function is more complex than what is represented by a single Slater determinant, which is an approximation.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally agree that the wave function for identical bosons must be symmetric and for fermions must be antisymmetric. However, there is disagreement regarding the acceptability of certain wave function constructions and the implications of using multiple Slater determinants.

Contextual Notes

Some limitations are noted regarding the assumptions made about the wave functions, particularly in terms of their representation of the number of particles present and the complexity of the actual n-electron wave function compared to the approximations provided by Slater determinants.

aaaa202
Messages
1,144
Reaction score
2
For multibosonic systems, as I understand, the wave function must always be symmetric (antisymmetric for fermionic, which this question easily generalizes to).
But as far as I can see for N>2 you can easily construct a lot of other wave functions which are symmetric rather than the one my book finds (which essentially is the slater determinant one with + instead of -),if you allow for the fact that each product only contains product of two wave functions.

Say for instance you have 3 particles with wavefunction a1, b2, c3

Then we could choose:

ψ = a1b2 + a2b1 + a1b3 + a3b1 + (combination of a and c, combination of b and c in the same way)

The wave function above is invariant under any switch between the number 1,2 and 3 (which will represent the three coordinate sets for our bosons).
Why is it then, that a wave function of this kind is not acceptable?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
You are constructing a wavefunction composed of states that have only 2 of the 3 particles present at a time. Your textbook is describing wavefunctions corresponding to having all 3 particles present at the same time.
 
why is my ones necessarily only describing 2 particles present? Yes, each product only contains two wavefunctions, but all three particles' wavefunctions are included in the product as a whole.
 
You're writing ψ as a coherent superposition of states, with a probability amplitude for being in each state. In the first two states, particle 3 does not exist. In the third and fourth state, particle 2 does not exist, and so on. This is a clear contradiction, each state must contain the same particles.
 
why exactly is that a contradiction? For a three bosonic system the wave function must be symmetric. I don't see any loss of generality in dropping out on one of the particles in one as long as its compensated for in another of the terms.
Maybe you can elaborate on that superposition thing, as far as I understood the symmetric formula with the slater determinant (switch minuses to plus) is not a superposition, its a requirement that the wave function for an n-bosonic system satisfies it.
 
Try calculating \langle \psi | \psi \rangle for your wave function. I think you will see why it is not acceptable.
 
OP, a single permanent wave function (i.e., the symmetrized orbital product) is *not* the general bosonic wave function, just as a single Slater determinant is not a general fermionic wave function. However, general bosonic wave functions can be decomposed into linear combinations of permanents. If |phi_i> is a basis of the one-particle space, then the set of all permanents that can be formed from the |phi_i> is a basis of the Fock space. That is, all bosonic wave functions can be decomposed into sums of permanents, but in general not into a single one.

If you are familiar with electronic structure: Choosing a single permanent is analogous to the Hartree-Fock approximation, decomposing a wave function into sums of permanents is analogous to the configuration interaction (CI) method.
 
Can you elaborate please? Isn't it true no matter what that for an n-bosonic or fermionic system the wave function describing it must NO MATTER WHAT be symmetric or antisymmetric and that can only be done (apparently) with the formulas provided by the slater determinant.
 
Indeed, the wave function for an ensemble of identical bosons (fermions) must be symmetric (anti-symmetric) with respect to the interchange of two particles.

The Slater determinant is a simple method to construct a wave function for n fermions that ensures that the properties of the fermionic wave functions are satisfied. But there are many Slater derterminants that you can write for the same nfermion system. An keep in mind that a Slater determinant only produces a wave function that is a linear combination of products of one-fermion wave functions, which in itself is an approximation.
 
  • #10
What you mean it can produce more than one antisymmetric combination? And what do you mean by the approximation?
 
  • #11
When you write a multi-electron wave function as a Slater determinant, you are by construction writing an n-electron wave function as a product of n one-electron wave functions, and that is an approximation. The real n-electron wave function will be a complicated function of the coordinates of all electrons.

Also, you can write multiple Slater determinants for n electrons by choosing different one-electron wave functions to put in the derterminant.

Take for example He. You can construct the Slater determinant ψA using 1sα and 1sβ. You can also construct it using 1sα and 2sβ (ψB), or 1sα and 2pβ (ψC), etc. You can then take as the actual wave function a linear combination of these Slater derterminants, ψ = cA ψA + cB ψB + cC ψC. This is in essence what is called configuration interaction.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: aaaa202

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
13K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
Replies
6
Views
4K
Replies
18
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
4K
Replies
4
Views
6K