Why does bringing N 1-orbital atoms together yield N levels?

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter geologic
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Atoms Levels Yield
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the behavior of N hydrogen atoms when brought together into a ring formation, specifically how their 1s energy levels evolve. As N atoms approach, the original 1s state does not remain constant; instead, it fans out into N distinct energy levels due to electron interactions. For 2 atoms, bonding and anti-bonding states yield two distinct energy levels, while for 3 atoms, the analysis reveals only 2 energetically distinct arrangements, leading to 2 levels. The consensus is that when N atoms are combined, the system yields (N+1)/2 distinct energy levels, influenced by the Pauli exclusion principle and the nature of wavefunction interactions.

PREREQUISITES
  • Quantum mechanics fundamentals
  • Understanding of wavefunctions and their interactions
  • Knowledge of the Pauli exclusion principle
  • Familiarity with energy eigenstates and atomic bonding theories
NEXT STEPS
  • Research the implications of the Pauli exclusion principle on multi-electron systems
  • Study the formation of energy bands in solids and their relation to atomic interactions
  • Explore the modeling of atomic interactions using finite square wells
  • Investigate the concept of superposition in quantum systems and its effects on energy states
USEFUL FOR

Physicists, chemists, and students studying quantum mechanics, particularly those interested in atomic interactions, energy levels, and molecular bonding theories.

geologic
Messages
7
Reaction score
0
A common example of this is that when bringing N hydrogen atoms together into a ring. Far apart, assume each electron exists in the 1s state. As we bring them together, instead of each electron staying at the original 1s level, or all of them changing by the same amount, the 1s level fans out into N.

For the case of 2 atoms, I can understand this as bonding or anti-bonding of the atoms. i.e., do the wavefunctions add between the protons, meaning each electron can share in the potential of both protons (bonding) or do the wavefunctions destructively interfere between the protons (anti-bonding).

With 3 atoms, I can't find 3 levels. Assuming Gaussian shaped wavefunctions, note that the sign of each wavefunction between any two atoms defines the wavefunction on the rest of the ring. Since the signs of the wavefunction are independent, there should be 2^3=8 possibilities since each wavefunction can be + or -. Yet, there are really only 2 energetically distinct arrangements that I see: all have the same sign (two cases) or 2 of 3 have the same sign (2*(3 choose 2)), to account for both sign cases). So I get 3 atoms yield 2 levels.

Can somebody shed light on what I've done incorrectly? Or is 3 too small to work correctly? Is there an argument about the shape of the orbitals I've neglected?

Thank you.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Hint: Pauli exclusion principle.
 
geologic said:
Yet, there are really only 2 energetically distinct arrangements that I see: all have the same sign (two cases) or 2 of 3 have the same sign (2*(3 choose 2)), to account for both sign cases). So I get 3 atoms yield 2 levels.

You are right in that you only get two distinct energy levels. However there are two independent wavefunctions giving the same energy in case of the upper level.
In the case of a ring with N atoms, you get (N+1)/2 distinct energy levels.
 
Simon Bridge said:
Hint: Pauli exclusion principle.

Yeah, I suppose I'm unclear about what defines a state in this context. If I assume all of the electrons remain in the 1s state, while sort of forming a metal, then I have more electrons than available states. So, the creation of more states solves this problem, but isn't obviously the answer.


DrDu said:
You are right in that you only get two distinct energy levels. However there are two independent wavefunctions giving the same energy in case of the upper level.
In the case of a ring with N atoms, you get (N+1)/2 distinct energy levels.

By the two independent wavefunctions in the upper (anti-bonding) level, do you mean the sign of them? Then this should yield 4 total levels since you could argue the same thing for the constructively interfering wavefunctions.

Also, the (N+1)/2 argument seems contrary to what I remember reading in Kittel: N atoms yield N levels. I assumed the levels were distinct.


Thanks for your replies, please follow up!
 
Lets restrict talk to energy eigenstates of the system then.

When you bring a lot of atoms together, the electron-electron interactions mean that there is no longer a well-defined 1s state. The new system has different energy levels. The old 1s state is a superposition of the new system ... and the electrons decay into the new energy levels creating the new ground state.

You can model this by putting two finite square wells at different distances from each other and look what happens to the first few bound states when they are different distances apart. Also start with just one square well, with one particle, and "switch on" a second one.

Another way of thinking about it: no two electrons in the universe are ever in exactly the same discrete state - its just that the energy levels for far-separated wells are so very similar our instruments cannot tell the difference. When the wells get closer, their interactions force the states to split and you can see the difference.

Whatever - once the combined system has formed, the inital 1s states no longer exist and their energy levels may even be forbidden.

When lots of atoms are close together, like in a solid, the energy levels merge to form bands.

Note: I was wondering if DrDu was thinking of molecular energy or, maybe, configuration states.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K