Thursday, February 7, 2013

Homework 6: one-electron states of molecules and crystals.

One can write molecular wave-functions as linear combination of atomic wave-functions with different center positions. (In my experience, this is the most common way in which to construct them. See, for example, LCAO.)

For example, suppose your are given a generic attractive potential (in 1D) of $U(x)$ for which the electron ground state wave-function is $\psi_o (x)$, and the energy of an electron in this state is $E_o$. You are given all that:
i) an atom-like potential, $U(x)$ (attractive, negative, single well, symmetric, with its minimum at x=0 ),
ii) an atom-like ground state wave-function, $\psi_o (x)$ (a simple,  normalized, exponential function such as $e^{-|x|/a}/a^{1/2}$  or,  $e^{-x^2/(2a^2}/(a^{1/2} \pi^{1/4})$),
iii) the ground state energy of this atom-like state in this potential, $E_o$.
The idea is -- with these things as given, solved and known: how would you use them to construct one-electron wave-functions for molecules and crystals?

1. Suppose that and electron experiences the double potential,
$U_m (x) = U(x) + U(x-b)$, where U(x) has a simple minimum at x=0 and U(x-b) has an identical minimum at (x-b)=0.
a) Sketch $U_m (x)$
b) Write an expression for a wave-function that might be a reasonable guess for the ground state of this potential. Do this by combining atom-like wave-functions with different center positions.
c) Sketch your wave-function.
d) How would you normalize it, more or less? (You can assume that the atomic wave-functions are initially normalized.) Is it easy or difficult to normalize the molecular wave-function?
(please comment on this below. Is it hard or easy? why?)

2. For the same potential,
a) How might you make a molecular wave-function that would be a reasonable guess for the first excited state of this potential?
b) Sketch your wave-function.
c) how many nodes does this state have?

3. Now consider 4 identical potentials in a row.
For example,$U_m (x) = U(x) + U(x-b) + U(x-2b) + U(x-3b)$.
a) sketch $U_m (x)$.
b) Make a molecular wave-function that might be a reasonable guess for the ground state of this potential by combining atomic wave-functions with different center positions?
c) Sketch your wave-function.
d) Now many excited states can you make (using just the atomic ground state $\psi_o (x)$)?
e) Make them all (write an expression for each one) and sketch each one in a separate graph next to its wave-function. (hint: You are given the atomic wave-functions. What you need to do is write a plus or minus sign in from of them in an informed manner that, for example, makes the molecular states you are creating orthogonal to each other. You know you are done when you cannot make any more that are orthogonal to the ones you already have.)
f) Discuss their energy order. (Which is lowest energy? next lowest?, highest?, why?)
g) How many nodes does each one have?

4. Let's now consider many (N) such identical potentials, all in a row.
a) What does the ground state of this many-well system look like? How would you construct it?
b) Discuss here in this blog the excited states you can create. What are they like? How would you describe them?
===============================================
Problems 1-4 are very important. I would focus a lot of attention on them, especially 4. Problem 4 is too difficult and nuanced for any one person to do alone. It has many layers that can be gradually peeled back and explored. I think the best way to approach it is to post your thoughts and questions about it here, and then you can make progress on it by working together as a class. You will get beaucoup credit for your contributions here.
================================================

5. I would like to add one more problem which is pretty interesting, but not as deep and nuanced as 4 (so i do not want to take too much attention away from 4 by adding this last problem).
a) Do a contour plot illustrating the nature of the state:
$\psi(x,y,z) = (e^{-(r/a)} + e^{-r_b/a})/\sqrt{2 \pi a^3})$,  (typo corrected Feb 15)
where
$r_b = \sqrt{(x-b)^2 + y^2 + z^2}$
(what plane did you choose to do your contour plot in? why?)

18 comments:

  1. For number 3 part d, can't we technically make 4! states if we don't care whether they are orthogonal to each other?

    If not, why do we care whether they are orthogonal if we're just trying to construct states and not trying to have them all be of similar energies?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. i think it might be 2^4 if we don't care if they are orthogonal to each other.

      Delete
    2. Doh. Yes, 2^4 states. Thank You.

      Delete
    3. There are only 2^3 states since half of them are identical. This is true because the wave-function ++--=--++ (imagine a psi_0 in front of each sign)

      Delete
    4. Wow. good counting. i see what you mean!

      Delete
  2. Regarding 4b...

    It seems that since the wavefunction components extend into infinity that states would be evaluated based on nodes per unit length, rather than a finite number of nodes like we discussed in class. Then it would be useful to liken the patterns of the components to periodic functions and Fourier-like series. For instance, a certain state maybe be described as $\psi_(m,n) (x) = e^{i(n*\pi)}$ while another state could be $\psi_(m,n-1) (x) = e^{i(\pi/3*(n-1))} - e^{i(\pi*(n-1))}$ which has half the number of nodes per unit length as the first. Then the position functions could be defined as the real part of these functions. Also, while I haven't been able to evaluate anything past these two, there should be more complicated combinations of these periodic functions that can be created to decrease the number of nodes until there are zero. Is this an efficient way of describing these functions?

    ReplyDelete
  3. If anyone wants to play around with some real calculated states and energy levels, check this out

    http://phet.colorado.edu/en/simulation/band-structure

    I've been playing with this all morning

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. make sure to go through and see everything that you can play around with, for example you can change a bunch of parameters of the potential wells, you can change how many wells you want, and you can go between square wells and atomic wells

      Delete
    2. That's a very cool program. It's fun to play with the wave functions and watch how they evolve in time. You can see the real and the imaginary components as well. Thanks for the website!

      Delete
  4. What were the states that we made called again? I remember in class you said it was Bloch states of the Warner type, or something like that?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Wannier. Bloch states written in terms of local Wannier functions.

      Delete
  5. Regarding problem 1d: I'm unclear as to how exactly to normalize the wave function. I assume we are supposed to multiply the wave function by a constant such that the integral over all space is 1. In lecture that constant was sqrt(1/2), but it seems like it should just be 1/2. The integral of each individual wave would be 1, so their sum would be 2 and so multiplying by 1/2 would produce 1. What am I missing?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. what you say makes sense, but it is the integral of the wf squared. that is where the sqrt comes from. Does that make sense?

      Delete
  6. When we look at the N number of excited states we can create in problem 4, should we be thinking about whether or not the ψ(x) functions constructively or destructively interfere over certain potentials or between potentials?

    Or are the patterns found in problem 3 with four potentials repeated for N potentials? (I'm sure it's not that simple, is it?)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I think that since its just ground state the wave functions shouldn't interfere at all, right? The most important parts are probably where the min/maxes occur (at each node, if I'm interpreting node right here...)

      I also think that the N potential well should just be like the 4 potential wells but with N of them, but that does seem too simple...

      Delete
    2. Weather or not the wave function is larger over the potential or between the potential wells makes a difference when calculating the energy. Generally speaking, states that are weaker over the potential well and stronger between the wells would have more energy, but when thinking about the energy just remember that states with more nodes have more energy. This is because the electron is more confined and it takes more kinetic energy to make that state.

      It talks about this stuff in the book in chapter 10 I think, and it has a diagram with 4 square wells and some explanations that might help.

      Delete
    3. Perhaps a way to think about it, and I might be going a bit out on a limb here, is self-inductance. If the electron were some kind of moving charge and was not alternating phase, there would be low impedance, and it would not take much kinetic energy to remain at that energy level. The more phase shifts for the electron, the more impedance, since impedance, or reactance goes up with frequency. The more impedance, the more energy necessary to keep the electron in that state.

      Delete
  7. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete