Computational quantum mechanics operators

This two general Cl function expressions, along with the results obtained in the section 5.1 above, permit to compute the expected value form of any quantum mechanical operator in a most complete general way. 

The Hamiltonian operator in Eq. 1 contains sums of different types of quantum mechanical operators. One type of operator in Ti gives the kinetic energy of each electron in by computing the second derivative of the electron s wave function with respect to all three Cartesian coordinates axes. There are also terms in H that use Coulomb s law to compute the potential energy due to (a) the attraction between each nucleus and each electron, (b) the repulsion between each parr of electrons, and (c) the repulsion between each pair of nuclei. 

A brief summary of the mathematical notation adopted throughout this text is in order. Scalar quantities, whether constants or variables, are represented by italic characters. Vectors and matrices are represented by boldface characters (individual matrix elements are scalar, however, and thus are represented by italic characters that are indexed by subscript(s) identifying the particular element). Quantum mechanical operators are represented by italic characters if diey have scalar expectation values and boldface characters if their expectation values are vectors or matrices (or if they are typically constructed as matrices for computational purposes). The only deliberate exception to the above rules is that quantities represented by Greek characters typically are made neither italic nor boldface, irrespective of their scalar or vector/matrix nature. 

Often we must compute values of quantities that are not simple functions of the space coordinates, such as the y component of the momentum, py, where Equation (E.4) is not applicable. To get around this, we say that corresponding to every classical variable, there is a quantum mechanical operator. An operator is a symbol that directs us to do some mathematical operation. For example, the momentum operators are... 

The derivation of Eq. (218) from Eq. (206) follows from local gauge invariance, and it is always possible to apply a local gauge transform to the vector A, the Maxwell vector potential. The ordinary derivative of the d Alembert wave equation is replaced by an 0(3) covariant derivative. The U(l) equivalent of Eq. (218) in quantum-mechanical (operator) form is Eq. (13), and Eq. (212) is the rigorously correct form of the phenomenological Eq. (25). It can be seen that Eq. (212) is richly structured in the vacuum and must be solved numerically. The vacuum currents present in Eq. (218) can be computed from the right-hand side of the wave equation (212), and these vacuum currents follow from local gauge invariance. 

The computational problem is formally the same whether a Gaussian, plane wave or polynomial basis is used - calculate matrix elements of quantum mechanical operators over basis functions and solve the variational problem by an iterative procedure - but the nature of the functions results in some differences. With a GTO basis the matrix elements are calculated directly, while with a plane wave basis the matrix elements involving the potential energy can be generated by simple multiplication, as long... 

Comparison [14, 15] of such extrapolated energies with their exphcitly computed fiiU Cl counterparts [16] has indicated a high degree of accuracy (within 1.0 kcal/mol) with this combination of variational and perturbative methods. One disadvantage of this approach is that no comparably accurate means of extrapolating the properties of the associated truncated MRD-CI wave functions has ever been found. The fact that most interesting properties such as dipole moments involve one-electron quantum mechanical operators helps to minimize the negative consequences of this state of affairs. 

J. D. Augspurger and C. . Dykstra,/. Comput. Chem., 11,105 (1990). General Quantum Mechanical Operators. An Open-Ended Approach for One-Electron Integrals with Gaussian Bases. 

An introduction to magnetic properties merging classical relationships with quantum mechanical computational recipes constitutes a trait d union between classical and quantum mechanics rather interesting fiom the epistemological point of view. In fact, p(r) and J(r) are subobservables [1], that is, expectation values of corresponding quantum mechanical operators if these expectation values are known as functions in R, a number of molecular electromagnetic properties can be evaluated without the explicit use of electronic wave functions. 

The calculation of the properties of a solid via quantum mechanics essentially involves solving the Schrodinger equation for the collection of atoms that makes up the material. The Schrodinger equation operates upon electron wave functions, and so in quantum mechanical theories it is the electron that is the subject of the calculations. Unfortunately, it is not possible to solve this equation exactly for real solids, and various approximations have to be employed. Moreover, the calculations are very demanding, and so quantum evaluations in the past have been restricted to systems with rather few atoms, so as to limit the extent of the approximations made and the computation time. As computers increase in capacity, these limitations are becoming superseded. 

Hypercube, Inc. at http //www.hyper.com offers molecular modeling packages under the HyperChem name. HyperChem s newest version, Hyper-Chem Release 7.5, is a full 32-bit application, developed for the Windows 95, 98, NT, ME, 2000, and XP operating systems. Density Functional Theory (DFT) has been added as a basic computational engine to complement Molecular Mechanics, Semiempirical Quantum Mechanics and ab initio Quantum Mechanics. The DFT engine includes four combination or hybrid functions, such as the popular B3-LYP or Becke-97 methods. The Bio+ force field in HyperChem represents a version of the Chemistry at HARvard using Molecular Mechanics (CHARMM) force field. Release 7.5 of HyperChem updates... 

QTST is predicated on this approach. The exact expression 50 is seen to be a quantum mechanical trace of a product of two operators. It is well known, that such a trace can be recast exactly as a phase space integration of the product of the Wigner representations of the two operators. The Wigner phase space representation of the projection operator limt-joo %) for the parabolic barrier potential is h(p + mwtq). Computing the Wigner phase space representation of the symmetrized thermal flux operator involves only imaginary time matrix elements. As shown by Poliak and Liao, the QTST expression for the rate is then ... 

Recently there has emerged the beginning of a direct, operational link between quantum chemistry and statistical thermodynamic. The link is obtained by the ability to write E = V Vij—namely, to write the output of quantum-mechanical computations as the standard input for statistical computations, It seems very important that an operational link be found in order to connect the discrete description of matter (X-ray, nmr, quantum theory) with the continuous description of matter (boundary conditions, diffusion). The link, be it a transformation (probably not unitary) or other technique, should be such that the nonequilibrium concepts, the dissipative structure concepts, can be used not only as a language for everyday biologist, but also as a tool of quantitation value, with a direct, quantitative and operational link to the discrete description of matter. 

In M0ller-Plesset theory, first-order perturbation theory does not improve on the HF energy because the zeroth-order Hamiltonian is not itself the HF Hamiltonian. However, first-order perturbation theory can be useful for estimating energetic effects associated with operators that extend the HF Hamiltonian. Typical examples of such terms include the mass-velocity and one-electron Darwin corrections that arise in relativistic quantum mechanics. It is fairly difficult to self-consistently optimize wavefunctions for systems where these tenns are explicitly included in the Hamiltonian, but an estimate of their energetic contributions may be had from simple first-order perturbation theory, since that energy is computed simply by taking the expectation values of the operators over the much more easily obtained HF wave functions. 

Equation (9.32) is also useful to the extent it suggests die general way in which various spectral properties may be computed. The energy of a system represented by a wave function is computed as the expectation value of the Hamiltonian operator. So, differentiation of the energy with respect to a perturbation is equivalent to differentiation of the expectation value of the Hamiltonian. In the case of first derivatives, if the energy of the system is minimized with respect to the coefficients defining die wave function, the Hellmann-Feynman theorem of quantum mechanics allows us to write... 

This becomes particularly clear to the student of Quantum Mechanics. His previous experience was probably that functions specified an action on some specified number to produce another number. This notion was quickly replaced by regarding (wave-)functions as objects, to be acted upon by operators to produce other functions. After a while it becomes clear that it is often much more profitable to regard the operators as objects, to be combined by composition and commutation rules and perhaps mapped onto each other by functions. Any of these levels of abstraction can be found also in computer programs. 

---