Eigenfunctions symmetry

Two states /a and /b that are eigenfunctions of a Hamiltonian Hq in the absence of some external perturbation (e.g., electromagnetic field or static electric field or potential due to surrounding ligands) can be "coupled" by the perturbation V only if the symmetries of V and of the two wavefunctions obey a so-called selection rule. In particular, only if the coupling integral (see Appendix D which deals with time independent perturbation theory)... 

In my discussion of pyridine, I took a combination of these determinants that had the correct singlet spin symmetry (that is, the combination that represented a singlet state). I could equally well have concentrated on the triplet states. In modem Cl calculations, we simply use all the raw Slater determinants. Such single determinants by themselves are not necessarily spin eigenfunctions, but provided we include them all we will get correct spin eigenfunctions on diago-nalization of the Hamiltonian matrix. 

In dealing with systems containing only two electrons we have not been troubled with the exclusion principle, but have accepted both symmetric and antisymmetric positional eigenfunctions for by multiplying by a spin eigenfunction of the proper symmetry character an antisymmetric total eigenfunction can always be obtained. In the case of two hydrogen atoms there are three... 

In case that the symmetry character of an electron-pair structure and an ionic structure for a molecule are the same, it may be difficult to decide between the two, for the structure may he anywhere between these extremes. The zeroth-order eigenfunction for the two bond electrons for a molecule MX (HF, say, or NaCl) with a single electron-pair bond would be... 

If the perturbation function shows cubic symmetry, and in certain other special cases, the first-order perturbation energy is not effective in destroying the orbital magnetic moment, for the eigenfunction px = = i py leads to the same first-order perturbation terms as pi or pv or any other combinations of them. In such cases the higher order perturbation energies are to be compared with the multiplet separation in the above criterion. 

To see why this is so, let us attempt to apply the procedure of Section II.B to a bound-state wave function. This is illustrated schematically in Fig. 19. It is clear immediately that we cannot construct an unsymmetric in the double space, because each bound-state eigenfunction must be an irreducible representation of the double-space symmetry group. Thus a bound-state function in the double space is necessarily symmetric or antisymmetric under R2k, and is thus either a Fq or a Fn function. For a Fq function, we have Fn = 0 (since and Fn cannot form a degenerate pair), which implies [from Eq. (6)] that... 

The Spin adapted Reduced Hamiltonian SRH) is the contraetion to a p-electron space of the matrix representation of the Hamiltonian Operator, 2 , in the N-electron space for a given Spin Symmetry [17,18,25,28], The basis for the matrix representation are the eigenfunctions of the operator. The block matrix which is contracted is that which corresponds to the spin symmetry selected In this way, the spin adaptation of the contracted matrix is insnred. 

The most famous case concerns the symmetry breaking in the Hartree-Fock approximation. The phenomenon appeared on elementary problems, such as H2, when the so-called unrestricted Hartree-Fock algorithms were tried. The unrestricted Hartree-Fock formalism, using different orbitals for a and p electrons, was first proposed by G. Berthier [5] in 1954 (and immediately after J.A. Pople [6] ) for problems where the number of a andp electrons were different. This formulation takes the freedom to deviate from the constraints of being an eigenfunction. 

It is important to distinguish between mmetiy properties of wave functions on one hand and those of density matrices and densities on the other. The symmetry properties of wave functions are derived from those of the Hamiltonian. The "normal" situation is that the Hamiltonian commutes with a set of symmetry operations which form a group. The eigenfunctions of that Hamiltonian must then transform according to the irreducible representations of the group. Approximate wave functions with the same symmetry properties can be constructed, and they make it possible to simplify the calculations. 

It is also of interest to study the "inverse" problem. If something is known about the symmetry properties of the density or the (first order) density matrix, what can be said about the symmetry properties of the corresponding wave functions In a one electron problem the effective Hamiltonian is constructed either from the density [in density functional theories] or from the full first order density matrix [in Hartree-Fock type theories]. If the density or density matrix is invariant under all the operations of a space CToup, the effective one electron Hamiltonian commutes with all those elements. Consequently the eigenfunctions of the Hamiltonian transform under these operations according to the irreducible representations of the space group. We have a scheme which is selfconsistent with respect to symmetty. 

The first step in the solution of equation (10.28b) is to hold the two nuclei fixed in space, so that the operator drops out. Equation (10.28b) then takes the form of (10.6). Since the diatomic molecule has axial symmetry, the eigenfunctions and eigenvalues of He in equation (10.6) depend only on the fixed value R of the intemuclear distance, so that we may write them as tpKiy, K) and Sk(R). If equation (10.6) is solved repeatedly to obtain the ground-state energy eo(K) for many values of the parameter R, then a curve of the general form... 

The basis of the expansion, ifra, are configuration state functions (CSF), which are linear combinations of Slater determinants that are eigenfunctions of the spin operator and have the correct spatial symmetry and total spin of the electronic state under investigation [42],... 

When spin-orbit coupling is introduced the symmetry states in the double group CJ are found from the direct products of the orbital and spin components. Linear combinations of the C"V eigenfunctions are then taken which transform correctly in C when spin is explicitly included, and the space-spin combinations are formed according to Ballhausen (39) so as to be diagonal under the rotation operation Cf. For an odd-electron system the Kramers doublets transform as e ( /2)a, n =1, 3, 5,... whilst for even electron systems the degenerate levels transform as e na, n = 1, 2, 3,. For d1 systems the first term in H naturally vanishes and the orbital functions are at once invested with spin to construct the C functions. 

The problem of evaluating the effect of the perturbation created by the ligands thus reduces to the solution of the secular determinant with matrix elements of the type rp[ lICT (pk, where rpj) and cpk) identify the eigenfunctions of the free ion. Since cpt) and cpk) are spherically symmetric, and can be expressed in terms of spherical harmonics, the potential is expanded in terms of spherical harmonics to fully exploit the symmetry of the system in evaluating these matrix elements. In detail, two different formalisms have been developed in the past to deal with the calculation of matrix elements of Equation 1.13 [2, 3]. Since t/CF is the sum of one-electron operators, while cpi) and cpk) are many-electron functions, both the formalisms require decomposition of free ion terms in linear combinations of monoelectronic functions. 

Since the Hamiltonian is symmetric in space coordinates the time-dependent Schrodinger equation prevents a system of identical particles in a symmetric state from passing into an anti-symmetric state. The symmetry character of the eigenfunctions therefore is a property of the particles themselves. Only one eigenfunction corresponds to each eigenfunction and hence there is no exchange degeneracy. 

How do CMOs and LMOs differ The CMOs are symmetry-adapted eigenfunctions of the Fock (or Kohn-Sham) operator F, necessarily reflecting all the molecular point-group symmetries of F itself,26 whereas the LMOs often lack... 

Similar to closed chaotic billiards the idea was to adjust RMT to the effective Hamiltonian Heff = H — iT (see the pioneering work (J.J.M. Verbaarschot et.al., 1985) and (H.-J. Sommers et.al., 1999) for references). These matrices correspond to GUE with broken time-reversal symmetry. A next natural step was to assume that in the transition region between GOE and GUE, the eigenfunctions are complex and may be thought as columns of the unitary random matrix (G. Lenz et.al., 1992 E. Kanzieper et.al., 1996) S = S +ieS2, composed of two independent orthogonal matrices. The parameter... 

---