Hamiltonian Interaction Modeling

Figure C3.2.18.(a) Model a-helix, (b) hydrogen bonding contacts in tire helix, and (c) schematic representation of tire effective Hamiltonian interactions between atoms in tire protein backbone. From [23].

In conclusion, just as the IBM, the FDSM contains, for each low energy collective mode, a dynamical symmetry. For no broken pairs, some of the FDSM symmetries correspond to those experimentally known and studied previouly by the IBM. Thus all the IBM dynamical symmetries are recovered. In addition, as a natural consequence of the Hamiltonian, the model describes also the coupling of unpaired particles to such modes. Furthermore, since the model is fully microscopic, its parameters are calculable from effective nucleon-nucleon interactions. The uncanny resemblance of these preliminary results to well-established phenomenology leads us to speculate that fermion dynamical symmetries in nuclear structure may be far more pervasive than has commonly been supposed. 

The Kondo-lattice Hamiltonian conserves total spin and being an interacting model is nontrivial to solve. However, as with the conjugated systems, it is possible to solve finite Kondo chains efficiently by employing the VB method. The VB... 

Let us consider a (2A + l)-degrees-of-freedom oscillator system (A is a nonnegative integer), whose Hamiltonian is given by a -interaction model truncated in reciprocal space (< )4 MTRS) ... 

Effective Hamiltonians and effective operators are used to provide a theoretical justification and, when necessary, corrections to the semi-empirical Hamiltonians and operators of many fields. In such applications, Hq may, but does not necessarily, correspond to a well defined model. For example. Freed and co-workers utilize ab initio DPT and QDPT calculations to study some semi-empirical theories of chemical bonding [27-29] and the Slater-Condon parameters of atomic physics [30]. Lindgren and his school employ a special case of DPT to analyze atomic hyperfine interaction model operators [31]. Ellis and Osnes [32] review the extensive body of work on the derivation of the nuclear shell model. Applications to other problems of nuclear physics, to solid state, and to statistical physics are given in reviews by Brandow [33, 34], while... 

The Hiickel model as applied to polyenes possesses a symmetry known as alternancy symmetry, since the polyene system can be subdivided into two sublattices such that the Hiickel resonance integral involves sites on different sublattices. In such systems, the Hamiltonian remains invariant when the creation and annihilation operators at each site are interchanged with a phase of +1 for sites on one sublattice and a phase of -1 on sites of the other. Even in interacting models this symmetry exists when the system is half-filled. The alternancy symmetry is known variously as electron-hole symmetry or charge-conjugation symmetry [16]. 

Of course, the effective Hamiltonian/interaction lies in the model space, which is a part of the restricted Hilbert space with constant number of photons, while the wave operator now acts in the extended space. 

Note that our purpose of rigorous modelling cannot be completely separated from earlier research on semi-empirical or model Hamiltonians. On one side these Hamiltonians could be parametrized by theoretical simulation techniques and on the other some experimental data could also be introduced in the simulation techniques, for example in the characterization of truncated Hamiltonians. Finally it should be emphasized that research on pseudo-Hamiltonians and model Hamiltonians is always guided by some intuitive knowledge of the passive and active constituents of the system (atomic cores, atoms in molecules, functional group,...) and by the assumption of transferability of their potentials and interactions. 

Hubbard Hamiltonians are model Hamiltonians describing the low-energy physics of interacting fermionic and bosonic particles in a lattice [105]. They have the general tight-binding form... 

A practically identical model has been proposed independently by Weinstein and his CO workers the interaction field modified Hamiltonian (IFMH) model [141]. These authors discussed in details the case of the HF. .. HCOF complex and compared the IFMH results with perturbational calculations. It is interesting to note that in the course of the IFMH calculation the first iteration and the fully converged results yield practically identical interaction energy at least for the actual case. On the other hand, individual components of the interaction energy differ considerably in the two calculations, which shows the importance of charge reorganizations. 

There has been a considerable effort to go beyond the mean field approximation just discussed. However in doing so one has always to keep in mind that a serious approximation has been made by eliminating the conduction electrons from the problem. For metals this approximation is so drastic that it hardly pays to go beyond the simplest approximation within the effective-ion interaction model. Nevertheless it is an interesting mathematical question how the hamiltonian defined by eq. (17.84) can be solved more accurately. There exist several refinements as compared with the mean field results. Using a Green s function decoupling method it was shown (Pytte and Thomas, 1968) that the... 

Unfortunately Frohlich could not know that the electron-phonon interaction was not the true interaction model and applied his transformation to the wrong Hamiltonian. Since the author did not initially involved the COM problem into the consideration, he made the same mistake as Frohlich in all previous works referred to [12-20] with the aforesaid negative consequences for the later comparison tests [22] with the Born-Handy ansatz. Therefore we now present the solution which correctly incorporates all 3N degrees of freedom, unified under the conception of electron-hyperphonon interaction. 

The independent particles described by the Hartree-Fock Hamiltonian, or indeed by the Hamiltonian associated with any independent particle model other than the non-interacting model (or bare particle model) are different from the original particles, i.e. the electrons. These particles are termed quasiparticles. The interactions between these quasiparticles are weaker than the interaction between the original bare particles. There are important differences between the properties of the quasiparticles and those of the bare particles. In particular, we have seen that... 

The correlation functions provide an alternate route to the equilibrium properties of classical fluids. In particular, the two-particle correlation fimction of a system with a pairwise additive potential detemrines all of its themiodynamic properties. It also detemrines the compressibility of systems witir even more complex tliree-body and higher-order interactions. The pair correlation fiinctions are easier to approximate than the PFs to which they are related they can also be obtained, in principle, from x-ray or neutron diffraction experiments. This provides a useful perspective of fluid stmcture, and enables Hamiltonian models and approximations for the equilibrium stmcture of fluids and solutions to be tested by direct comparison with the experimentally detennined correlation fiinctions. We discuss the basic relations for the correlation fiinctions in the canonical and grand canonical ensembles before considering applications to model systems. 

Slightly more complex models treat the water, the amphiphile and the oil as tliree distinct variables corresponding to the spin variables. S = +1, 0, and -1. The most general Hamiltonian with nearest-neighboiir interactions has the fomi... 

If the states are degenerate rather than of different symmetry, the model Hamiltonian becomes the Jahn-Teller model Hamiltonian. For example, in many point groups D and so a doubly degenerate electronic state can interact with a doubly degenerate vibrational mode. In this, the x e Jahn-Teller effect the first-order Hamiltonian is then [65]... 

The first theoretical handling of the weak R-T combined with the spin-orbit coupling was carried out by Pople [71]. It represents a generalization of the perturbative approaches by Renner and PL-H. The basis functions are assumed as products of (42) with the eigenfunctions of the spin operator conesponding to values E = 1/2. The spin-orbit contribution to the model Hamiltonian was taken in the phenomenological form (16). It was assumed that both interactions are small compared to the bending vibrational frequency and that both the... 

---