Interaction diagram interpretation

Having carefully constructed the interaction diagram for the carbonyl group in Figure 3.21, we must now interpret it. We first make note of the frontier orbitals. 

Use a two-orbital interaction diagram to explain the observed feature of any one of the following systems. Note A clear orbital interaction diagram includes pictures of the orbitals before and after the interaction and shows the disposition of the electrons. A brief verbal explanation of the diagram, in addition to the interpretation, is also desirable. If more than two orbitals seem to be involved, use your judgment to choose the two most important orbitals. 

What I have tried to do in this book and the published papers behind it is to move simultaneously in two directions—to form a link between chemistry and physics by introducing simple band structure perspectives into chemical thinking about surfaces. And I have tried to interpret these delocalized band structures from a very chemical point of view—via frontier orbital considerations based on interaction diagrams. 

According to the BCS (Bardeen, Cooper and Schrieffer) theory, electrons form pairs below the critieal temperature T., stabilized by a decrease in energy A = kT. . Lattice vibrations, more precisely acoustic phonons, are mediators of the interaction. This interpretation is confirmed through different experimental observations when the transition temperature is low (T. < 30 0 K). For higher temperatures, and henee stronger interaetions, the mechanism of pair formation stated by BCS must be reexamined. Several proposals have been made but to date none have been impressive. The phase diagram in Figure 11.7 shows how superconductivity appears under extreme eonditions. 

This expression may be interpreted in a very similar spirit to tliat given above for one-photon processes. Now there is a second interaction with the electric field and the subsequent evolution is taken to be on a third surface, with Hamiltonian H. In general, there is also a second-order interaction with the electric field through which returns a portion of the excited-state amplitude to surface a, with subsequent evolution on surface a. The Feymnan diagram for this second-order interaction is shown in figure Al.6.9. 

The main cost of this enlianced time resolution compared to fluorescence upconversion, however, is the aforementioned problem of time ordering of the photons that arrive from the pump and probe pulses. Wlien the probe pulse either precedes or trails the arrival of the pump pulse by a time interval that is significantly longer than the pulse duration, the action of the probe and pump pulses on the populations resident in the various resonant states is nnambiguous. When the pump and probe pulses temporally overlap in tlie sample, however, all possible time orderings of field-molecule interactions contribute to the response and complicate the interpretation. Double-sided Feymuan diagrams, which provide a pictorial view of the density matrix s time evolution under the action of the laser pulses, can be used to detenuine the various contributions to the sample response [125]. 

Note This simple orbital interaction picture is nsefnl for interpreting results, bill neglects many aspects of a calcnlation, such as electron-electron interactions. These diagrams are closely related to the results from Extended Ilhckel calculations. 

In Eq. (11-120) Sc denotes the contribution to 8 from connected diagrams only, i.e., from the diagrams shown in Fig. 11-5. The energy E0 in this phase factor, exp (+iE0T), can be interpreted as the vacuum self-energy due to the interaction By redefining... 

---