Model molecular systems with possible

Mesoscale self-assembly We have not yet modeled MESA by computer, but with the wealth of experimental results we are in a position to develop believable computer simulations calibrated by experiment. The force of attraction between the objects is well understood mathematically in a number of cases [33,120] and in some systems it may be possible to measure these forces experimentally [149]. Some of the problems encountered in modeling molecular systems will also be encountered in modeling MESA. For example, finding global rather than local minima, the availability of computer time limiting how long the assembly can be modeled, and constructing potential functions for interactions that have not been determined... 

My personal special emphasis has always been on the wavefunction itself. Since the wavefunction is not an observable, it is not possible to carry out an empirical calibration of a model wavefunction. Rather one must place it in the context of a sequence of wavefunctions that ultimately converges to the exact answer and produces correct properties without empirical corrections. At the same time, I prefer wavefunctions that apply to as wide a range of molecular systems as possible but that have some chance of being interpreted. The Cl wavefunctions generated for small molecules using natural or MCSCF orbitals are of this type. More modern wavefunctions such as MPn, full Cl, or coupled clusters calculated with Hartree-Fock virtual orbitals are not interpretable, and are usually never even looked at. 

As the graphical capabilities of the computer systems became more powerful simultaneously the number of visualized structures increased. With the introduction of raster graphics (1974) and colored raster graphics displays (1979), other forms of molecular representations were possible [197]. CPK models could be represented and colored bonds or molecular surfaces could be visualized. 

At a physical level. Equation 35 represents a mixing of all of the possible electronic states of the molecule, all of which have some probability of being attained according to the laws of quantum mechanics. Full Cl is the most complete non-relativistic treatment of the molecular system possible, within the limitations imposed by the chosen basis set. It represents the possible quantum states of the system while modelling the electron density in accordance with the definition (and constraints) of the basis set in use. For this reason, it appears in the rightmost column of the following methods chart ... 

The chemical task in quantum chemistry consist of choosing a proven model (i. e. the reduction of the molecular system to as few as possible atoms while conserving its characteristic properties), and choosing a reliable quantum chemical method, and last but not least, the interpretation of the data calculated using suitable reaction theoretical concepts5 . The following part deals with quantum chemical methods often used and special qualities of their application. 

In molecular DFT calculations, it is natural to include all electrons in the calculations and hence no further subtleties than the ones described arise in the calculation of the isomer shift. However, there are situations where other approaches are advantageous. The most prominent situation is met in the case of solids. Here, it is difficult to capture the effects of an infinite system with a finite size cluster model and one should resort to dedicated solid state techniques. It appears that very efficient solid state DFT implementations are possible on the basis of plane wave basis sets. However, it is difficult to describe the core region with plane wave basis sets. Hence, the core electrons need to be replaced by pseudopotentials, which precludes a direct calculation of the electron density at the Mossbauer absorber atom. However, there are workarounds and the subtleties involved in this subject are discussed in a complementary chapter by Blaha (see CD-ROM, Part HI). 

In contrast to the NRTL-SAC model, the UNIFAC model developed by Fredenslund et. al. [29] divides each molecule into a set of functional groups that interact with each other on a binaiy basis and whose interactions are combined together to describe the global liquid phase interaction between molecules. Because the segments in UNIFAC are based on functional groups it is possible to model a system provided that all of the molecular structures are known. The problem with pharmaceutical sized molecules is that existing UNIFAC parameter tables do not contain many of the group interaction parameters that are necessary, and even when they do, the interactions are fitted to a database of chemicals that are much smaller and simpler than pharmaceuticals, and typically fail to represent them adequately. 

---