Modelling Atoms Atomic Orbitals

Erwin Schrodinger developed an equation to describe the electron in the hydrogen atom as having both wavelike and particle-like behaviour. Solution of the Schrodinger wave equation by application of the so-called quantum mechanics or wave mechanics shows that electronic energy levels within atoms are quantised that is, only certain specific electronic energy levels are allowed. 

Solving the Schrodinger wave equation yields a series of mathematical functions called wavefunctions, represented by R (Greek letter psi), and their corresponding energies. 

The square of the wavefunction, T2, relates to the probability of finding the electron at a particular location in space, with atomic orbitals being conveniently pictured as boundary surfaces (regions of space where there is a 90% probability of finding the electron within the enclosed volume). 

In this quantum mechanical model of the hydrogen atom, three quantum numbers are used to describe an atomic orbital  

In order to understand how electrons of many-electron atoms arrange themselves into the available orbitals it is necessary to define a fourth quantum number  

---

In the MO bonding model, atomic orbitals which are of the same symmetry, similar energy and which have significant overlap are combined to produce an equal number of MOs. These are no longer localized at... 

Common Basis Sets—Modeling Atomic Orbitals... 

Boranes are typical species with electron-deficient bonds, where a chemical bond has more centers than electrons. The smallest molecule showing this property is diborane. Each of the two B-H-B bonds (shown in Figure 2-60a) contains only two electrons, while the molecular orbital extends over three atoms. A correct representation has to represent the delocalization of the two electrons over three atom centers as shown in Figure 2-60b. Figure 2-60c shows another type of electron-deficient bond. In boron cage compounds, boron-boron bonds share their electron pair with the unoccupied atom orbital of a third boron atom [86]. These types of bonds cannot be accommodated in a single VB model of two-electron/ two-centered bonds. 

Molecular dipole moments are often used as descriptors in QPSR models. They are calculated reliably by most quantum mechanical techniques, not least because they are part of the parameterization data for semi-empirical MO techniques. Higher multipole moments are especially easily available from semi-empirical calculations using the natural atomic orbital-point charge (NAO-PC) technique [40], but can also be calculated rehably using ab-initio or DFT methods. They have been used for some QSPR models. 

I lie next level of approximation is the neglect of diatomic differential overlap model (NDDO [Pople et al. 1965]) this theory only neglects differential overlap between atomic orbitals on... 

Each of these tools has advantages and limitations. Ab initio methods involve intensive computation and therefore tend to be limited, for practical reasons of computer time, to smaller atoms, molecules, radicals, and ions. Their CPU time needs usually vary with basis set size (M) as at least M correlated methods require time proportional to at least M because they involve transformation of the atomic-orbital-based two-electron integrals to the molecular orbital basis. As computers continue to advance in power and memory size, and as theoretical methods and algorithms continue to improve, ab initio techniques will be applied to larger and more complex species. When dealing with systems in which qualitatively new electronic environments and/or new bonding types arise, or excited electronic states that are unusual, ab initio methods are essential. Semi-empirical or empirical methods would be of little use on systems whose electronic properties have not been included in the data base used to construct the parameters of such models. 

An extended Huckel calculation is a simple means for modeling the valence orbitals based on the orbital overlaps and experimental electron affinities and ionization potentials. In some of the physics literature, this is referred to as a tight binding calculation. Orbital overlaps can be obtained from a simplified single STO representation based on the atomic radius. The advantage of extended Huckel calculations over Huckel calculations is that they model all the valence orbitals. 

The neglect of electron-electron interactions in the Extended Hiickel model has several consequences. For example, the atomic orbital binding energies are fixed and do not depend on charge density. With the more accurate NDO semi-empirical treatments, these energies are appropriately sensitive to the surrounding molecular environment. 

Carbon has six electrons around the atomic core as shown in Fig. 2. Among them two electrons are in the K-shell being the closest position from the centre of atom, and the residual four electrons in the L-shell. TTie former is the Is state and the latter are divided into two states, 2s and 2p. The chemical bonding between neighbouring carbon atoms is undertaken by the L-shell electrons. Three types of chemical bonds in carbon are single bond contributed from one 2s electron and three 2p electrons to be cited as sp bonding, double bond as sp and triple bond as sp from the hybridised atomic-orbital model. 

Valence bond and molecular orbital theory both incorporate the wave description of an atom s electrons into this picture of H2, but in somewhat different ways. Both assume that electron waves behave like more familiar waves, such as sound and light waves. One important property of waves is called interference in physics. Constructive interference occurs when two waves combine so as to reinforce each other (in phase) destructive interference occurs when they oppose each other (out of phase) (Figure 2.2). Recall from Section 1.1 that electron waves in atoms are characterized by then- wave function, which is the same as an orbital. For an electron in the most stable state of a hydrogen atom, for example, this state is defined by the I5 wave function and is often called the I5 orbital. The valence bond model bases the connection between two atoms on the overlap between half-filled orbitals of the two atoms. The molecular orbital model assembles a set of molecular- orbitals by combining the atomic orbitals of all of the atoms in the molecule. 

The usefulness of spin density surfaces can be seen in the following models of methyl radical, CH3, and allyl radical, CH2=CHCH2. In each case, the surface is shaped somewhat like a 2p atomic orbital on carbon. There are some interesting differences between the two radicals, however. While the unpaired electron is confined to the carbon atom in methyl radical, it is delocalized over the two terminal carbons in allyl radical. 

In later chapters we will be concerned with the LCAO model. Suppose we have a set of n atomic orbitals > i(r), X2( )> > d a normalized LCAO orbital... 

The orbital model is a very attractive one, and it can obviously be used to successfully model atoms, molecules and the solid state because it is now part... 

In the PPP model, each first-row atom such as carbon and nitrogen contributes a single basis functiqn to the n system. Just as in Huckel theory, the orbitals x, m e not rigorously defined but we can visualize them as 2p j atomic orbitals. Each first-row atom contributes a certain number of ar-electrons—in the pyridine case, one electron per atom just as in Huckel 7r-electron theory. 

Looking back, 1 seem to have made two contradictory statements about the basis fiinctions Xt used in the PPP model. On the one hand, I appealed to your chemical Intuition and prior knowledge by suggesting that the basis functions should be j garded as ordinary atomic orbitals of the correct symmetry (i.e. 2p orbitals). On the other hand, 1 told you that the basis functions used in such calculations are taken to be orthonormal and so... 

We said in Section 1.5 that chemists use two models for describing covalent bonds valence bond theory and molecular orbital theory. Having now seen the valence bond approach, which uses hybrid atomic orbitals to account for geometry and assumes the overlap of atomic orbitals to account for electron sharing, let s look briefly at the molecular orbital approach to bonding. We ll return to the topic in Chapters 14 and 15 for a more in-depth discussion. 

In the 1930s a theoretical treatment of the covalent bond was developed by, among others, Linus Pauling (1901-1994), then at the California Institute of Technology. The atomic orbital or valence bond model won him the Nobel Prize in chemistry in 1954. Eight years later, Pauling won the Nobel Peace Prize for his efforts to stop nuclear testing. 

As pointed out in Chapter 7, the atomic orbital (valence bond) model regards benzene as a resonance hybrid of the two structures... 

In Chapter 9, we considered a simple picture of metallic bonding, the electron-sea model The molecular orbital approach leads to a refinement of this model known as band theory. Here, a crystal of a metal is considered to be one huge molecule. Valence electrons of the metal are fed into delocalized molecular orbitals, formed in the usual way from atomic... 

Atomic hydrogen spectrum, 253 Atomic number. 88 and periodic table, 89 table, inside back cover Atomic orbitals, 262. 263 Atomic pile, 120 Atomic theory, 17, 22, 28, 234 as a model, 17 chemical evidence for, 234 of John Dalton, 236 review, 34... 

Starting with Bohr s version of 1913, the evolution of this model was examined in an attempt to highlight the assumptions and approximations that were made at each stage. As in the case of many other papers in this volume, there is an educational motivation for raising these questions, especially in view of the central role of the atomic orbital model at all levels of chemical education. My suspicion is that many chemical educators do not appreciate the extent to which this model is an approximation and the conditions under which it ceases to be applicable. 

In case the general reader might be wondering about the connection between atomic orbitals and the periodic table, let me address this issue briefly. As mentioned above, in the case of the first paper, the modern explanation for the periodic table is based entirely on the orbital model. It is only by ignoring the approximate nature of the model that the explanation for the periodic system might appear to be full and complete. 

This paper deals with some questions in the foundations of chemistry. The atomic orbital (or electronic configuration) model is examined, with regards to both its origins and current usage. I explore the question of whether the commonly-used electronic configuration of atoms have any basis in quantum mechanics as is often claimed particularly in chemical education. 

The problems which the orbital approximation raises in chemical education have been discussed elsewhere by the author (Scerri [1989], [1991]). Briefly, chemistry textbooks often fail to stress the approximate nature of atomic orbitals and imply that the solution to all difficult chemical problems ultimately lies in quantum mechanics. There has been an increassing tendency for chemical education to be biased towards theories, particularly quantum mechanics. Textbooks show a growing tendency to begin with the establishment of theoretical concepts such as atomic orbitals. Only recently has a reaction begun to take place, with a call for more qualitatively based courses and texts (Zuckermann [1986]). A careful consideration of the orbital model would therefore have consequences for chemical education and would clarify the status of various approximate theories purporting to be based on quantum mechanics. 

To improve our model we note that s- and /7-orbitals are waves of electron density centered on the nucleus of an atom. We imagine that the four orbitals interfere with one another and produce new patterns where they intersect, like waves in water. Where the wavefunctions are all positive or all negative, the amplitudes are increased by this interference where the wavefunctions have opposite signs, the overall amplitude is reduced and might even be canceled completely. As a result, the interference between the atomic orbitals results in new patterns. These new patterns are called hybrid orbitals. Each of the four hybrid orbitals, designated bn, is formed from a linear combinations of the four atomic orbitals ... 

The structure of CaB contains bonding bands typical of the boron sublattice and capable of accommodating 20 electrons per CaB formula, and separated from antibonding bands by a relatively narrow gap (from 1.5 to 4.4 eV) . The B atoms of the B(, octahedron yield only 18 electrons thus a transfer of two electrons from the metal to the boron sublattice is necessary to stabilize the crystalline framework. The semiconducting properties of M B phases (M = Ca, Sr ", Ba, Eu, Yb ) and the metallic ones of M B or M B5 phases (Y, La, Ce, Pr, Nd ", Gd , Tb , Dy and Th ) are directly explained by this model . The validity of these models may be questionable because of the existence and stability of Na,Ba, Bft solid solutions and of KB, since they prove that the CaB -type structure is still stable when the electron contribution of the inserted atom is less than two . A detailed description of physical properties of hexaborides involves not only the bonding and antibonding B bands, but also bonds originating in the atomic orbitals of the inserted metal . ... 

The complex contains 72 atoms with 244 valence electrons distributed in 226 valence atomic orbitals. In order to reduce the computational effort, and to assess the contribution of the ligand 7r-orbitals to the overall spectrum, we examined a "reduced" model, see Figure 2, in which the benzene rings of the ligands are replaced by -HC=CH- groups. This model compound consists of... 

---