Orbital approximate theories

In view of this, early quantum mechanical approximations still merit interest, as they can provide quantitative data that can be correlated with observations on chemical reactivity. One of the most successful methods for explaining the course of chemical reactions is frontier molecular orbital (FMO) theory [5]. The course of a chemical reaction is rationali2ed on the basis of the highest occupied molecular orbital (HOMO) and the lowest unoccupied molecular orbital (LUMO), the frontier orbitals. Both the energy and the orbital coefficients of the HOMO and LUMO of the reactants are taken into account. 

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. 

The most usual starting point for approximate solutions to the electronic Schrodinger equation is to make the orbital approximation. In Hartree-Fock (HF) theory the many-electron wavefunction is taken to be the antisymmetrized product of one-electron wavefunctions (spin-orbitals) ... 

In this section we examine this orthogonality constraint in order to evaluate its consequences for a theory of valence. Is it a substantive formal constraint on the type of model we may use does it restrict the type of physical phenomenon we can describe or is it simply a technical constraint on the method of calculation or what In fact we shall find that the strong orthogonality constraint is central to any orbital basis theory of molecular electronic structure. It has a bearing on the applicability of the model approximations we use, on the validity of most numerical approximations used within these models and (apart from the simplest MO model) has a dominant effect on the technical feasibility of the methods of solution of the equations generated by our models. Thus, it is of some importance to try to separate these various effects and attempt to evaluate them individually. 

These criteria are justified by considering competition between CO and L for ti-electrons, and by the orbital sharing theory of interaction parameters, and are shared by the other approximate force field considered. 

Molecular orbital an initio calculations. These calcnlations represent a treatment of electron distribution and electron motion which implies that individual electrons are one-electron functions containing a product of spatial functions called molecular orbitals hi(x,y,z), 4/2(3 ,y,z), and so on. In the simplest version of this theory, a single assignment of electrons to orbitals is made. In turn, the orbitals form a many-electron wave function, 4/, which is the simplest molecular orbital approximation to solve Schrodinger s equation. In practice, the molecular orbitals, 4 1, 4/2,- -are taken as a linear combination of N known one-electron functions 4>i(x,y,z), 4>2(3,y,z) ... 

Equations (3.3) define the essence of the Hiickel molecular orbital (HMO) theory. Notice that the total energy is just the sum of the energies of the individual electrons. Simple Hiickel molecular orbital (SHMO) theory requires further approximations that we will discuss in due course. 

Sample problems and quizzes, grouped approximately by chapter, are presented in Appendix B. Many are based on examples from the recent literature and references are provided. Detailed answers are worked out for many of the problems. These serve as further examples to the reader of the application of the principles of orbital interaction theory. 

Molecular-orbital theory treats molecule formation from the separated atoms as arising from the interaction of the separate atomic orbitals to form new orbitals (molecular orbitals) which embrace the complete framework of the molecule. The ground state of the molecule is then one in which the electrons are assigned to the orbitals of lowest energy and are subject to the Pauli exclusion principle. Excited states are obtained by promoting an electron from a filled molecular orbital to an orbital which is normally empty in the ground state. The form of the molecular orbitals depends upon our model of molecule formation, but we shall describe (and use in detail in Sec. IV) only the most common, viz., the linear combination of atomic orbitals approximation. 

Here, we seek to obtain wave functions - molecular orbitals - in a manner analogous to atomic orbital (AO) theory. We harbour no preconceptions about the chemical bond except that, as in VB theory, the atomic orbitals of the constituent atoms are used as a basis. A naive, zeroth-order approximation might be to regard each AO as an MO, so that the distribution of electron density in a molecule is simply obtained by superimposing the constituent atoms whose AOs remain essentially unaltered. But since there is inevitably an appreciable amount of orbital overlap between atoms in any stable molecule - without it there would be no bonding - we must find a set of orthogonal linear combinations of the constituent atomic orbitals. These are the MOs, and their number must be equal to the number of AOs being combined. 

In molecular orbital (MO) theory, which is the most common implementation of QM used by chemists, electrons are distributed around the atomic nuclei until they reach a so-called self-consistent field (SCF), that is, until the attractive and repulsive forces between all the particles (electrons and nuclei) are in a steady state, and the energy is at a minimum. An SCF calculation yields the electronic wave function 4C (the electronic motion being separable from nuclear motion thanks to the Born-Oppenheimer approximation). This is the type of wave function usually referred to in the literature and in the rest of this chapter. 

It is interesting to note that while both Harry Kroto and Robert Curl were primarily interested in microwave spectroscopy, they published papers in the field of theoretical chemistry in the 1960s. For example, the paper by R. F. Curl Jr. and C. A. Coulson [Proc. Phys. Soc., 78,831 (1965)], Coulomb Hole in the Ground State of Two-Electron Atoms, resulted from a sabbatical year at Oxford. See also, H. W. Kroto and D. P. Santry, J. Chem. Phys., 47, 792 (1967). CNDO Molecular-Orbital Theory of Molecular Spectra. I. The Virtual-Orbital Approximation to Excited States. 

When Hiickel parameters are not available or reliable (e.g. for silicon or sulfur compounds), SCF calculations are used instead. In these cases, only pertinent MOs are given. Energies are then given in eV. Do not forget that FO is an approximate theory, to be used only for preliminary studies. Spending too much time calculating the frontier orbitals would be futile. Avoid sophisticated methods and use only simple ones (Hiickel, MNDO, AMI, PM3, STO-3G or 3-21G). 

Since the exact ground-state electronic wave function and density can only be approximated for most A-electron systems, a variational theory is needed for the practical case exemplified by an orbital functional theory. As shown in Section 5.1, any rule T 4> defines an orbital functional theory that in principle is exact for ground states. The reference state for any A-electron wave function T determines an orbital energy functional E = Eq + Ec,in which E0 = T + Eh + Ex + V is a sum of explicit orbital functionals, and If is aresidual correlation energy functional. In practice, the combination of exchange and correlation energy is approximated by an orbital functional Exc. 

Up to this point, our main concern was to reformulate the results of the LD ligand influence theory in the DMM form. Its main content was the symmetry-based analysis of the possible interplay between two types of perturbation substitution and deformation, controlled by the selection rules incorporated in the polarization propagator of the CLS. The mechanism of this interplay can be simply formulated as follows substitution produces perturbations of different symmetries which are supposed to induce transition densities of the same symmetries. In the frontier orbital approximation, only those densities among all possible ones can actually appear, which have the symmetry which enters into decomposition of the tensor product TH TL to the irreducible representations. These survived transition densities then induce the geometry deformations of the same symmetry. 

---