Orbitals qualitative properties

The NEVPT approach has a list of remarkable qualitative properties (size-consistency, invariance to the rotation of active orbitals, absence of intruder states, first-order correction to the wave function is a pure spin state) which indicates that this as a serious candidate when an MR problem should be solve. Although with all these properties the QMBPT2 method cannot compete (e.g., it is obviously not invariant to the rotation of active orbitals), the relative accuracy of these methods is still an interesting question. 

In this paper a new perturbation approach has been introduced based on a quasiparticle framework where the quasiparticles are introduced by a many-particle unitary transformation. The new approach has some beneficial qualitative properties like the size-extensivity and robustness against the intruder problem. According to the presented test calculations its accuracy is comparable to that of the NEVPT approach. The main disadvantages of the quasiparticle-based MBPT are the lack of invariance to the rotation of active orbitals and the high calculation cost of intermediate quantities for large CAS problems. 

It is important to have a grasp of the qualitative properties of the hydrogen-like orbitals in three-dimensional space and to realize that they represent three-dimensional de Broglie waves. The real orbitals that we have obtained correspond to standing waves, with stationary nodes. We can visualize these waves by considering where they vanish. A three-dimensional wave can vanish at a surface (a nodal surface). Since each orbital is a product of three factors, the orbital vanishes if any one of the factors vanishes. 

Emphasis on the ways in which spatial properties of electron density orbitals, qualitatively conceived, determine crucial features of atomic interactions and molecular geometry paved the path for introduction of abstract models represented dia-grammatically. Simple sketches of orbitals begin to appear in the research journal literature of the 1930s but their appearance was rare and remained so until at least the late 1960s. A few seminal textbooks instead appear to be responsible for the widespread introduction of orbital diagrams into chemistry classrooms and conversation. 

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. 

Extended Hiickel gives a qualitative view of the valence orbitals. The formulation of extended Hiickel is such that it is only applicable to the valence orbitals. The method reproduces the correct symmetry properties for the valence orbitals. Energetics, such as band gaps, are sometimes reasonable and other times reproduce trends better than absolute values. Extended Hiickel tends to be more useful for examining orbital symmetry and energy than for predicting molecular geometries. It is the method of choice for many band structure calculations due to the very computation-intensive nature of those calculations. 

While orbitals may be useful for qualitative understanding of some molecules, it is important to remember that they are merely mathematical functions that represent solutions to the Hartree-Fock equations for a given molecule. Other orbitals exist which will produce the same energy and properties and which may look quite different. There is ultimately no physical reality which can be associated with these images. In short, individual orbitals are mathematical not physical constructs. 

In Chapter 7, we used valence bond theory to explain bonding in molecules. It accounts, at least qualitatively, for the stability of the covalent bond in terms of the overlap of atomic orbitals. By invoking hybridization, valence bond theory can account for the molecular geometries predicted by electron-pair repulsion. Where Lewis structures are inadequate, as in S02, the concept of resonance allows us to explain the observed properties. 

The reader will be aware at this point (for example, by comparing the H2S orbitals of Figures 3 and 4) that the final result is not unique, this being of course consistent with the qualitative character of these methods. The symmetry properties are, however, preserved,... 

The period 1930-1980s may be the golden age for the growth of qualitative theories and conceptual models. As is well known, the frontier molecular orbital theory [1-3], Woodward-Hoffmann rules [4, 5], and the resonance theory [6] have equipped chemists well for rationalizing and predicting pericyclic reaction mechanisms or molecular properties with fundamental concepts such as orbital symmetry and hybridization. Remarkable advances in aeative synthesis and fine characterization during recent years appeal for new conceptual models. 

Qualitatively, we can understand this variation by recalling that as the principal quantum number increases, the valence orbitals become less stable. In tin, the four n — 5 valence electrons are bound relatively loosely to the atom, resulting in the metallic properties associated with electrons that are easily removed, hi carbon, the four n — 2 valence electrons are bound relatively tightly to the atom, resulting in nonmetallic behavior. Silicon ( = 3) and germanium (a = 4) fall in between these two extremes. Example describes the elements with five valence electrons. 

Relative contribution of each of these structures differs significantly and is determined by internal structural characteristics of the nitrones and by the influence of external factors, such as changes in polarity of solvent, formation of a hydrogen bond, and complexation and protonation. Changes in the electronic stmcture of nitrones, effected by any of these factors, which are manifested in the changes of physicochemical properties and spectral characteristics, can be explained, qualitatively, by analyzing the relative contribution of A-G structures. On the basis of a vector analysis of dipole moments of two series of nitrones (355), a quantum-chemical computation of ab initio molecular orbitals of the model nitrone CH2=N(H)0 and its tautomers, and methyl derivatives (356), it has been established that the bond in nitrones between C and N atoms is almost... 

The GHO basis can therefore provide a localised, directional set of orbitals (hybrids) which do not have the principal qualitative disadvantage of the usual hybrid sets they can be mutually orientated in any directions. What is more the directions taken up by the GHOs can be decided variationally and not by the unitary properties of a hybridisation matrix . This conclusion means that the use of a GHO basis provides both a localised bonding picture and simultaneously a theoretical validation of the VSEPR rules. Thus, it is not necessary, for example, to contrast the hybrid method and the VSEPR method for molecular geometries (30) they are complementary. 

---