Spin and Symmetry

The symmetry of molecular systems with non-zero spin will be taken up in three stages We begin with an elementary discussion of the symmetry properties of spinning electrons and follow it with a few words about how the net spin of the electrons in a molecule affects its state symmetry. Then, in preparation for the analysis of thermal reactions in which electron spin is not conserved, we will consider how the overall symmetry of a reacting system can be retained by compensatory changes in spin- and orbital-angular momentum. [2, Chaps. 3-5] 

---

The single Slater determinant wavefunction (properly spin and symmetry adapted) is the starting point of the most common mean field potential. It is also the origin of the molecular orbital concept. 

In the present work, we report on a new semi-empirical theoretical approach which allows us to perform spin and symmetry unconstrained total energy calculations for clusters of transition metal atoms in a co .putationally efficient way. Our approach is based on the Tight Binding Molecular Dynamics (TBMD) method. 

Total number of spin and symmetry adapted configurations Number of spin and symmetry adapted configurations selected by second-order perturbation theory and treatedvariationally Property calculated with respect to the center of mass. 

If there is a molecular symmetry group whose elements leave the hamiltonian 36 invariant, then the closed-shell wavefunction belongs to the totally symmetric representation of both the spin and symmetry groups.8 It is further true that under these symmetry operations the molecular orbitals transform among each other by means of an orthogonal transformation, such as mentioned in Eq. (5) 9) and, therefore, span a representation of the molecular symmetry group. In general, this representation is reducible. 

G. Gidofalvi and D. A. Mazziotti, Spin and symmetry adaptation of the variational two-electron reduced-density-matrix method. Phys. Rev. A 72, 052505 (2005). 

Zgid, D., Nooijen, M. On the spin and symmetry adaptation of the density matrix renormalization group method. J. Chem. Phys. 2008, 128, 014107. 

The situation clearly becomes less favorable in lower symmetries where the terms of the same spin and symmetry span the subspaces of dimensionalities higher than two. For example, in the octahedral environment the LS states of cP- (d -) configuration span up to seven-dimensional spaces of many-electronic states [98]. Clearly that at an arbitrarily low symmetry the problem of linearly expressing the exact energy of many-electronic terms through the Racah parameters cannot be solved and obviously the energy of any of such multiple terms cannot be expressed as a linear combination of only diagonal matrix elements of the Hamiltonian. 

The fact that there are many electronic transitions possible, however, does not mean that they can or will occur. There are complex selection rules based on the symmetry of the ground and excited states of the molecule under examination. Basically, electronic transitions are allowed if the orientation of the electron spin does not change during the transition and if the symmetry of the initial and final functions is different these are called the spin and symmetry selection rules, respectively. However, the so-called forbidden transitions can still occur, but give rise to weak absorptions. 

Most Cl calculations involve configurations formed from a common set of orthonormal orbitals by spin and symmetry adaptation of Slater determinants. In this case S is a unit matrix and the formation of H is greatly simplified. 

More detailed discussions of the spin and symmetry properties of density matrices are given by McWeeny and Kutzelnigg [27] and by Davidson [28]. 

If the TV-particle basis were a complete set of JV-electron functions, the use of the variational approach would introduce no error, because the true wave function could be expanded exactly in such a basis. However, such a basis would be of infinite dimension, creating practical difficulties. In practice, therefore, we must work with incomplete IV-particle basis sets. This is one of our major practical approximations. In addition, we have not addressed the question of how to construct the W-particle basis. There are no doubt many physically motivated possibilities, including functions that explicitly involve the interelectronic coordinates. However, any useful choice of function must allow for practical evaluation of the JV-electron integrals of Eq. 1.7 (and Eq. 1.8 if the functions are nonorthogonal). This rules out many of the physically motivated choices that are known, as well as many other possibilities. Almost universally, the iV-particle basis functions are taken as linear combinations of products of one-electron functions — orbitals. Such linear combinations are usually antisymmetrized to account for the permutational symmetry of the wave function, and may be spin- and symmetry-adapted, as discussed elsewhere ... 

A d2 complex ion has D4 symmetry. It has the electronic configuration (b2)2 in the ground-state and excited-state configurations b2e, b2a, b2b. Determine the electronic states that arise from these configurations. Hence decide which of the possible El transitions from the ground state to excited states are spin- and symmetry-allowed. If any of the possible spin-allowed El transitions are symmetry-forbidden, are they allowed Ml transitions ... 

We observed no room temperature reaction between either state of C2 and C02. This result is somewhat surprising since both spin and symmetry allowed reactive channels exist for both C2 fragments ... 

The situation clearly becomes less favorable in lower symmetries where the terms of the same spin and symmetry span the subspaces of dimensionalities higher than... 

In this case the spin and symmetry of the function eq. (2.104) coincide with the spin and symmetry of the wave functions of the ( /-system 4>)(. An assumption that the functions dn and1 satisfy the strong orthogonality condition of eq. (1.185) together with the variational principle yields a pair of the coupled equations for the functional multipliers ... 

I completely subscribe to Professor Schldfer s opinion that for chemists, the inductive approach from experimental facts is more elucidating than deductions from necessarily uncertain assumptions. Thus, the attempts to relate the spectrochemical series to a variation of charges on the ligands, their distances, and the average radii of the partly filled shell have all been completely inadequate. On the other hand, the relative order of the energy levels having different spin and symmetry types are dependent only upon the ratio between A and a representative value of the interelectronic repulsion parameters, say B. Hence, the electrostatic model has made results known and accepted which would not have been so evident in the more general M.O. formulation. 

The left hand side has been written to indicate the parentage of the function i.e. the fact that it has been derived from the ionised state r a. S2 A 2. The first two quantities on the right hand side are coupling coefficients — the linear coefficients required to generate a state with the correct spin and orbital properties (16,17). Although the function written in Eq. (8) has the same spin and symmetry as the ground state, it is clearly not antisymmetric in all N electrons, since the IVth electron, which is the one added, occupies uniquely the shell r. In order to form a properly antisymmetric state, we must ensure that the i 7th electron can occupy all the shells, and also every spin-orbital component of each shell. This... 

If a closed shell is ionised, all possible states resulting from spin and orbital coupling of the hole with the open shell will be produced. The total intensity of ionised states with spin and symmetry (S2 A 2) is proportional to the spin-orbital degeneracy ... 

When the ionised shell r is one of several open shells in the molecule (as may happen with configurations of e and t% electrons in cubic ligand fields), more complicated formulae must be applied. Suppose that the ground state has two open shells r and s in which the electrons are separately coupled to form functions with spin and symmetry (S3A3) and (54 4 4) respectively. Thus we write this state ... 

Most applications in spectroscopy and photochemistry has therefore used a simplified approach. A state average calculation is performed where the same set of MOs is used for a number of electronic states of the same spin and symmetry. Thus, the Cl problem is solved for a number of roots (say M) and the orbitals are optimized for the average energy, Eaver of these states ... 

---