Static induced electronic dipoles

In the above discussion of the shell-model, we have assumed that the atoms or ions are not statically polarized. This is only the case for structures with sufficiently high symmetry. However, in general structures, the ions are often located at sites with low symmetry and therefore carry static induced electronic dipoles. Examples are layer structures such as Pbl. Because of the large polarizabilities of the nonmetals, we expect that their electric static dipole moments are important for the understanding of static and dynamic properties of these layer compounds. An extended shell model for... 

In Exp. 29, the effect of a static or low-frequency electric field on a molecule was considered and it was seen that a dipole moment is induced because of movement of the charged electrons and nuclei. At high optical frequencies (—10 Hz), the nuclei cannot respond rapidly enough to follow the field, but polarization of the electron distribution can occur. For an isolated molecule, an oscillating radiation field of intensity E will induce a dipole moment of magnitude... 

The polarizability of an atom or molecule describes the response of the electron cloud to an external field. The atomic or molecular energy shift KW due to an external electric field E is proportional to i for external fields that are weak compared to the internal electric fields between the nucleus and electron cloud. The electric dipole polarizability a is the constant of proportionality defined by KW = -0(i /2. The induced electric dipole moment is aE. Hyperpolarizabilities, coefficients of higher powers of , are less often required. Technically, the polarizability is a tensor quantity but for spherically symmetric charge distributions reduces to a single number. In any case, an average polarizability is usually adequate in calculations. Frequency-dependent or dynamic polarizabilities are needed for electric fields that vary in time, except for frequencies that are much lower than electron orbital frequencies, where static polarizabilities suffice. 

There are two kinds of problems when an attempt is made to interpret the f-electron spectra using the J-0 theory. One of them is conceptual. The standard realization of the Judd-Ofelt model is based on the assumption that only the central ion is perturbed by the environment, while in fact there is a mutual interaction between two subsystems, the central ion and the surrounding ligands. As a consequence the dynamic model has been introduced [29-32]. In this model the lanthanide ion plays a static role. The dipoles on the ligands, which result from the presence of the lanthanide ion, induce in turn the multi-poles on the central ion. This interaction between the multi-poles on the central ion and the dipoles on the ligands is the origin of additional contributions to the transition amplitude, and consequently to the intensity parameters Q, ... 

From Eq, (1) it is clear that a model of crystal polarization that is adequate for the description of the piezoelectric and pyroelectric properties of the P-phase of PVDF must include an accurate description of both the dipole moment of the repeat unit and the unit cell volume as functions of temperature and applied mechanical stress or strain. The dipole moment of the repeat unit includes contributions from the intrinsic polarity of chemical bonds (primarily carbon-fluorine) owing to differences in electron affinity, induced dipole moments owing to atomic and electronic polarizability, and attenuation owing to the thermal oscillations of the dipole. Previous modeling efforts have emphasized the importance of one more of these effects electronic polarizability based on continuum dielectric theory" or Lorentz field sums of dipole lattices" static, atomic level modeling of the intrinsic bond polarity" atomic level modeling of bond polarity and electronic and atomic polarizability in the absence of thermal motion. " The unit cell volume is responsive to the effects of temperature and stress and therefore requires a model based on an expression of the free energy of the crystal. 

Separation of Electronic and Nuclear Motions. The polarizabilities of the ground state and the excited state can follow an electronic transition, and the same is true of the induced dipole moments in the solvent since these involve the motions of electrons only. However, the solvent dipoles cannot reorganize during such a transition and the electric field which acts on the solute remains unchanged. It is therefore necessary to separate the solvent polarity functions into an orientation polarization and an induction polarization. The total polarization depends on the static dielectric constant Z), the induction polarization depends on the square of the refractive index n2, and the orientation polarization depends on the difference between the relevant functions of D and of n2 this separation between electronic and nuclear motions will appear in the equations of solvation energies and solvatochromic shifts. 

The cross-section in Eq. (1 illustrates another distinguishing feature of inelastic neutron scattering for vibrational spectroscopy, i.e., the absence of dipole and polarizability selection rules. In contrast, it is believed that in optical and inelastic electron surface spectroscopies that a vibrating molecule must possess a net component of a static or induced dipole moment perpendicular to a metal surface in order for the vibrational transition to be observed ( 7,8). This is because dipole moment changes of the vibrating molecule parallel to the surface are canceled by an equal image moment induced in the metal. 

The key differences between the PCM and the Onsager s model are that the PCM makes use of molecular-shaped cavities (instead of spherical cavities) and that in the PCM the solvent-solute interaction is not simply reduced to the dipole term. In addition, the PCM is a quantum mechanical approach, i.e. the solute is described by means of its electronic wavefunction. Similarly to classical approaches, the basis of the PCM approach to the local field relies on the assumption that the effective field experienced by the molecule in the cavity can be seen as the sum of a reaction field term and a cavity field term. The reaction field is connected to the response (polarization) of the dielectric to the solute charge distribution, whereas the cavity field depends on the polarization of the dielectric induced by the applied field once the cavity has been created. In the PCM, cavity field effects are accounted for by introducing the concept of effective molecular response properties, which directly describe the response of the molecular solutes to the Maxwell field in the liquid, both static E and dynamic E, [8,47,48] (see also the contribution by Cammi and Mennucci). 

Accordingly, the modifications to the KS operator are twofold (i) a static contribution through the static multipole moments (here charges) of the solvent molecules and (ii) a dynamical contribution which depends linearly on the electronic polarizability of the environment and also depends on the electronic density of the QM region. Due to the latter fact we need within each SCF iteration to update the DFT/MM part of the KS operator with the set of induced dipole moments determined from Eq. (13-29). We emphasize that it is the dynamical contribution that gives rise to polarization of the MM subsystem by the QM subsystem. 

---