The Quantum Model

First was the blackbody problem. A blackbody is a theoretical object that emits and absorbs radiation. When heated, the intensity 

As its temperature increases, a blackbody produces radiation that is more energetic (indicated by the x-axis of this graph) and more intense (indicated by the y-axis). 

This result was experimentally discovered in the nineteenth century, but it could not be explained by Maxwells theory of electromagnetism. (James Clerk Maxwell was a Scottish physicist whose formulation of the laws of electricity and magnetism were 

Ernest Rutherfords proposed atomic structure added to the problems posed to nineteenth century physics by the ultraviolet catastrophe and the photoelectric effect. Rutherfords atom had a negatively charged electron circling a positively charged nucleus. The physics of the day predicted that the atom would emit radiation, causing the electron to lose energy and spiral down into the nucleus. Theory predicted that Rutherfords atom could not exist. Clearly, science needed new ideas to explain these three anomalies. 

Max Planck, Albert Einstein, and Niels Bohr played the starring roles in solving the daunting problems that were facing physics 

Interatomic distance is calculated by mathematical modelling of the electron exchange that constitutes a covalent bond. Such a calculation was first performed by Heitler and London using Is atomic wave functions to simulate the bonding in H2. To model the more general case of homonuclear diatomic molecules the interacting atoms in their valence states are described by monopositive atomic cores and two valence electrons with constant wave functions (3.36). 

The molecular wave function is defined by the combination of atomic wave functions  

Because of the symmetry of the Hamiltonian integrals involving ipa T) and 7 a (2) are identical and calculated only once. 

If the valence-state wave functions are written in their simplest, hard-sphere form, 

The two methods of calculation are complementary in the sense that the point-charge method does not distinguish between bonds of different order, but fails to predict interatomic distance. The Heitler-London calculation, without further modification, only applies to homonuclear single bonds. 

---

For classical evolutions, we merely substitute crj for p. Looking at plots of N fi, p vs. v/N, it is clear that although the quantum dynamics generally appears to preserve the characteristic structure of the classical spectrum, particular structural details tend to be washed-away [ilachSSbj. If high or low frequency components are heavily favored in the classical evolution, for example, they will similarly be favored in the quantum model discrete peaks, however, will usually disappear. White-noise spectra, of course, will remain so in the quantum model. 

Bohr s hypothesis solved the impossible atom problem. The energy of an electron in orbit was fixed. It could go from one energy level to another, but it could not emit a continuous stream of radiation and spiral into the nucleus. The quantum model forbids that. 

The cornerstone of the strong anharmonic coupling theory relies on the assumption of a modulation of the fast mode frequency by the intermonomer distance. This behavior is correlated by many experimental observations, and it is undoubtly one of the main mechanisms that take place in a hydrogen bond. Because the intermonomer distance is, in the quantum model, represented by the dimensionless position coordinate Q of the slow mode, the effective angular frequency of the fast mode may be written [52,53]... 

As we have found in the above section, the damping of the slow mode when it is nearly alone produces (within the Boulil et al. model) a collapse of the fine structure of the lineshapes. That is in contradiction with the RY semiclassical model which predicts a broadening of the lineshape. Of course, because the quantum model is more fundamental, the semiclassical model must be questioned. However, it is well known that the RY semiclassical model of indirect relaxation has the merit to predict lineshapes that may transform progressively,... 

The quantum model of direct damping by Rosch and Ratner [58] leads to the same kinds of profiles as does the semiclassical model of indirect damping by Robertson and Yarwood [84], with the two limit situations of slow or fast modulations leading to Gaussian or Lorentzian profiles. 

There is one experimental parameter that does serve to distinguish between the semiclassical model and the quantum model for nonadiabatic proton transfer. In the semiclassical model, if one assumes that the magnitude of the electronic barrier directly correlates with the thermodynamic driving force, a statement of the Hammond postulate, then as the driving force increases the rate of reaction increases, eventually reaching a maximum rate. The quantum model has a... 

Various modeling approaches have been used for the catalyst layers, with different degrees of success. The approach taken usually depends on how the other parts of the fuel cell are being modeled and what the overall goal of the model is. Just as with membrane modeling, there are two main classes of models. There are the microscopic models, which include pore-level models as well as more detailed quantum models. The quantum models deal with detailed reaction mechanisms and elementary transfer reactions and transition states. They are beyond the scope of this review and are discussed elsewhere, along with the issues of the nature of the electro catalysts. 

It is a bit of a lie to say, as we did in previous chapters, that complex scalar product spaces are state spaces for quantum mechanical systems. Certainly every nonzero vector in a complex scalar product space determines a quantum mechanical state however, the converse is not true. If two vectors differ only by a phase factor, or if two vectors normaUze to the same vector, then they will determine the same physical state. This is one of the fundamental assumptions of quantum mechanics. The quantum model we used in Chapters 2 through 9 ignored this subtlety. However, to understand spin we must face this issue. 

At that time, it was still generally difficult to measure principal crystal susceptibilities at temperatures lower than that of liquid nitrogen. As susceptibilities vary most rapidly at temperatures lower than this, studies performed within the 80-300°K range often were not sufficiently exacting for the quantum models proposed. 

The classical theory makes especially clear the inherent ambiguity of data analysis with the optical model, and this ambiguity carries over into the quantum model. If we wish to use experimental differential cross sections to gain information about V0(r) and P(b) or T(r), we must assume a reasonable parametric form for V0(r) that determines the shape of the cross section in the absence of reaction. The value P(b) is then determined [or T(r) chosen] by what is essentially an extrapolation of this parametric form. In the classical picture a V0(r) with a less steep repulsive wall yields a lower reaction probability from the same experimental cross-section data. The pair of functions V0 r), P b) or VQ(r), T(r) is thus underdetermined. The ambiguity may be relieved somewhat (to what extent is not yet known) by fitting several sets of data at different collision energies and, especially, by fitting other types of data such as total elastic and/or reactive cross sections simultaneously. 

The different situations illustrated in Fig. 6 correspond more and more to approximate models when passing up to down. The top of the figure given the case described by Eq. (126) and corresponds to the reference quantum indirect damping. Below, is depicted the situation described by Eq. (146), where the Dyson time ordering operator is ignored in the quantum model. Further below is given the behavior that corresponds to both Eqs. (152) and (174), that is, to weak approximations on the classical limit of the quantum model [Eq. (152)] and to the semiclassical model [Eq. (174)]. At last, at the bottom we visualize the semiclassical model of Robertson and Yarwood [described by Eq. (185)]. 

First, one may observe that the asymmetry of the line shape appears only in the quantum approach corresponding to the top of the figure. One may also remark about the similarity in the line shapes that are intermediate between that of the quantum model and that of the semiclassical Robertson and Yarwood model appearing at the bottom. 

Erwin Schrodinger Schrodinger equation Established the field of wave mechanics that was the basis for the development of the quantum model of the atom... 

---