Fermi-Thomas atomic model

Bloch (1933a,b) first pointed out that in the Thomas-Fermi-Dirac statistical model the spectral distribution of atomic oscillator strength has the same shape for all atoms if the transition energy is scaled by Z. Therefore, in this model, I< Z Bloch estimated the constant of proportionality approximately as 10-15 eV. Another calculation using the Thomas-Fermi-Dirac model gives I tZ = a + bZ-2/3 with a = 9.2 and b = 4.5 as best adjusted values (Turner, 1964). This expression agrees rather well with experiments. Figure 2.3 shows the variation of IIZ vs. Z. 

The Xa multiple scattering method generates approximate singledeterminant wavefunctions, in which the non-local exchange interaction of the Hartree-Fock method has been replaced by a local term, as in the Thomas-Fermi-Dirac model. The orbitals are solutions of the one-electron differential equation (in atomic units)... 

It is not absolutely necessary to have accurate interatomic potentials to perform reasonably good calculations because the many collisions involved tend to obscure the details of the interaction. This, together with the fact that accurate potentials are only known for a few systems makes the Thomas-Fermi approach quite attractive. The Thomas-Fermi statistical model assumes that the atomic potential V(r) varies slowly enough within an electron wavelength so that many electrons can be localized within a volume over which the potential changes by a fraction of itself. The electrons can then be treated by statistical mechanics and obey Fermi-Dirac statistics. In this approximation, the potential in the atom is given by ... 

Models for the electronic structure of polynuclear systems were also developed. Except for metals, where a free electron model of the valence electrons was used, all methods were based on a description of the electronic structure in terms of atomic orbitals. Direct numerical solutions of the Hartree-Fock equations were not feasible and the Thomas-Fermi density model gave ridiculous results. Instead, two different models were introduced. The valence bond formulation (5) followed closely the concepts of chemical bonds between atoms which predated quantum theory (and even the discovery of the electron). In this formulation certain reasonable "configurations" were constructed by drawing bonds between unpaired electrons on different atoms. A mathematical function formed from a sum of products of atomic orbitals was used to represent each configuration. The energy and electronic structure was then... 

Model potential methods and their utilization in atomic structure calculations are reviewed in [139], main attention being paid to analytic effective model potentials in the Coulomb and non-Coulomb approximations, to effective model potentials based on the Thomas-Fermi statistical model of the atom, as well as employing a self-consistent field core potential. Relativistic effects in model potential calculations are discussed there, too. Paper [140] has examples of numerous model potential calculations of various atomic spectroscopic properties. 

There exists a whole number of approximate expressions for Vl(r) (see, for example [139]). The simplest, called the Thomas-Fermi potential, follows from the statistical model of an atom. Unfortunately, it leads to results of very low accuracy. More accurate is the Thomas-Fermi-Dirac model, in which an attempt is made to account for the exchange part of the potential energy of an electron in the framework of the free electron gas approach. Various forms of the parametric potential method are fairly widely utilized, particularly for multiply charged ions. Such potentials may look as follows [16] ... 

The idea of calculating atomic and molecular properties from electron density appears to have arisen from calculations made independently by Enrico Fermi and P.A.M. Dirac in the 1920s on an ideal electron gas, work now well-known as the Fermi-Dirac statistics [19]. In independent work by Fermi [20] and Thomas [21], atoms were modelled as systems with a positive potential (the nucleus) located in a uniform (homogeneous) electron gas. This obviously unrealistic idealization, the Thomas-Fermi model [22], or with embellishments by Dirac the Thomas-Fermi-Dirac model [22], gave surprisingly good results for atoms, but failed completely for molecules it predicted all molecules to be unstable toward dissociation into their atoms (indeed, this is a theorem in Thomas-Fermi theory). 

March and Parr also point out as already mentioned above that the interpretation of the result ju=0 for the neutral Thomas-Fermi atom (cf the result for the central field model for molecules in Section 9, where the chemical potential is also zero for neutral molecules) is that the gross trend with Z is juocZ-1/3 at large Z. Of course, such a discussion would have to be refined considerably to reproduce the chemically important periodic effects in p, which will be focused upon below. 

While Eq. (12) represents the correct prediction of the non-relativistic Schro-dinger equation as Z —> oo, in the range of the Periodic Table corrections are needed. One is due to the fact that Eq. (11) near the point atomic nucleus assumed, shows that pit) diverges as r 3/2 and this is due to neglecting density gradients in the Fermi gas model employed. This, as was shown by Scott [12], corrects [13,14] Eq. (12) with a term (1/2)Z2. Earlier Dirac had introduced the exchange energy A into the Thomas-Fermi atom, with the result... 

At the present time, by far the most useful non-empirical alternatives to Cl are the methods based on density functional theory (DFT) . The development of DFT can be traced from its pre-quantum-mechanical roots in Drude s treatment of the electron gas" in metals and Sommerfeld s quantum-statistical version of this, through the Thomas-Fermi-Dirac model of the atom. Slater s Xa method, the laying of the formal foundations by... 

The first generation is the local density approximation (LDA). This estimation involves the Dirac functional for exchange, which is nothing else than the functional proposed by Dirac [15] in 1927 for the so-called Thomas-Fermi-Dirac model of the atoms. For the correlation energy, some parameterizations have been proposed, and the formula can be considered as the limit of what can be obtained at this level of approximation [16-18], The Xa approximation falls into this category, since a known proportion of the exchange energy approximates the correlation. 

Thomas-Fermi model [18], or with embellishments by Dirac, the Thomas-Fermi-Dirac model [18], gave surprisingly good results for atoms, but failed completely for molecules it predicted all molecules to be unstable toward dissociation into their atoms (indeed, this is a theorem in Thomas-Fermi theory). 

For some computational techniques in quantum chemistry a simple zero-th order approximation of the electron density of any atom of the system can be useful as the starting point of an iterative procedure. A very simple description of the electron density and binding energy of any atom or ion allows a rapid evaluation of very complex stmctures. This is the spirit of the orbital-free, explicit density functional approaches, usually based on the Thomas-Fermi-Dirac model and its extensions [1]. 

In this work a simple analytical atomic density model is obtained from the expression of a modified Thomas-Fermi-Dirac model with quantum corrections near the nucleus as the minimization of a semiexplicit density functional. The use of a simple exponential analytical form for the density outside the near-nucleus region and the resolution of a single-particle Schrodinger equation with an effective potential near the origin allows us to solve easily the problem and obtain an asymptotic expression for the energy of an atom or ion in terms of the nuclear charge Z and the number of electrons N. 

Slater proposes an effective quantum number n = 3.7, the atomic factor can only be presented in the form of a sum with an infinite number of components. The series may be terminated if the effective quantum number for the N shell is taken as 3.5, 4.0, or 4.5. We calculated values of the atomic factor for the neutral Br atom with different values of n. The most satisfactory agreement with the theoretical form factors, calculated according to the Thomas—Fermi—Dirac model, was obtained at n — 4.5 screening coefficients proposed in [11] were used in the calculations. The equation of the atomic scattering function for the N shell in the case of a spherically symmetrical electron density distribution and n — 4.5 has the following form ... 

An early, well-known model was developed by Thomas and Eermi. -i2 In the Thomas-Fermi (TF) model, the ground state energy oi an atom is given by... 

For electronic structure calculations of atoms and molecules there are three exactly solvable models the Thomas-Fermi statistical model (the limit A —> oo for fixed N/Z, where N is the number of electrons and Z is the nuclear charge) the noninteracting electron model,the limit of infinite nuclear charge (Z —> oo, for fixed N) and the large-dimension model D - oo for fixed N and Z). ... 

In one of the earliest DFT models, the Thomas-Fermi theory, the kinetic energy of an atom or a molecule is approximated using the above type of treatment on a local level. That is, for each volume element in r space, one... 

In 1926 Llewellyn Thomas proposed treating the electrons in an atom by analogy to a statistical gas of particles. Electron-shells are not envisaged in this model, which was independently rediscovered by Enrico Fermi two years later. For many years the Thomas-Fermi method was regarded as a mathematical curiosity without much hope of application since the results it yielded were inferior to those obtained by the method based on electron orbitals.17... 

Actually, the first attempts to use the electron density rather than the wave function for obtaining information about atomic and molecular systems are almost as old as is quantum mechanics itself and date back to the early work of Thomas, 1927 and Fermi, 1927. In the present context, their approach is of only historical interest. We therefore refrain from an in-depth discussion of the Thomas-Fermi model and restrict ourselves to a brief summary of the conclusions important to the general discussion of DFT. The reader interested in learning more about this approach is encouraged to consult the rich review literature on this subject, for example by March, 1975, 1992 or by Parr and Yang, 1989. 

For neutral atoms, N = Z, (23) requires x ixo) = 0> so that x vanishes at the same point as x- Since this condition cannot be satisfied for a finite value xo by non-trivial solutions, the point xo must be at infinity. The solution X(x) for a neutral atom must hence be asymptotic to the x-axis, x(°°) = 0. There is no boundary to the neutral atom in the Thomas-Fermi model. 

The universal function x(x) obtained by numerical integration and valid for all neutral atoms decreases monotonically. The electron density is similar for all atoms, except for a different length scale, which is determined by the quantity b and proportional to Z. The density is poorly determined at both small and large values of r. However, since most electrons in complex atoms are at intermediate distances from the nucleus the Thomas-Fermi model is useful for calculating quantities that depend on the average electron density, such as the total energy. The Thomas-Fermi model therefore cannot account for the periodic properties of atoms, but provides a good estimate of initial fields used in more elaborate calculations like those to be discussed in the next section. 

The most obvious defect of the Thomas-Fermi model is the neglect of interaction between electrons, but even in the most advanced modern methods this interaction still presents the most difficult problem. The most useful practical procedure to calculate the electronic structure of complex atoms is by means of the Hartree-Fock procedure, which is not by solution of the atomic wave equation, but by iterative numerical procedures, based on the hydrogen model. In this method the exact Hamiltonian is replaced by... 

The electronic wave function of an n-electron molecule is defined in 3n-dimensional configuration space, consistent with any conceivable molecular geometry. If the only aim is to characterize a molecule of fixed Born-Oppenheimer geometry the amount of information contained in the molecular wave function is therefore quite excessive. It turns out that the three-dimensional electron density function contains adequate information to uniquely determine the ground-state electronic properties of the molecule, as first demonstrated by Hohenberg and Kohn [104]. The approach is equivalent to the Thomas-Fermi model of an atom applied to molecules. 

The important features of ael are represented by the Thomas-Fermi model of the atom which assumes that orbital electrons screen exponentially the nuclear charge 7. On this model we have,... 

---