Thomas-Fermi statistical model

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 ... 

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. 

For electronic structure calculations there are mainly three exactly solvable models the Thomas-Fermi statistical model, the noninteracting electron model, and the large-dimension model. With the poineering work of Herschbach, it was recognized that the large dimension limit, where the dimensionality of space is treated as a free parameter, is simple, captures the main physics of the system, and is analytically solvable. In the final section we will summarize the main ideas of the large-dimension model for electronic structure problems. 

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). ... 

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. 

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). 

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... 

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... 

At the center of the approach taken by Thomas and Fermi is a quantum statistical model of electrons which, in its original formulation, takes into account only the kinetic energy while treating the nuclear-electron and electron-electron contributions in a completely classical way. In their model Thomas and Fermi arrive at the following, very simple expression for the kinetic energy based on the uniform electron gas, a fictitious model system of constant electron density (more information on the uniform electron gas will be given in Section 6.4) ... 

Since the early days of quantum mechanics, the wave function theory has proven to be very successful in describing many different quantum processes and phenomena. However, in many problems of quantum chemistry and solid-state physics, where the dimensionality of the systems studied is relatively high, ab initio calculations of the structure of atoms, molecules, clusters, and crystals, and their interactions are very often prohibitive. Hence, alternative formulations based on the direct use of the probability density, gathered under what is generally known as the density matrix theory [1], were also developed since the very beginning of the new mechanics. The independent electron approximation or Thomas-Fermi model, and the Hartree and Hartree-Fock approaches are former statistical models developed in that direction [2]. These models can be considered direct predecessors of the more recent density functional theory (DFT) [3], whose principles were established by Hohenberg,... 

The so-called Hartree-Fock-Slater method is much more widely utilized, and is a hybrid of the Hartree and Thomas-Fermi-Dirac methods. In this method the direct part of the potential is calculated using the Hartree-Fock approach, whereas the exchange part is approximated by some statistical expression of the model of free electrons. The Slater potential is given by ... 

Physical properties of atoms and ions in intense magnetic fields are hence obtained in the statistical limit of Thomas-Fermi theory. This discussion is then supplemented by the hyperstrong limit, considered especially by Lieb and co-workers. Chemistry in intense magnetic fields is thereby compared and contrasted with terrestrial chemistry. Some emphasis is then placed on a model of confined atoms in intense electric fields the statistical Thomas-Fermi approximation again being the central tool employed. 

A practical way to handle the calculations by a unified approach comprising all ions was proposed by Brandt and Kitagawa [15]. In this approach the structure of the ion is represented by a statistical model (of Thomas-Fermi type), and/( ) is analytically expressed as... 

The first statistical models of these interactions are the well-known Thomas-Fermi (TF) and Thomas-Fermi-Dirac (TFD) theories based on the idea of approximating the behavior of electrons by that of the uniform negatively charged gas. Some authors (Sheldon, 1955 Teller, 1962 Balazs, 1967 Firsov, 1953,1957 Townsend and Handler, 1962 Townsend and Keller, 1963 Goodisman, 1971) proved that these theories provide an adequate description of purely repulsive diatomic interactions. Abraham-son (1963, 1964) and Konowalow et al. (Konowalow, 1969 Konowalow and Zakheim, 1972) extended this region to intermediate internuclear distances, but Gombas (1949) and March (1957) showed that the Abraham-son approach is incorrect, and so the question of how adequately the TFD theory provides diatomic interactions for closed-shell atoms is still open. Here we need to note that until recently, there has existed only work by Sheldon (1955), as far as we know, in which the TFD interaction potential is actually calculated by solving the TFD equation for a series of internuclear distances (see also, Kaplan, 1982). 

Baker, E.B. The application of the Fermi-Thomas statistical model to the calculation of potential distribution in positive ions. Phys. Rev. 36, 630 (1930)... 

---