Violation of the selection rules

A term label like for example, is thus no longer strictly meaningful for it implies constant spin- and orbital angular momentum properties (5 = 1, L = 3). One consequence of spin-orbit coupling is a scrambling of the two kinds of angular momentum. So a nominal term may really more properly be described as a mixture of terms of different spin-multiplicity as, for example, in Eq. (4.10). 

The mixing coefficients a and b in (4.10) depend upon the efficiency of the spin-orbit coupling process, parameterized by the so-called spin-orbit coupling coefficient A (or for a single electron). As A O, so also do a or b. Spin-orbit coupling effects, especially for the first period transition elements, are rather small compared with either Coulomb or crystal-field effects, so the mixing coefficients a ox b are small. However, insofar that they are non-zero, we might write a transition moment as in Eq. (4.11). 

The first two terms in the expansion are strictly zero because of the spin selection rule, while the last two are non-zero, at least so far as the spin-selection rule is concerned. So a spin-forbidden transition like this, X VT , can be observed because the descriptions X and are only approximate that is why we enclose them in quotation marks. To emphasize the spin-orbit coupling coefficients for the first row transition elements are small, the mixing coefficients a and b are small, and hence the intensities of these spin-forbidden transitions are very weak. 

Consider now spin-allowed transitions. The parity and angular momentum selection rules forbid pure d d transitions. Once again the rule is absolute. It is our description of the wavefunctions that is at fault. Suppose we enquire about a d-d transition in a tetrahedral complex. It might be supposed that the parity rule is inoperative here, since the tetrahedron has no centre of inversion to which the d orbitals and the light operator can be symmetry classified. But, this is not at all true for two reasons, one being empirical (which is more of an observation than a reason) and one theoretical. The empirical reason is that if the parity rule were irrelevant, the intensities of d-d bands in tetrahedral molecules could be fully allowed and as strong as those we observe in dyes, for example. In fact, the d-d bands in tetrahedral species are perhaps two or three orders of magnitude weaker than many fully allowed transitions. 

The theoretical reason is as follows. Although the placing of the ligands in a tetrahedral molecule does not define a centre of symmetry, the d orbitals are nevertheless centrosymmetric and the light operator is still of odd parity and so d-d transitions remain parity and orbitally Al = 1) forbidden. It is the nuclear coordinates that fail to define a centre of inversion, while we are considering a 

---

Observed on the wing of the CS2 bending mode. Occurs in violation of the selection rules of the point group Dsd but is IR active under the Csi factor group of the crystal. Could also be a combination vibration or caused by the CS2 impurity which was present in the sample (see text)... 

In general it is not necessary to measure all possible configurations in order to identify all the phonons. However, it should be pointed out that frequently violations of the selection rules appear or that in a particular orientation forbidden phonons appear. These are believed to be caused by disorders in the single crystal. 

In addition to the bands centered on the fundamental frequencies, other bands appear in the spectra of polyatomic molecules. We have mentioned overtone bands in the spectrum of diatomic molecules due to violation of the selection rule, Ap = +1, that is permitted because of anharmonicity. But in polyatomic molecules, combination bands also appear. For example, in the case of water if the absorbed quantum splits to raise from 0 to 1 and V2 from 0- 1, there will be a vibration-rotation band centered on the combination frequency, + V2 This process is relatively less probable than the absorbtion of a single quantum at either fundamental frequency, so the intensity of the band is relatively weak. Nonetheless, combination bands appear with sufficient intensity to be an important feature of the infrared spectra of polyatomic molecules. Even in the case of a simple molecule like water, there are a large number of prominent bands, several of which are listed in Table 25.2. 

This contributes to the violation of the selection rules, which forbid the vibrational modes for the armchair SWCNT and permit the existence of vibrations in the zigzag SWCNT. With the presence of vacancies in the armchair SWCNT, optical vibrations can appear which are connected with the displacement perpendicular to the axis planes and parallel to the axis planes, respectively. An analogous situation can be observed for the zigzag SWCNT. In summary, this leads to a change in the relative intensities and broadening of the close scattering lines for both types of SWCNT. 

For most of the crystals mentioned in section 5.3, the periodicity about the c-axis is greater than two-fold (i.e., n > 2). For such so-called uniaxial crystals it is not too difficult to distinguish different types of radiation. Three different spectra need to be compared the axial (for which k c, and hence necessarily Elc and H I c) the transverse n (for which fe L c, c, and hence necessarily H 1 c) and the transverse a (for which k c, Elc, and hence necessarily H c). As Runciman (1958) pointed out, a line coincident in both the axial and a spectra is electric-dipole, while one coincident in both the axial and n spectra is magnetic-dipole or electric-quadrupole. The reader who attempts to verify these assertions soon discovers that the condition n > 2 is crucially important, since the components of D, L -I- 2S and for which q = l must connect a particular lower sublevel to an upper one that is of a different type from that reached by the components for which q = 0. The identifications of D2 of 4f and the levels of the multiplet of 4f referred to in section 5.2 were made by studying the polarizations of the various allowed transitions from sublevel to sublevel. The opportunity for several consistency checks made the J assignments very secure. It turned out that the transitions H4 -> D2 and Fq - D2 are electric-dipole, while Fi-> Dq is magnetic-dipole. Deviations from perfect Russell-Saunders coupling are responsible for the apparent violations of the selection rule AS = 0, which holds for D, L + 2S and... 

Following the initial experiments by Kaiser, Axe (1964) extended the theories of Judd (1962) and Ofelt (1962) to calculate selection rules and intensities of two-photon transitions in solids doped with lanthanides. The theoretical predictions with later extensions by Bader and Gold (1968) laid largely untested as an hiatus occurred in the experimental studies in this area, the emphasis having shifted in this period to the observation of (4f) states buried in allowed (5d) or conduction bands. Interest has since returned following the work of Degenais (1981), Downer et al. (1982) and Down and Bivas (1983) on Gd " in LaFj. As noted in fig. 20, these workers observed a number of violations of the selection rules developed by Axe in both the intensity and polarization dependence and were able to trace the descrepancies to various approximations necessary in the... 

Actually, violations of this selection rule are not unknown, even in relatively light molecules. Thus for CO, the Cameron system of visible and UV bands is due to a transition between the singlet ground state and an excited triplet electronic state. 

Selection rules reflect the restrictions on stale changes available to an atom or molecule. Any transition in violation of a selection rule is said to be forbidden, but as we shall see, some transitions are more forbidden than others (to paraphrase George Orwell40). We shall not pursue the theoretical bases of the rules in any detail but merely outline simple tests for their application. 

Coupling with external electric fields is possible only for and because of the selection rules. Here, we put the molecule under the electric field that is resonant with the mode Vg, thereby violating the conservation of Kellman s constants. However, coupling the mode with the electric field is not sufficient, because both and Vg need to be excited for the present purpose. Then, in order to make the energy flow from Vg to v, we utilize the resonance 44/5s by locating the SEP initial conditions near its resonant region. A schematic explanation of our ideas is shown in Figure 3.21. 

Such odd-numbered cyclic groups of lines do not normally appear in atoms because of the rule A/ = 1 for an electron. Their appearance in atoms corresponds to the violation of this selection rule for atoms in strong electric fields. 

In recent years, several organic reagents have been found which rather selectively carry out 0-acylation of arylhydroxylamine compounds (e.g. Fig. 17). This apparent violation of the general rule was first reported for acetyl cyanide (36, 68, 78). Recently, aspirin was reported to facilitate the covalent binding of carcinogenic arylhydroxylamine compounds to DNA, and it was proposed that an intermolecular transfer of the acetyl group from the phenolic ester of aspirin to the -OH of the arylhydroxylamine compound occurred to produce the arylhydroxylamine-O-acetyl ester (75). Unfortunately, the direct detection of this intermediate was not accomplished. Explanations of these unusual and specific 0-acylations are not yet available. 

In EMIRS and SNIFTIRS measurements the "inactive" s-polarlsed radiation is prevented from reaching the detector and the relative intensities of the vibrational bands observed in the spectra from the remaining p-polarised radiation are used to deduce the orientation of adsorbed molecules. It should be pointed out, however, that vibrational coupling to adsorbate/adsorbent charge transfer (11) and also w electrochemically activated Stark effect (7,12,13) can lead to apparent violations of the surface selection rule which can invalidate simple deductions of orientation. 

BHa environments (rule 4). In actual fact, however, selected compounds either comply marginally or violate the rules to varying degrees. In the sense that these few exceptions define the limits of the rules, it is useful to break the rules down into subsets of varying importance. Thus a primary violation of rule three (3p) may be a more serious offense than a secondary violation of the more important rule 2 (2s). 

The role of spin in the reaction is an especially interesting and important issue in carbene chemistry. Apparent violation of the spin selection rule, such as the reaction of ground state singlet carbene with triplet molecular oxygen in matrices as well as in solution, and the reaction of triplet ground-state carbenes with (singlet) CO, CO2, and N2 in matrices, are challenging issues for the near future. 

In (a) the ion is so situated as to be in a noncentrosymmetric field, even when it is not vibrating. In this case electric-dipole emission is allowed. In (b) there is inversion symmetry when the ion is not vibrating, but vibration carried it to some other point Py at which the center of symmetry is lost. It should be self-evident that, even when the ion is in a noncentrosymmetric environment, vibrations may be important. That is, changes in the crystal-field symmetry induced by the vibronic motion will lead to violations of the crystal-field-selection rules. 

A total set of selection rules consists of the sum of all selection rules both exact and approximate . Transition is forbidden if at least one selection rule is violated. The transitions may be forbidden to a different extent -by one, two, three, etc. violated conditions. If an electronic transition is between complex configurations, then, as we shall see in the next section, there may be a large number of selection rules. However, the majority of them, especially with regard to the quantum numbers of intermediate momenta, are rather approximate, even when a specific pure coupling scheme is valid. This is explained by the presence of interaction between the momenta. 

The following examples of stereospecific or selective anti processes are typical of those 1,2-additions and eliminations which obey the selectivity rules. The much smaller group which violate or appear to violate the symmetry prohibition will be discussed later. A typical anti course of addition and elimination is given in (154) (Stevens and Valicenti, 1965) and (155) (Fowler et al., 1967). 

Both the alAg — X3I and the b1 it — X3I transitions are extremely weak. The selection rules, discussed in Section 7.2.3, show that both transitions violate the A,S = 0 and the g< 1 >g selection rules. In addition, the a X transition violates the A A = 0, 1 selection rule and the b—Xtransition the + < 1 >— selection rule. Spin-orbit interaction breaks down the AS = 0 selection rule to some extent. Magnetic dipole selection rules, as opposed to the electric dipole selection rules of Section 7.2.3, allow both the a-X and b-X transitions but only weakly. 

There is one additional property of the overtones that might reveal the anharmonic character of y, the absorption coefficient. The appearance of overtones in the IR spectrum, in violation of the harmonic oscillator selection rules, is attributed to electrical and mechanical anharmonicity. If the H bond caused additional anharmonicity, the intensity of the harmonics should increeise with H bond formation. 

As already developed in the start of this section, the reaction of carboxylate anions with 1-chloroethyl carbonates is widely used for the preparation of commercial prodrugs. The hard nucleophile R COO" attacks selectively the soft center B, that is apparently contrary to the HSAB theory. However, the required use of added Nal may favour a cation-like transition state, the cationic intermediate having therefore two hard electrophilic centers and B attack would not be in violation of the rule [Scheme 80],... 

---