Download presentation
Presentation is loading. Please wait.
Published bySophie Dawson Modified over 9 years ago
1
Why H 3 + ??? Bethany A. Wellen, Andrew S. Petit, and Anne B. McCoy The Ohio State University Using Diffusion Monte Carlo (DMC) to Probe the Rotationally Excited States of H 3 +
2
Why H 3 + ???
3
B.J. McCall, Spectroscopy of H 3 + in Laboratory and Astrophysical Plasmas, Ph.D. Thesis, University of Chicago, (2001).
4
Why H 3 + ??? B.J. McCall, T.R. Geballe, K.H. Hinkle, and T. Oka, Science, 279, 1910 (1998).
5
Why H 3 + ??? B.J. McCall, T.R. Geballe, K.H. Hinkle, and T. Oka, Science, 279, 1910 (1998). Ortho Para
6
Why H 3 + ??? B.J. McCall, T.R. Geballe, K.H. Hinkle, and T. Oka, Science, 279, 1910 (1998). Ortho Para OrthoPara
7
Why H 3 + ??? B.J. McCall, T.R. Geballe, K.H. Hinkle, and T. Oka, Science, 279, 1910 (1998). Ortho Para OrthoPara
8
Why H 3 + ??? B.J. McCall, T.R. Geballe, K.H. Hinkle, and T. Oka, Science, 279, 1910 (1998). K.N. Crabtree, N. Indriolo, H. Kreckel, B.A. Tom, and B.J. McCall, The Astrophysical Journal, 729, 1 (2011). OrthoPara
9
Why H 3 + ??? B.J. McCall, T.R. Geballe, K.H. Hinkle, and T. Oka, Science, 279, 1910 (1998). K.N. Crabtree, N. Indriolo, H. Kreckel, B.A. Tom, and B.J. McCall, The Astrophysical Journal, 729, 1 (2011). OrthoPara
10
Why H 3 + ???
11
H5+H5+
12
H5+H5+
13
H5+H5+
14
H5+H5+
15
Diffusion Monte Carlo J.B. Anderson J. Chem. Phys., 63, 1499 (1975). J.B. Anderson J. Chem. Phys., 65, 4121 (1976).
16
Why H 3 + ??? Diffusion Monte Carlo J.B. Anderson J. Chem. Phys., 63, 1499 (1975). J.B. Anderson J. Chem. Phys., 65, 4121 (1976).
17
Why H 3 + ??? Diffusion Monte Carlo J.B. Anderson J. Chem. Phys., 63, 1499 (1975). J.B. Anderson J. Chem. Phys., 65, 4121 (1976).
18
Why H 3 + ??? Diffusion Monte Carlo J.B. Anderson J. Chem. Phys., 63, 1499 (1975). J.B. Anderson J. Chem. Phys., 65, 4121 (1976).
19
Why H 3 + ??? Diffusion Monte Carlo J.B. Anderson J. Chem. Phys., 63, 1499 (1975). J.B. Anderson J. Chem. Phys., 65, 4121 (1976).
20
Why H 3 + ??? Diffusion Monte Carlo J.B. Anderson J. Chem. Phys., 63, 1499 (1975). J.B. Anderson J. Chem. Phys., 65, 4121 (1976).
21
Why H 3 + ??? Diffusion Monte Carlo J.B. Anderson J. Chem. Phys., 63, 1499 (1975). J.B. Anderson J. Chem. Phys., 65, 4121 (1976).
22
Why H 3 + ??? Diffusion Monte Carlo E ref
23
Why H 3 + ??? Taking Diffusion Monte Carlo to Excited States and Beyond!!!
24
Why H 3 + ??? Taking Diffusion Monte Carlo to Excited States and Beyond!!!
25
Why H 3 + ??? Taking Diffusion Monte Carlo to Excited States and Beyond!!! = +
26
Why H 3 + ??? Taking Diffusion Monte Carlo to Excited States and Beyond!!! = +
27
Why H 3 + ??? Taking Diffusion Monte Carlo to Excited States and Beyond!!! = + If r node is correct, then the average energy in each nodal region MUST be identical
28
Why H 3 + ??? Taking Diffusion Monte Carlo to Excited States and Beyond!!! = + If r node is correct, then the average energy in each nodal region MUST be identical
29
Why H 3 + ??? Our Rotational DMC Ansatz C B A
30
Why H 3 + ??? Our Rotational DMC Ansatz C B A C B A C B A
31
Why H 3 + ??? Our Rotational DMC Ansatz C B A C B A C B A
32
Why H 3 + ??? Our Rotational DMC Ansatz C B A C B A C B A Eckart frame employed to maximize separation of rotational and vibrational motion
33
Why H 3 + ??? Our Rotational DMC Ansatz C B A C B A C B A Eckart frame employed to maximize separation of rotational and vibrational motion Focusing on M=0 states
34
Why H 3 + ??? Our Rotational DMC Ansatz Two Key Assumptions:
35
Why H 3 + ??? Our Rotational DMC Ansatz Two Key Assumptions: Rotational component of wave function ONLY depends on BLAHHH A.S. Petit and A.B. McCoy, J. Phys. Chem. A., 113, 12706 (2009).
36
Why H 3 + ??? Our Rotational DMC Ansatz Two Key Assumptions: Rotational component of wave function ONLY depends on BLAHHH A.S. Petit and A.B. McCoy, J. Phys. Chem. A., 113, 12706 (2009).
37
Why H 3 + ??? Our Rotational DMC Ansatz Two Key Assumptions: Rotational component of wave function ONLY depends on BLAHHH M=0 nodal surfaces given by: A.S. Petit and A.B. McCoy, J. Phys. Chem. A., 113, 12706 (2009).
38
Why H 3 + ??? Is Our Ansatz Reasonable??? A. Aguado, O. Concero, C. Tablero, C. Sanz, and M. Paniagua, J. Chem. Phys., 112, 1240 (2000). K Energy (cm -1 ) E J=10,K − Fit to E 10,K =A+BK 2
39
Why H 3 + ??? Is Our Ansatz Reasonable??? A. Aguado, O. Concero, C. Tablero, C. Sanz, and M. Paniagua, J. Chem. Phys., 112, 1240 (2000). K Energy (cm -1 ) Residual of Fit (cm -1 ) E J=10,K − Fit to E 10,K =A+BK 2
40
Why H 3 + ??? J=1 Rotationally Excited State DMC Energy (cm -1 ) Literature (cm -1 ) DMC Error (cm -1 ) ZPE4361.7 ± 1.74362.10.4 |1,0,0>88.3 ± 2.087.01.3 |1,1,0> + 64.3 ± 2.364.10.2 A. Aguado, O. Concero, C. Tablero, C. Sanz, and M. Paniagua, J. Chem. Phys., 112, 1240 (2000). B.M. Dinelli, L. Neale, O.L. Polyansky, and J. Tennyson, J. Mol. Spect., 181, 142 (1997).
41
Why H 3 + ??? J=1 Rotationally Excited State DMC Energy (cm -1 ) Literature (cm -1 ) DMC Error (cm -1 ) ZPE4361.7 ± 1.74362.10.4 |1,0,0>88.3 ± 2.087.01.3 |1,1,0> + 64.3 ± 2.364.10.2 |1,0,0> |1,1,0> + A. Aguado, O. Concero, C. Tablero, C. Sanz, and M. Paniagua, J. Chem. Phys., 112, 1240 (2000). B.M. Dinelli, L. Neale, O.L. Polyansky, and J. Tennyson, J. Mol. Spect., 181, 142 (1997).
42
Why H 3 + ??? Moving on to Higher J A. Aguado, O. Concero, C. Tablero, C. Sanz, and M. Paniagua, J. Chem. Phys., 112, 1240 (2000). B.M. Dinelli, L. Neale, O.L. Polyansky, and J. Tennyson, J. Mol. Spect., 181, 142 (1997). +++++++++++
43
Why H 3 + ??? Moving on to Higher J A. Aguado, O. Concero, C. Tablero, C. Sanz, and M. Paniagua, J. Chem. Phys., 112, 1240 (2000). B.M. Dinelli, L. Neale, O.L. Polyansky, and J. Tennyson, J. Mol. Spect., 181, 142 (1997). +++++++++++
44
Why H 3 + ??? Moving on to Higher J
45
Why H 3 + ??? Moving on to Higher J
46
Why H 3 + ??? Moving on to Higher J A. Aguado, O. Concero, C. Tablero, C. Sanz, and M. Paniagua, J. Chem. Phys., 112, 1240 (2000). B.M. Dinelli, L. Neale, O.L. Polyansky, and J. Tennyson, J. Mol. Spect., 181, 142 (1997). +++++++++++
47
Why H 3 + ??? Moving on to Higher J
48
Why H 3 + ??? Moving on to Higher J
49
Why H 3 + ??? Moving on to Higher J
50
Why H 3 + ??? Moving on to Higher J
51
Why H 3 + ??? Moving on to Higher J
52
Why H 3 + ??? Rotation-Vibration Coupling + + + Å
53
Why H 3 + ??? Rotation-Vibration Coupling + + + Θ (°)
54
Why H 3 + ??? Rotation-Vibration Coupling + StateE 10,|K| (cm -1 ) E 10,|K| -E 10,|K|+1 (cm -1 ) |10,1,0> + 4348.851.7 |10,2,0> + 4297.081.3 |10,3,0> + 4215.7128.8 |10,4,0> + 4086.8160.3 |10,5,0> + 3926.6199.6 |10,6,0> + 3726.9241.8 |10,7,0> + 3485.1287.9 |10,8,0> + 3197.2340.2 |10,9,0> + 2857.0405.2 |10,10,0> + 2451.8 A. Aguado, O. Concero, C. Tablero, C. Sanz, and M. Paniagua, J. Chem. Phys., 112, 1240 (2000). Å + + + + Θ (°)
55
Why H 3 + ??? Future Work Understand the cause of the breakdown of the methodology at high J
56
Why H 3 + ??? Future Work Understand the cause of the breakdown of the methodology at high J H5+H5+
57
Why H 3 + ??? Future Work Understand the cause of the breakdown of the methodology at high J H5+H5+ Use DMC to map out the minimized energy pathways for the formation of H 5 +
58
Why H 3 + ??? Dr. Anne B. McCoy (TJ02) Dr. Sara E. Ray Bethany A. Wellen Andrew S. Petit (RI10) Annie L. Lesiak Dr. Charlotte E. Hinkle (RI02) Dr. Samantha Horvath Acknowledgements
59
Why H 3 + ??? Dr. Anne B. McCoy (TJ02) Dr. Sara E. Ray Bethany A. Wellen Andrew S. Petit (RI10) Annie L. Lesiak Dr. Charlotte E. Hinkle (RI02) Dr. Samantha Horvath Acknowledgements
60
Why H 3 + ??? QUESTIONS???
Similar presentations
© 2025 SlidePlayer.com. Inc.
All rights reserved.