In a crude model of benzene, the six pi electrons are assumed to occupy the lowest energy levels of an electron on a ring system, with r = 140 pm, obeying the usual aufbau and pauli principles.
Use this model to predict the wavelength of EM radiation required to excite an electron from the HOMO to LUMO.
Is this the best way to go about this? Apologies for the notes, dont know how to write equations on TSR. So I'd calculate deltaE between m=3 and m=4 using the equation provided along with I = mr^2. Then having calculated deltaE I would use the de broglie equation to caluclate the wavelength?
Looks good to me, although in this model isn't the ground state m=0 case?
I always forget with the particle on a circle, isnt m=0 disallowed because of the solutions to the SE, psi(theta) = Am.cos(m.theta) and psi(theta) = Am.sin(m.theta) where Am = normalisation coefficient. When m = 0 the cos part = 1 which is fine but then the sin part = 0 which implies the wavefunction is zero over all space, which cant be normalised. So dont we disregard m = 0?
No, if you go through all the maths, you should get
ψ(θ)=2π1eimθ
so that
ψ(0)=2π1
And so the wavefn is non-zero. This won't change your answer, though, because the excitation you're looking at is now from the m=3 HSOMO to the m=4 LUMO.
No, if you go through all the maths, you should get
Ah OK, but then with the particle in a box (whether its 1D, 2D, 3D) why is n=0 disallowed? Surely we can apply the same logic as above but just with a different normalisation constant (root(1/2)) ?
Ah OK, but then with the particle in a box (whether its 1D, 2D, 3D) why is n=0 disallowed? Surely we can apply the same logic as above but just with a different normalisation constant (root(1/2)) ?
Is it because of the uncertainty principle?
No, it's because the solution for a particle in a 1D box is
ψn=L2sin(Lnπx)
so that ψ0=0. This means that the probability of the particle being found somewhere in the box is zero when n=0, i.e. the particle does not exist.
Ah OK, but then with the particle in a box (whether its 1D, 2D, 3D) why is n=0 disallowed? Surely we can apply the same logic as above but just with a different normalisation constant (root(1/2)) ?
Is it because of the uncertainty principle?
You see why this is, right? If you sub in n=0, you have sin(0)=0, so ψ0=0, i.e. no probability
No, it's because the solution for a particle in a 1D box is
ψn=L2sin(Lnπx)
so that ψ0=0. This means that the probability of the particle being found somewhere in the box is zero when n=0, i.e. the particle does not exist.
... But I had stupidly forgotten that the solutions to the wavefunctions for a circle and for a box were different. We were taught the solutions to the particle on a circle as the wavefunction(theta) = Am.Cos(m.theta) and Am.Sin(m.theta) (i.e. not in exponential form) which makes it harder to see why m=0 is allowed. I was plugging it into the sin function and concluding that the wavefunction was then zero - which is not allowed.
No, if you go through all the maths, you should get
ψ(θ)=2π1eimθ
so that
ψ(0)=2π1
And so the wavefn is non-zero. This won't change your answer, though, because the excitation you're looking at is now from the m=3 HSOMO to the m=4 LUMO.
Of course, the boundary condition is ψ(θ)=ψ(θ+2π), or we could define some wavefn such that it meets up at θ≡0mod2π but not at any other values.
Surely the HOMO is now m=2, or am I missing something?
And as for the boundary condition, most circles are only defined from 0 to 2pi!