Analysis of diatomic bond dissociation and formation in terms of the reaction force and the position-dependent reaction force constant
- 107 Downloads
Bond dissociation and formation in diatomic molecules are analyzed in terms of the reaction force F(R) and the reaction force constant κ(R). These were determined for a group of 13 molecules from their extended-Rydberg potential energy functions V(R), which are of near-experimental quality. From F(R) and κ(R) comes a two-stage description of dissociation/formation. In dissociation, the first stage involves stretching of the bond, which is opposed by an increasingly negative retarding force F(R). This reaches a minimum and then begins to weaken in the second stage, which is the transition from stretched molecule to free atoms. Bond formation begins with the reverse transition, driven by a positive F(R) which reaches a maximum for the stretched molecule and then becomes a decreasing restoring force. In the stages in which the system is a stretched molecule, κ(R) is positive with its maximum at the equilibrium bond length; it is zero at the minimum or maximum of F(R), and negative throughout the transition stages, going through a minimum. κ(R) <0 has been found to characterize the transition portion of a reaction. This description of dissociation/formation is reinforced by computed B3LYP and Hartree-Fock force constants at different atom separations for the singlet molecules. Hartree-Fock wave function stability assessments suggest that, for the single-bonded singlet molecules, the onset of electron unpairing in dissociation comes in the neighborhood of the F(R) minimum.
KeywordsDiatomic molecule dissociation/formation Extended-Rydberg potential energy function Position-dependent reaction force constant Reaction force Wave function stability
ATL would like to acknowledge the support of Projects FONDECYT #1060590 and #1070590 and Project FONDAP #11980002 (CIMAT).
- 6.Politzer P, Murray JS (2008) Collect Czech Chem Commun 73:822-830Google Scholar
- 7.Rydberg R (1931) Z Phys 73:376–385Google Scholar
- 9.Gaussian 03, Revision C.02, Frisch MJ, Trucks GW, Schlegel HB, Scuseria GE, Robb MA, Cheeseman JR, Montgomery JA Jr, Vreven T, Kudin KN, Burant JC, Millam JM, Iyengar SS, Tomasi J, Barone, Mennucci VB, Cossi M, Scalmani G, Rega N, Petersson GA, Nakatsuji H, Hada M, Ehara M, Toyota K, Fukuda R, Hasegawa J, Ishida M, Nakajima T, Honda Y, Kitao O, Nakai H, Klene M, Li X, Knox JE, Hratchian HP, Cross JB, Adamo C, Jaramillo J, Gomperts R, Stratmann RE, Yazyev O, Austin AJ, Cammi R, Pomelli C, Ochterski JW, Ayala PY, Morokuma K, Voth GA, Salvador P, Dannenberg JJ, Zakrzewski VG, Dapprich S, Daniels AD, Strain MC, Farkas O, Malick DK, Rabuck AD, Raghavachari K, Foresman JB, Ortiz JV, Cui Q, Baboul AG, Clifford S, Cioslowski J, Stefanov BB, Liu G, Liashenko A, Piskorz P, Komaromi I, Martin RL, Fox DJ, Keith T, Al-Laham MA, Peng CY, Nanayakkara A, Challacombe M, Gill PMW, Johnson B, Chen W, Wong MW, Gonzalez C, Pople JA (2004) Gaussian Inc, Wallingford CTGoogle Scholar
- 10.Levine IN (2000) Quantum Chemistry, 5th edn. Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJGoogle Scholar