Long-range interaction — where it appears
Named by 11 essays across 6 fields — each of them below, with the objects they name alongside it.
The lattice sum that depends on the order of adding
An ionic solid's binding is the sum of every pair of charges in it, and the series does not converge absolutely — rearranged, it gives a different answer. That is a genuine mathematical difficulty rather than a technicality, and it is the clearest example of something a real-space, neighbour-by-neighbour method cannot compute at all.
Zero dipole is not no interaction
Benzene's dipole moment is exactly zero at every origin, and its quadrupole moment is large enough to decide a crystal structure. Two benzenes face to face repel by nine kilojoules a mole; edge to face they attract, and the sign changes on the way between.
The atoms that meet across a ring
Twelve closed conformers of a ten-membered ring at one bond angle, so every one has identical angle strain by construction. Two of them differ by 0.026 kilojoules a mole in torsional energy and by 0.80 ångström in how close two atoms on opposite sides of the ring come — 2.331 against 3.131, where two carbons are in contact at about 3.4. An account built from angles and torsions calls those two structures the same.
The tenth that is not drawn
A ninety per cent contour of a hydrogen 1s orbital is a sphere of radius 2.661 bohr, and two of them stop touching at 5.322 bohr — where the overlap between the two orbitals is still 0.0768 and rising in importance. At a three-ångström contact, 36.9 per cent of the overlap integral lies outside both drawn surfaces, and holding nine tenths of it inside the picture would take a contour enclosing 97.28 per cent.
The radius that was tabulated
A van der Waals radius is a fitted number that every structural argument in chemistry uses. Computing it instead — a repulsion taken from computed overlap integrals, an attraction taken from two measured scalars, and no length anywhere — puts helium's contact at 3.140 ångström against a tabulated 2.80, neon's at 3.226 against 3.08 and argon's at 3.996 against 3.76. And the surface two atoms actually stop at encloses 99.4 per cent of the density, not ninety.
The same overlap, a different bond
A 1s and a 2s change their overlap by two thirds between two and seven bohr, and change what they are bonded by by 0.154 per cent. The overlap turns over and the bonding turns over with it, at exactly the same separation to five decimal places — the arithmetic refused the expectation that the secular denominators would move it — and what separates one pair from another is not where the maximum is but how little of it there is.
The explanation with the wrong sign
Two methyl groups on one carbon make a ring easier to close, by up to eleven thousand-fold, and the textbook reason is that they compress the ring's internal angle. Computed from a standard bending term, that compression helps a three-ring and a four-ring and hinders every ring from five up — predicting a slowing of 0.754-fold for the five-ring measured to speed up 250-fold. The account with the right sign is about rotations rather than angles, and it has a ceiling of 36.5 that the measurement is already above.
The give-back that turned into a saving
Take a wavefunction optimised for an on-site repulsion, weight its correlation hole with an interaction that reaches one neighbour, and the enhancement at one bond gives back forty-four per cent of the on-site saving. Putting that neighbour term into the Hamiltonian and solving exactly does not shrink the give-back. It reverses its sign.
A sign change is not always a zero
The solved give-back changes sign somewhere between a neighbour repulsion of two and one of four, and a bisection looks like the way to find the value where the structure beyond contact contributes exactly nothing. It changes sign twice. One crossing is that value; at the other the quantity the fraction is a fraction of has vanished instead, and a bisection reports the two in identical words.
A cancellation between two separations
The give-back's numerator has one term in it, so its root is the repulsion at which the pair count at one bond returns to its free value. Let the interaction reach two bonds and the numerator has two terms with opposite signs, and its root becomes a cancellation between an enhancement at one separation and a depletion at the next — at a repulsion where neither is at its free value. Which side of the old zero the new root falls on reverses between a reach of a third and a half, because whether two bonds are enhanced or depleted is the interaction's own doing.
A root that moves when nothing else does
Give the ring of six an interaction that falls off as one over the distance and the give-back's numerator has three terms. It still has one root, and at that root every separation's pair change has the opposite sign from the two-bond case. But the root has a weakness the earlier essays never tested: lower the interaction by the same amount at every separation and not one state changes, while the root moves — by as much as the reach of the interaction did, and out of existence altogether if the zero is put at one bond.
Named alongside it
The objects these essays reach for when they reach for this one.
Model limitIntermolecular forceConventionCorrelation energyElectron correlationExact diagonalisationHubbard modelOn-site repulsionDouble occupancyMany-electron wavefunctionsOverlap integralReference state