* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
Download S.V. Stepanov
Wave–particle duality wikipedia , lookup
Atomic theory wikipedia , lookup
Casimir effect wikipedia , lookup
Particle in a box wikipedia , lookup
Rutherford backscattering spectrometry wikipedia , lookup
Tight binding wikipedia , lookup
X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy wikipedia , lookup
Theoretical and experimental justification for the Schrödinger equation wikipedia , lookup
Beyond the point Ps approximation (account of internal Coulombic attraction) S.V. Stepanov, D.S. Zwezhinski, V.M. Byakov Institute for Theoretical and Experimental Physics, Moscow -- Phylosophy of science: role of basic elementary models -- Intratrack mechanism of Ps formation -- Ps bubble: Exchange repulsion or something else? -- Non-point Ps. Account of intrinsic Coulombic e+e- interaction in a medium with a cavity. Ĥ via e+ and e- work functions (+ polarization corrections) -- e+e- psi-function, minimization of total energy -- E(R), pick-off rate, contact density, equilibrium radius … -- How to link macroscopic and microscopic considerations? What are general basis of a science? (take Quantum Mechanics as an example) 1) ideas/concepts (Ψ-function, operators, commutative properties, the Schrodinger equation, superposition principal ...); 2) methods which realize ideas (perturbation theory, variational principle, quasiclassical approximation ...) 3) basic elementary models illustrate how these methods do really work (oscillator, H-atom, potential well, free electron gas, the Thomas-Fermi model, ...) 4) experimental verification (“Great experiments in physics”) Basic models are very important because: -- being simple and solvable they give us directions of thinking to conceive more complicate systems; -- they make up a basement of all education process Quantum Mechanics + => - Physical Chemistry => & Kinetics Radiation + Positron + Ps Chemistry basic models are: ionization stopping power; H.Bethe’s formula (1930) ion-electron recombination; L.Onsager’s formula (1937) diffusion-controlled rate constant; M.Smoluchowski (1917) the Debye-Huckel screening (1923) ambipolar diffusion; prescribed diffusion; G.Jaffe (1913) energy losses of subexcitation electrons; H.Froehlich (1953) model of solvated and quasifree electron; J.Jortner (1968…) Ps bubble model; Ferrel, Goldanskii, Tao, Eldrup et al. (1957…) … Intratrack recombination mechanism of Ps formation in liquids instead of the Ore model in gases: 1. Ps is formed as a result of combination of the thermalized e+ with one of the knocked out intratrack e- in the e+ blob. Initially Ps appears as a e+qf + e-blob e+…e- weakly bound (~0.1eV) +e- pair. stretched e qf-Ps Ps in a bubble 2. Because of energy loss on + weakly bound e e - pair vibration, this pair transforms rep 20 Å , Ebinding 0.1 eV + V +V e+ e 0 0 into a quasifree Ps, the +e- in an ground state of e e+ - e E qf-Ps binding Coulombic attraction ~ 1-1.5 eV unperturbed medium. + e e quasi-free Ps 3. Further energy gain is due rqf-Ps 3-6 Å Ps in the V V +V |+ bubble to rearrangement of molecules +Ry/2*(1-1/ )~ ~ 3-5 eV (formation of the Ps bubble). ee ee+ EPs What is a driving force of -6.8 eV; Ps in vacuum this process? Ps 0 + + 0 0 2 + - In 1956(7) R.Ferrel suggested that the driving force of the formation of the Ps bubble is an exchange repulsion between the Ps electron and molecular electrons. Nature of the exchange repulsion is e- e- Coulombic repulsion combined with the correct permutation symmetry of the e- wave function. - eno HeH- ion -2 0 2 -2 0 2 e 0 0 -5 -6 + e- 2aB/r -0.5 H atom e-1 0 r/2aB ss e- -2 ex ce e- e- r/2aB + -4 energy /Ry -3 He atom xce ss -2 4aB/r +e energy /Ry -1 bound state r/2aB + + Without further details, Ferrel approximated this repulsion by a potential well (rectangular). U 2 PR (r) U EPs R (r) EPs R RU electronic density Ps bubble model => pick-off annihilation rate and energetics and kinetics of the Ps bubble formation The Tao-Eldrup Ps bubble model relates λpo=1/τ3 and R. It assuming U=∞. pick-off annihilation rate, 1/ns Determination of δ in T-E Eq. Relation between pick-off annihilation rate of ortho-Ps and surface tension. Tao-Eldrup Eq. with fixed +=2 /ns H O gives =1.66 Å 0.6 2 D2O CS2 OH 0.4 (CHC H) CO 4 9 3 2 C3H7OH 0.2 C6H6 C8H17OH cC6H12 C2H5C6H5 1234TMB dioxane decane C7H14 (CH3)2C6H4 C2H5OH heptane CH3CN m-xylene hexane nC14H30 p-xylene diethylether C6F6 dodecane toluene n-C5H12 iC8H18 CH3OH mesitylene Xe TMS C(CH3)4 Ar N2 H2 He 0 0 20 40 60 surface tension, dyn/cm 80 However, beyond exchange repulsion there is important variation of internal Coulombic energy of e+e- pair (attraction between e+ and e- screened by the medium). Known scaling property of the Schrödinger Eq. for Ps atom e2 => e2/ε, (ε≈n2≈2) gives for e+e- binding energy It is seen that in comparison with the exchange repulsion (typically U=1-4 eV) variation of the Coulombic energy is not small. So it should be taken into account. It was not done yet. We have to reject consideration of Ps as a point particle. Hamiltonian of the e+e- pair in a medium with a spherical cavity Interaction of e+ and e- with a medium: V0 is the V0+ -? Same as for e- ground state energy of an excess particle in a medium (work function) How e+ and e- interacts each other in a medium with a spherical cavity? r=|r+-r-| r - + R 1 = The energy of e+e- Coulombic attraction may be expressed via z + r+ series over the Legendre polynomials Pl (cos θ): 2 Examples of e+ and e- Coulombic interaction in a medium with a spherical cavity We really gain a lot of energy (several eV) only in the case when both particles are well inside the sphere (left figure). Trial wave function for energy minimization (simplest, but sufficient) Total energy = <Ψ+-|H|Ψ+-> → min over a and b => all energy contributions and contact density and pick-off annihilation rate (λ+ ≈2/ns) -Ry/ 2 = =-1.7 eV a -Ry/ = =-3.4 eV 2 delocalized e+e- pair delocalized e+e- pair b,Å B c and 1) Even if e+ e3 = work functions are 0 0 to 0, and 5 each 10 equal 0 free volume R, Å particle does not V++V-=2 eV; =2 consider a cavity b a potential Ry/22= neither as aB as a poten. =1.7 eV =nor barrier, 1 2+V= well, Ps bubble may -Ry/2 =0.3 eV be formed due to ana -Ry/2= =-3.4 eV enhancement of the c=e+e(aB/a) Coulombic 3 attraction the =inside 0 cavity 0 (no dielectric 5 10 0 free inside). volume R, Å screening 5 potential energy = 0 0 finite well, "point" Ps total energy energy, eV =aB Conclusions: =(a /a) c ; a , Å ; Ry/2 Ry/2 = =1.7 eV 2 -5 Tao-Eldrup model -Ry/2 -10 Coulombic energy -Ry 5 10 free volume R, Å e+e- kinetic energy Ry/2 5 potential energy finite well, point Ps 0 total energy energy, eV b e+e- kinetic energy delocalized e+e- pair delocalized e+e- pair b,Å c ; a , Å ; 1 V++V-=0; =2 -5 Tao-Eldrup model -Ry/2 -10 Coulombic energy -Ry 5 10 free volume R, Å Minimization of e+e- energy, <H> Two limiting cases: 1) “vacuum” Ps -- at large R: a=aB , Etot=-Ry/2 , ηc=1 … 2) quasi-free Ps = “vacuum” Ps with a scaling e2 -> e2/ε, ε=2 a=εaB , ηc=1/ε3 Etot = -Ry/2ε2 + +|V0++ V0- | Big difference with Tao-Eldrup! λpick-off calculated according to Tao- Eldrup, for a “point” Ps in a finite well U and for e+e- pair 1 V +V+=0 V-+V+=2 eV 0.8 po (R) / + 2) At R<1.5-2.2 A all the obtained dependencies have a plateau, but at larger R there are significant variations. It is related with the known quantum mechanical phenomenon -- absence of a bound state of a particle in a small finite 3d-potential well. In such cavities Ps cannot be bound, it does not exert any repulsive pressure on them and does not stimulate their transformation into equilibrium Ps bubble. It could be that finding a suitable preexisting cavity, where qf-Ps may localize, be a limiting factor of formation of the Ps bubble state. U = 5.1 eV U =0.96 Å 0.6 finite well 0.4 Tao-Eldrup formula 0.2 qf-Ps rep=3aB/21.5 Å 0 0 1 2 3 4 free volume radius R, Å 5 energy 0 -5 0 Tao-Eldrup model -Ry/2 total energy of the Ps bubble Ee+e- delocalized e+e- pair surface 3) For such a bubble relative contact V++Vthe =0 density is ηc0.9. It is -higher then experimental values surface (0.65-0.75). This energy may indicate that e+ and e- interact with 0 a medium in a different way (i.e. V0total energy of the + >V0 ). Roughly, Ps electron may be Ps bubble trapped in a cavity, but e+ will be bound to e- by the Coulombic attraction. This scenario can be considered Ee+e-in the frameworks of our approach. One may -5 try psi-function of the pair in an “asymmetric” towards e+ and e- form: 5 10 0 free volume R, Å delocalized e+e- pair V++V-=2 eV energy, eV Equilibrium size of Ps bubble in water is 5Å, which is on 2 Å larger then in the Tao-Eldrup model 5 10 free volume R, Å 4) Challenge for the positron/Ps-newcomers : Any Ps bubble model reduces the original multi-particle problem to a simpler one: to a problem of one or two species in an external self-consistent field, describing Ps-medium interaction. To obtain this field we use macroscopic approaches. However, their linkage with, for example, actual arrangement of molecules, forming boundary of the Ps bubble, usage a concept of dielectric permittivity and so on, remains always uncertain. More adequate approaches should be developed or used... In condensed phase in addition to the exchange repulsion there is polarization attraction between excess e- and a medium. So the ground state energy, V0 -, of excess e- is a sum of its kinetic energy (exchange repulsion) and polarization attraction [Springett B.E., Jortner J., Cohen M.N., 1968] vacuum liquid phase e -qf wave function zero energy in vacuum V 0 Up If we consider qf-Ps in a continuum (no cavity), the distance between e+ and e- is 3εaB/2 ≈1.5 Å (about the Wigner-Seitz radius of a molecule), so other molecules “see” this qf-Ps as an electrically neutral object. Therefore, it is reaso-nable to subtract from V0 - +V0 +, U-out + U+out ≈-2 eV