L-苯丙氨酸构象和电离能的理论研究

我们对L-苯丙氨酸进行了全势能面搜索,采用B3LYP方法优化了L-苯丙氨酸的648种可能构象,最终得到了37种稳定存在的构象.分别采用B3LYP、B3PW91、M06-2X、MP2和CCSD(T)计算了L-苯丙氨酸最稳定的10种构象的相对能量,其中M06-2X和MP2方法能够给出较好的结果.对比不同的基组,说明采用aug-cc-pVDZ已经接近达到基组收敛极限.用电子传播子理论P3近似方法计算稳定构象外价壳层轨道的垂直电离能与光电子能谱实验符合的很好;根据构象的相对能量以及理论模拟与实验的光电能谱的比对,说明对气相光电子能谱至少四种构象有贡献.     

NCO自由基分子和离子的电子结构计算

运用从头算方法计算了NCO自由基分子和离子的电子结构。为理解涉及NCO自由基在电离层和大气等媒介中的作用提供理论依据。     

环戊烷分子的电子动量谱

报导了在高分辨率电子动量谱仪上获得的环戊烷分子的结合能谱和动量谱的实验结果,并用Hartree-Fock方法和密度泛函方法做了理论计算.实验得到的环戊烷分子各电子轨道的电离能值与光电子谱得到的数据一致,动量分布的实验结果也与理论计算基本吻合.     

Al2Hx(x=1～3)分子团簇结构与光谱研究

用密度泛函理论(DFT)的B3LYP方法在6-311 g(d,p)水平上对Al2Hx(x=1~3)分子团簇的几何构型、电子结构、振动频率、垂直电离能和垂直电子亲和能等性质进行了理论研究.通过对基态结构的几何参数分析发现,它们的基态结构趋于对称性较高的构型.它们的基态结构为:Al2H(2A1)C2V,Al2H2(1Ag)D2h和Al2H3(2A′1)D3h.对基态结构的垂直电离能讨论表明,氢原子数从1增加到3,其气态分子越来越稳定.     

XNCS→XSCN (X=Cl,Br)异构化的实验与量子化学研究

捕获得到了纯净化合物ClSCN和BrSCN紫外光电子能谱图，OVGF方法计算的ClSCN和BrSCN的电离能与实验值吻合很好，并用该方法首次预测了ClNCS和BrNCS的电离能．讨论了XNCS→XSCN(X=Cl，Br)的异构化过程，首次优化得到了四元环过渡态的构型．着重从电子密度拓扑分析计算了反应进程中的各点，讨论了反应进程中键的断裂和生成，上述反应都经历了三元环过渡结构，找到了这类反应的“能量过渡态”和“结构过渡态”．     

探测低动量粒子的高精度中心漂移室性能的估算

分析估算了用于探测低动量带电粒子的高精度中心漂移室(CDC)的动量分辨率与电离能损,对低动量带电粒子的动量测量以及利用dE/dx识别粒子的能力进行了讨论,并探讨了CDC对两个典型过程的探测性能.     

乙硼烷离子和自由基异构体重排与体系势能面的量子化学计算研究

在B3LYP／6－311G（d,p)和QCISD（T）／6－311＋＋G（3df,2p)（单点）水平下，对B2H6^ 阳离子和B2H5自由基全优化得到9个几何异构体，B2H5^＋单态体系（D3h,C1),B2H5^ 三重态（Cs,Cs,C1),B2H5自由基（C2v,Cs,Cs,Cs)，得到势能面上与体系异构化过程相联系的5种过渡态。     

类锂体系(Z=21—30)基态1s22s电离能和相对论项能的理论计算

使用全实加关联方法和里兹(Ritz)变分方法计算了类锂体系(Z=21—30)基态1s²2s的非相对论能量和波函数；包括动能修正、电子-电子接触项、轨道-轨道相互作用项以及Darwin项的相对论修正和质量极化项由全实加关联波函数的一阶微扰给出，量子电动力学修正QED(quantum electronic dynamic)由有效核电荷方法和类氢公式计算；给出了中等核电荷的高电离类锂体系基态的电离能、相对论效应的项能(term energy)，并将计算结果与实验数据进行了比较，表明FCPC 关键词： 类锂体系 全实加关联 电离能 项能     

丁酮分子内价轨道1a"的电子动量谱学研究

用高分辨率电子动量谱仪进行丁酮分子的结合能谱和内价轨道1a"电子动量谱的实验工作,以及用HartreeFock和密度泛函理论方法对1a"轨道电子动量谱的理论研究.得到了各价轨道的电离能值以及理论计算的总能、偶极矩和1a"轨道的二维密度图.并比较了内价轨道1a"的电子动量谱的实验和理论计算结果,实验结果与理论计算符合较好.     

NH0-1+2-3离解能等的高级ab initio计算与评价

A recent experimental determination[1] of the dissociation energies (D0) for H2N-H, H2N+-H and H2N-H+, the ionization energies for NH3 and NH2 resulted in large deviations when compared with those of the earlier values and the QCISD(T)/6-311+G(3df,2p) ab initio calculations. We have performed some higher level ab initio calculations on these data by utilizing the Gaussian 92/DFT and Gaussian 94 pakages of programs and have assessed the available experimental values. Our calculations were carried out at the QCISD (TQ)/aug-cc-pVDZ, G2(QCI), QCISD(T)/6-311 ++G(3df,3pd) and QCISD(T)/aug-cc-pVTZ levels of theory. Geometries were optimized at both of the MP2(full)/6-31G(d) and the MP2(full)/6-31(d,p) levels, and were compared with those of the experiments if available. The MP2(full)/6-31G(d,p) tight-optimized geometries for the neutrals are closer to those of the experiments than those of the MP2 (full)/6-31G(d), and are in excellent agreement with the experimental results as shown in Table 1. In this case, we assumed that the optimized geometries for the cations would be better if p polarization functions are added to the hydrogen atoms. We firstly noted that the symmetry of the NH3+ cation was D3h, other than Cs. as reported in ref.[1]. All of the zero-point energies and the final geometries are calculated at the MP2(full)/6-31G(d,p) level of theory. We have also repeated the QCISD(T )/6-311 + G(3df,2p) calculations of ref. [1], because we could not identify their level of goemetry optimization. It is found that the total energy, -55.244 19 Hartrees, for NH2+(1A1 ) in ref.[1] might be in error. Our result is -55.336 29 Hartrees at the same level of theory. At our highest level [QCISD(T)/aug-cc-pVTZ] of calculations as shown in Table 3, the D0 (temperature at zero Kelvin) values of H2N-H, H2N+-H(3B1for NH2+ ) and H2N- H+ are 4.51, 5.49 and 8.00 eV, respectively. These data reported in re f.[1] were 4.97, 5.59 and 8.41 eV, respectively. Our result on D0(H2N-H) supports the work of ref.[2,3,5,6]. The ionization energies (IE) for NH3 and NH2 (3B1 for NH2+) at our highest level are 10.11 and 11.09 eV while in ref.[1] were 10.16 and 10.78 eV, respectively. For the latter, our result supports the experiment of ref.[3]. Our predicted D0 for HN2+-H and IE for NH2 (1A1 for each NH2+) are 6.80 and 12.39 eV, respectively. These values differ greatly from the predicted values (9.29 and 14.88 eV) of ref.[1] where the total energy of NH2+(1A1) might be in error. The D0 value for HN-H has not been found in ref.[1]. Our result supports the work of ref.[3]. We have also derived all of these values at the temperature of 298K and under the pressure of 101kPa at several levels of thoery as shown in Table 3. On examining the experiment of ref.[1] in detail, it is easy to find that all of the larger deviations might be from a too high value of the appearance potential of proton AP(H+). Indeed, ref.[1] has mentioned that the determintion of AP(H+), due to kinetic shift, would lead to a hihger value for the dissociation energy as has been pointed out by Berkowitz and Ruscic. In this work, we concluded that, besides some mistakes in the theoretical calculations of ref.[1], the dissociation energies for H2N-H and H2N-H+,the IE for NH2 (3B1 for NH2+) might also be unreliable and need to be re-examined.