Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-vfjqv Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-27T03:29:52.805Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Bridging the gap between laboratory astrophysics and quantum chemistry: The concept of potential energy surfaces

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 October 2020

C. M. R. Rocha*
Affiliation:
Department of Chemistry & Coimbra Chemistry Centre, University of Coimbra, 3004-535Coimbra, Portugal email: cmrocha@qui.uc.pt
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

An exotic molecular inventory exists in space. While some species have well-known terrestrial analogs, others are very reactive and can hardly survive in the laboratory timely to allow for their characterization. With an eye toward these latter, we highlight in this contribution the role of quantum chemistry in providing astrochemically relevant data where experiment struggles. Special attention is given to the concept of molecular potential energy surfaces (PESs), a key aspect in theoretical chemical physics, and the possible dynamical attributes taken therefrom. As case studies, we outline our current efforts in obtaining global PESs of carbon clusters. It is thus hoped that, with such an active synergy between theoretical chemistry and state-of-the-art experimental/observational techniques (the pillars to the modern laboratory astrophysics), scientists may gather the required knowledge to explain the origins, abundances and the driving force toward molecular complexity in the Universe.

Type
Contributed Papers
Copyright
© International Astronomical Union 2020

References

Agúndez, M. & Wakelam, V. 2013, Chem. Rev., 113, 8710 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Born, M. & Oppenheimer, R. 1927, Ann. Phys., 389, 457 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Flower, D. 2007, Molecular Collisions in the Interstellar Medium (New York: Cambridge University Press)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fortenberry, R. C. 2017, Int. J. Quantum Chem., 117, 81 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Helgaker, T., Jørgensen, P., & Olsen, J. 2000, Molecular Electronic-Structure Theory (Chichester: John Wiley & Sons)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Landau, L. D. & Lifshitz, L. M. 1981, Quantum Mechanics Non-Relativistic Theory (Bristol: Pergamon Press)Google Scholar
Levine, R. D. 2005, Molecular Reaction Dynamics (New York: Cambridge University Press)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lodi, L. & Tennyson, J. 2010, J. Phys. B: At. Mol. Opt. Phys., 43, 133001 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McGuire, B. A. 2018, ApJS, 239, 17 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Murrell, J. N., Carter, S., Farantos, S. C. and Huxley, P., & Varandas, A. J. C. 1984, Molecular Potential Energy Functions (Chichester: John Wiley & Sons)Google Scholar
Rocha, C. M. R. & Varandas, A. J. C. 2018, Chem. Phys. Lett., 700, 36 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rocha, C. M. R. & Varandas, A. J. C. 2019, J. Phys. Chem. A, 123, 8169 Google Scholar
Rocha, C. M. R., Li, J., Varandas, A. J. C., et al. 2019, J. Phys. Chem. A, 123, 3121 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tielens, A. G. G. M. 2013, Rev. Mod. Phys., 85, 1021 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Varandas, A. J. C. & Rocha, C. M. R. 2018, Phil. Trans. R. Soc. A, 376, 20170145 CrossRefGoogle Scholar