Relationship between the symmetry number of a molecule as used in rotational spectroscopy and point group
$begingroup$
While doing a problem set I noticed that the symmetry number of a molecule turns out (usually) to be half the number of symmetry elements that the point group the molecule belongs to.
When I say symmetry number I refer to the symmetry number used in rotational spectroscopy — i.e. the number of indistinguishable orientations of the molecule. This accounts for suitable symmetrisation of the rotational wavefunction and the nuclear wavefunction of the molecule.
For example benzene belongs to point group $D_mathrm{6h}$, which has 24 symmetry elements. It also has symmetry number 12, i.e. 1/2 the number of symmetry elements in it's point group.
Another few examples:
- Water. Point group $C_mathrm{2v}$, with 4 symmetry elements. Has 2 as symmetry number.
- Ammonia. Point group $C_mathrm{3v}$ with 6 symmetry elements. 3 as symmetry number.
- Ethene. Point group $D_mathrm{2h}$ with 8 symmetry elements. 4 as symmetry number.
This seems to be a general trend. It sort of makes sense intuitively that the 2 should have a relationship, but I can't formalise the reason for this.
Obviously for diatomics/linear molecules this doesn't apply. This is because rotational motion around the axis of symmetry is not physical — moment of inertia around this axis is zero, as all mass along axis. Thus there are no rotational levels associated with this axis. But ignoring diatomics/linear molecules, where we have neglected/ignored an axis of rotation, the above relationship seems to hold.
Why is this the case? I'd appreciate both a mathematical derivation and a more intuitive argument.
quantum-chemistry spectroscopy symmetry
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
While doing a problem set I noticed that the symmetry number of a molecule turns out (usually) to be half the number of symmetry elements that the point group the molecule belongs to.
When I say symmetry number I refer to the symmetry number used in rotational spectroscopy — i.e. the number of indistinguishable orientations of the molecule. This accounts for suitable symmetrisation of the rotational wavefunction and the nuclear wavefunction of the molecule.
For example benzene belongs to point group $D_mathrm{6h}$, which has 24 symmetry elements. It also has symmetry number 12, i.e. 1/2 the number of symmetry elements in it's point group.
Another few examples:
- Water. Point group $C_mathrm{2v}$, with 4 symmetry elements. Has 2 as symmetry number.
- Ammonia. Point group $C_mathrm{3v}$ with 6 symmetry elements. 3 as symmetry number.
- Ethene. Point group $D_mathrm{2h}$ with 8 symmetry elements. 4 as symmetry number.
This seems to be a general trend. It sort of makes sense intuitively that the 2 should have a relationship, but I can't formalise the reason for this.
Obviously for diatomics/linear molecules this doesn't apply. This is because rotational motion around the axis of symmetry is not physical — moment of inertia around this axis is zero, as all mass along axis. Thus there are no rotational levels associated with this axis. But ignoring diatomics/linear molecules, where we have neglected/ignored an axis of rotation, the above relationship seems to hold.
Why is this the case? I'd appreciate both a mathematical derivation and a more intuitive argument.
quantum-chemistry spectroscopy symmetry
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
Table II on this NIST webpage gives the number of symmetry elements for most of the common point groups and a brief explanation of how they can be obtained. It seems to align with the trend you are describing. @SwedishArchitect
$endgroup$
– Tyberius
yesterday
add a comment |
$begingroup$
While doing a problem set I noticed that the symmetry number of a molecule turns out (usually) to be half the number of symmetry elements that the point group the molecule belongs to.
When I say symmetry number I refer to the symmetry number used in rotational spectroscopy — i.e. the number of indistinguishable orientations of the molecule. This accounts for suitable symmetrisation of the rotational wavefunction and the nuclear wavefunction of the molecule.
For example benzene belongs to point group $D_mathrm{6h}$, which has 24 symmetry elements. It also has symmetry number 12, i.e. 1/2 the number of symmetry elements in it's point group.
Another few examples:
- Water. Point group $C_mathrm{2v}$, with 4 symmetry elements. Has 2 as symmetry number.
- Ammonia. Point group $C_mathrm{3v}$ with 6 symmetry elements. 3 as symmetry number.
- Ethene. Point group $D_mathrm{2h}$ with 8 symmetry elements. 4 as symmetry number.
This seems to be a general trend. It sort of makes sense intuitively that the 2 should have a relationship, but I can't formalise the reason for this.
Obviously for diatomics/linear molecules this doesn't apply. This is because rotational motion around the axis of symmetry is not physical — moment of inertia around this axis is zero, as all mass along axis. Thus there are no rotational levels associated with this axis. But ignoring diatomics/linear molecules, where we have neglected/ignored an axis of rotation, the above relationship seems to hold.
Why is this the case? I'd appreciate both a mathematical derivation and a more intuitive argument.
quantum-chemistry spectroscopy symmetry
$endgroup$
While doing a problem set I noticed that the symmetry number of a molecule turns out (usually) to be half the number of symmetry elements that the point group the molecule belongs to.
When I say symmetry number I refer to the symmetry number used in rotational spectroscopy — i.e. the number of indistinguishable orientations of the molecule. This accounts for suitable symmetrisation of the rotational wavefunction and the nuclear wavefunction of the molecule.
For example benzene belongs to point group $D_mathrm{6h}$, which has 24 symmetry elements. It also has symmetry number 12, i.e. 1/2 the number of symmetry elements in it's point group.
Another few examples:
- Water. Point group $C_mathrm{2v}$, with 4 symmetry elements. Has 2 as symmetry number.
- Ammonia. Point group $C_mathrm{3v}$ with 6 symmetry elements. 3 as symmetry number.
- Ethene. Point group $D_mathrm{2h}$ with 8 symmetry elements. 4 as symmetry number.
This seems to be a general trend. It sort of makes sense intuitively that the 2 should have a relationship, but I can't formalise the reason for this.
Obviously for diatomics/linear molecules this doesn't apply. This is because rotational motion around the axis of symmetry is not physical — moment of inertia around this axis is zero, as all mass along axis. Thus there are no rotational levels associated with this axis. But ignoring diatomics/linear molecules, where we have neglected/ignored an axis of rotation, the above relationship seems to hold.
Why is this the case? I'd appreciate both a mathematical derivation and a more intuitive argument.
quantum-chemistry spectroscopy symmetry
quantum-chemistry spectroscopy symmetry
edited yesterday
andselisk
17.5k656117
17.5k656117
asked yesterday
Swedish ArchitectSwedish Architect
1,05121017
1,05121017
$begingroup$
Table II on this NIST webpage gives the number of symmetry elements for most of the common point groups and a brief explanation of how they can be obtained. It seems to align with the trend you are describing. @SwedishArchitect
$endgroup$
– Tyberius
yesterday
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Table II on this NIST webpage gives the number of symmetry elements for most of the common point groups and a brief explanation of how they can be obtained. It seems to align with the trend you are describing. @SwedishArchitect
$endgroup$
– Tyberius
yesterday
$begingroup$
Table II on this NIST webpage gives the number of symmetry elements for most of the common point groups and a brief explanation of how they can be obtained. It seems to align with the trend you are describing. @SwedishArchitect
$endgroup$
– Tyberius
yesterday
$begingroup$
Table II on this NIST webpage gives the number of symmetry elements for most of the common point groups and a brief explanation of how they can be obtained. It seems to align with the trend you are describing. @SwedishArchitect
$endgroup$
– Tyberius
yesterday
add a comment |
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
This is not in general true
Consider molecules a point group not containing inversion symmetry, e.g. $C_2$ hydrogen peroxide
The $C_2$ group has only two elements, $E$ and $C_2$, and the $C_2$ rotation operation maps between two identical arrangements of atoms. Both the symmetry number and order of the group are 2.
Matrix representations
All rotations in 3D space can be represented by a orthogonal 3x3 matrix with determinant 1, and the composition of rotations about the origin can be represented by matrix multiplication of the transformation.
More formally: the group SO$(3)$ (3D rotations) is isomorphic to the group of orthogonal real 3x3 matrices under multiplication.
The number of symmetry elements in a point group formed from rotations (and which hence preserve chirality) will be the same as the number which can be represented by such matrices and the same as the number of equivalent orientations of the molecule (the symmetry number) as they are all representation of the same thing - 3D rotations.
Inversions
The group of all transformations that keep the origin fixed, including reflections as well as rotations is O$(3)$ - or the product of SO$(3)$ with the set $lbrace I,-Irbrace$ or the inversion operation. It maps rotations onto improper rotations (which include reflections - improper rotation by 0 degrees) and hence all symmetries in 3D space.
All point groups with inversion symmetry, such as the 3 listed in the question, contains this $-I$ element. $-I$ will multiple all the elements of the rotation matrix by $-1$ and create an orthogonal 3x3 matrix with determinant -1. By composition with each of the rotations elements of the point group it creates another element - an inversion, improper rotation or reflection - doubling the size of the group without increasing the symmetry number.
Conclusion: chirality matters
This rule is true for non-chiral groups. You can invert the molecule to get another symmetric copy for every rotationally equivalent copy, so the order of the group is twice the symmetry number.
For chiral groups that will create the enantiomer which isn't symmetrically equivalent so the order of the group and symmetry number are the same.
$endgroup$
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
});
});
}, "mathjax-editing");
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "431"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fchemistry.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f110492%2frelationship-between-the-symmetry-number-of-a-molecule-as-used-in-rotational-spe%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
This is not in general true
Consider molecules a point group not containing inversion symmetry, e.g. $C_2$ hydrogen peroxide
The $C_2$ group has only two elements, $E$ and $C_2$, and the $C_2$ rotation operation maps between two identical arrangements of atoms. Both the symmetry number and order of the group are 2.
Matrix representations
All rotations in 3D space can be represented by a orthogonal 3x3 matrix with determinant 1, and the composition of rotations about the origin can be represented by matrix multiplication of the transformation.
More formally: the group SO$(3)$ (3D rotations) is isomorphic to the group of orthogonal real 3x3 matrices under multiplication.
The number of symmetry elements in a point group formed from rotations (and which hence preserve chirality) will be the same as the number which can be represented by such matrices and the same as the number of equivalent orientations of the molecule (the symmetry number) as they are all representation of the same thing - 3D rotations.
Inversions
The group of all transformations that keep the origin fixed, including reflections as well as rotations is O$(3)$ - or the product of SO$(3)$ with the set $lbrace I,-Irbrace$ or the inversion operation. It maps rotations onto improper rotations (which include reflections - improper rotation by 0 degrees) and hence all symmetries in 3D space.
All point groups with inversion symmetry, such as the 3 listed in the question, contains this $-I$ element. $-I$ will multiple all the elements of the rotation matrix by $-1$ and create an orthogonal 3x3 matrix with determinant -1. By composition with each of the rotations elements of the point group it creates another element - an inversion, improper rotation or reflection - doubling the size of the group without increasing the symmetry number.
Conclusion: chirality matters
This rule is true for non-chiral groups. You can invert the molecule to get another symmetric copy for every rotationally equivalent copy, so the order of the group is twice the symmetry number.
For chiral groups that will create the enantiomer which isn't symmetrically equivalent so the order of the group and symmetry number are the same.
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
This is not in general true
Consider molecules a point group not containing inversion symmetry, e.g. $C_2$ hydrogen peroxide
The $C_2$ group has only two elements, $E$ and $C_2$, and the $C_2$ rotation operation maps between two identical arrangements of atoms. Both the symmetry number and order of the group are 2.
Matrix representations
All rotations in 3D space can be represented by a orthogonal 3x3 matrix with determinant 1, and the composition of rotations about the origin can be represented by matrix multiplication of the transformation.
More formally: the group SO$(3)$ (3D rotations) is isomorphic to the group of orthogonal real 3x3 matrices under multiplication.
The number of symmetry elements in a point group formed from rotations (and which hence preserve chirality) will be the same as the number which can be represented by such matrices and the same as the number of equivalent orientations of the molecule (the symmetry number) as they are all representation of the same thing - 3D rotations.
Inversions
The group of all transformations that keep the origin fixed, including reflections as well as rotations is O$(3)$ - or the product of SO$(3)$ with the set $lbrace I,-Irbrace$ or the inversion operation. It maps rotations onto improper rotations (which include reflections - improper rotation by 0 degrees) and hence all symmetries in 3D space.
All point groups with inversion symmetry, such as the 3 listed in the question, contains this $-I$ element. $-I$ will multiple all the elements of the rotation matrix by $-1$ and create an orthogonal 3x3 matrix with determinant -1. By composition with each of the rotations elements of the point group it creates another element - an inversion, improper rotation or reflection - doubling the size of the group without increasing the symmetry number.
Conclusion: chirality matters
This rule is true for non-chiral groups. You can invert the molecule to get another symmetric copy for every rotationally equivalent copy, so the order of the group is twice the symmetry number.
For chiral groups that will create the enantiomer which isn't symmetrically equivalent so the order of the group and symmetry number are the same.
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
This is not in general true
Consider molecules a point group not containing inversion symmetry, e.g. $C_2$ hydrogen peroxide
The $C_2$ group has only two elements, $E$ and $C_2$, and the $C_2$ rotation operation maps between two identical arrangements of atoms. Both the symmetry number and order of the group are 2.
Matrix representations
All rotations in 3D space can be represented by a orthogonal 3x3 matrix with determinant 1, and the composition of rotations about the origin can be represented by matrix multiplication of the transformation.
More formally: the group SO$(3)$ (3D rotations) is isomorphic to the group of orthogonal real 3x3 matrices under multiplication.
The number of symmetry elements in a point group formed from rotations (and which hence preserve chirality) will be the same as the number which can be represented by such matrices and the same as the number of equivalent orientations of the molecule (the symmetry number) as they are all representation of the same thing - 3D rotations.
Inversions
The group of all transformations that keep the origin fixed, including reflections as well as rotations is O$(3)$ - or the product of SO$(3)$ with the set $lbrace I,-Irbrace$ or the inversion operation. It maps rotations onto improper rotations (which include reflections - improper rotation by 0 degrees) and hence all symmetries in 3D space.
All point groups with inversion symmetry, such as the 3 listed in the question, contains this $-I$ element. $-I$ will multiple all the elements of the rotation matrix by $-1$ and create an orthogonal 3x3 matrix with determinant -1. By composition with each of the rotations elements of the point group it creates another element - an inversion, improper rotation or reflection - doubling the size of the group without increasing the symmetry number.
Conclusion: chirality matters
This rule is true for non-chiral groups. You can invert the molecule to get another symmetric copy for every rotationally equivalent copy, so the order of the group is twice the symmetry number.
For chiral groups that will create the enantiomer which isn't symmetrically equivalent so the order of the group and symmetry number are the same.
$endgroup$
This is not in general true
Consider molecules a point group not containing inversion symmetry, e.g. $C_2$ hydrogen peroxide
The $C_2$ group has only two elements, $E$ and $C_2$, and the $C_2$ rotation operation maps between two identical arrangements of atoms. Both the symmetry number and order of the group are 2.
Matrix representations
All rotations in 3D space can be represented by a orthogonal 3x3 matrix with determinant 1, and the composition of rotations about the origin can be represented by matrix multiplication of the transformation.
More formally: the group SO$(3)$ (3D rotations) is isomorphic to the group of orthogonal real 3x3 matrices under multiplication.
The number of symmetry elements in a point group formed from rotations (and which hence preserve chirality) will be the same as the number which can be represented by such matrices and the same as the number of equivalent orientations of the molecule (the symmetry number) as they are all representation of the same thing - 3D rotations.
Inversions
The group of all transformations that keep the origin fixed, including reflections as well as rotations is O$(3)$ - or the product of SO$(3)$ with the set $lbrace I,-Irbrace$ or the inversion operation. It maps rotations onto improper rotations (which include reflections - improper rotation by 0 degrees) and hence all symmetries in 3D space.
All point groups with inversion symmetry, such as the 3 listed in the question, contains this $-I$ element. $-I$ will multiple all the elements of the rotation matrix by $-1$ and create an orthogonal 3x3 matrix with determinant -1. By composition with each of the rotations elements of the point group it creates another element - an inversion, improper rotation or reflection - doubling the size of the group without increasing the symmetry number.
Conclusion: chirality matters
This rule is true for non-chiral groups. You can invert the molecule to get another symmetric copy for every rotationally equivalent copy, so the order of the group is twice the symmetry number.
For chiral groups that will create the enantiomer which isn't symmetrically equivalent so the order of the group and symmetry number are the same.
edited yesterday
answered yesterday
user213305user213305
856416
856416
add a comment |
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Chemistry Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fchemistry.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f110492%2frelationship-between-the-symmetry-number-of-a-molecule-as-used-in-rotational-spe%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
$begingroup$
Table II on this NIST webpage gives the number of symmetry elements for most of the common point groups and a brief explanation of how they can be obtained. It seems to align with the trend you are describing. @SwedishArchitect
$endgroup$
– Tyberius
yesterday