2011
DOI: 10.1021/ct200438t
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Quantum Electrodynamics Effects in Rovibrational Spectra of Molecular Hydrogen

Abstract: The dissociation energies from all rovibrational levels of H2 and D2 in the ground electronic state are calculated with high accuracy by including relativistic and quantum electrodynamics (QED) effects in the nonadiabatic treatment of the nuclear motion. For D2, the obtained energies have theoretical uncertainties of 0.001 cm(-1). For H2, similar uncertainties are for the lowest levels, while for the higher ones the uncertainty increases to 0.005 cm(-1). Very good agreement with recent high-resolution measurem… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

22
251
1

Year Published

2012
2012
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 185 publications
(274 citation statements)
references
References 71 publications
(127 reference statements)
22
251
1
Order By: Relevance
“…The Q (1) and O(3) transitions share a common upper EF level, and the energy difference of 248.7329(21) cm −1 gives the ground state splitting X, v ′′ = 11, J ′′ = 1 → 3. This can be compared to the theoretical splitting derived from Komasa et al [9] of 248.731(7) cm −1 . In analogous fashion, the Q(3) and O(3) share the same lower X level, which enables the extraction of the EF, v ′ = 1, J ′ = 1 → 3 energy splitting of 61.1194(21) cm −1 .…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 84%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…The Q (1) and O(3) transitions share a common upper EF level, and the energy difference of 248.7329(21) cm −1 gives the ground state splitting X, v ′′ = 11, J ′′ = 1 → 3. This can be compared to the theoretical splitting derived from Komasa et al [9] of 248.731(7) cm −1 . In analogous fashion, the Q(3) and O(3) share the same lower X level, which enables the extraction of the EF, v ′ = 1, J ′ = 1 → 3 energy splitting of 61.1194(21) cm −1 .…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 84%
“…[22], the uncertainties in the calculations [9] are five times worse for the v = 8-11 in comparison with the v = 0 level energies. Along with the previous measurements on the X, v = 12 levels in Ref.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 87%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…49 based on the approach developed by Komasa et al 85 On the other hand the thermally averaged collisional shift can be estimated from the single line shape fitting thanks to its speed dependence, however, result will be dramatically dependent on the form of assumed B S (x) function. Finally, the line intensity determined from SD e BBP 25.990 × 10 −28 cm −1 /(molecule/cm 2 ) agrees very well, within 0.04%, with the theoretical value 25.980×10 −28 cm −1 /(molecule/cm 2 ) reported in Ref.…”
Section: Line Profilementioning
confidence: 99%
“…1 Recently, also high-order relativistic and quantum-electrodynamic effects, i.e., molecular Lamb shifts were included in the calculations, although limited to the X 1 + g ground state. 2 For D 2 these calculations were subjected to test and confirmed in a measurement of the dissociation energy of the ground state 3 at an accuracy level of <0.001 cm −1 . For the electronically excited states of 1 + u symmetry 4 and 1 u symmetry 5 ab initio calculations have been performed, although at lower accuracy than for the ground state.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%