2005
DOI: 10.1021/jp053097q
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Quantum Mechanical Polarizable Continuum Model Approach to the Kerr Effect of Pure Liquids

Abstract: A quantum mechanical methodology, working within the framework of the polarizable continuum model (PCM), yielding quantities directly comparable with data extracted from Kerr experiments of liquids, is presented. The procedure permits us to obtain the final molar property (specifically, the Kerr constant) in terms of effective molecular dipoles and (hyper)polarizabilities. The latter are obtained through an ab initio description of the molecule of interest when it is mutually interacting with the surrounding m… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

0
39
0

Year Published

2006
2006
2019
2019

Publication Types

Select...
7
2

Relationship

6
3

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 30 publications
(39 citation statements)
references
References 50 publications
0
39
0
Order By: Relevance
“…There exists, therefore, a formal difference between the macroscopic spectroscopic response of the solution sample, which is defined in terms of the Maxwell field, and the response of the molecule in the cavity within a dielectric medium, which depends instead on the field locally acting on the molecule in the cavity. However, as already pointed out in the literature, [13][14][15][38][39][40][41][42][43][44] in order to gain a reliable connection between the microscopic properties of the molecule and the macroscopic response, it is compulsory to account for the difference between the Maxwell and the cavity fields.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…There exists, therefore, a formal difference between the macroscopic spectroscopic response of the solution sample, which is defined in terms of the Maxwell field, and the response of the molecule in the cavity within a dielectric medium, which depends instead on the field locally acting on the molecule in the cavity. However, as already pointed out in the literature, [13][14][15][38][39][40][41][42][43][44] in order to gain a reliable connection between the microscopic properties of the molecule and the macroscopic response, it is compulsory to account for the difference between the Maxwell and the cavity fields.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“… T melt 78 ; Density (ρ): Ben 79 , Tol 36 , PhOH 80 , pCr 81 , Pyrr 39 , Py 82 ; Enthalpy of vaporization (Δ vap H ): Ben 67 , Tol 78 , PhOH 80 , Pyrr 83 , Py 84 ; Isothermal compressibility (κ T ): Ben 85 , Tol 86 , PhOH 78 , pCr 87 , Pyrr 76 , Py 88 ; Isothermal expansion (α p ): Ben 85 , Tol 85 , PhOH 89 , pCr 90 , Pyrr 76 , Py 88 ; Dielectric constant (ε): Ben 91 , Tol 92 , PhOH 80 , pCr 93 , Pyrr 94 , Py 95 …”
Section: Figurementioning
confidence: 99%
“…A quantum mechanical approach to the "local field" problem has been formulated for PCM for several optical and spectroscopic properties. 20,21,25,26,[41][42][43][44] The foundations for the PCM approach to the "local field" problem rely upon the assumption that the "effective" field experienced by the molecule in the cavity can be seen as the sum of a reaction field term and a cavity field term. The reaction field is connected to the response (polarization) of the dielectric to the solute charge distribution, whereas the cavity field depends on the polarization of the dielectric induced by the applied field once the cavity has been created.…”
Section: Theorymentioning
confidence: 99%