Introduction and Background Information
We have presented a number of studies of triplet states of
acetylene to assist in the interpretation of spectroscopic experiments by
the Field
group(MIT) and others.
Acetylene plays an important role in fundamental studies of physical
chemistry, since it represents the simplest possible alkyne and is one of
the most thoroughly studied tetra-atomic molecules. Moreover, excited
states of acetylene have an important place in history after landmark
papers by Ingold, King, and Innes
[C. K. Ingold and G. W. King, J. Chem. Soc. (London)
1953, 2702, 2704, 2708, 2725, 2745; K. K. Innes, J. Chem. Phys.
22, 863 (1954)] showed that the first
excited singlet state (labeled A 1Au) is trans-bent;
this was the first was experimental demonstration that an excited state
could have a qualitatively different geometry than the ground
state.
Electronic Structure Predictions from Walsh Diagrams
Based on the Walsh diagram for HAAH molecules, one would expect a pi->pi*
transition to lead to four low-lying triplet and four low-lying singlet
minima, and moreover that all of these minima ought to be bent. The
triplets are lower-lying in energy than the singlets, and simple group
theory in conjunction with the Walsh diagram suggests that the lowest
excited potential energy surface (T1) will have cis and trans
minima with term symbols 3A2 and
3Au, respectively. The next-higher triplet potential
energy surface (T2) is predicted to have cis and trans minima
3B2 and 3Bu, respectively,
according to the Walsh diagram. These predictions based on very rudimentary
electronic structure considerations were ultimately overturned, as discussed
below.
Early Experimental Work: Burton and Hunziker
One of the first experimental studies of triplet acetylene was by
Burton and Hunziker [J. Chem. Phys. 57, 339 (1972)],
who deduced that a metastable triplet
state of acetylene was formed via mercury photosensitization. Arguing by
analogy to other systems, these workers expected that they had formed the
most stable of the possible triplet species in their experiment. Since they
failed to observe any absorption by this triplet state between 220 and 540
nm, they argued that it must be linear or trans-bent, which would make
upward transitions to any other triplet states forbidden by symmetry.
However, this contradicted other theoretical studies performed around that
time [W. E. Kammer, Chem. Phys. Lett. 6, 529 (1970);
R. Ditchfield, J. Del Bene, and J. A. Pople, J. Am. Chem. Soc.
94, 4806 (1972); D. Demoulin, Chem. Phys. 11,
329 (1975)], which seemed to indicate that (1) in contrast to the Walsh
predictions, the 3B2 and 3Bu
states were actually lower than 3A2 and
3Au, and that
(2) the cis 3B2 state was a few tenths of an eV below
the trans minimum 3Bu.
Given the very modest levels of theory possible at that time, however,
it was commonly anticipated that better theoretical treatments would come
into harmony with the exeperimental interpretations.
More Accurate Theory Clarifies the Situation
In 1978, Wetmore and Schaefer [J. Chem. Phys. 69, 1648
(1978)] presented the first theoretical study
sufficiently reliable to settle the question of the character of the
lowest-lying triplet state of acetylene. Their double-zeta plus
polarization configuration interaction singles and doubles (DZP CISD) study
of the four lowest-lying triplet minima of acetylene predicted the
3B2 cis minimum to be the lowest energy, at 0.35 eV
below the 3Bu trans form and 3.49 eV above the ground
state. Moreover, because the cis form
was found to be the lowest in energy, an upward transition to the
3A2 minimum would be symmetry allowed and was
predicted to appear at 8630 cm-1. Rising to the challenge,
Wendt, Hippler, and Hunziker [J. Chem. Phys. 70, 4044 (1979)]
made triplet acetylene and
found a single, strong band in its absorption spectrum at 7388
cm-1. The lack of a vibrational progression indicated very
similar geometries for the 3A2 and
3B2 minima, consistent with the theoretical
predictions. Moreover, the rotational constants extracted from the spectrum
were in good agreement with the computed values.
Next: Potential difficulties for
3B2 predictions
Up: Contents
Previous: Contents
C. David
Sherrill
28 Jan 2000