Physical Chemistry 3: — Chemical Kinetics — - Christian-Albrechts ...

Physical Chemistry 3: — Chemical Kinetics — - Christian-Albrechts ... Physical Chemistry 3: — Chemical Kinetics — - Christian-Albrechts ...

21.10.2014 Views

7.1 Foundations of transition state theory 149 7.1.2 Formal kinetic model In order to derive the TST expression for ( ), wefirst look at a simple formal kinetic model. This formal kinetic model has its roots in the original idea that the TS can be considered as some sort of an “activated complex” with a local energy minimum on the PES. It is not a good derivation of the TST expression for ( ), but leads to the correct expression. I Activated complex model of TST: y A+BC 1 À 2 ABC ‡ 3 → P (7.3) £ ABC ‡ ¤ = 1 [A] [BC] 2 + 3 (7.4) I Assumption: 3 ¿ 2 y £ ¤ ABC ‡ = 1 [A] [BC] = 12 [A] [BC] (7.5) 2 y Equilibrium between the reactants (A+BC)andtheTS(ABC ‡ ): y [P] = 3 £ ABC ‡ ¤ (7.6) = 3 | {z 12 [A] [BC] (7.7) } = I ACT expression for rate constant: = 3 12 (7.8) Below, we will find that and 3 = ‡ = 12 ∝ exp µ− ∆‡ (7.9) (7.10) 7.1.3 The fundamental equation for k (T ) The above derivation of the TST rate constant was based on an oversimplified picture, since the TS is not at a local minimum but at a saddle point on the PES. In this section, we derive the TST fundamental equation more carefully by bringing in some dynamical aspects. In (1) - (4), we explore the implications of the quasi-equilibrium assumption, and in (5) - (9) we develop a dynamical semiclassical model: 42 42 Semiclassical because the translation is handled classically while all other degrees of freedom are described quantum mechanically.

7.1 Foundations of transition state theory 150 (1) We start by assuming equilibrium between the reactants and products: A+BC 1 À 2 ABC ‡ 3 À 4 P (7.11) (2) We consider two dividing surfaces at the TS separated by a distance of ≤ . is the “length” of a “phase space cell” in semiclassical theory which is determined by Heisenberg’s uncertainty principle: ∆ ‡ × ∆ ‡ = × ∆ ‡ = (7.12) (3) We now consider the number densities of molecules passing through these surfaces from left to right ( −→ ‡ )andfromrighttoleft( ←− ‡ ). The total number density ‡ at the TS in equilibrium is their sum, i.e., ‡ = −→ ‡ + ←− ‡ = ‡ A BC (7.13) In equilibrium, we must have Thus, −→ ‡ = ←− ‡ (7.14) −→ ‡ = ←− ‡ = 1 2 ‡ = ‡ 2 A BC (7.15) (4) We now suddenly remove all the products. Then ←− ‡ =0 However, there is no reason for −→ ‡ to change, because the molecules on the reactant side remain in internal equilibrium (this is the quasi-equilibrium assumption). 43 y −→ ‡ = ‡ 2 = ‡ 2 A BC (7.16) Thus, we can still express −→ ‡ using the equilibrium constant ‡ even if there is no equilibrium between reactants and products. (5) We now turn to the reaction rate, which is given by the number density of molecules −→ ‡ in the time interval that are crossing the DS in the forward direction. We can write this as −→ ‡ = −→ −→ ‡ ‡ ‡ = ‡ (7.17) where • −→ ‡ is the decay rate of the TS in the forward direction (or the frequency factor for the molecules crossing the DS in the forward direction), 43 The quasi-equilibrium assumption for −→ ‡ is made in canonical TST. In a microcanonical derivation · · −→ ←− of the TST expression for (), we consider the fluxes ‡ and ‡ through the dividing surface at the TS. Then, the individual molecules “dont’t know” that the products have been removed and · · ←− −→ ‡ =0. Since they don’t know about this, the flux ‡ has to remain unchanged.

7.1 Foundations of transition state theory 149<br />

7.1.2 Formal kinetic model<br />

In order to derive the TST expression for ( ), wefirst look at a simple formal kinetic<br />

model. This formal kinetic model has its roots in the original idea that the TS can be<br />

considered as some sort of an “activated complex” with a local energy minimum on<br />

the PES. It is not a good derivation of the TST expression for ( ), but leads to the<br />

correct expression.<br />

I<br />

Activated complex model of TST:<br />

y<br />

A+BC 1 À<br />

2<br />

ABC ‡ 3 → P (7.3)<br />

£<br />

ABC<br />

‡ ¤ = 1 [A] [BC]<br />

2 + 3<br />

(7.4)<br />

I Assumption: 3 ¿ 2 y<br />

£ ¤ ABC<br />

‡ = 1<br />

[A] [BC] = <br />

12 [A] [BC] (7.5)<br />

2<br />

y Equilibrium between the reactants (A+BC)andtheTS(ABC ‡ ):<br />

y<br />

[P]<br />

<br />

= 3<br />

£<br />

ABC<br />

‡ ¤ <br />

(7.6)<br />

= 3 | {z 12 [A] [BC] (7.7)<br />

}<br />

=<br />

I<br />

ACT expression for rate constant:<br />

= 3 12 (7.8)<br />

Below, we will find that<br />

and<br />

3 = ‡ = <br />

<br />

<br />

12 ∝ exp<br />

µ− ∆‡<br />

<br />

(7.9)<br />

(7.10)<br />

7.1.3 The fundamental equation for k (T )<br />

The above derivation of the TST rate constant was based on an oversimplified picture,<br />

since the TS is not at a local minimum but at a saddle point on the PES. In this section,<br />

we derive the TST fundamental equation more carefully by bringing in some dynamical<br />

aspects. In (1) - (4), we explore the implications of the quasi-equilibrium assumption,<br />

and in (5) - (9) we develop a dynamical semiclassical model: 42<br />

42 Semiclassical because the translation is handled classically while all other degrees of freedom are<br />

described quantum mechanically.

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!