<?xml version="1.0"?>
<feed xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xml:lang="en">
	<id>https://chemwiki.ch.ic.ac.uk/api.php?action=feedcontributions&amp;feedformat=atom&amp;user=Sns18</id>
	<title>ChemWiki - User contributions [en]</title>
	<link rel="self" type="application/atom+xml" href="https://chemwiki.ch.ic.ac.uk/api.php?action=feedcontributions&amp;feedformat=atom&amp;user=Sns18"/>
	<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://chemwiki.ch.ic.ac.uk/wiki/Special:Contributions/Sns18"/>
	<updated>2026-05-17T23:01:59Z</updated>
	<subtitle>User contributions</subtitle>
	<generator>MediaWiki 1.43.0</generator>
	<entry>
		<id>https://chemwiki.ch.ic.ac.uk/index.php?title=01509561&amp;diff=805961</id>
		<title>01509561</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://chemwiki.ch.ic.ac.uk/index.php?title=01509561&amp;diff=805961"/>
		<updated>2020-05-15T22:38:41Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;Sns18: &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;= Molecular Reaction Dynamics Report =&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;by Sharifa Sheikh&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Exercise 1 ==&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q1. On a potential energy surface diagram, how is the transition state mathematically defined? How can the transition state be identified, and how can it be distinguished from a local minimum of the potential energy surface?&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
On a potential energy surface (PES) diagram, the transition state is mathematically defined as the saddle point. The transition state corresponds to the point of maximum potential energy on the minimum energy pathway.&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
In order to identify a transition state, begin a reactant trajectory at the estimated transition state position, with zero momentum, and it should not move in any direction. To distinguish the transition state from a local minimum on the PES, change the trajectory parameters so that it starts close to the transition state, and the path should move away as it goes &#039;down&#039; the PES, away from the maximum, and the potential energy decreases as it is converted to kinetic energy. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q2. Report your best estimate of the transition state position (r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;) and explain your reasoning illustrating it with a “Internuclear Distances vs Time” plot for a relevant trajectory.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
For the reaction, H + H&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;, the transition state position was found to be r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 90.75 pm. Referring to the reactants, A is the incoming hydrogen atom; B and C are the two atoms in the hydrogen molecule. For the trajectory starting at the transition state, Figure 1 shows a graph of Internuclear Distance against Time. As can be seen, the lines for the distances A-B and B-C are flat, showing that as time progresses the atoms are not getting closer or further away from each other, but rather their internuclear distances remain constant. There is no gradient at the transition state, and the atoms have no momentum, so they remain in the same place.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[File:01509561_r=90.75.png|thumb|Figure 1 - A graph of Internuclear Distance against Time for a trajectory started at the transition state for the reaction H + H&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;. Initial conditions: r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 90.75 pm and p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 0.0 g.mol&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt; |none]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q3. Comment on how the mep and the trajectory you just calculated differ.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Below, Figures 2 and 3 show the results of two calculations with the same initial conditions. Figure 2 uses an MEP calculation type and Figure 3 uses a Dynamics calculation type.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Figure 2 shows the trajectory where at each step the momentum is reset to zero, meaning the path taken is that of the minimum energy, where the descent in potential energy is the steepest.&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt; This differs from Figure 3, which is a more realistic calculation as it does not reset the momentum. The trajectory shown in Figure 3 shows a more wavy path, corresponding to the vibrational energy in the molecule, resulting in oscillation of the atoms in the molecule.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[File:01509561_bc=91.75,MEP.png|thumb|Figure 2 - A contour plot showing the minimum energy path, r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;+1 pm,  r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; and the momenta p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 0.0 g.mol&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;|none]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[File:01509561_bc=91.75,Dynamics.png|thumb|Figure 3 - A contour plot using &#039;Dynamics&#039; calculations, r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;+1 pm, r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; and the momenta p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 0.0 g.mol&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;|none]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q4. Complete the table above by adding the total energy, whether the trajectory is reactive or unreactive, and provide a plot of the trajectory and a small description for what happens along the trajectory. What can you conclude from the table?&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
It has been concluded that trajectories with the following initial conditions are always reactive: r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 74 pm, r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 200 pm, with -3.1 &amp;lt; p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1 &amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; / g.mol&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt; &amp;lt; -1.6 and p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = -5.1 g.mol&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;. This is supported by the results of the trajectories in the first two rows of the table. The data in the table below (all table trajectories run with r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; =74 pm and r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 200 pm) shows that trajectories with the same positions but higher values of momenta are not necessarily reactive. The trajectory in the fourth row has higher values of momenta, and thus higher kinetic energy, but is unreactive. Although the reactants have enough energy to cross the energy barrier, the products re-cross it and return to reactants.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
{| class=&amp;quot;wikitable&amp;quot; border=1&lt;br /&gt;
! p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;/&amp;amp;nbsp;g.mol&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt; !! p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;/&amp;amp;nbsp;g.mol&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt; !! E&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;tot&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; / kJ mol&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt; !! Reactive? !! Description of the dynamics !! Illustration of the trajectory&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
| -2.56 || -5.1  ||-414.280||Reactive||The reactants have more translational energy and less vibrational energy as they move towards each other. They react and pass through the transition state to form the products. The products have less translational energy and more vibrational energy as illustrated by the oscillations in Figure 4.||[[File:01509561_table,image1.png|300px|thumb|Figure 4]]&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
| -3.1  || -4.1  ||-420.077||Unreactive||The reactants get closer together but do not have enough energy to form the transition state and move further away from each other again. No reaction occurs. The hydrogen molecule maintains the same level of oscillation (vibrational energy) throughout.||[[File:01509561_table,image2.png|300px|thumb|Figure 5]]&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
| -3.1  || -5.1  ||-413.977||Reactive||The reactants have enough energy to form the transition state and go on to form products in a successful reaction. The product molecule oscillates to a slightly greater degree than the reactant molecule, meaning it has a greater proportion of vibrational energy. ||[[File:01509561_table,image3.png|300px|thumb|Figure 6]]&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
| -5.1  || -10.1 ||-357.277||Unreactive||The reactants cross the energy barrier to form products but then re-cross the barrier back to reactants. The reactants begin with a large amount of translational energy, which is converted into vibrational energy of the the product molecule and the end reactant molecule after re-crossing the energy barrier.||[[File:01509561_table,image4.png|300px|thumb|Figure 7]]&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
| -5.1  || -10.6 ||-349.477||Reactive||The reactants have a large amount of translational energy as they move towards each other, with a small level of vibrational energy. They cross the energy barrier, oscillating greatly, to form products in a successful reaction. The product molecule has a lot of vibrational energy and less translational energy.||[[File:01509561_table,image5.png|300px|thumb|Figure 8]]&lt;br /&gt;
|}&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q5.&#039;&#039;&#039; &#039;&#039;&#039;Given the results you have obtained, how will Transition State Theory predictions for reaction rate values compare with experimental values?&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Transition State theory relies on a number of assumptions in order to predict the rate of a reaction. These assumptions include: the reactant molecules follow the Maxwell-Boltzmann distribution in terms of their energy distribution; even when there is no equilibrium present, the distribution of activated complexes forming products are still in accordance with the Maxwell-Boltzmann laws; quantum effects, such as quantum tunnelling, are ignored; motion in the transition state can be classically treated and separated from other motions; and, arguably the most crucial of assumptions, once reactants have passed through the transition state to form products, they cannot re-cross the energy barrier to reactants again.&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;2,3&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Overall, these assumptions result in the overestimation of reaction rate values, when compared to the experimental values. This is predominantly due to the assumption that once a system has crossed the energy barrier, it cannot re-cross and return to reactants. Therefore, if you have a certain number of barrier crossings, Transition State Theory assumes that 100% of these will result in a successful reaction and the formation of products. However, in reality, the proportion would be less than 100% as some systems would re-cross the barrier resulting in an unsuccessful reaction. Thus, the rate of the reaction would, in reality, be slightly less than the Transition State Theory prediction.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Exercise 2 ==&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q6.&#039;&#039;&#039; &#039;&#039;&#039;By inspecting the potential energy surfaces, classify the F + H&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; and H + HF reactions according to their energetics (endothermic or exothermic). How does this relate to the bond strength of the chemical species involved?&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The potential energy surface for F + H&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; shows that the exit channel of the products is lower in potential energy than the entry channel of the reactants, so the reaction is exothermic. The potential energy surface for H + HF shows that the exit channel of the products is higher in potential energy than the entry channel of the reactants, so the reaction is endothermic. This means that H-F is a stronger bond than H-H, as the energy required to break H-H is less than the energy released when H-F is formed, in the case of F + H&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;, making it exothermic. In the case of H + HF, the reverse is true.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q7.&#039;&#039;&#039; &#039;&#039;&#039;Locate the approximate position of the transition state.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The position of the transition state correlates to r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 74 pm and r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 181.4 pm (based on F + H&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;, r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;H-H&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; and r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;F-H&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;).&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[File:01509561_F+H2,ts.png|300px|thumb|Figure 9 - A contour plot showing the position of the transition state for the F + H&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; reaction. Initial conditions for the trajectory: r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 74 pm, r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 181.4 pm, p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 0.0 g.mol&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;|none]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q8.&#039;&#039;&#039; &#039;&#039;&#039;Report the activation energy for both reactions.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The activation energies are calculated by taking the difference between the energy at the transition state and the energy at the minimum of the reactant channel. The reactions F + H&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; and H + HF are the reverse of each other so the activation energies will be different but the energy of the transition state will be the same.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
F+H&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;, E&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;a&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = (-433.942) - (-435.100) = 1.158 kJ mol&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
H + HF, E&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;a&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = (-433.942) - (-560.700) = 126.758 kJ mol&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q9.&#039;&#039;&#039; &#039;&#039;&#039;In light of the fact that energy is conserved, discuss the mechanism of release of the reaction energy. Explain how this could be confirmed experimentally.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Energy is conserved in all reactions, but the energy distribution of the products is often different to that of the reactants. In the case of F + H&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;, the energy of the reactants is mostly in the form of translational kinetic energy; they have a small amount of vibrational energy. The products have a much larger amount of vibrational energy and less translational energy. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The reaction energy is released primarily through vibrational oscillation of the products and some translational kinetic energy. To confirm this experimentally, a method called infrared chemiluminescence can be utilised to examine the distribution of energy in the products. Infrared chemiluminescence is a technique that can be used to determine the vibrational state populations by studying the intensities of the infrared radiation emitted from vibrationally excited molecules.&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q10. Discuss how the distribution of energy between different modes (translation and vibration) affect the efficiency of the reaction, and how this is influenced by the position of the transition state.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
According to Polanyi&#039;s rules, an &#039;early&#039; energy barrier, in the reactant channel, favours more highly vibrationally excited products. While a &#039;late&#039; energy barrier, in the product channel, favours products with more translational energy. The energy distribution in the reactants, in conjunction with the position of the energy barrier, can affect how efficient a reaction is. Having more translational energy in the reactants when the transition state is &#039;early&#039; leads to a more efficient reaction, but if the reactants were to have more vibrational energy, the reaction would be much less efficient and may not even be successful in forming products. Additionally, for a &#039;late&#039; transition state, having more vibrational energy in the reactants leads to a more efficient reaction.&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;4,5&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== References ==&lt;br /&gt;
# P. Atkins, J. de Paula, and J. Keeler, in &#039;&#039;Atkins’ Physical Chemistry&#039;&#039;, Oxford University Press, Oxford, 11th edn, 2018, ch. 18, pp. 804-809&lt;br /&gt;
# K. J. Laidler, in &#039;&#039;Chemical Kinetics&#039;&#039;, Harper &amp;amp; Row, New York; London, 3rd edn, 1987, ch. 4, pp. 88-98&lt;br /&gt;
# J. I. Steinfeld, J. S. Francisco and W. L. Hase, in &#039;&#039;Chemical Kinetics and Dynamics&#039;&#039;, Prentice-Hall, Upper Saddle River, 2nd edn, 1989, ch. 10.1-10.3+10.10, pp. 287-321&lt;br /&gt;
# J. C. Polanyi, &#039;&#039;Acc. Chem. Res.&#039;&#039;, 1972, &#039;&#039;&#039;5&#039;&#039;&#039;, 161-168&lt;br /&gt;
# J. I. Steinfeld, J. S. Francisco and W. L. Hase, in &#039;&#039;Chemical Kinetics and Dynamics&#039;&#039;, Prentice-Hall, Upper Saddle River, 2nd edn, 1989, ch. 9.4.2, pp. 272-274&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>Sns18</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://chemwiki.ch.ic.ac.uk/index.php?title=01509561&amp;diff=805960</id>
		<title>01509561</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://chemwiki.ch.ic.ac.uk/index.php?title=01509561&amp;diff=805960"/>
		<updated>2020-05-15T22:37:36Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;Sns18: &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;= Molecular Reaction Dynamics Report =&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;by Sharifa Sheikh&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Exercise 1 ==&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q1. On a potential energy surface diagram, how is the transition state mathematically defined? How can the transition state be identified, and how can it be distinguished from a local minimum of the potential energy surface?&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
On a potential energy surface (PES) diagram, the transition state is mathematically defined as the saddle point. The transition state corresponds to the point of maximum potential energy on the minimum energy pathway.&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
In order to identify a transition state, begin a reactant trajectory at the estimated transition state position, with zero momentum, and it should not move in any direction. To distinguish the transition state from a local minimum on the PES, change the trajectory parameters so that it starts close to the transition state, and the path should move away as it goes &#039;down&#039; the PES, away from the maximum, and the potential energy decreases as it is converted to kinetic energy. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q2. Report your best estimate of the transition state position (r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;) and explain your reasoning illustrating it with a “Internuclear Distances vs Time” plot for a relevant trajectory.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
For the reaction, H + H&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;, the transition state position was found to be r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 90.75 pm. Referring to the reactants, A is the incoming hydrogen atom; B and C are the two atoms in the hydrogen molecule. For the trajectory starting at the transition state, Figure 1 shows a graph of Internuclear Distance against Time. As can be seen, the lines for the distances A-B and B-C are flat, showing that as time progresses the atoms are not getting closer or further away from each other, but rather their internuclear distances remain constant. There is no gradient at the transition state, and the atoms have no momentum, so they remain in the same place.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[File:01509561_r=90.75.png|thumb|Figure 1 - A graph of Internuclear Distance against Time for a trajectory started at the transition state for the reaction H + H&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;. Initial conditions: r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 90.75 pm and p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 0.0 g.mol&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt; |none]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q3. Comment on how the mep and the trajectory you just calculated differ.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Below, Figures 2 and 3 show the results of two calculations with the same initial conditions. Figure 2 uses an MEP calculation type and Figure 3 uses a Dynamics calculation type.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Figure 2 shows the trajectory where at each step the momentum is reset to zero, meaning the path taken is that of the minimum energy, where the descent in potential energy is the steepest.&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt; This differs from Figure 3, which is a more realistic calculation as it does not reset the momentum. The trajectory shown in Figure 3 shows a more wavy path, corresponding to the vibrational energy in the molecule, resulting in oscillation of the atoms in the molecule.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[File:01509561_bc=91.75,MEP.png|thumb|Figure 2 - A contour plot showing the minimum energy path, r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;+1 pm,  r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; and the momenta p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 0.0 g.mol&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;|none]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[File:01509561_bc=91.75,Dynamics.png|thumb|Figure 3 - A contour plot using &#039;Dynamics&#039; calculations, r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;+1 pm, r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; and the momenta p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 0.0 g.mol&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;|none]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q4. Complete the table above by adding the total energy, whether the trajectory is reactive or unreactive, and provide a plot of the trajectory and a small description for what happens along the trajectory. What can you conclude from the table?&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
It has been concluded that trajectories with the following initial conditions are always reactive: r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 74 pm, r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 200 pm, with -3.1 &amp;lt; p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1 &amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; / g.mol&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt; &amp;lt; -1.6 and p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = -5.1 g.mol&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;. This is supported by the results of the trajectories in the first two rows of the table. The data in the table below (all table trajectories run with r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; =74 pm and r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 200 pm) shows that trajectories with the same positions but higher values of momenta are not necessarily reactive. The trajectory in the fourth row has higher values of momenta, and thus higher kinetic energy, but is unreactive. Although the reactants have enough energy to cross the energy barrier, the products re-cross it and return to reactants.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
{| class=&amp;quot;wikitable&amp;quot; border=1&lt;br /&gt;
! p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;/&amp;amp;nbsp;g.mol&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt; !! p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;/&amp;amp;nbsp;g.mol&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt; !! E&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;tot&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; / kJ mol-1 !! Reactive? !! Description of the dynamics !! Illustration of the trajectory&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
| -2.56 || -5.1  ||-414.280||Reactive||The reactants have more translational energy and less vibrational energy as they move towards each other. They react and pass through the transition state to form the products. The products have less translational energy and more vibrational energy as illustrated by the oscillations in Figure 4.||[[File:01509561_table,image1.png|300px|thumb|Figure 4]]&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
| -3.1  || -4.1  ||-420.077||Unreactive||The reactants get closer together but do not have enough energy to form the transition state and move further away from each other again. No reaction occurs. The hydrogen molecule maintains the same level of oscillation (vibrational energy) throughout.||[[File:01509561_table,image2.png|300px|thumb|Figure 5]]&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
| -3.1  || -5.1  ||-413.977||Reactive||The reactants have enough energy to form the transition state and go on to form products in a successful reaction. The product molecule oscillates to a slightly greater degree than the reactant molecule, meaning it has a greater proportion of vibrational energy. ||[[File:01509561_table,image3.png|300px|thumb|Figure 6]]&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
| -5.1  || -10.1 ||-357.277||Unreactive||The reactants cross the energy barrier to form products but then re-cross the barrier back to reactants. The reactants begin with a large amount of translational energy, which is converted into vibrational energy of the the product molecule and the end reactant molecule after re-crossing the energy barrier.||[[File:01509561_table,image4.png|300px|thumb|Figure 7]]&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
| -5.1  || -10.6 ||-349.477||Reactive||The reactants have a large amount of translational energy as they move towards each other, with a small level of vibrational energy. They cross the energy barrier, oscillating greatly, to form products in a successful reaction. The product molecule has a lot of vibrational energy and less translational energy.||[[File:01509561_table,image5.png|300px|thumb|Figure 8]]&lt;br /&gt;
|}&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q5.&#039;&#039;&#039; &#039;&#039;&#039;Given the results you have obtained, how will Transition State Theory predictions for reaction rate values compare with experimental values?&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Transition State theory relies on a number of assumptions in order to predict the rate of a reaction. These assumptions include: the reactant molecules follow the Maxwell-Boltzmann distribution in terms of their energy distribution; even when there is no equilibrium present, the distribution of activated complexes forming products are still in accordance with the Maxwell-Boltzmann laws; quantum effects, such as quantum tunnelling, are ignored; motion in the transition state can be classically treated and separated from other motions; and, arguably the most crucial of assumptions, once reactants have passed through the transition state to form products, they cannot re-cross the energy barrier to reactants again.&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;2,3&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Overall, these assumptions result in the overestimation of reaction rate values, when compared to the experimental values. This is predominantly due to the assumption that once a system has crossed the energy barrier, it cannot re-cross and return to reactants. Therefore, if you have a certain number of barrier crossings, Transition State Theory assumes that 100% of these will result in a successful reaction and the formation of products. However, in reality, the proportion would be less than 100% as some systems would re-cross the barrier resulting in an unsuccessful reaction. Thus, the rate of the reaction would, in reality, be slightly less than the Transition State Theory prediction.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Exercise 2 ==&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q6.&#039;&#039;&#039; &#039;&#039;&#039;By inspecting the potential energy surfaces, classify the F + H&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; and H + HF reactions according to their energetics (endothermic or exothermic). How does this relate to the bond strength of the chemical species involved?&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The potential energy surface for F + H&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; shows that the exit channel of the products is lower in potential energy than the entry channel of the reactants, so the reaction is exothermic. The potential energy surface for H + HF shows that the exit channel of the products is higher in potential energy than the entry channel of the reactants, so the reaction is endothermic. This means that H-F is a stronger bond than H-H, as the energy required to break H-H is less than the energy released when H-F is formed, in the case of F + H&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;, making it exothermic. In the case of H + HF, the reverse is true.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q7.&#039;&#039;&#039; &#039;&#039;&#039;Locate the approximate position of the transition state.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The position of the transition state correlates to r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 74 pm and r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 181.4 pm (based on F + H&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;, r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;H-H&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; and r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;F-H&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;).&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[File:01509561_F+H2,ts.png|300px|thumb|Figure 9 - A contour plot showing the position of the transition state for the F + H&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; reaction. Initial conditions for the trajectory: r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 74 pm, r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 181.4 pm, p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 0.0 g.mol&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;|none]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q8.&#039;&#039;&#039; &#039;&#039;&#039;Report the activation energy for both reactions.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The activation energies are calculated by taking the difference between the energy at the transition state and the energy at the minimum of the reactant channel. The reactions F + H&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; and H + HF are the reverse of each other so the activation energies will be different but the energy of the transition state will be the same.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
F+H&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;, E&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;a&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = (-433.942) - (-435.100) = 1.158 kJ mol&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
H + HF, E&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;a&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = (-433.942) - (-560.700) = 126.758 kJ mol&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q9.&#039;&#039;&#039; &#039;&#039;&#039;In light of the fact that energy is conserved, discuss the mechanism of release of the reaction energy. Explain how this could be confirmed experimentally.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Energy is conserved in all reactions, but the energy distribution of the products is often different to that of the reactants. In the case of F + H&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;, the energy of the reactants is mostly in the form of translational kinetic energy; they have a small amount of vibrational energy. The products have a much larger amount of vibrational energy and less translational energy. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The reaction energy is released primarily through vibrational oscillation of the products and some translational kinetic energy. To confirm this experimentally, a method called infrared chemiluminescence can be utilised to examine the distribution of energy in the products. Infrared chemiluminescence is a technique that can be used to determine the vibrational state populations by studying the intensities of the infrared radiation emitted from vibrationally excited molecules.&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q10. Discuss how the distribution of energy between different modes (translation and vibration) affect the efficiency of the reaction, and how this is influenced by the position of the transition state.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
According to Polanyi&#039;s rules, an &#039;early&#039; energy barrier, in the reactant channel, favours more highly vibrationally excited products. While a &#039;late&#039; energy barrier, in the product channel, favours products with more translational energy. The energy distribution in the reactants, in conjunction with the position of the energy barrier, can affect how efficient a reaction is. Having more translational energy in the reactants when the transition state is &#039;early&#039; leads to a more efficient reaction, but if the reactants were to have more vibrational energy, the reaction would be much less efficient and may not even be successful in forming products. Additionally, for a &#039;late&#039; transition state, having more vibrational energy in the reactants leads to a more efficient reaction.&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;4,5&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== References ==&lt;br /&gt;
# P. Atkins, J. de Paula, and J. Keeler, in &#039;&#039;Atkins’ Physical Chemistry&#039;&#039;, Oxford University Press, Oxford, 11th edn, 2018, ch. 18, pp. 804-809&lt;br /&gt;
# K. J. Laidler, in &#039;&#039;Chemical Kinetics&#039;&#039;, Harper &amp;amp; Row, New York; London, 3rd edn, 1987, ch. 4, pp. 88-98&lt;br /&gt;
# J. I. Steinfeld, J. S. Francisco and W. L. Hase, in &#039;&#039;Chemical Kinetics and Dynamics&#039;&#039;, Prentice-Hall, Upper Saddle River, 2nd edn, 1989, ch. 10.1-10.3+10.10, pp. 287-321&lt;br /&gt;
# J. C. Polanyi, &#039;&#039;Acc. Chem. Res.&#039;&#039;, 1972, &#039;&#039;&#039;5&#039;&#039;&#039;, 161-168&lt;br /&gt;
# J. I. Steinfeld, J. S. Francisco and W. L. Hase, in &#039;&#039;Chemical Kinetics and Dynamics&#039;&#039;, Prentice-Hall, Upper Saddle River, 2nd edn, 1989, ch. 9.4.2, pp. 272-274&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>Sns18</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://chemwiki.ch.ic.ac.uk/index.php?title=01509561&amp;diff=805956</id>
		<title>01509561</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://chemwiki.ch.ic.ac.uk/index.php?title=01509561&amp;diff=805956"/>
		<updated>2020-05-15T22:32:15Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;Sns18: &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;= Molecular Reaction Dynamics Report =&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;by Sharifa Sheikh&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Exercise 1 ==&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q1. On a potential energy surface diagram, how is the transition state mathematically defined? How can the transition state be identified, and how can it be distinguished from a local minimum of the potential energy surface?&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
On a potential energy surface (PES) diagram, the transition state is mathematically defined as the saddle point. The transition state corresponds to the point of maximum potential energy on the minimum energy pathway.&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
In order to identify a transition state, begin a reactant trajectory at the estimated transition state position, with zero momentum, and it should not move in any direction. To distinguish the transition state from a local minimum on the PES, change the trajectory parameters so that it starts close to the transition state, and the path should move away as it goes &#039;down&#039; the PES, away from the maximum, and the potential energy decreases as it is converted to kinetic energy. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q2. Report your best estimate of the transition state position (r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;) and explain your reasoning illustrating it with a “Internuclear Distances vs Time” plot for a relevant trajectory.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
For the reaction, H + H&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;, the transition state position was found to be r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 90.75 pm. Referring to the reactants, A is the incoming hydrogen atom; B and C are the two atoms in the hydrogen molecule. For the trajectory starting at the transition state, Figure 1 shows a graph of Internuclear Distance against Time. As can be seen, the lines for the distances A-B and B-C are flat, showing that as time progresses the atoms are not getting closer or further away from each other, but rather their internuclear distances remain constant. There is no gradient at the transition state, and the atoms have no momentum, so they remain in the same place.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[File:01509561_r=90.75.png|thumb|Figure 1 - A graph of Internuclear Distance against Time for a trajectory started at the transition state for the reaction H + H&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;. Initial conditions: r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 90.75 pm and p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 0.0 g.mol&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt; |none]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q3. Comment on how the mep and the trajectory you just calculated differ.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Below, Figures 2 and 3 show the results of two calculations with the same initial conditions. Figure 2 uses an MEP calculation type and Figure 3 uses a Dynamics calculation type.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Figure 2 shows the trajectory where at each step the momentum is reset to zero, meaning the path taken is that of the minimum energy, where the descent in potential energy is the steepest.&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt; This differs from Figure 3, which is a more realistic calculation as it does not reset the momentum. The trajectory shown in Figure 3 shows a more wavy path, corresponding to the vibrational energy in the molecule, resulting in oscillation of the atoms in the molecule.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[File:01509561_bc=91.75,MEP.png|thumb|Figure 2 - A contour plot showing the minimum energy path, r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;+1 pm,  r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; and the momenta p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 0.0 g.mol&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;|none]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[File:01509561_bc=91.75,Dynamics.png|thumb|Figure 3 - A contour plot using &#039;Dynamics&#039; calculations, r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;+1 pm, r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; and the momenta p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 0.0 g.mol&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;|none]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q4. Complete the table above by adding the total energy, whether the trajectory is reactive or unreactive, and provide a plot of the trajectory and a small description for what happens along the trajectory. What can you conclude from the table?&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
It has been concluded that trajectories with the following initial conditions are always reactive: r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 74 pm, r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 200 pm, with -3.1 &amp;lt; p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1 &amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; / g.mol&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt; &amp;lt; -1.6 and p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = -5.1 g.mol&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;. This is supported by the results of the trajectories in the first two rows of the table. The data in the table below (all table trajectories run with r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; =74 pm and r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 200 pm) shows that trajectories with the same positions but higher values of momenta are not necessarily reactive. The trajectory in the fourth row has higher values of momenta, and thus higher kinetic energy, but is unreactive. Although the reactants have enough energy to cross the energy barrier, the products re-cross it and return to reactants.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
{| class=&amp;quot;wikitable&amp;quot; border=1&lt;br /&gt;
! p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;/&amp;amp;nbsp;g.mol&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt; !! p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;/&amp;amp;nbsp;g.mol&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt; !! E&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;tot&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; / kJ mol-1 !! Reactive? !! Description of the dynamics !! Illustration of the trajectory&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
| -2.56 || -5.1  ||-414.280||Reactive||The reactants have more translational energy and less vibrational energy as they move towards each other. They react and pass through the transition state to form the products. The products have less translational energy and more vibrational energy as illustrated by the oscillations in Figure 4.||[[File:01509561_table,image1.png|300px|thumb|Figure 4]]&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
| -3.1  || -4.1  ||-420.077||Unreactive||The reactants get closer together but do not have enough energy to form the transition state and move further away from each other again. No reaction occurs. The hydrogen molecule maintains the same level of oscillation (vibrational energy) throughout.||[[File:01509561_table,image2.png|300px|thumb|Figure 5]]&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
| -3.1  || -5.1  ||-413.977||Reactive||The reactants have enough energy to form the transition state and go on to form products in a successful reaction. The product molecule oscillates to a slightly greater degree than the reactant molecule, meaning it has a greater proportion of vibrational energy. ||[[File:01509561_table,image3.png|300px|thumb|Figure 6]]&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
| -5.1  || -10.1 ||-357.277||Unreactive||The reactants cross the energy barrier to form products but then re-cross the barrier back to reactants. The reactants begin with a large amount of translational energy, which is converted into vibrational energy of the the product molecule and the end reactant molecule after re-crossing the energy barrier.||[[File:01509561_table,image4.png|300px|thumb|Figure 7]]&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
| -5.1  || -10.6 ||-349.477||Reactive||The reactants have a large amount of translational energy as they move towards each other, with a small level of vibrational energy. They cross the energy barrier, oscillating greatly, to form products in a successful reaction. The product molecule has a lot of vibrational energy and less translational energy.||[[File:01509561_table,image5.png|300px|thumb|Figure 8]]&lt;br /&gt;
|}&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q5.&#039;&#039;&#039; &#039;&#039;&#039;Given the results you have obtained, how will Transition State Theory predictions for reaction rate values compare with experimental values?&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Transition State theory relies on a number of assumptions in order to predict the rate of a reaction. These assumptions include: the reactant molecules follow the Maxwell-Boltzmann distribution in terms of their energy distribution; even when there is no equilibrium present, the distribution of activated complexes forming products are still in accordance with the Maxwell-Boltzmann laws; quantum effects, such as quantum tunnelling, are ignored; motion in the transition state can be classically treated and separated from other motions; and, arguably the most crucial of assumptions, once reactants have passed through the transition state to form products, they cannot re-cross the energy barrier to reactants again.&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;2,3&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Overall, these assumptions result in the overestimation of reaction rate values, when compared to the experimental values. This is predominantly due to the assumption that once a system has crossed the energy barrier, it cannot re-cross and return to reactants. Therefore, if you have a certain number of barrier crossings, Transition State Theory assumes that 100% of these will result in a successful reaction and the formation of products. However, in reality, the proportion would be less than 100% as some systems would re-cross the barrier resulting in an unsuccessful reaction. Thus, the rate of the reaction would, in reality, be slightly less than the Transition State Theory prediction.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Exercise 2 ==&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q6.&#039;&#039;&#039; &#039;&#039;&#039;By inspecting the potential energy surfaces, classify the F + H&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; and H + HF reactions according to their energetics (endothermic or exothermic). How does this relate to the bond strength of the chemical species involved?&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The potential energy surface for F + H&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; shows that the exit channel of the products is lower in potential energy than the entry channel of the reactants, so the reaction is exothermic. The potential energy surface for H + HF shows that the exit channel of the products is higher in potential energy than the entry channel of the reactants, so the reaction is endothermic. This means that H-F is a stronger bond than H-H, as the energy required to break H-H is less than the energy released when H-F is formed, in the case of F + H&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;, making it exothermic. In the case of H + HF, the reverse is true.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q7.&#039;&#039;&#039; &#039;&#039;&#039;Locate the approximate position of the transition state.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The position of the transition state correlates to r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 74 pm and r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 181.4 pm (based on F + H&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;, r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;H-H&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; and r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;F-H&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;).&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[File:01509561_F+H2,ts.png|300px|thumb|Figure 9 - A contour plot showing the position of the transition state for the F + H&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; reaction. Initial conditions for the trajectory: r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 74 pm, r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 181.4 pm, p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 0.0 g.mol&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;|none]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q8.&#039;&#039;&#039; &#039;&#039;&#039;Report the activation energy for both reactions.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The activation energies are calculated by taking the difference between the energy at the transition state and the energy at the minimum of the reactant channel. The reactions F + H&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; and H + HF are the reverse of each other so the activation energies will be different but the energy of the transition state will be the same.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
F+H&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;, E&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;a&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = (-433.942) - (-435.100) = 1.158 kJ mol&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
H + HF, E&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;a&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = (-433.942) - (-560.700) = 126.758 kJ mol&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q9.&#039;&#039;&#039; &#039;&#039;&#039;In light of the fact that energy is conserved, discuss the mechanism of release of the reaction energy. Explain how this could be confirmed experimentally.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Energy is conserved in all reactions, but the energy distribution of the products is often different to that of the reactants. In the case of F + H&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;, the energy of the reactants is mostly in the form of translational kinetic energy; they have a small amount of vibrational energy. The products have a much larger amount of vibrational energy and less translational energy. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The reaction energy is released primarily through vibrational oscillation of the products and some translational kinetic energy. To confirm this experimentally, a method called infrared chemiluminescence can be utilised to examine the distribution of energy in the products. Infrared chemiluminescence is a technique that can be used to determine the vibrational state populations by studying the intensities of the infrared radiation emitted from vibrationally excited molecules.&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q10. Discuss how the distribution of energy between different modes (translation and vibration) affect the efficiency of the reaction, and how this is influenced by the position of the transition state.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
According to Polanyi&#039;s rules, an &#039;early&#039; energy barrier, in the reactant channel, favours more highly vibrationally excited products. While a &#039;late&#039; energy barrier, in the product channel, favours products with more translational energy. The energy distribution in the reactants, in conjunction with the position of the energy barrier, can affect how efficient a reaction is. Having more translational energy in the reactants when the the transition state is &#039;early&#039; leads to a more efficient reaction. Additionally, having more vibrational energy in the reactants when the transition state is &#039;late&#039; leads to a more efficient reaction.&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;4,5&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== References ==&lt;br /&gt;
# P. Atkins, J. de Paula, and J. Keeler, in &#039;&#039;Atkins’ Physical Chemistry&#039;&#039;, Oxford University Press, Oxford, 11th edn, 2018, ch. 18, pp. 804-809&lt;br /&gt;
# K. J. Laidler, in &#039;&#039;Chemical Kinetics&#039;&#039;, Harper &amp;amp; Row, New York; London, 3rd edn, 1987, ch. 4, pp. 88-98&lt;br /&gt;
# J. I. Steinfeld, J. S. Francisco and W. L. Hase, in &#039;&#039;Chemical Kinetics and Dynamics&#039;&#039;, Prentice-Hall, Upper Saddle River, 2nd edn, 1989, ch. 10.1-10.3+10.10, pp. 287-321&lt;br /&gt;
# J. C. Polanyi, &#039;&#039;Acc. Chem. Res.&#039;&#039;, 1972, &#039;&#039;&#039;5&#039;&#039;&#039;, 161-168&lt;br /&gt;
# J. I. Steinfeld, J. S. Francisco and W. L. Hase, in &#039;&#039;Chemical Kinetics and Dynamics&#039;&#039;, Prentice-Hall, Upper Saddle River, 2nd edn, 1989, ch. 9.4.2, pp. 272-274&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>Sns18</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://chemwiki.ch.ic.ac.uk/index.php?title=01509561&amp;diff=805954</id>
		<title>01509561</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://chemwiki.ch.ic.ac.uk/index.php?title=01509561&amp;diff=805954"/>
		<updated>2020-05-15T22:28:19Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;Sns18: &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;= Molecular Reaction Dynamics Report =&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;by Sharifa Sheikh&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Exercise 1 ==&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q1. On a potential energy surface diagram, how is the transition state mathematically defined? How can the transition state be identified, and how can it be distinguished from a local minimum of the potential energy surface?&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
On a potential energy surface (PES) diagram, the transition state is mathematically defined as the saddle point. The transition state corresponds to the point of maximum potential energy on the minimum energy pathway.&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
In order to identify a transition state, begin a reactant trajectory at the estimated transition state position, with zero momentum, and it should not move in any direction. To distinguish the transition state from a local minimum on the PES, change the trajectory parameters so that it starts close to the transition state, and the path should move away as it goes &#039;down&#039; the PES, away from the maximum, and the potential energy decreases as it is converted to kinetic energy. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q2. Report your best estimate of the transition state position (r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;) and explain your reasoning illustrating it with a “Internuclear Distances vs Time” plot for a relevant trajectory.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
For the reaction, H + H&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;, the transition state position was found to be r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 90.75 pm. Referring to the reactants, A is the incoming hydrogen atom; B and C are the two atoms in the hydrogen molecule. For the trajectory starting at the transition state, Figure 1 shows a graph of Internuclear Distance against Time. As can be seen, the lines for the distances A-B and B-C are flat, showing that as time progresses the atoms are not getting closer or further away from each other, but rather their internuclear distances remain constant. There is no gradient at the transition state, and the atoms have no momentum, so they remain in the same place.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[File:01509561_r=90.75.png|thumb|Figure 1 - A graph of Internuclear Distance against Time for a trajectory started at the transition state for the reaction H + H&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;. Initial conditions: r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 90.75 pm and p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 0.0 g.mol&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt; |none]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q3. Comment on how the mep and the trajectory you just calculated differ.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Below, Figures 2 and 3 show the results of two calculations with the same initial conditions. Figure 2 uses an MEP calculation type and Figure 3 uses a Dynamics calculation type.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Figure 2 shows the trajectory where at each step the momentum is reset to zero, meaning the path taken is that of the minimum energy, where the descent in potential energy is the steepest.&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt; This differs from Figure 3, which is a more realistic calculation as it does not reset the momentum. The trajectory shown in Figure 3 shows a more wavy path, corresponding to the vibrational energy in the molecule, resulting in oscillation of the atoms in the molecule.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[File:01509561_bc=91.75,MEP.png|thumb|Figure 2 - A contour plot showing the minimum energy path, r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;+1 pm,  r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; and the momenta p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 0.0 g.mol&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;|none]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[File:01509561_bc=91.75,Dynamics.png|thumb|Figure 3 - A contour plot using &#039;Dynamics&#039; calculations, r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;+1 pm, r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; and the momenta p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 0.0 g.mol&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;|none]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q4. Complete the table above by adding the total energy, whether the trajectory is reactive or unreactive, and provide a plot of the trajectory and a small description for what happens along the trajectory. What can you conclude from the table?&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
It has been concluded that trajectories with the following initial conditions are always reactive: r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 74 pm, r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 200 pm, with -3.1 &amp;lt; p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1 &amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; / g.mol&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt; &amp;lt; -1.6 and p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = -5.1 g.mol&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;. This is supported by the results of the trajectories in the first two rows of the table. The data in the table below (all table trajectories run with r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; =74 pm and r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 200 pm) shows that trajectories with the same positions but higher values of momenta are not necessarily reactive. The trajectory in the fourth row has higher values of momenta, and thus higher kinetic energy, but is unreactive. Although the reactants have enough energy to cross the energy barrier, the products re-cross it and return to reactants.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
{| class=&amp;quot;wikitable&amp;quot; border=1&lt;br /&gt;
! p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;/&amp;amp;nbsp;g.mol&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt; !! p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;/&amp;amp;nbsp;g.mol&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt; !! E&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;tot&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; / kJ mol-1 !! Reactive? !! Description of the dynamics !! Illustration of the trajectory&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
| -2.56 || -5.1  ||-414.280||Reactive||The reactants have more translational energy and less vibrational energy as they move towards each other. They react and pass through the transition state to form the products. The products have less translational energy and more vibrational energy as illustrated by the oscillations in Figure 4.||[[File:01509561_table,image1.png|300px|thumb|Figure 4]]&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
| -3.1  || -4.1  ||-420.077||Unreactive||The reactants get closer together but do not have enough energy to form the transition state and move further away from each other again. No reaction occurs. The hydrogen molecule maintains the same level of oscillation (vibrational energy) throughout.||[[File:01509561_table,image2.png|300px|thumb|Figure 5]]&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
| -3.1  || -5.1  ||-413.977||Reactive||The reactants have enough energy to form the transition state and go on to form products in a successful reaction. The product molecule oscillates to a slightly greater degree than the reactant molecule, meaning it has a greater proportion of vibrational energy. ||[[File:01509561_table,image3.png|300px|thumb|Figure 6]]&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
| -5.1  || -10.1 ||-357.277||Unreactive||The reactants cross the energy barrier to form products but then re-cross the barrier back to reactants. The reactants begin with a large amount of translational energy, which is converted into vibrational energy of the the product molecule and the end reactant molecule after re-crossing the energy barrier.||[[File:01509561_table,image4.png|300px|thumb|Figure 7]]&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
| -5.1  || -10.6 ||-349.477||Reactive||The reactants have a large amount of translational energy as they move towards each other, with a small level of vibrational energy. They cross the energy barrier, oscillating greatly, to form products in a successful reaction. The product molecule has a lot of vibrational energy and less translational energy.||[[File:01509561_table,image5.png|300px|thumb|Figure 8]]&lt;br /&gt;
|}&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q5.&#039;&#039;&#039; &#039;&#039;&#039;Given the results you have obtained, how will Transition State Theory predictions for reaction rate values compare with experimental values?&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Transition State theory relies on a number of assumptions in order to predict the rate of a reaction. These assumptions include: the reactant molecules follow the Maxwell-Boltzmann distribution in terms of their energy distribution; even when there is no equilibrium present, the distribution of activated complexes forming products are still in accordance with the Maxwell-Boltzmann laws; quantum effects, such as quantum tunnelling, are ignored; motion in the transition state can be classically treated and separated from other motions; and, arguably the most crucial of assumptions, once reactants have passed through the transition state to form products, they cannot re-cross the energy barrier to reactants again.&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;2,3&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Overall, these assumptions result in the overestimation of reaction rate values, when compared to the experimental values. This is predominantly due to the assumption that once a system has crossed the energy barrier, it cannot re-cross and return to reactants. Therefore, if you have a certain number of barrier crossings, Transition State Theory assumes that 100% of these will result in a successful reaction and the formation of products. However, in reality, the proportion would be less than 100% as some systems would re-cross the barrier resulting in an unsuccessful reaction. Thus, the rate of the reaction would, in reality, be slightly less than the Transition State Theory prediction.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Exercise 2 ==&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q6.&#039;&#039;&#039; &#039;&#039;&#039;By inspecting the potential energy surfaces, classify the F + H&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; and H + HF reactions according to their energetics (endothermic or exothermic). How does this relate to the bond strength of the chemical species involved?&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The potential energy surface for F + H&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; shows that the exit channel of the products is lower in potential energy than the entry channel of the reactants, so the reaction is exothermic. The potential energy surface for H + HF shows that the exit channel of the products is higher in potential energy than the entry channel of the reactants, so the reaction is endothermic. This means that H-F is a stronger bond than H-H, as the energy required to break H-H is less than the energy released when H-F is formed, in the case of F + H&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;, making it exothermic. In the case of H + HF, the reverse is true.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q7.&#039;&#039;&#039; &#039;&#039;&#039;Locate the approximate position of the transition state.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The position of the transition state correlates to r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 74 pm and r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 181.4 pm (based on F + H&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;, r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;H-H&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; and r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;F-H&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;).&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[File:01509561_F+H2,ts.png|300px|thumb|Figure 9 - A contour plot showing the position of the transition state for the F + H&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; reaction|none]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q8.&#039;&#039;&#039; &#039;&#039;&#039;Report the activation energy for both reactions.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The activation energies are calculated by taking the difference between the energy at the transition state and the energy at the minimum of the reactant channel. The reactions F + H&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; and H + HF are the reverse of each other so the activation energies will be different but the energy of the transition state will be the same.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
F+H&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;, E&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;a&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = (-433.942) - (-435.100) = 1.158 kJ mol&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
H + HF, E&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;a&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = (-433.942) - (-560.700) = 126.758 kJ mol&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q9.&#039;&#039;&#039; &#039;&#039;&#039;In light of the fact that energy is conserved, discuss the mechanism of release of the reaction energy. Explain how this could be confirmed experimentally.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Energy is conserved in all reactions, but the energy distribution of the products is often different to that of the reactants. In the case of F + H&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;, the energy of the reactants is mostly in the form of translational kinetic energy; they have a small amount of vibrational energy. The products have a much larger amount of vibrational energy and less translational energy. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The reaction energy is released primarily through vibrational oscillation of the products and some translational kinetic energy. To confirm this experimentally, a method called infrared chemiluminescence can be utilised to examine the distribution of energy in the products. Infrared chemiluminescence is a technique that can be used to determine the vibrational state populations by studying the intensities of the infrared radiation emitted from vibrationally excited molecules.&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q10. Discuss how the distribution of energy between different modes (translation and vibration) affect the efficiency of the reaction, and how this is influenced by the position of the transition state.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
According to Polanyi&#039;s rules, an &#039;early&#039; energy barrier, in the reactant channel, favours more highly vibrationally excited products. While a &#039;late&#039; energy barrier, in the product channel, favours products with more translational energy. The energy distribution in the reactants, in conjunction with the position of the energy barrier, can affect how efficient a reaction is. Having more translational energy in the reactants when the the transition state is &#039;early&#039; leads to a more efficient reaction. Additionally, having more vibrational energy in the reactants when the transition state is &#039;late&#039; leads to a more efficient reaction.&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;4,5&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== References ==&lt;br /&gt;
# P. Atkins, J. de Paula, and J. Keeler, in &#039;&#039;Atkins’ Physical Chemistry&#039;&#039;, Oxford University Press, Oxford, 11th edn, 2018, ch. 18, pp. 804-809&lt;br /&gt;
# K. J. Laidler, in &#039;&#039;Chemical Kinetics&#039;&#039;, Harper &amp;amp; Row, New York; London, 3rd edn, 1987, ch. 4, pp. 88-98&lt;br /&gt;
# J. I. Steinfeld, J. S. Francisco and W. L. Hase, in &#039;&#039;Chemical Kinetics and Dynamics&#039;&#039;, Prentice-Hall, Upper Saddle River, 2nd edn, 1989, ch. 10.1-10.3+10.10, pp. 287-321&lt;br /&gt;
# J. C. Polanyi, &#039;&#039;Acc. Chem. Res.&#039;&#039;, 1972, &#039;&#039;&#039;5&#039;&#039;&#039;, 161-168&lt;br /&gt;
# J. I. Steinfeld, J. S. Francisco and W. L. Hase, in &#039;&#039;Chemical Kinetics and Dynamics&#039;&#039;, Prentice-Hall, Upper Saddle River, 2nd edn, 1989, ch. 9.4.2, pp. 272-274&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>Sns18</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://chemwiki.ch.ic.ac.uk/index.php?title=01509561&amp;diff=805945</id>
		<title>01509561</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://chemwiki.ch.ic.ac.uk/index.php?title=01509561&amp;diff=805945"/>
		<updated>2020-05-15T22:25:19Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;Sns18: &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;= Molecular Reaction Dynamics Report =&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;by Sharifa Sheikh&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Exercise 1 ==&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q1. On a potential energy surface diagram, how is the transition state mathematically defined? How can the transition state be identified, and how can it be distinguished from a local minimum of the potential energy surface?&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
On a potential energy surface (PES) diagram, the transition state is mathematically defined as the saddle point. The transition state corresponds to the point of maximum potential energy on the minimum energy pathway.&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
In order to identify a transition state, begin a reactant trajectory at the estimated transition state position, with zero momentum, and it should not move in any direction. To distinguish the transition state from a local minimum on the PES, change the trajectory parameters so that it starts close to the transition state, and the path should move away as it goes &#039;down&#039; the PES, away from the maximum, and the potential energy decreases as it is converted to kinetic energy. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q2. Report your best estimate of the transition state position (r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;) and explain your reasoning illustrating it with a “Internuclear Distances vs Time” plot for a relevant trajectory.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
For the reaction, H + H&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;, the transition state position was found to be r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 90.75 pm. Referring to the reactants, A is the incoming hydrogen atom; B and C are the two atoms in the hydrogen molecule. For the trajectory starting at the transition state, Figure 1 shows a graph of Internuclear Distance against Time. As can be seen, the lines for the distances A-B and B-C are flat, showing that as time progresses the atoms are not getting closer or further away from each other, but rather their internuclear distances remain constant. There is no gradient at the transition state, and the atoms have no momentum, so they remain in the same place.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[File:01509561_r=90.75.png|thumb|Figure 1 - A graph of Internuclear Distance against Time for a trajectory started at the transition state for the reaction H + H&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;. Initial conditions: r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 90.75 pm and p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 0.0 g.mol&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt; |none]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q3. Comment on how the mep and the trajectory you just calculated differ.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Below, Figures 2 and 3 show the results of two calculations with the same initial conditions. Figure 2 uses an MEP calculation type and Figure 3 uses a Dynamics calculation type.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Figure 2 shows the trajectory where at each step the momentum is reset to zero, meaning the path taken is that of the minimum energy, where the descent in potential energy is the steepest.&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt; This differs from Figure 3, which is a more realistic calculation as it does not reset the momentum. The trajectory shown in Figure 3 shows a more wavy path, corresponding to the vibrational energy in the molecule, resulting in oscillation of the atoms in the molecule.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[File:01509561_bc=91.75,MEP.png|thumb|Figure 2 - A contour plot showing the minimum energy path, r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;+1 pm,  r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; and the momenta p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 0.0 g.mol&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;|none]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[File:01509561_bc=91.75,Dynamics.png|thumb|Figure 3 - A contour plot using &#039;Dynamics&#039; calculations, r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;+1 pm, r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; and the momenta p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 0.0 g.mol&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;|none]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q4. Complete the table above by adding the total energy, whether the trajectory is reactive or unreactive, and provide a plot of the trajectory and a small description for what happens along the trajectory. What can you conclude from the table?&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
It has been concluded that trajectories with the following initial conditions are always reactive: r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; =74 pm, r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 200 pm, with -3.1 &amp;lt; p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1 &amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; / g.mol&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt; &amp;lt; -1.6 and p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = -5.1 g.mol&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;. This is supported by the results of the trajectories in the first two rows of the table. The data in the table below (all table trajectories run with r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; =74 pm and r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 200 pm) shows that trajectories with the same positions but higher values of momenta are not necessarily reactive. The trajectory in the fourth row has higher values of momenta, and thus higher kinetic energy, but is unreactive. Although the reactants have enough energy to cross the energy barrier, the products re-cross it and return to reactants.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
{| class=&amp;quot;wikitable&amp;quot; border=1&lt;br /&gt;
! p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;/&amp;amp;nbsp;g.mol&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt; !! p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;/&amp;amp;nbsp;g.mol&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt; !! E&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;tot&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; / kJ mol-1 !! Reactive? !! Description of the dynamics !! Illustration of the trajectory&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
| -2.56 || -5.1  ||-414.280||Reactive||The reactants have more translational energy and less vibrational energy as they move towards each other. They react and pass through the transition state to form the products. The products have less translational energy and more vibrational energy as illustrated by the oscillations in Figure 4.||[[File:01509561_table,image1.png|300px|thumb|Figure 4]]&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
| -3.1  || -4.1  ||-420.077||Unreactive||The reactants get closer together but do not have enough energy to form the transition state and move further away from each other again. No reaction occurs. The hydrogen molecule maintains the same level of oscillation (vibrational energy) throughout.||[[File:01509561_table,image2.png|300px|thumb|Figure 5]]&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
| -3.1  || -5.1  ||-413.977||Reactive||The reactants have enough energy to form the transition state and go on to form products in a successful reaction. The product molecule oscillates to a slightly greater degree than the reactant molecule, meaning it has a greater proportion of vibrational energy. ||[[File:01509561_table,image3.png|300px|thumb|Figure 6]]&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
| -5.1  || -10.1 ||-357.277||Unreactive||The reactants cross the energy barrier to form products but then re-cross the barrier back to reactants. The reactants begin with a large amount of translational energy, which is converted into vibrational energy of the the product molecule and the end reactant molecule after re-crossing the energy barrier.||[[File:01509561_table,image4.png|300px|thumb|Figure 7]]&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
| -5.1  || -10.6 ||-349.477||Reactive||The reactants have a large amount of translational energy as they move towards each other, with a small level of vibrational energy. They cross the energy barrier, oscillating greatly, to form products in a successful reaction. The product molecule has a lot of vibrational energy and less translational energy.||[[File:01509561_table,image5.png|300px|thumb|Figure 8]]&lt;br /&gt;
|}&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q5.&#039;&#039;&#039; &#039;&#039;&#039;Given the results you have obtained, how will Transition State Theory predictions for reaction rate values compare with experimental values?&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Transition State theory relies on a number of assumptions in order to predict the rate of a reaction. These assumptions include: the reactant molecules follow the Maxwell-Boltzmann distribution in terms of their energy distribution; even when there is no equilibrium present, the distribution of activated complexes forming products are still in accordance with the Maxwell-Boltzmann laws; quantum effects, such as quantum tunnelling, are ignored; motion in the transition state can be classically treated and separated from other motions; and, arguably the most crucial of assumptions, once reactants have passed through the transition state to form products, they cannot re-cross the energy barrier to reactants again.&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;2,3&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Overall, these assumptions result in the overestimation of reaction rate values, when compared to the experimental values. This is predominantly due to the assumption that once a system has crossed the energy barrier, it cannot re-cross and return to reactants. Therefore, if you have a certain number of barrier crossings, Transition State Theory assumes that 100% of these will result in a successful reaction and the formation of products. However, in reality, the proportion would be less than 100% as some systems would re-cross the barrier resulting in an unsuccessful reaction. Thus, the rate of the reaction would, in reality, be slightly less than the Transition State Theory prediction.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Exercise 2 ==&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q6.&#039;&#039;&#039; &#039;&#039;&#039;By inspecting the potential energy surfaces, classify the F + H&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; and H + HF reactions according to their energetics (endothermic or exothermic). How does this relate to the bond strength of the chemical species involved?&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The potential energy surface for F + H&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; shows that the exit channel of the products is lower in potential energy than the entry channel of the reactants, so the reaction is exothermic. The potential energy surface for H + HF shows that the exit channel of the products is higher in potential energy than the entry channel of the reactants, so the reaction is endothermic. This means that H-F is a stronger bond than H-H, as the energy required to break H-H is less than the energy released when H-F is formed, in the case of F + H&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;, making it exothermic. In the case of H + HF, the reverse is true.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q7.&#039;&#039;&#039; &#039;&#039;&#039;Locate the approximate position of the transition state.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The position of the transition state correlates to r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 74 pm and r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 181.4 pm (based on F + H&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;, r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;H-H&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; and r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;F-H&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;).&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[File:01509561_F+H2,ts.png|300px|thumb|Figure 9 - A contour plot showing the position of the transition state for the F + H&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; reaction|none]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q8.&#039;&#039;&#039; &#039;&#039;&#039;Report the activation energy for both reactions.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The activation energies are calculated by taking the difference between the energy at the transition state and the energy at the minimum of the reactant channel. The reactions F + H&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; and H + HF are the reverse of each other so the activation energies will be different but the energy of the transition state will be the same.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
F+H&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;, E&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;a&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = (-433.942) - (-435.100) = 1.158 kJ mol&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
H + HF, E&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;a&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = (-433.942) - (-560.700) = 126.758 kJ mol&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q9.&#039;&#039;&#039; &#039;&#039;&#039;In light of the fact that energy is conserved, discuss the mechanism of release of the reaction energy. Explain how this could be confirmed experimentally.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Energy is conserved in all reactions, but the energy distribution of the products is often different to that of the reactants. In the case of F + H&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;, the energy of the reactants is mostly in the form of translational kinetic energy; they have a small amount of vibrational energy. The products have a much larger amount of vibrational energy and less translational energy. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The reaction energy is released primarily through vibrational oscillation of the products and some translational kinetic energy. To confirm this experimentally, a method called infrared chemiluminescence can be utilised to examine the distribution of energy in the products. Infrared chemiluminescence is a technique that can be used to determine the vibrational state populations by studying the intensities of the infrared radiation emitted from vibrationally excited molecules.&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q10. Discuss how the distribution of energy between different modes (translation and vibration) affect the efficiency of the reaction, and how this is influenced by the position of the transition state.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
According to Polanyi&#039;s rules, an &#039;early&#039; energy barrier, in the reactant channel, favours more highly vibrationally excited products. While a &#039;late&#039; energy barrier, in the product channel, favours products with more translational energy. The energy distribution in the reactants, in conjunction with the position of the energy barrier, can affect how efficient a reaction is. Having more translational energy in the reactants when the the transition state is &#039;early&#039; leads to a more efficient reaction. Additionally, having more vibrational energy in the reactants when the transition state is &#039;late&#039; leads to a more efficient reaction.&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;4,5&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== References ==&lt;br /&gt;
# P. Atkins, J. de Paula, and J. Keeler, in &#039;&#039;Atkins’ Physical Chemistry&#039;&#039;, Oxford University Press, Oxford, 11th edn, 2018, ch. 18, pp. 804-809&lt;br /&gt;
# K. J. Laidler, in &#039;&#039;Chemical Kinetics&#039;&#039;, Harper &amp;amp; Row, New York; London, 3rd edn, 1987, ch. 4, pp. 88-98&lt;br /&gt;
# J. I. Steinfeld, J. S. Francisco and W. L. Hase, in &#039;&#039;Chemical Kinetics and Dynamics&#039;&#039;, Prentice-Hall, Upper Saddle River, 2nd edn, 1989, ch. 10.1-10.3+10.10, pp. 287-321&lt;br /&gt;
# J. C. Polanyi, &#039;&#039;Acc. Chem. Res.&#039;&#039;, 1972, &#039;&#039;&#039;5&#039;&#039;&#039;, 161-168&lt;br /&gt;
# J. I. Steinfeld, J. S. Francisco and W. L. Hase, in &#039;&#039;Chemical Kinetics and Dynamics&#039;&#039;, Prentice-Hall, Upper Saddle River, 2nd edn, 1989, ch. 9.4.2, pp. 272-274&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>Sns18</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://chemwiki.ch.ic.ac.uk/index.php?title=01509561&amp;diff=805914</id>
		<title>01509561</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://chemwiki.ch.ic.ac.uk/index.php?title=01509561&amp;diff=805914"/>
		<updated>2020-05-15T22:10:34Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;Sns18: &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;= Molecular Reaction Dynamics Report =&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;by Sharifa Sheikh&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Exercise 1 ==&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q1. On a potential energy surface diagram, how is the transition state mathematically defined? How can the transition state be identified, and how can it be distinguished from a local minimum of the potential energy surface?&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
On a potential energy surface (PES) diagram, the transition state is mathematically defined as the saddle point. The transition state corresponds to the point of maximum potential energy on the minimum energy pathway.&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
In order to identify a transition state, begin a reactant trajectory at the estimated transition state position, with zero momentum, and it should not move in any direction. To distinguish the transition state from a local minimum on the PES, change the trajectory parameters so that it starts close to the transition state, and the path should move away as it goes &#039;down&#039; the PES, away from the maximum, and the potential energy decreases as it is converted to kinetic energy. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q2. Report your best estimate of the transition state position (r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;) and explain your reasoning illustrating it with a “Internuclear Distances vs Time” plot for a relevant trajectory.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
For the reaction, H + H&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;, the transition state position was found to be r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 90.75 pm. Referring to the reactants, A is the incoming hydrogen atom; B and C are the two atoms in the hydrogen molecule. For the trajectory starting at the transition state, Figure 1 shows a graph of Internuclear Distance against Time. As can be seen, the lines for the distances A-B and B-C are flat, showing that as time progresses the atoms are not getting closer or further away from each other, but rather their internuclear distances remain constant. There is no gradient at the transition state, and the atoms have no momentum, so they remain in the same place.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q3. Comment on how the mep and the trajectory you just calculated differ.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Below, Figures 2 and 3 show the results of two calculations with the same initial conditions. Figure 2 uses an MEP calculation type and Figure 3 uses a Dynamics calculation type.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Figure 2 shows the trajectory where at each step the momentum is reset to zero, meaning the path taken is that of the minimum energy, where the descent in potential energy is the steepest.&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt; This differs from Figure 3, which is a more realistic calculation as it does not reset the momentum. The trajectory shown in Figure 3 shows a more wavy path, corresponding to the vibrational energy in the molecule, resulting in oscillation of the atoms in the molecule.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[File:01509561_bc=91.75,MEP.png|thumb|Figure 2 - A contour plot showing the minimum energy path, r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;+1 pm,  r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; and the momenta p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 0 g.mol&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;|none]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[File:01509561_bc=91.75,Dynamics.png|thumb|Figure 3 - A contour plot using &#039;Dynamics&#039; calculations, r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;+1 pm, r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; and the momenta p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 0 g.mol&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;|none]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q4. Complete the table above by adding the total energy, whether the trajectory is reactive or unreactive, and provide a plot of the trajectory and a small description for what happens along the trajectory. What can you conclude from the table?&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
It has been concluded that trajectories with the following initial conditions are always reactive: r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; =74 pm, r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 200 pm, with -3.1 &amp;lt; p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1 &amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; / g.mol&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt; &amp;lt; -1.6 and p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = -5.1 g.mol&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;. This is supported by the results of the trajectories in the first two rows of the table. The data in the table below (all table trajectories run with r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; =74 pm and r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 200 pm) shows that trajectories with the same positions but higher values of momenta are not necessarily reactive. The trajectory in the fourth row has higher values of momenta, and thus higher kinetic energy, but is unreactive. Although the reactants have enough energy to cross the energy barrier, the products re-cross it and return to reactants.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
{| class=&amp;quot;wikitable&amp;quot; border=1&lt;br /&gt;
! p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;/&amp;amp;nbsp;g.mol&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt; !! p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;/&amp;amp;nbsp;g.mol&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt; !! E&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;tot&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; / kJ mol-1 !! Reactive? !! Description of the dynamics !! Illustration of the trajectory&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
| -2.56 || -5.1  ||-414.280||Reactive||The reactants have more translational energy and less vibrational energy as they move towards each other. They react and pass through the transition state to form the products. The products have less translational energy and more vibrational energy as illustrated by the oscillations in Figure 4.||[[File:01509561_table,image1.png|300px|thumb|Figure 4]]&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
| -3.1  || -4.1  ||-420.077||Unreactive||The reactants get closer together but do not have enough energy to form the transition state and move further away from each other again. No reaction occurs. The hydrogen molecule maintains the same level of oscillation (vibrational energy) throughout.||[[File:01509561_table,image2.png|300px|thumb|Figure 5]]&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
| -3.1  || -5.1  ||-413.977||Reactive||The reactants have enough energy to form the transition state and go on to form products in a successful reaction. The product molecule oscillates to a slightly greater degree than the reactant molecule, meaning it has a greater proportion of vibrational energy. ||[[File:01509561_table,image3.png|300px|thumb|Figure 6]]&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
| -5.1  || -10.1 ||-357.277||Unreactive||The reactants cross the energy barrier to form products but then re-cross the barrier back to reactants. The reactants begin with a large amount of translational energy, which is converted into vibrational energy of the the product molecule and the end reactant molecule after re-crossing the energy barrier.||[[File:01509561_table,image4.png|300px|thumb|Figure 7]]&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
| -5.1  || -10.6 ||-349.477||Reactive||The reactants have a large amount of translational energy as they move towards each other, with a small level of vibrational energy. They cross the energy barrier, oscillating greatly, to form products in a successful reaction. The product molecule has a lot of vibrational energy and less translational energy.||[[File:01509561_table,image5.png|300px|thumb|Figure 8]]&lt;br /&gt;
|}&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q5.&#039;&#039;&#039; &#039;&#039;&#039;Given the results you have obtained, how will Transition State Theory predictions for reaction rate values compare with experimental values?&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Transition State theory relies on a number of assumptions in order to predict the rate of a reaction. These assumptions include: the reactant molecules follow the Maxwell-Boltzmann distribution in terms of their energy distribution; even when there is no equilibrium present, the distribution of activated complexes forming products are still in accordance with the Maxwell-Boltzmann laws; quantum effects, such as quantum tunnelling, are ignored; motion in the transition state can be classically treated and separated from other motions; and, arguably the most crucial of assumptions, once reactants have passed through the transition state to form products, they cannot re-cross the energy barrier to reactants again.&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;2,3&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Overall, these assumptions result in the overestimation of reaction rate values, when compared to the experimental values. This is predominantly due to the assumption that once a system has crossed the energy barrier, it cannot re-cross and return to reactants. Therefore, if you have a certain number of barrier crossings, Transition State Theory assumes that 100% of these will result in a successful reaction and the formation of products. However, in reality, the proportion would be less than 100% as some systems would re-cross the barrier resulting in an unsuccessful reaction. Thus, the rate of the reaction would, in reality, be slightly less than the Transition State Theory prediction.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Exercise 2 ==&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q6.&#039;&#039;&#039; &#039;&#039;&#039;By inspecting the potential energy surfaces, classify the F + H&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; and H + HF reactions according to their energetics (endothermic or exothermic). How does this relate to the bond strength of the chemical species involved?&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The potential energy surface for F + H&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; shows that the exit channel of the products is lower in potential energy than the entry channel of the reactants, so the reaction is exothermic. The potential energy surface for H + HF shows that the exit channel of the products is higher in potential energy than the entry channel of the reactants, so the reaction is endothermic. This means that H-F is a stronger bond than H-H, as the energy required to break H-H is less than the energy released when H-F is formed, in the case of F + H&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;, making it exothermic. In the case of H + HF, the reverse is true.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q7.&#039;&#039;&#039; &#039;&#039;&#039;Locate the approximate position of the transition state.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The position of the transition state correlates to r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 74 pm and r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 181.4 pm (based on F + H&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;, r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;H-H&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; and r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;F-H&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;).&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[File:01509561_F+H2,ts.png|300px|thumb|Figure 9 - A contour plot showing the position of the transition state for the F + H&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; reaction|none]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q8.&#039;&#039;&#039; &#039;&#039;&#039;Report the activation energy for both reactions.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The activation energies are calculated by taking the difference between the energy at the transition state and the energy at the minimum of the reactant channel. The reactions F + H&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; and H + HF are the reverse of each other so the activation energies will be different but the energy of the transition state will be the same.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
F+H&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;, E&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;a&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = (-433.942) - (-435.100) = 1.158 kJ mol&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
H + HF, E&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;a&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = (-433.942) - (-560.700) = 126.758 kJ mol&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q9.&#039;&#039;&#039; &#039;&#039;&#039;In light of the fact that energy is conserved, discuss the mechanism of release of the reaction energy. Explain how this could be confirmed experimentally.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Energy is conserved in all reactions, but the energy distribution of the products is often different to that of the reactants. In the case of F + H&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;, the energy of the reactants is mostly in the form of translational kinetic energy; they have a small amount of vibrational energy. The products have a much larger amount of vibrational energy and less translational energy. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The reaction energy is released primarily through vibrational oscillation of the products and some translational kinetic energy. To confirm this experimentally, a method called infrared chemiluminescence can be utilised to examine the distribution of energy in the products. Infrared chemiluminescence is a technique that can be used to determine the vibrational state populations by studying the intensities of the infrared radiation emitted from vibrationally excited molecules.&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q10. Discuss how the distribution of energy between different modes (translation and vibration) affect the efficiency of the reaction, and how this is influenced by the position of the transition state.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
According to Polanyi&#039;s rules, an &#039;early&#039; energy barrier, in the reactant channel, favours more highly vibrationally excited products. While a &#039;late&#039; energy barrier, in the product channel, favours products with more translational energy. The energy distribution in the reactants, in conjunction with the position of the energy barrier, can affect how efficient a reaction is. Having more translational energy in the reactants when the the transition state is &#039;early&#039; leads to a more efficient reaction. Additionally, having more vibrational energy in the reactants when the transition state is &#039;late&#039; leads to a more efficient reaction.&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;4,5&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== References ==&lt;br /&gt;
# P. Atkins, J. de Paula, and J. Keeler, in &#039;&#039;Atkins’ Physical Chemistry&#039;&#039;, Oxford University Press, Oxford, 11th edn, 2018, ch. 18, pp. 804-809&lt;br /&gt;
# K. J. Laidler, in &#039;&#039;Chemical Kinetics&#039;&#039;, Harper &amp;amp; Row, New York; London, 3rd edn, 1987, ch. 4, pp. 88-98&lt;br /&gt;
# J. I. Steinfeld, J. S. Francisco and W. L. Hase, in &#039;&#039;Chemical Kinetics and Dynamics&#039;&#039;, Prentice-Hall, Upper Saddle River, 2nd edn, 1989, ch. 10.1-10.3+10.10, pp. 287-321&lt;br /&gt;
# J. C. Polanyi, &#039;&#039;Acc. Chem. Res.&#039;&#039;, 1972, &#039;&#039;&#039;5&#039;&#039;&#039;, 161-168&lt;br /&gt;
# J. I. Steinfeld, J. S. Francisco and W. L. Hase, in &#039;&#039;Chemical Kinetics and Dynamics&#039;&#039;, Prentice-Hall, Upper Saddle River, 2nd edn, 1989, ch. 9.4.2, pp. 272-274&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>Sns18</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://chemwiki.ch.ic.ac.uk/index.php?title=01509561&amp;diff=805911</id>
		<title>01509561</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://chemwiki.ch.ic.ac.uk/index.php?title=01509561&amp;diff=805911"/>
		<updated>2020-05-15T22:07:38Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;Sns18: &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;= Molecular Reaction Dynamics Report =&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;by Sharifa Sheikh&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Exercise 1 ==&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q1. On a potential energy surface diagram, how is the transition state mathematically defined? How can the transition state be identified, and how can it be distinguished from a local minimum of the potential energy surface?&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
On a potential energy surface (PES) diagram, the transition state is mathematically defined as the saddle point. The transition state corresponds to the point of maximum potential energy on the minimum energy pathway.&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
In order to identify a transition state, begin a reactant trajectory at the estimated transition state position, with zero momentum, and it should not move in any direction. To distinguish the transition state from a local minimum on the PES, change the trajectory parameters so that it starts close to the transition state, and the path should move away as it goes &#039;down&#039; the PES, away from the maximum, and the potential energy decreases as it is converted to kinetic energy. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q2. Report your best estimate of the transition state position (r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;) and explain your reasoning illustrating it with a “Internuclear Distances vs Time” plot for a relevant trajectory.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
For the reaction, H + H&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;, the transition state position was found to be r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 90.75 pm. Referring to the reactants, A is the incoming hydrogen atom; B and C are the two atoms in the hydrogen molecule. For the trajectory starting at the transition state, Figure 1 shows a graph of Internuclear Distance against Time. As can be seen, the lines for the distances A-B and B-C are flat, showing that as time progresses the atoms are not getting closer or further away from each other, but rather their internuclear distances remain constant. There is no gradient at the transition state, and the atoms have no momentum, so they remain in the same place.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q3. Comment on how the mep and the trajectory you just calculated differ.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Below, Figures 2 and 3 show the results of two calculations with the same initial conditions. Figure 2 uses an MEP calculation type and Figure 3 uses a Dynamics calculation type.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Figure 2 shows the trajectory where at each step the momentum is reset to zero, meaning the path taken is that of the minimum energy, where the descent in potential energy is the steepest.&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt; This differs from Figure 3, which is a more realistic calculation as it does not reset the momentum. The trajectory shown in Figure 3 shows a more wavy path, corresponding to the vibrational energy in the molecule, resulting in oscillation of the atoms in the molecule.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[File:01509561_bc=91.75,MEP.png|thumb|Figure 2 - A contour plot showing the minimum energy path, r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;+1 pm,  r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; and the momenta p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 0 g.mol&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;|none]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[File:01509561_bc=91.75,Dynamics.png|thumb|Figure 3 - A contour plot using &#039;Dynamics&#039; calculations, r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;+1 pm, r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; and the momenta p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 0 g.mol&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;|none]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q4. Complete the table above by adding the total energy, whether the trajectory is reactive or unreactive, and provide a plot of the trajectory and a small description for what happens along the trajectory. What can you conclude from the table?&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
It has been concluded that trajectories with the following initial conditions are always reactive: r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; =74 pm, r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 200 pm, with -3.1 &amp;lt; p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1 &amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; / g.mol&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt; &amp;lt; -1.6 and p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = -5.1 g.mol&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;. This is supported by the results of the trajectories in the first two rows of the table. The data in the table below (all table trajectories run with r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; =74 pm and r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 200 pm) shows that trajectories with the same positions but higher values of momenta are not necessarily reactive. The trajectory in the fourth row has higher values of momenta, and thus higher kinetic energy, but is unreactive. Although the reactants have enough energy to cross the energy barrier, the products re-cross it and return to reactants.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
{| class=&amp;quot;wikitable&amp;quot; border=1&lt;br /&gt;
! p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;/&amp;amp;nbsp;g.mol&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt; !! p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;/&amp;amp;nbsp;g.mol&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt; !! E&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;tot&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; / kJ mol-1 !! Reactive? !! Description of the dynamics !! Illustration of the trajectory&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
| -2.56 || -5.1  ||-414.280||Reactive||The reactants have more translational energy and less vibrational energy as they move towards each other. They react and pass through the transition state to form the products. The products have less translational energy and more vibrational energy as illustrated by the oscillations in Figure 4.||[[File:01509561_table,image1.png|300px|thumb|Figure 4]]&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
| -3.1  || -4.1  ||-420.077||Unreactive||The reactants get closer together but do not have enough energy to form the transition state and move further away from each other again. No reaction occurs. The hydrogen molecule maintains the same level of oscillation (vibrational energy) throughout.||[[File:01509561_table,image2.png|300px|thumb|Figure 5]]&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
| -3.1  || -5.1  ||-413.977||Reactive||The reactants have enough energy to form the transition state and go on to form products in a successful reaction. The product molecule oscillates to a slightly greater degree than the reactant molecule, meaning it has a greater proportion of vibrational energy. ||[[File:01509561_table,image3.png|300px|thumb|Figure 6]]&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
| -5.1  || -10.1 ||-357.277||Unreactive||The reactants cross the energy barrier to form products but then re-cross the barrier back to reactants. The reactants begin with a large amount of translational energy, which is converted into vibrational energy of the the product molecule and the end reactant molecule after re-crossing the energy barrier.||[[File:01509561_table,image4.png|300px|thumb|Figure 7]]&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
| -5.1  || -10.6 ||-349.477||Reactive||The reactants have a large amount of translational energy, with a small level of vibrational energy, and cross the energy barrier to form products in a successful reaction. There is a lot of oscillation between a reactant-resembling structure and a product-resembling structure as the atoms undergo the reaction and before finally forming the products. The product molecule has a lot of vibrational energy and less translational energy.||[[File:01509561_table,image5.png|300px|thumb|Figure 8]]&lt;br /&gt;
|}&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q5.&#039;&#039;&#039; &#039;&#039;&#039;Given the results you have obtained, how will Transition State Theory predictions for reaction rate values compare with experimental values?&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Transition State theory relies on a number of assumptions in order to predict the rate of a reaction. These assumptions include: the reactant molecules follow the Maxwell-Boltzmann distribution in terms of their energy distribution; even when there is no equilibrium present, the distribution of activated complexes forming products are still in accordance with the Maxwell-Boltzmann laws; quantum effects, such as quantum tunnelling, are ignored; motion in the transition state can be classically treated and separated from other motions; and, arguably the most crucial of assumptions, once reactants have passed through the transition state to form products, they cannot re-cross the energy barrier to reactants again.&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;2,3&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Overall, these assumptions result in the overestimation of reaction rate values, when compared to the experimental values. This is predominantly due to the assumption that once a system has crossed the energy barrier, it cannot re-cross and return to reactants. Therefore, if you have a certain number of barrier crossings, Transition State Theory assumes that 100% of these will result in a successful reaction and the formation of products. However, in reality, the proportion would be less than 100% as some systems would re-cross the barrier resulting in an unsuccessful reaction. Thus, the rate of the reaction would, in reality, be slightly less than the Transition State Theory prediction.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Exercise 2 ==&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q6.&#039;&#039;&#039; &#039;&#039;&#039;By inspecting the potential energy surfaces, classify the F + H&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; and H + HF reactions according to their energetics (endothermic or exothermic). How does this relate to the bond strength of the chemical species involved?&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The potential energy surface for F + H&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; shows that the exit channel of the products is lower in potential energy than the entry channel of the reactants, so the reaction is exothermic. The potential energy surface for H + HF shows that the exit channel of the products is higher in potential energy than the entry channel of the reactants, so the reaction is endothermic. This means that H-F is a stronger bond than H-H, as the energy required to break H-H is less than the energy released when H-F is formed, in the case of F + H&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;, making it exothermic. In the case of H + HF, the reverse is true.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q7.&#039;&#039;&#039; &#039;&#039;&#039;Locate the approximate position of the transition state.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The position of the transition state correlates to r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 74 pm and r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 181.4 pm (based on F + H&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;, r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;H-H&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; and r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;F-H&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;).&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[File:01509561_F+H2,ts.png|300px|thumb|Figure 9 - A contour plot showing the position of the transition state for the F + H&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; reaction|none]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q8.&#039;&#039;&#039; &#039;&#039;&#039;Report the activation energy for both reactions.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The activation energies are calculated by taking the difference between the energy at the transition state and the energy at the minimum of the reactant channel. The reactions F + H&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; and H + HF are the reverse of each other so the activation energies will be different but the energy of the transition state will be the same.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
F+H&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;, E&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;a&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = (-433.942) - (-435.100) = 1.158 kJ mol&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
H + HF, E&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;a&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = (-433.942) - (-560.700) = 126.758 kJ mol&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q9.&#039;&#039;&#039; &#039;&#039;&#039;In light of the fact that energy is conserved, discuss the mechanism of release of the reaction energy. Explain how this could be confirmed experimentally.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Energy is conserved in all reactions, but the energy distribution of the products is often different to that of the reactants. In the case of F + H&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;, the energy of the reactants is mostly in the form of translational kinetic energy; they have a small amount of vibrational energy. The products have a much larger amount of vibrational energy and less translational energy. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The reaction energy is released primarily through vibrational oscillation of the products and some translational kinetic energy. To confirm this experimentally, a method called infrared chemiluminescence can be utilised to examine the distribution of energy in the products. Infrared chemiluminescence is a technique that can be used to determine the vibrational state populations by studying the intensities of the infrared radiation emitted from vibrationally excited molecules.&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q10. Discuss how the distribution of energy between different modes (translation and vibration) affect the efficiency of the reaction, and how this is influenced by the position of the transition state.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
According to Polanyi&#039;s rules, an &#039;early&#039; energy barrier, in the reactant channel, favours more highly vibrationally excited products. While a &#039;late&#039; energy barrier, in the product channel, favours products with more translational energy. The energy distribution in the reactants, in conjunction with the position of the energy barrier, can affect how efficient a reaction is. Having more translational energy in the reactants when the the transition state is &#039;early&#039; leads to a more efficient reaction. Additionally, having more vibrational energy in the reactants when the transition state is &#039;late&#039; leads to a more efficient reaction.&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;4,5&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== References ==&lt;br /&gt;
# P. Atkins, J. de Paula, and J. Keeler, in &#039;&#039;Atkins’ Physical Chemistry&#039;&#039;, Oxford University Press, Oxford, 11th edn, 2018, ch. 18, pp. 804-809&lt;br /&gt;
# K. J. Laidler, in &#039;&#039;Chemical Kinetics&#039;&#039;, Harper &amp;amp; Row, New York; London, 3rd edn, 1987, ch. 4, pp. 88-98&lt;br /&gt;
# J. I. Steinfeld, J. S. Francisco and W. L. Hase, in &#039;&#039;Chemical Kinetics and Dynamics&#039;&#039;, Prentice-Hall, Upper Saddle River, 2nd edn, 1989, ch. 10.1-10.3+10.10, pp. 287-321&lt;br /&gt;
# J. C. Polanyi, &#039;&#039;Acc. Chem. Res.&#039;&#039;, 1972, &#039;&#039;&#039;5&#039;&#039;&#039;, 161-168&lt;br /&gt;
# J. I. Steinfeld, J. S. Francisco and W. L. Hase, in &#039;&#039;Chemical Kinetics and Dynamics&#039;&#039;, Prentice-Hall, Upper Saddle River, 2nd edn, 1989, ch. 9.4.2, pp. 272-274&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>Sns18</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://chemwiki.ch.ic.ac.uk/index.php?title=01509561&amp;diff=805898</id>
		<title>01509561</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://chemwiki.ch.ic.ac.uk/index.php?title=01509561&amp;diff=805898"/>
		<updated>2020-05-15T21:59:29Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;Sns18: &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;= Molecular Reaction Dynamics Report =&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;by Sharifa Sheikh&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Exercise 1 ==&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q1. On a potential energy surface diagram, how is the transition state mathematically defined? How can the transition state be identified, and how can it be distinguished from a local minimum of the potential energy surface?&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
On a potential energy surface (PES) diagram, the transition state is mathematically defined as the saddle point. The transition state corresponds to the point of maximum potential energy on the minimum energy pathway.&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
In order to identify a transition state, begin a reactant trajectory at the estimated transition state position, with zero momentum, and it should not move in any direction. To distinguish the transition state from a local minimum on the PES, change the trajectory parameters so that it starts close to the transition state, and the path should move away as it goes &#039;down&#039; the PES, away from the maximum, and the potential energy decreases as it is converted to kinetic energy. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q2. Report your best estimate of the transition state position (r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;) and explain your reasoning illustrating it with a “Internuclear Distances vs Time” plot for a relevant trajectory.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
For the reaction, H + H&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;, the transition state position was found to be r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 90.75 pm. Referring to the reactants, A is the incoming hydrogen atom; B and C are the two atoms in the hydrogen molecule. For the trajectory starting at the transition state, Figure 1 shows a graph of Internuclear Distance against Time. As can be seen, the lines for the distances A-B and B-C are flat, showing that as time progresses the atoms are not getting closer or further away from each other, but rather their internuclear distances remain constant. There is no gradient at the transition state, and the atoms have no momentum, so they remain in the same place.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q3. Comment on how the mep and the trajectory you just calculated differ.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Below, Figures 2 and 3 show the results of two calculations with the same initial conditions. Figure 2 uses an MEP calculation type and Figure 3 uses a Dynamics calculation type.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Figure 2 shows the trajectory where at each step the momentum is reset to zero, meaning the path taken is that of the minimum energy, where the descent in potential energy is the steepest.&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt; This differs from Figure 3, which is a more realistic calculation as it does not reset the momentum. The trajectory shown in Figure 3 shows a more wavy path, corresponding to the vibrational energy in the molecule, resulting in oscillation of the atoms in the molecule.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[File:01509561_bc=91.75,MEP.png|thumb|Figure 2 - A contour plot showing the minimum energy path, r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;+1 pm,  r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; and the momenta p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 0 g.mol&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;|none]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[File:01509561_bc=91.75,Dynamics.png|thumb|Figure 3 - A contour plot using &#039;Dynamics&#039; calculations, r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;+1 pm, r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; and the momenta p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 0 g.mol&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;|none]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q4. Complete the table above by adding the total energy, whether the trajectory is reactive or unreactive, and provide a plot of the trajectory and a small description for what happens along the trajectory. What can you conclude from the table?&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
It has been concluded that trajectories with the following initial conditions are always reactive: r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; =74 pm, r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 200 pm, with -3.1 &amp;lt; p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1 &amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; / g.mol&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt; &amp;lt; -1.6 and p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = -5.1 g.mol&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;. This is supported by the results of the trajectories in the first two rows of the table. The data in the table below (all table trajectories run with r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; =74 pm and r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 200 pm) shows that trajectories with the same positions but higher values of momenta are not necessarily reactive. The trajectory in the fourth row has higher values of momenta, and thus higher kinetic energy, but is unreactive. Although the reactants have enough energy to cross the energy barrier, the products re-cross it and return to reactants.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
{| class=&amp;quot;wikitable&amp;quot; border=1&lt;br /&gt;
! p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;/&amp;amp;nbsp;g.mol&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt; !! p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;/&amp;amp;nbsp;g.mol&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt; !! E&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;tot&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; / kJ mol-1 !! Reactive? !! Description of the dynamics !! Illustration of the trajectory&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
| -2.56 || -5.1  ||-414.280||Reactive||The reactants have more translational energy and less vibrational energy. They react and pass through the transition state to form the products. The products have less translational energy and more vibrational energy as illustrated by the oscillations in Figure 4.||[[File:01509561_table,image1.png|300px|thumb|Figure 4]]&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
| -3.1  || -4.1  ||-420.077||Unreactive||The reactants get closer together but do not have enough energy to form the transition state and move further away from each other again. No reaction occurs. The hydrogen molecule maintains the same level of oscillation throughout.||[[File:01509561_table,image2.png|300px|thumb|Figure 5]]&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
| -3.1  || -5.1  ||-413.977||Reactive||The reactants have enough energy to form the transition state and go on to form products in a successful reaction. The product molecule has oscillates to a slightly greater degree than the reactant molecule. ||[[File:01509561_table,image3.png|300px|thumb|Figure 6]]&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
| -5.1  || -10.1 ||-357.277||Unreactive||The reactants cross the energy barrier to form products but then re-cross the barrier back to reactants. The reactants begin with a large amount of translational energy, which is converted into vibrational energy of the the product molecule and the end reactant molecule after re-crossing the energy barrier.||[[File:01509561_table,image4.png|300px|thumb|Figure 7]]&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
| -5.1  || -10.6 ||-349.477||Reactive||The reactants have a large amount of translational energy, with a small level of vibrational energy, and cross the energy barrier to form products in a successful reaction. There is a lot of oscillation between a reactant-resembling structure and a product-resembling structure as the atoms undergo the reaction and before finally forming the products. The product molecule has a lot of vibrational energy and less translational energy.||[[File:01509561_table,image5.png|300px|thumb|Figure 8]]&lt;br /&gt;
|}&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q5.&#039;&#039;&#039; &#039;&#039;&#039;Given the results you have obtained, how will Transition State Theory predictions for reaction rate values compare with experimental values?&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Transition State theory relies on a number of assumptions in order to predict the rate of a reaction. These assumptions include: the reactant molecules follow the Maxwell-Boltzmann distribution in terms of their energy distribution; even when there is no equilibrium present, the distribution of activated complexes forming products are still in accordance with the Maxwell-Boltzmann laws; quantum effects, such as quantum tunnelling, are ignored; motion in the transition state can be classically treated and separated from other motions; and, arguably the most crucial of assumptions, once reactants have passed through the transition state to form products, they cannot re-cross the energy barrier to reactants again.&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;2,3&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Overall, these assumptions result in the overestimation of reaction rate values, when compared to the experimental values. This is predominantly due to the assumption that once a system has crossed the energy barrier, it cannot re-cross and return to reactants. Therefore, if you have a certain number of barrier crossings, Transition State Theory assumes that 100% of these will result in a successful reaction and the formation of products. However, in reality, the proportion would be less than 100% as some systems would re-cross the barrier resulting in an unsuccessful reaction. Thus, the rate of the reaction would, in reality, be slightly less than the Transition State Theory prediction.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Exercise 2 ==&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q6.&#039;&#039;&#039; &#039;&#039;&#039;By inspecting the potential energy surfaces, classify the F + H&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; and H + HF reactions according to their energetics (endothermic or exothermic). How does this relate to the bond strength of the chemical species involved?&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The potential energy surface for F + H&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; shows that the exit channel of the products is lower in potential energy than the entry channel of the reactants, so the reaction is exothermic. The potential energy surface for H + HF shows that the exit channel of the products is higher in potential energy than the entry channel of the reactants, so the reaction is endothermic. This means that H-F is a stronger bond than H-H, as the energy required to break H-H is less than the energy released when H-F is formed, in the case of F + H&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;, making it exothermic. In the case of H + HF, the reverse is true.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q7.&#039;&#039;&#039; &#039;&#039;&#039;Locate the approximate position of the transition state.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The position of the transition state correlates to r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 74 pm and r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 181.4 pm (based on F + H&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;, r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;H-H&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; and r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;F-H&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;).&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[File:01509561_F+H2,ts.png|300px|thumb|Figure 9 - A contour plot showing the position of the transition state for the F + H&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; reaction|none]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q8.&#039;&#039;&#039; &#039;&#039;&#039;Report the activation energy for both reactions.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The activation energies are calculated by taking the difference between the energy at the transition state and the energy at the minimum of the reactant channel. The reactions F + H&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; and H + HF are the reverse of each other so the activation energies will be different but the energy of the transition state will be the same.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
F+H&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;, E&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;a&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = (-433.942) - (-435.100) = 1.158 kJ mol&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
H + HF, E&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;a&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = (-433.942) - (-560.700) = 126.758 kJ mol&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q9.&#039;&#039;&#039; &#039;&#039;&#039;In light of the fact that energy is conserved, discuss the mechanism of release of the reaction energy. Explain how this could be confirmed experimentally.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Energy is conserved in all reactions, but the energy distribution of the products is often different to that of the reactants. In the case of F + H&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;, the energy of the reactants is mostly in the form of translational kinetic energy; they have a small amount of vibrational energy. The products have a much larger amount of vibrational energy and less translational energy. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The reaction energy is released primarily through vibrational oscillation of the products and some translational kinetic energy. To confirm this experimentally, a method called infrared chemiluminescence can be utilised to examine the distribution of energy in the products. Infrared chemiluminescence is a technique that can be used to determine the vibrational state populations by studying the intensities of the infrared radiation emitted from vibrationally excited molecules.&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q10. Discuss how the distribution of energy between different modes (translation and vibration) affect the efficiency of the reaction, and how this is influenced by the position of the transition state.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
According to Polanyi&#039;s rules, an &#039;early&#039; energy barrier, in the reactant channel, favours more highly vibrationally excited products. While a &#039;late&#039; energy barrier, in the product channel, favours products with more translational energy. The energy distribution in the reactants, in conjunction with the position of the energy barrier, can affect how efficient a reaction is. Having more translational energy in the reactants when the the transition state is &#039;early&#039; leads to a more efficient reaction. Additionally, having more vibrational energy in the reactants when the transition state is &#039;late&#039; leads to a more efficient reaction.&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;4,5&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== References ==&lt;br /&gt;
# P. Atkins, J. de Paula, and J. Keeler, in &#039;&#039;Atkins’ Physical Chemistry&#039;&#039;, Oxford University Press, Oxford, 11th edn, 2018, ch. 18, pp. 804-809&lt;br /&gt;
# K. J. Laidler, in &#039;&#039;Chemical Kinetics&#039;&#039;, Harper &amp;amp; Row, New York; London, 3rd edn, 1987, ch. 4, pp. 88-98&lt;br /&gt;
# J. I. Steinfeld, J. S. Francisco and W. L. Hase, in &#039;&#039;Chemical Kinetics and Dynamics&#039;&#039;, Prentice-Hall, Upper Saddle River, 2nd edn, 1989, ch. 10.1-10.3+10.10, pp. 287-321&lt;br /&gt;
# J. C. Polanyi, &#039;&#039;Acc. Chem. Res.&#039;&#039;, 1972, &#039;&#039;&#039;5&#039;&#039;&#039;, 161-168&lt;br /&gt;
# J. I. Steinfeld, J. S. Francisco and W. L. Hase, in &#039;&#039;Chemical Kinetics and Dynamics&#039;&#039;, Prentice-Hall, Upper Saddle River, 2nd edn, 1989, ch. 9.4.2, pp. 272-274&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>Sns18</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://chemwiki.ch.ic.ac.uk/index.php?title=01509561&amp;diff=805893</id>
		<title>01509561</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://chemwiki.ch.ic.ac.uk/index.php?title=01509561&amp;diff=805893"/>
		<updated>2020-05-15T21:56:22Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;Sns18: &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;= Molecular Reaction Dynamics Report =&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;by Sharifa Sheikh&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Exercise 1 ==&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q1. On a potential energy surface diagram, how is the transition state mathematically defined? How can the transition state be identified, and how can it be distinguished from a local minimum of the potential energy surface?&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
On a potential energy surface (PES) diagram, the transition state is mathematically defined as the saddle point. The transition state corresponds to the point of maximum potential energy on the minimum energy pathway.&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
In order to identify a transition state, begin a reactant trajectory at the estimated transition state position, with zero momentum, and it should not move in any direction. To distinguish the transition state from a local minimum on the PES, change the trajectory parameters so that it starts close to the transition state, and the path should move away as it goes &#039;down&#039; the PES, away from the maximum, and the potential energy decreases as it is converted to kinetic energy. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q2. Report your best estimate of the transition state position (r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;) and explain your reasoning illustrating it with a “Internuclear Distances vs Time” plot for a relevant trajectory.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
For the reaction, H + H&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;, the transition state position was found to be r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 90.75 pm. Referring to the reactants, A is the incoming hydrogen atom; B and C are the two atoms in the hydrogen molecule. For the trajectory starting at the transition state, Figure 1 shows a graph of Internuclear Distance against Time. As can be seen, the lines for the distances A-B and B-C are flat, showing that as time progresses the atoms are not getting closer or further away from each other, but rather their internuclear distances remain constant. There is no gradient at the transition state, and the atoms have no momentum, so they remain in the same place.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q3. Comment on how the mep and the trajectory you just calculated differ.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Below, Figures 2 and 3 show the results of two calculations with the same initial conditions. Figure 2 uses an MEP calculation type and Figure 3 uses a Dynamics calculation type.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Figure 2 shows the trajectory where at each step the momentum is reset to zero, meaning the path taken is that of the minimum energy, where the descent in potential energy is the steepest.&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt; This differs from Figure 3, which is a more realistic calculation as it does not reset the momentum. The trajectory shown in Figure 3 shows a more wavy path, corresponding to the vibrational energy in the molecule, resulting in oscillation of the atoms in the molecule.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[File:01509561_bc=91.75,MEP.png|thumb|Figure 2 - A contour plot showing the minimum energy path, r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;+1 pm,  r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; and the momenta p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 0 g.mol&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;|none]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[File:01509561_bc=91.75,Dynamics.png|thumb|Figure 3 - A contour plot using &#039;Dynamics&#039; calculations, r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;+1 pm, r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; and the momenta p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 0 g.mol&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;|none]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q4. Complete the table above by adding the total energy, whether the trajectory is reactive or unreactive, and provide a plot of the trajectory and a small description for what happens along the trajectory. What can you conclude from the table?&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
It has been concluded that trajectories with the following initial conditions are always reactive: r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; =74 pm, r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 200 pm, with -3.1 &amp;lt; p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1 &amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; / g.mol&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt; &amp;lt; -1.6 and p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = -5.1 g.mol&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;. This is supported by the results of the trajectories in the first two rows of the table. The data in the table below (all table trajectories run with r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; =74 pm and r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 200 pm) shows that trajectories with the same positions but higher values of momenta are not necessarily reactive. The trajectory in the fourth row has higher values of momenta, and thus higher kinetic energy, but is unreactive. Although the reactants have enough energy to cross the energy barrier, the products re-cross it and return to reactants.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
{| class=&amp;quot;wikitable&amp;quot; border=1&lt;br /&gt;
! p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;/&amp;amp;nbsp;g.mol&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt; !! p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;/&amp;amp;nbsp;g.mol&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt; !! E&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;tot&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; / kJ mol-1 !! Reactive? !! Description of the dynamics !! Illustration of the trajectory&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
| -2.56 || -5.1  ||-414.280||Reactive||The reactants have more translational energy and less vibrational energy. They react and pass through the transition state to form the products. The products have less translational energy and more vibrational energy as illustrated by the oscillations in Figure 4.||[[File:01509561_table,image1.png|300px|thumb|Figure 4]]&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
| -3.1  || -4.1  ||-420.077||Unreactive||The reactants get closer together but do not have enough energy to form the transition state and move further away from each other again. No reaction occurs. The hydrogen molecule maintains the same level of oscillation throughout.||[[File:01509561_table,image2.png|300px|thumb|Figure 5]]&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
| -3.1  || -5.1  ||-413.977||Reactive||The reactants have enough energy to form the transition state and go on to form products in a successful reaction. The product molecule has oscillates to a slightly greater degree than the reactant molecule. ||[[File:01509561_table,image3.png|300px|thumb|Figure 6]]&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
| -5.1  || -10.1 ||-357.277||Unreactive||The reactants cross the energy barrier to form products but then re-cross the barrier back to reactants. The reactants begin with a large amount of translational energy, which is converted into vibrational energy of the the product molecule and the end reactant molecule after re-crossing the energy barrier.||[[File:01509561_table,image4.png|300px|thumb|Figure 7]]&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
| -5.1  || -10.6 ||-349.477||Reactive||The reactants have a large amount of translational energy, with a small level of vibrational energy, and cross the energy barrier to form products in a successful reaction. There is a lot of oscillation between a reactant-resembling structure and a product-resembling structure as the atoms undergo the reaction and before finally forming the products. The product molecule has a lot of vibrational energy and less translational energy.||[[File:01509561_table,image5.png|300px|thumb|Figure 8]]&lt;br /&gt;
|}&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q5.&#039;&#039;&#039; &#039;&#039;&#039;Given the results you have obtained, how will Transition State Theory predictions for reaction rate values compare with experimental values?&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Transition State theory relies on a number of assumptions in order to predict the rate of a reaction. These assumptions include: the reactant molecules follow the Maxwell-Boltzmann distribution in terms of their energy distribution; even when there is no equilibrium present, the distribution of activated complexes forming products are still in accordance with the Maxwell-Boltzmann laws; quantum effects, such as quantum tunnelling, are ignored; motion in the transition state can be classically treated and separated from other motions; and, arguably the most crucial of assumptions, once reactants have passed through the transition state to form products, they cannot re-cross the energy barrier to reactants again.&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;2,3&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Overall, these assumptions result in the overestimation of reaction rate values, when compared to the experimental values. This is predominantly due to the assumption that once a system has crossed the energy barrier, it cannot re-cross and return to reactants. Therefore, if you have a certain number of barrier crossings, Transition State Theory assumes that 100% of these will result in a successful reaction and the formation of products. However, in reality, the proportion would be less than 100% as some systems would re-cross the barrier resulting in an unsuccessful reaction. Thus, the rate of the reaction would, in reality, be slightly less than the Transition State Theory prediction.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Exercise 2 ==&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q6.&#039;&#039;&#039; &#039;&#039;&#039;By inspecting the potential energy surfaces, classify the F + H&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; and H + HF reactions according to their energetics (endothermic or exothermic). How does this relate to the bond strength of the chemical species involved?&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The potential energy surface for F + H&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; shows that the exit channel of the products is lower in potential energy than the entry channel of the reactants, so the reaction is exothermic. The potential energy surface for H + HF shows that the exit channel of the products is higher in potential energy than the entry channel of the reactants, so the reaction is endothermic. This means that H-F is a stronger bond than H-H, as the energy required to break H-H is less than the energy released when H-F is formed, in the case of F + H&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;, making it exothermic. In the case of H + HF, the reverse is true.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q7.&#039;&#039;&#039; &#039;&#039;&#039;Locate the approximate position of the transition state.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The position of the transition state correlates to r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 74 pm and r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 181.4 pm (based on F + H&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;, r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;H-H&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; and r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;F-H&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;).&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[File:01509561_F+H2,ts.png|300px|thumb|Figure 9 - A contour plot showing the position of the transition state for the F + H&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; reaction|none]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q8.&#039;&#039;&#039; &#039;&#039;&#039;Report the activation energy for both reactions.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The activation energies are calculated by taking the difference between the energy at the transition state and the energy at the minimum of the reactant channel. The reactions F + H&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; and H + HF are the reverse of each other so the activation energies will be different but the energy of the transition state will be the same.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
F+H&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;, E&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;a&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = (-433.942) - (-435.100) = 1.158 kJ mol&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
H + HF, E&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;a&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = (-433.942) - (-560.700) = 126.758 kJ mol&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q9.&#039;&#039;&#039; &#039;&#039;&#039;In light of the fact that energy is conserved, discuss the mechanism of release of the reaction energy. Explain how this could be confirmed experimentally.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Energy is conserved in all reactions, but the energy distribution of the products is often different to that of the reactants. In the case of F + H&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;, the energy of the reactants is mostly in the form of translational kinetic energy; they have a small amount of vibrational energy. The products have a much larger amount of vibrational energy and less translational energy. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The reaction energy is released primarily through vibrational oscillation of the products and some translational kinetic energy. To confirm this experimentally, a method called infrared chemiluminescence can be utilised to examine the distribution of energy in the products. Infrared chemiluminescence is a technique that can be used to determine the vibrational state populations by studying the intensities of the infrared radiation emitted from vibrationally excited molecules.&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q10. Discuss how the distribution of energy between different modes (translation and vibration) affect the efficiency of the reaction, and how this is influenced by the position of the transition state.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
According to Polanyi&#039;s rules, an &#039;early&#039; energy barrier, in the reactant channel, favours more highly vibrationally excited products. While a &#039;late&#039; energy barrier, in the product channel, favours products with more translational energy. The energy distribution in the reactants, in conjunction with the position of the energy barrier, can affect how efficient a reaction is. Having more translational energy in the reactants when the the transition state is &#039;early&#039; leads to a more efficient reaction. Additionally, having more vibrational energy in the reactants when the transition state is &#039;late&#039; leads to a more efficient reaction.&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;4,5&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== References ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
1. P. Atkins, J. de Paula, and J. Keeler, in Atkins’ Physical Chemistry, Oxford University Press, Oxford, 11th edn, 2018, ch. 18, pp. 804-809&lt;br /&gt;
2.	K. J. Laidler, in Chemical Kinetics, Harper &amp;amp; Row, New York; London, 3rd edn, 1987, ch. 4, pp. 88-98&lt;br /&gt;
3.	J. I. Steinfeld, J. S. Francisco and W. L. Hase, in Chemical Kinetics and Dynamics, Prentice-Hall, Upper Saddle River, 2nd edn, 1989, ch. 10.1-10.3+10.10, pp. 287-321&lt;br /&gt;
4.	J. C. Polanyi, Acc. Chem. Res., 1972, 5, 161-168&lt;br /&gt;
5.	J. I. Steinfeld, J. S. Francisco and W. L. Hase, in Chemical Kinetics and Dynamics, Prentice-Hall, Upper Saddle River, 2nd edn, 1989, ch. 9.4.2, pp. 272-274&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>Sns18</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://chemwiki.ch.ic.ac.uk/index.php?title=01509561&amp;diff=805733</id>
		<title>01509561</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://chemwiki.ch.ic.ac.uk/index.php?title=01509561&amp;diff=805733"/>
		<updated>2020-05-15T21:13:00Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;Sns18: &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;= Molecular Reaction Dynamics Report =&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;by Sharifa Sheikh&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Exercise 1 ==&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q1. On a potential energy surface diagram, how is the transition state mathematically defined? How can the transition state be identified, and how can it be distinguished from a local minimum of the potential energy surface?&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
On a potential energy surface (PES) diagram, the transition state is mathematically defined as the saddle point. The transition state corresponds to the point of maximum potential energy on the minimum energy pathway.&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
In order to identify a transition state, begin a reactant trajectory at the estimated transition state position, with zero momentum, and it should not move in any direction. To distinguish the transition state from a local minimum on the PES, change the trajectory parameters so that it starts close to the transition state, and the path should move away as it goes &#039;down&#039; the PES, away from the maximum, and the potential energy decreases as it is converted to kinetic energy. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q2. Report your best estimate of the transition state position (r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;) and explain your reasoning illustrating it with a “Internuclear Distances vs Time” plot for a relevant trajectory.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
For the reaction, H + H&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;, the transition state position was found to be r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 90.75 pm. Referring to the reactants, A is the incoming hydrogen atom; B and C are the two atoms in the hydrogen molecule. For the trajectory starting at the transition state, Figure 1 shows a graph of Internuclear Distance against Time. As can be seen, the lines for the distances A-B and B-C are flat, showing that as time progresses the atoms are not getting closer or further away from each other, but rather their internuclear distances remain constant. There is no gradient at the transition state, and the atoms have no momentum, so they remain in the same place.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q3. Comment on how the mep and the trajectory you just calculated differ.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Below, Figures 2 and 3 show the results of two calculations with the same initial conditions. Figure 2 uses an MEP calculation type and Figure 3 uses a Dynamics calculation type.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Figure 2 shows the trajectory where at each step the momentum is reset to zero, meaning the path taken is that of the minimum energy, where the descent in potential energy is the steepest.&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt; This differs from Figure 3, which is a more realistic calculation as it does not reset the momentum. The trajectory shown in Figure 3 shows a more wavy path, corresponding to the vibrational energy in the molecule, resulting in oscillation of the atoms in the molecule.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[File:01509561_bc=91.75,MEP.png|thumb|Figure 2 - A contour plot showing the minimum energy path, r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;+1 pm,  r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; and the momenta p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 0 g.mol&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;|none]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[File:01509561_bc=91.75,Dynamics.png|thumb|Figure 3 - A contour plot using &#039;Dynamics&#039; calculations, r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;+1 pm, r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; and the momenta p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 0 g.mol&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;|none]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q4. Complete the table above by adding the total energy, whether the trajectory is reactive or unreactive, and provide a plot of the trajectory and a small description for what happens along the trajectory. What can you conclude from the table?&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
It has been concluded that trajectories with the following initial conditions are always reactive: r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; =74 pm, r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 200 pm, with -3.1 &amp;lt; p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1 &amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; / g.mol&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt; &amp;lt; -1.6 and p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = -5.1 g.mol&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;. This is supported by the results of the trajectories in the first two rows of the table. The data in the table below (all table trajectories run with r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; =74 pm and r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 200 pm) shows that trajectories with the same positions but higher values of momenta are not necessarily reactive. The trajectory in the fourth row has higher values of momenta, and thus higher kinetic energy, but is unreactive. Although the reactants have enough energy to cross the energy barrier, the products re-cross it and return to reactants.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
{| class=&amp;quot;wikitable&amp;quot; border=1&lt;br /&gt;
! p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;/&amp;amp;nbsp;g.mol&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt; !! p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;/&amp;amp;nbsp;g.mol&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt; !! E&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;tot&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; / kJ mol-1 !! Reactive? !! Description of the dynamics !! Illustration of the trajectory&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
| -2.56 || -5.1  ||-414.280||Reactive||The reactants have more translational energy and less vibrational energy. They react and pass through the transition state to form the products. The products have less translational energy and more vibrational energy as illustrated by the oscillations in Figure 4.||[[File:01509561_table,image1.png|300px|thumb|Figure 4]]&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
| -3.1  || -4.1  ||-420.077||Unreactive||The reactants get closer together but do not have enough energy to form the transition state and move further away from each other again. No reaction occurs. The hydrogen molecule maintains the same level of oscillation throughout.||[[File:01509561_table,image2.png|300px|thumb|Figure 5]]&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
| -3.1  || -5.1  ||-413.977||Reactive||The reactants have enough energy to form the transition state and go on to form products in a successful reaction. The product molecule has oscillates to a slightly greater degree than the reactant molecule. ||[[File:01509561_table,image3.png|300px|thumb|Figure 6]]&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
| -5.1  || -10.1 ||-357.277||Unreactive||The reactants cross the energy barrier to form products but then re-cross the barrier back to reactants. The reactants begin with a large amount of translational energy, which is converted into vibrational energy of the the product molecule and the end reactant molecule after re-crossing the energy barrier.||[[File:01509561_table,image4.png|300px|thumb|Figure 7]]&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
| -5.1  || -10.6 ||-349.477||Reactive||The reactants have a large amount of translational energy, with a small level of vibrational energy, and cross the energy barrier to form products in a successful reaction. There is a lot of oscillation between a reactant-resembling structure and a product-resembling structure as the atoms undergo the reaction and before finally forming the products. The product molecule has a lot of vibrational energy and less translational energy.||[[File:01509561_table,image5.png|300px|thumb|Figure 8]]&lt;br /&gt;
|}&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q5.&#039;&#039;&#039; &#039;&#039;&#039;Given the results you have obtained, how will Transition State Theory predictions for reaction rate values compare with experimental values?&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Transition State theory relies on a number of assumptions in order to predict the rate of a reaction. These assumptions include: the reactant molecules follow the Maxwell-Boltzmann distribution in terms of their energy distribution; even when there is no equilibrium present, the distribution of activated complexes forming products are still in accordance with the Maxwell-Boltzmann laws; quantum effects, such as quantum tunnelling, are ignored; motion in the transition state can be classically treated and separated from other motions; and, arguably the most crucial of assumptions, once reactants have passed through the transition state to form products, they cannot re-cross the energy barrier to reactants again.&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;2,3&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Overall, these assumptions result in the overestimation of reaction rate values, when compared to the experimental values. This is predominantly due to the assumption that once a system has crossed the energy barrier, it cannot re-cross and return to reactants. Therefore, if you have a certain number of barrier crossings, Transition State Theory assumes that 100% of these will result in a successful reaction and the formation of products. However, in reality, the proportion would be less than 100% as some systems would re-cross the barrier resulting in an unsuccessful reaction. Thus, the rate of the reaction would, in reality, be slightly less than the Transition State Theory prediction.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Exercise 2 ==&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q6.&#039;&#039;&#039; &#039;&#039;&#039;By inspecting the potential energy surfaces, classify the F + H&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; and H + HF reactions according to their energetics (endothermic or exothermic). How does this relate to the bond strength of the chemical species involved?&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The potential energy surface for F + H&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; shows that the exit channel of the products is lower in potential energy than the entry channel of the reactants, so the reaction is exothermic. The potential energy surface for H + HF shows that the exit channel of the products is higher in potential energy than the entry channel of the reactants, so the reaction is endothermic. This means that H-F is a stronger bond than H-H, as the energy required to break H-H is less than the energy released when H-F is formed, in the case of F + H&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;, making it exothermic. In the case of H + HF, the reverse is true.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q7.&#039;&#039;&#039; &#039;&#039;&#039;Locate the approximate position of the transition state.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The position of the transition state correlates to r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 74 pm and r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 181.4 pm (based on F + H&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;, r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;H-H&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; and r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;F-H&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;).&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[File:01509561_F+H2,ts.png|300px|thumb|Figure 9 - A contour plot showing the position of the transition state for the F + H&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; reaction|none]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q8.&#039;&#039;&#039; &#039;&#039;&#039;Report the activation energy for both reactions.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The activation energies are calculated by taking the difference between the energy at the transition state and the energy at the minimum of the reactant channel. The reactions F + H&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; and H + HF are the reverse of each other so the activation energies will be different but the energy of the transition state will be the same.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
F+H&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;, E&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;a&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = (-433.942) - (-435.100) = 1.158 kJ mol&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
H + HF, E&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;a&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = (-433.942) - (-560.700) = 126.758 kJ mol&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q9.&#039;&#039;&#039; &#039;&#039;&#039;In light of the fact that energy is conserved, discuss the mechanism of release of the reaction energy. Explain how this could be confirmed experimentally.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Energy is conserved in all reactions, but the energy distribution of the products is often different to that of the reactants. In the case of F + H&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;, the energy of the reactants is mostly in the form of translational kinetic energy; they have a small amount of vibrational energy. The products have a much larger amount of vibrational energy and less translational energy. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The reaction energy is released primarily through vibrational oscillation of the products and some translational kinetic energy. There are several experimental methods that can be used to examine the distribution of energy in the products. Infrared chemiluminescence is a technique that can be used to determine the vibrational state populations by studying the intensities of the infrared radiation emitted from vibrationally excited molecules. Multiphoton ionisation techniques&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q10. Discuss how the distribution of energy between different modes (translation and vibration) affect the efficiency of the reaction, and how this is influenced by the position of the transition state.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
answer&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== References ==&lt;br /&gt;
1.&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>Sns18</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://chemwiki.ch.ic.ac.uk/index.php?title=01509561&amp;diff=805585</id>
		<title>01509561</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://chemwiki.ch.ic.ac.uk/index.php?title=01509561&amp;diff=805585"/>
		<updated>2020-05-15T20:33:07Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;Sns18: &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;= Molecular Reaction Dynamics Report =&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;by Sharifa Sheikh&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Exercise 1 ==&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q1. On a potential energy surface diagram, how is the transition state mathematically defined? How can the transition state be identified, and how can it be distinguished from a local minimum of the potential energy surface?&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
On a potential energy surface (PES) diagram, the transition state is mathematically defined as the saddle point. The transition state corresponds to the point of maximum potential energy on the minimum energy pathway.&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
In order to identify a transition state, begin a reactant trajectory at the estimated transition state position, with zero momentum, and it should not move in any direction. To distinguish the transition state from a local minimum on the PES, change the trajectory parameters so that it starts close to the transition state, and the path should move away as it goes &#039;down&#039; the PES, away from the maximum, and the potential energy decreases as it is converted to kinetic energy. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q2. Report your best estimate of the transition state position (r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;) and explain your reasoning illustrating it with a “Internuclear Distances vs Time” plot for a relevant trajectory.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
For the reaction, H + H&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;, the transition state position was found to be r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 90.75 pm. Referring to the reactants, A is the incoming hydrogen atom; B and C are the two atoms in the hydrogen molecule. For the trajectory starting at the transition state, Figure 1 shows a graph of Internuclear Distance against Time. As can be seen, the lines for the distances A-B and B-C are flat, showing that as time progresses the atoms are not getting closer or further away from each other, but rather their internuclear distances remain constant. There is no gradient at the transition state, and the atoms have no momentum, so they remain in the same place.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q3. Comment on how the mep and the trajectory you just calculated differ.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Below, Figures 2 and 3 show the results of two calculations with the same initial conditions. Figure 2 uses an MEP calculation type and Figure 3 uses a Dynamics calculation type.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Figure 2 shows the trajectory where at each step the momentum is reset to zero, meaning the path taken is that of the minimum energy, where the descent in potential energy is the steepest.&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt; This differs from Figure 3, which is a more realistic calculation as it does not reset the momentum. The trajectory shown in Figure 3 shows a more wavy path, corresponding to the vibrational energy in the molecule, resulting in oscillation of the atoms in the molecule.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[File:01509561_bc=91.75,MEP.png|thumb|Figure 2 - A contour plot showing the minimum energy path, r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;+1 pm,  r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; and the momenta p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 0 g.mol&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;|none]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[File:01509561_bc=91.75,Dynamics.png|thumb|Figure 3 - A contour plot using &#039;Dynamics&#039; calculations, r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;+1 pm, r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; and the momenta p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 0 g.mol&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;|none]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q4. Complete the table above by adding the total energy, whether the trajectory is reactive or unreactive, and provide a plot of the trajectory and a small description for what happens along the trajectory. What can you conclude from the table?&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
It has been concluded that trajectories with the following initial conditions are always reactive: r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; =74 pm, r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 200 pm, with -3.1 &amp;lt; p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1 &amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; / g.mol&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt; &amp;lt; -1.6 and p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = -5.1 g.mol&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;. This is supported by the results of the trajectories in the first two rows of the table. The data in the table below (all table trajectories run with r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; =74 pm and r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 200 pm) shows that trajectories with the same positions but higher values of momenta are not necessarily reactive. The trajectory in the fourth row has higher values of momenta, and thus higher kinetic energy, but is unreactive. Although the reactants have enough energy to cross the energy barrier, the products re-cross it and return to reactants.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
{| class=&amp;quot;wikitable&amp;quot; border=1&lt;br /&gt;
! p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;/&amp;amp;nbsp;g.mol&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt; !! p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;/&amp;amp;nbsp;g.mol&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt; !! E&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;tot&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; / kJ mol-1 !! Reactive? !! Description of the dynamics !! Illustration of the trajectory&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
| -2.56 || -5.1  ||-414.280||Reactive||The reactants have more translational energy and less vibrational energy. They react and pass through the transition state to form the products. The products have less translational energy and more vibrational energy as illustrated by the oscillations in Figure 4.||[[File:01509561_table,image1.png|300px|thumb|Figure 4]]&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
| -3.1  || -4.1  ||-420.077||Unreactive||The reactants get closer together but do not have enough energy to form the transition state and move further away from each other again. No reaction occurs. The hydrogen molecule maintains the same level of oscillation throughout.||[[File:01509561_table,image2.png|300px|thumb|Figure 5]]&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
| -3.1  || -5.1  ||-413.977||Reactive||The reactants have enough energy to form the transition state and go on to form products in a successful reaction. The product molecule has oscillates to a slightly greater degree than the reactant molecule. ||[[File:01509561_table,image3.png|300px|thumb|Figure 6]]&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
| -5.1  || -10.1 ||-357.277||Unreactive||The reactants cross the energy barrier to form products but then re-cross the barrier back to reactants. The reactants begin with a large amount of translational energy, which is converted into vibrational energy of the the product molecule and the end reactant molecule after re-crossing the energy barrier.||[[File:01509561_table,image4.png|300px|thumb|Figure 7]]&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
| -5.1  || -10.6 ||-349.477||Reactive||The reactants have a large amount of translational energy, with a small level of vibrational energy, and cross the energy barrier to form products in a successful reaction. There is a lot of oscillation between a reactant-resembling structure and a product-resembling structure as the atoms undergo the reaction and before finally forming the products. The product molecule has a lot of vibrational energy and less translational energy.||[[File:01509561_table,image5.png|300px|thumb|Figure 8]]&lt;br /&gt;
|}&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q5.&#039;&#039;&#039; &#039;&#039;&#039;Given the results you have obtained, how will Transition State Theory predictions for reaction rate values compare with experimental values?&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Transition State theory relies on a number of assumptions in order to predict the rate of a reaction. These assumptions include: the reactant molecules follow the Maxwell-Boltzmann distribution in terms of their energy distribution; even when there is no equilibrium present, the distribution of activated complexes forming products are still in accordance with the Maxwell-Boltzmann laws; quantum effects, such as quantum tunnelling, are ignored; motion in the transition state can be classically treated and separated from other motions; and, arguably the most crucial of assumptions, once reactants have passed through the transition state to form products, they cannot re-cross the energy barrier to reactants again.&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;2,3&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Overall, these assumptions result in the overestimation of reaction rate values, when compared to the experimental values. This is predominantly due to the assumption that once a system has crossed the energy barrier, it cannot re-cross and return to reactants. Therefore, if you have a certain number of barrier crossings, Transition State Theory assumes that 100% of these will result in a successful reaction and the formation of products. However, in reality, the proportion would be less than 100% as some systems would re-cross the barrier resulting in an unsuccessful reaction. Thus, the rate of the reaction would, in reality, be slightly less than the Transition State Theory prediction.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Exercise 2 ==&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q6.&#039;&#039;&#039; &#039;&#039;&#039;By inspecting the potential energy surfaces, classify the F + H&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; and H + HF reactions according to their energetics (endothermic or exothermic). How does this relate to the bond strength of the chemical species involved?&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The potential energy surface for F + H&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; shows that the exit channel of the products is lower in potential energy than the entry channel of the reactants, so the reaction is exothermic. The potential energy surface for H + HF shows that the exit channel of the products is higher in potential energy than the entry channel of the reactants, so the reaction is endothermic. This means that H-F is a stronger bond than H-H, as the energy required to break H-H is less than the energy released when H-F is formed, in the case of F + H&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;, making it exothermic. In the case of H + HF, the reverse is true.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q7.&#039;&#039;&#039; &#039;&#039;&#039;Locate the approximate position of the transition state.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The position of the transition state correlates to r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 74 pm and r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 181.4 pm (based on F + H&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;, r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;H-H&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; and r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;F-H&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;).&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[File:01509561_F+H2,ts.png|300px|thumb|Figure 9 - A contour plot showing the position of the transition state for the F + H&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; reaction|none]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q8.&#039;&#039;&#039; &#039;&#039;&#039;Report the activation energy for both reactions.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The activation energies are calculated by taking the difference between the energy at the transition state and the energy at the minimum of the reactant channel. The reactions F + H&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; and H + HF are the reverse of each other so the activation energies will be different but the energy of the transition state will be the same.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
F+H&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;, E&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;a&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = (-433.942) - (-435.100) = 1.158 kJ mol&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
H + HF, E&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;a&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = (-433.942) - (-560.700) = 126.758 kJ mol&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q9.&#039;&#039;&#039; &#039;&#039;&#039;In light of the fact that energy is conserved, discuss the mechanism of release of the reaction energy. Explain how this could be confirmed experimentally.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The reactants start off with a small amount of vibrational energy; most of their energy &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q10.&#039;&#039;&#039; &#039;&#039;&#039;Discuss how the distribution of energy between different modes (translation and vibration) affect the efficiency of the reaction, and how this is influenced by the position of the transition state.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
answer&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== References ==&lt;br /&gt;
1.&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>Sns18</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://chemwiki.ch.ic.ac.uk/index.php?title=01509561&amp;diff=805405</id>
		<title>01509561</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://chemwiki.ch.ic.ac.uk/index.php?title=01509561&amp;diff=805405"/>
		<updated>2020-05-15T19:33:08Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;Sns18: &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;= Molecular Reaction Dynamics Report =&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;by Sharifa Sheikh&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Exercise 1 ==&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q1. On a potential energy surface diagram, how is the transition state mathematically defined? How can the transition state be identified, and how can it be distinguished from a local minimum of the potential energy surface?&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
On a potential energy surface (PES) diagram, the transition state is mathematically defined as the saddle point. The transition state corresponds to the point of maximum potential energy on the minimum energy pathway.&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
In order to identify a transition state, begin a reactant trajectory at the estimated transition state position, with zero momentum, and it should not move in any direction. To distinguish the transition state from a local minimum on the PES, change the trajectory parameters so that it starts close to the transition state, and the path should move away as it goes &#039;down&#039; the PES, away from the maximum, and the potential energy decreases as it is converted to kinetic energy. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q2. Report your best estimate of the transition state position (r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;) and explain your reasoning illustrating it with a “Internuclear Distances vs Time” plot for a relevant trajectory.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
For the reaction, H + H&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;, the transition state position was found to be r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 90.75 pm. Referring to the reactants, A is the incoming hydrogen atom; B and C are the two atoms in the hydrogen molecule. For the trajectory starting at the transition state, Figure 1 shows a graph of Internuclear Distance against Time. As can be seen, the lines for the distances A-B and B-C are flat, showing that as time progresses the atoms are not getting closer or further away from each other, but rather their internuclear distances remain constant. There is no gradient at the transition state, and the atoms have no momentum, so they remain in the same place.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q3. Comment on how the mep and the trajectory you just calculated differ.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Below, Figures 2 and 3 show the results of two calculations with the same initial conditions. Figure 2 uses an MEP calculation type and Figure 3 uses a Dynamics calculation type.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Figure 2 shows the trajectory where at each step the momentum is reset to zero, meaning the path taken is that of the minimum energy, where the descent in potential energy is the steepest.&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt; This differs from Figure 3, which is a more realistic calculation as it does not reset the momentum. The trajectory shown in Figure 3 shows a more wavy path, corresponding to the vibrational energy in the molecule, resulting in oscillation of the atoms in the molecule.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[File:01509561_bc=91.75,MEP.png|thumb|Figure 2 - A contour plot showing the minimum energy path, r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;+1 pm,  r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; and the momenta p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 0 g.mol&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;|none]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[File:01509561_bc=91.75,Dynamics.png|thumb|Figure 3 - A contour plot using &#039;Dynamics&#039; calculations, r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;+1 pm, r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; and the momenta p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 0 g.mol&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;|none]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q4. Complete the table above by adding the total energy, whether the trajectory is reactive or unreactive, and provide a plot of the trajectory and a small description for what happens along the trajectory. What can you conclude from the table?&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
It has been concluded that trajectories with the following initial conditions are always reactive: r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; =74 pm, r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 200 pm, with -3.1 &amp;lt; p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1 &amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; / g.mol&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt; &amp;lt; -1.6 and p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = -5.1 g.mol&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;. This is supported by the results of the trajectories in the first two rows of the table. The data in the table below (all table trajectories run with r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; =74 pm and r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 200 pm) shows that trajectories with the same positions but higher values of momenta are not necessarily reactive. The trajectory in the fourth row has higher values of momenta, and thus higher kinetic energy, but is unreactive. Although the reactants have enough energy to cross the energy barrier, the products re-cross it and return to reactants.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
{| class=&amp;quot;wikitable&amp;quot; border=1&lt;br /&gt;
! p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;/&amp;amp;nbsp;g.mol&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt; !! p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;/&amp;amp;nbsp;g.mol&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt; !! E&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;tot&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; / kJ mol-1 !! Reactive? !! Description of the dynamics !! Illustration of the trajectory&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
| -2.56 || -5.1  ||-414.280||Reactive||The reactants have more translational energy and less vibrational energy. They react and pass through the transition state to form the products. The products have less translational energy and more vibrational energy as illustrated by the oscillations in Figure 4.||[[File:01509561_table,image1.png|300px|thumb|Figure 4]]&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
| -3.1  || -4.1  ||-420.077||Unreactive||The reactants get closer together but do not have enough energy to form the transition state and move further away from each other again. No reaction occurs. The hydrogen molecule maintains the same level of oscillation throughout.||[[File:01509561_table,image2.png|300px|thumb|Figure 5]]&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
| -3.1  || -5.1  ||-413.977||Reactive||The reactants have enough energy to form the transition state and go on to form products in a successful reaction. The product molecule has oscillates to a slightly greater degree than the reactant molecule. ||[[File:01509561_table,image3.png|300px|thumb|Figure 6]]&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
| -5.1  || -10.1 ||-357.277||Unreactive||The reactants cross the energy barrier to form products but then re-cross the barrier back to reactants. The reactants begin with a large amount of translational energy, which is converted into vibrational energy of the the product molecule and the end reactant molecule after re-crossing the energy barrier.||[[File:01509561_table,image4.png|300px|thumb|Figure 7]]&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
| -5.1  || -10.6 ||-349.477||Reactive||The reactants have a large amount of translational energy, with a small level of vibrational energy, and cross the energy barrier to form products in a successful reaction. There is a lot of oscillation between a reactant-resembling structure and a product-resembling structure as the atoms undergo the reaction and before finally forming the products. The product molecule has a lot of vibrational energy and less translational energy.||[[File:01509561_table,image5.png|300px|thumb|Figure 8]]&lt;br /&gt;
|}&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q5.&#039;&#039;&#039; &#039;&#039;&#039;Given the results you have obtained, how will Transition State Theory predictions for reaction rate values compare with experimental values?&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Transition State theory relies on a number of assumptions in order to predict the rate of a reaction. These assumptions include: the reactant molecules follow the Maxwell-Boltzmann distribution in terms of their energy distribution; even when there is no equilibrium present, the distribution of activated complexes forming products are still in accordance with the Maxwell-Boltzmann laws; quantum effects, such as quantum tunnelling, are ignored; motion in the transition state can be classically treated and separated from other motions; and, arguably the most crucial of assumptions, once reactants have passed through the transition state to form products, they cannot re-cross the energy barrier to reactants again.&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;2,3&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Overall, these assumptions result in the overestimation of reaction rate values, when compared to the experimental values. This is predominantly due to the assumption that once a system has crossed the energy barrier, it cannot re-cross and return to reactants. Therefore, if you have a certain number of barrier crossings, Transition State Theory assumes that 100% of these will result in a successful reaction and the formation of products. However, in reality, the proportion would be less than 100% as some systems would re-cross the barrier resulting in an unsuccessful reaction. Thus, the rate of the reaction would, in reality, be slightly less than the Transition State Theory prediction.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Exercise 2 ==&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q6.&#039;&#039;&#039; &#039;&#039;&#039;By inspecting the potential energy surfaces, classify the F + H&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; and H + HF reactions according to their energetics (endothermic or exothermic). How does this relate to the bond strength of the chemical species involved?&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The potential energy surface for F + H&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; shows that the exit channel of the products is lower in potential energy than the entry channel of the reactants, so the reaction is exothermic. The potential energy surface for H + HF shows that the exit channel of the products is higher in potential energy than the entry channel of the reactants, so the reaction is endothermic. This means that H-F is a stronger bond than H-H, as the energy required to break H-H is less than the energy released when H-F is formed, in the case of F + H&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;, making it exothermic. In the case of H + HF, the reverse is true.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q7.&#039;&#039;&#039; &#039;&#039;&#039;Locate the approximate position of the transition state.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The position of the transition state correlates to r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 74 pm and r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 181.4 pm (based on F + H&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;, r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;H-H&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; and r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;F-H&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;).&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[File:01509561_F+H2,ts.png|300px|thumb|Figure 9 - A contour plot showing the position of the transition state for the F + H&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; reaction|none]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q8.&#039;&#039;&#039; &#039;&#039;&#039;Report the activation energy for both reactions.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
F+H2, Ea=&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
H + HF, Ea=&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q9.&#039;&#039;&#039; &#039;&#039;&#039;In light of the fact that energy is conserved, discuss the mechanism of release of the reaction energy. Explain how this could be confirmed experimentally.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The reactants start off with a small amount of vibrational energy; most of their energy &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q10.&#039;&#039;&#039; &#039;&#039;&#039;Discuss how the distribution of energy between different modes (translation and vibration) affect the efficiency of the reaction, and how this is influenced by the position of the transition state.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
answer&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== References ==&lt;br /&gt;
1.&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>Sns18</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://chemwiki.ch.ic.ac.uk/index.php?title=File:01509561_F%2BH2,ts.png&amp;diff=805399</id>
		<title>File:01509561 F+H2,ts.png</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://chemwiki.ch.ic.ac.uk/index.php?title=File:01509561_F%2BH2,ts.png&amp;diff=805399"/>
		<updated>2020-05-15T19:30:13Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;Sns18: &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>Sns18</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://chemwiki.ch.ic.ac.uk/index.php?title=01509561&amp;diff=805396</id>
		<title>01509561</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://chemwiki.ch.ic.ac.uk/index.php?title=01509561&amp;diff=805396"/>
		<updated>2020-05-15T19:28:51Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;Sns18: /* Exercise 2 */&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;= Molecular Reaction Dynamics Report =&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;by Sharifa Sheikh&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Exercise 1 ==&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q1. On a potential energy surface diagram, how is the transition state mathematically defined? How can the transition state be identified, and how can it be distinguished from a local minimum of the potential energy surface?&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
On a potential energy surface (PES) diagram, the transition state is mathematically defined as the saddle point. The transition state corresponds to the point of maximum potential energy on the minimum energy pathway.&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
In order to identify a transition state, begin a reactant trajectory at the estimated transition state position, with zero momentum, and it should not move in any direction. To distinguish the transition state from a local minimum on the PES, change the trajectory parameters so that it starts close to the transition state, and the path should move away as it goes &#039;down&#039; the PES, away from the maximum, and the potential energy decreases as it is converted to kinetic energy. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q2. Report your best estimate of the transition state position (r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;) and explain your reasoning illustrating it with a “Internuclear Distances vs Time” plot for a relevant trajectory.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
For the reaction, H + H&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;, the transition state position was found to be r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 90.75 pm. Referring to the reactants, A is the incoming hydrogen atom; B and C are the two atoms in the hydrogen molecule. For the trajectory starting at the transition state, Figure 1 shows a graph of Internuclear Distance against Time. As can be seen, the lines for the distances A-B and B-C are flat, showing that as time progresses the atoms are not getting closer or further away from each other, but rather their internuclear distances remain constant. There is no gradient at the transition state, and the atoms have no momentum, so they remain in the same place.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q3. Comment on how the mep and the trajectory you just calculated differ.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Below, Figures 2 and 3 show the results of two calculations with the same initial conditions. Figure 2 uses an MEP calculation type and Figure 3 uses a Dynamics calculation type.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Figure 2 shows the trajectory where at each step the momentum is reset to zero, meaning the path taken is that of the minimum energy, where the descent in potential energy is the steepest.&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt; This differs from Figure 3, which is a more realistic calculation as it does not reset the momentum. The trajectory shown in Figure 3 shows a more wavy path, corresponding to the vibrational energy in the molecule, resulting in oscillation of the atoms in the molecule.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[File:01509561_bc=91.75,MEP.png|thumb|Figure 2 - A contour plot showing the minimum energy path, r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;+1 pm,  r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; and the momenta p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 0 g.mol&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;|none]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[File:01509561_bc=91.75,Dynamics.png|thumb|Figure 3 - A contour plot using &#039;Dynamics&#039; calculations, r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;+1 pm, r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; and the momenta p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 0 g.mol&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;|none]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q4. Complete the table above by adding the total energy, whether the trajectory is reactive or unreactive, and provide a plot of the trajectory and a small description for what happens along the trajectory. What can you conclude from the table?&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
It has been concluded that trajectories with the following initial conditions are always reactive: r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; =74 pm, r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 200 pm, with -3.1 &amp;lt; p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1 &amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; / g.mol&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt; &amp;lt; -1.6 and p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = -5.1 g.mol&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;. This is supported by the results of the trajectories in the first two rows of the table. The data in the table below (all table trajectories run with r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; =74 pm and r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 200 pm) shows that trajectories with the same positions but higher values of momenta are not necessarily reactive. The trajectory in the fourth row has higher values of momenta, and thus higher kinetic energy, but is unreactive. Although the reactants have enough energy to cross the energy barrier, the products re-cross it and return to reactants.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
{| class=&amp;quot;wikitable&amp;quot; border=1&lt;br /&gt;
! p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;/&amp;amp;nbsp;g.mol&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt; !! p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;/&amp;amp;nbsp;g.mol&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt; !! E&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;tot&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; / kJ mol-1 !! Reactive? !! Description of the dynamics !! Illustration of the trajectory&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
| -2.56 || -5.1  ||-414.280||Reactive||The reactants have more translational energy and less vibrational energy. They react and pass through the transition state to form the products. The products have less translational energy and more vibrational energy as illustrated by the oscillations in Figure 4.||[[File:01509561_table,image1.png|300px|thumb|Figure 4]]&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
| -3.1  || -4.1  ||-420.077||Unreactive||The reactants get closer together but do not have enough energy to form the transition state and move further away from each other again. No reaction occurs. The hydrogen molecule maintains the same level of oscillation throughout.||[[File:01509561_table,image2.png|300px|thumb|Figure 5]]&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
| -3.1  || -5.1  ||-413.977||Reactive||The reactants have enough energy to form the transition state and go on to form products in a successful reaction. The product molecule has oscillates to a slightly greater degree than the reactant molecule. ||[[File:01509561_table,image3.png|300px|thumb|Figure 6]]&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
| -5.1  || -10.1 ||-357.277||Unreactive||The reactants cross the energy barrier to form products but then re-cross the barrier back to reactants. The reactants begin with a large amount of translational energy, which is converted into vibrational energy of the the product molecule and the end reactant molecule after re-crossing the energy barrier.||[[File:01509561_table,image4.png|300px|thumb|Figure 7]]&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
| -5.1  || -10.6 ||-349.477||Reactive||The reactants have a large amount of translational energy, with a small level of vibrational energy, and cross the energy barrier to form products in a successful reaction. There is a lot of oscillation between a reactant-resembling structure and a product-resembling structure as the atoms undergo the reaction and before finally forming the products. The product molecule has a lot of vibrational energy and less translational energy.||[[File:01509561_table,image5.png|300px|thumb|Figure 8]]&lt;br /&gt;
|}&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q5.&#039;&#039;&#039; &#039;&#039;&#039;Given the results you have obtained, how will Transition State Theory predictions for reaction rate values compare with experimental values?&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Transition State theory relies on a number of assumptions in order to predict the rate of a reaction. These assumptions include: the reactant molecules follow the Maxwell-Boltzmann distribution in terms of their energy distribution; even when there is no equilibrium present, the distribution of activated complexes forming products are still in accordance with the Maxwell-Boltzmann laws; quantum effects, such as quantum tunnelling, are ignored; motion in the transition state can be classically treated and separated from other motions; and, arguably the most crucial of assumptions, once reactants have passed through the transition state to form products, they cannot re-cross the energy barrier to reactants again.&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;2,3&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Overall, these assumptions result in the overestimation of reaction rate values, when compared to the experimental values. This is predominantly due to the assumption that once a system has crossed the energy barrier, it cannot re-cross and return to reactants. Therefore, if you have a certain number of barrier crossings, Transition State Theory assumes that 100% of these will result in a successful reaction and the formation of products. However, in reality, the proportion would be less than 100% as some systems would re-cross the barrier resulting in an unsuccessful reaction. Thus, the rate of the reaction would, in reality, be slightly less than the Transition State Theory prediction.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Exercise 2 ==&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q6.&#039;&#039;&#039; &#039;&#039;&#039;By inspecting the potential energy surfaces, classify the F + H&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; and H + HF reactions according to their energetics (endothermic or exothermic). How does this relate to the bond strength of the chemical species involved?&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The potential energy surface for F + H&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; shows that the exit channel of the products is lower in potential energy than the entry channel of the reactants, so the reaction is exothermic. The potential energy surface for H + HF shows that the exit channel of the products is higher in potential energy than the entry channel of the reactants, so the reaction is endothermic. This means that H-F is a stronger bond than H-H, as the energy required to break H-H is less than the energy released when H-F is formed, in the case of F + H&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;, making it exothermic. In the case of H + HF, the reverse is true.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q7.&#039;&#039;&#039; &#039;&#039;&#039;Locate the approximate position of the transition state.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The position of the transition state correlates to r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 74 pm and r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 181.4 pm (based on F + H&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;, r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;H-H&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; and r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;F-H&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;).&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q8.&#039;&#039;&#039; &#039;&#039;&#039;Report the activation energy for both reactions.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
F+H2, Ea=&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
H + HF, Ea=&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q9.&#039;&#039;&#039; &#039;&#039;&#039;In light of the fact that energy is conserved, discuss the mechanism of release of the reaction energy. Explain how this could be confirmed experimentally.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The reactants start off with a small amount of vibrational energy; most of their energy &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q10.&#039;&#039;&#039; &#039;&#039;&#039;Discuss how the distribution of energy between different modes (translation and vibration) affect the efficiency of the reaction, and how this is influenced by the position of the transition state.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
answer&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== References ==&lt;br /&gt;
1.&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>Sns18</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://chemwiki.ch.ic.ac.uk/index.php?title=01509561&amp;diff=805386</id>
		<title>01509561</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://chemwiki.ch.ic.ac.uk/index.php?title=01509561&amp;diff=805386"/>
		<updated>2020-05-15T19:25:26Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;Sns18: /* Exercise 2 */&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;= Molecular Reaction Dynamics Report =&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;by Sharifa Sheikh&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Exercise 1 ==&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q1. On a potential energy surface diagram, how is the transition state mathematically defined? How can the transition state be identified, and how can it be distinguished from a local minimum of the potential energy surface?&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
On a potential energy surface (PES) diagram, the transition state is mathematically defined as the saddle point. The transition state corresponds to the point of maximum potential energy on the minimum energy pathway.&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
In order to identify a transition state, begin a reactant trajectory at the estimated transition state position, with zero momentum, and it should not move in any direction. To distinguish the transition state from a local minimum on the PES, change the trajectory parameters so that it starts close to the transition state, and the path should move away as it goes &#039;down&#039; the PES, away from the maximum, and the potential energy decreases as it is converted to kinetic energy. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q2. Report your best estimate of the transition state position (r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;) and explain your reasoning illustrating it with a “Internuclear Distances vs Time” plot for a relevant trajectory.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
For the reaction, H + H&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;, the transition state position was found to be r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 90.75 pm. Referring to the reactants, A is the incoming hydrogen atom; B and C are the two atoms in the hydrogen molecule. For the trajectory starting at the transition state, Figure 1 shows a graph of Internuclear Distance against Time. As can be seen, the lines for the distances A-B and B-C are flat, showing that as time progresses the atoms are not getting closer or further away from each other, but rather their internuclear distances remain constant. There is no gradient at the transition state, and the atoms have no momentum, so they remain in the same place.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q3. Comment on how the mep and the trajectory you just calculated differ.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Below, Figures 2 and 3 show the results of two calculations with the same initial conditions. Figure 2 uses an MEP calculation type and Figure 3 uses a Dynamics calculation type.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Figure 2 shows the trajectory where at each step the momentum is reset to zero, meaning the path taken is that of the minimum energy, where the descent in potential energy is the steepest.&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt; This differs from Figure 3, which is a more realistic calculation as it does not reset the momentum. The trajectory shown in Figure 3 shows a more wavy path, corresponding to the vibrational energy in the molecule, resulting in oscillation of the atoms in the molecule.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[File:01509561_bc=91.75,MEP.png|thumb|Figure 2 - A contour plot showing the minimum energy path, r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;+1 pm,  r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; and the momenta p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 0 g.mol&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;|none]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[File:01509561_bc=91.75,Dynamics.png|thumb|Figure 3 - A contour plot using &#039;Dynamics&#039; calculations, r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;+1 pm, r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; and the momenta p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 0 g.mol&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;|none]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q4. Complete the table above by adding the total energy, whether the trajectory is reactive or unreactive, and provide a plot of the trajectory and a small description for what happens along the trajectory. What can you conclude from the table?&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
It has been concluded that trajectories with the following initial conditions are always reactive: r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; =74 pm, r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 200 pm, with -3.1 &amp;lt; p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1 &amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; / g.mol&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt; &amp;lt; -1.6 and p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = -5.1 g.mol&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;. This is supported by the results of the trajectories in the first two rows of the table. The data in the table below (all table trajectories run with r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; =74 pm and r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 200 pm) shows that trajectories with the same positions but higher values of momenta are not necessarily reactive. The trajectory in the fourth row has higher values of momenta, and thus higher kinetic energy, but is unreactive. Although the reactants have enough energy to cross the energy barrier, the products re-cross it and return to reactants.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
{| class=&amp;quot;wikitable&amp;quot; border=1&lt;br /&gt;
! p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;/&amp;amp;nbsp;g.mol&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt; !! p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;/&amp;amp;nbsp;g.mol&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt; !! E&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;tot&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; / kJ mol-1 !! Reactive? !! Description of the dynamics !! Illustration of the trajectory&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
| -2.56 || -5.1  ||-414.280||Reactive||The reactants have more translational energy and less vibrational energy. They react and pass through the transition state to form the products. The products have less translational energy and more vibrational energy as illustrated by the oscillations in Figure 4.||[[File:01509561_table,image1.png|300px|thumb|Figure 4]]&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
| -3.1  || -4.1  ||-420.077||Unreactive||The reactants get closer together but do not have enough energy to form the transition state and move further away from each other again. No reaction occurs. The hydrogen molecule maintains the same level of oscillation throughout.||[[File:01509561_table,image2.png|300px|thumb|Figure 5]]&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
| -3.1  || -5.1  ||-413.977||Reactive||The reactants have enough energy to form the transition state and go on to form products in a successful reaction. The product molecule has oscillates to a slightly greater degree than the reactant molecule. ||[[File:01509561_table,image3.png|300px|thumb|Figure 6]]&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
| -5.1  || -10.1 ||-357.277||Unreactive||The reactants cross the energy barrier to form products but then re-cross the barrier back to reactants. The reactants begin with a large amount of translational energy, which is converted into vibrational energy of the the product molecule and the end reactant molecule after re-crossing the energy barrier.||[[File:01509561_table,image4.png|300px|thumb|Figure 7]]&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
| -5.1  || -10.6 ||-349.477||Reactive||The reactants have a large amount of translational energy, with a small level of vibrational energy, and cross the energy barrier to form products in a successful reaction. There is a lot of oscillation between a reactant-resembling structure and a product-resembling structure as the atoms undergo the reaction and before finally forming the products. The product molecule has a lot of vibrational energy and less translational energy.||[[File:01509561_table,image5.png|300px|thumb|Figure 8]]&lt;br /&gt;
|}&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q5.&#039;&#039;&#039; &#039;&#039;&#039;Given the results you have obtained, how will Transition State Theory predictions for reaction rate values compare with experimental values?&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Transition State theory relies on a number of assumptions in order to predict the rate of a reaction. These assumptions include: the reactant molecules follow the Maxwell-Boltzmann distribution in terms of their energy distribution; even when there is no equilibrium present, the distribution of activated complexes forming products are still in accordance with the Maxwell-Boltzmann laws; quantum effects, such as quantum tunnelling, are ignored; motion in the transition state can be classically treated and separated from other motions; and, arguably the most crucial of assumptions, once reactants have passed through the transition state to form products, they cannot re-cross the energy barrier to reactants again.&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;2,3&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Overall, these assumptions result in the overestimation of reaction rate values, when compared to the experimental values. This is predominantly due to the assumption that once a system has crossed the energy barrier, it cannot re-cross and return to reactants. Therefore, if you have a certain number of barrier crossings, Transition State Theory assumes that 100% of these will result in a successful reaction and the formation of products. However, in reality, the proportion would be less than 100% as some systems would re-cross the barrier resulting in an unsuccessful reaction. Thus, the rate of the reaction would, in reality, be slightly less than the Transition State Theory prediction.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Exercise 2 ==&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q6.&#039;&#039;&#039; &#039;&#039;&#039;By inspecting the potential energy surfaces, classify the F + H&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; and H + HF reactions according to their energetics (endothermic or exothermic). How does this relate to the bond strength of the chemical species involved?&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The potential energy surface for F + H&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; shows that the exit channel of the products is lower in potential energy than the entry channel of the reactants, so the reaction is exothermic. The potential energy surface for H + HF shows that the exit channel of the products is higher in potential energy than the entry channel of the reactants, so the reaction is endothermic. This means that H-F is a stronger bond than H-H, as the energy required to break H-H is less than the energy released when H-F is formed, in the case of F + H&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;, making it exothermic. In the case of H + HF, the reverse is true.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q7.&#039;&#039;&#039; &#039;&#039;&#039;Locate the approximate position of the transition state.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The position of the transition state correlates to r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 74 pm and r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 181.4 pm.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q8.&#039;&#039;&#039; &#039;&#039;&#039;Report the activation energy for both reactions.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
F+H2, Ea=&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
H + HF, Ea=&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q9.&#039;&#039;&#039; &#039;&#039;&#039;In light of the fact that energy is conserved, discuss the mechanism of release of the reaction energy. Explain how this could be confirmed experimentally.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The reactants start off with a small amount of vibrational energy; most of their energy &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q10.&#039;&#039;&#039; &#039;&#039;&#039;Discuss how the distribution of energy between different modes (translation and vibration) affect the efficiency of the reaction, and how this is influenced by the position of the transition state.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
answer&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== References ==&lt;br /&gt;
1.&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>Sns18</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://chemwiki.ch.ic.ac.uk/index.php?title=01509561&amp;diff=805385</id>
		<title>01509561</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://chemwiki.ch.ic.ac.uk/index.php?title=01509561&amp;diff=805385"/>
		<updated>2020-05-15T19:25:06Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;Sns18: /* Exercise 2 */&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;= Molecular Reaction Dynamics Report =&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;by Sharifa Sheikh&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Exercise 1 ==&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q1. On a potential energy surface diagram, how is the transition state mathematically defined? How can the transition state be identified, and how can it be distinguished from a local minimum of the potential energy surface?&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
On a potential energy surface (PES) diagram, the transition state is mathematically defined as the saddle point. The transition state corresponds to the point of maximum potential energy on the minimum energy pathway.&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
In order to identify a transition state, begin a reactant trajectory at the estimated transition state position, with zero momentum, and it should not move in any direction. To distinguish the transition state from a local minimum on the PES, change the trajectory parameters so that it starts close to the transition state, and the path should move away as it goes &#039;down&#039; the PES, away from the maximum, and the potential energy decreases as it is converted to kinetic energy. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q2. Report your best estimate of the transition state position (r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;) and explain your reasoning illustrating it with a “Internuclear Distances vs Time” plot for a relevant trajectory.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
For the reaction, H + H&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;, the transition state position was found to be r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 90.75 pm. Referring to the reactants, A is the incoming hydrogen atom; B and C are the two atoms in the hydrogen molecule. For the trajectory starting at the transition state, Figure 1 shows a graph of Internuclear Distance against Time. As can be seen, the lines for the distances A-B and B-C are flat, showing that as time progresses the atoms are not getting closer or further away from each other, but rather their internuclear distances remain constant. There is no gradient at the transition state, and the atoms have no momentum, so they remain in the same place.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q3. Comment on how the mep and the trajectory you just calculated differ.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Below, Figures 2 and 3 show the results of two calculations with the same initial conditions. Figure 2 uses an MEP calculation type and Figure 3 uses a Dynamics calculation type.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Figure 2 shows the trajectory where at each step the momentum is reset to zero, meaning the path taken is that of the minimum energy, where the descent in potential energy is the steepest.&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt; This differs from Figure 3, which is a more realistic calculation as it does not reset the momentum. The trajectory shown in Figure 3 shows a more wavy path, corresponding to the vibrational energy in the molecule, resulting in oscillation of the atoms in the molecule.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[File:01509561_bc=91.75,MEP.png|thumb|Figure 2 - A contour plot showing the minimum energy path, r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;+1 pm,  r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; and the momenta p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 0 g.mol&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;|none]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[File:01509561_bc=91.75,Dynamics.png|thumb|Figure 3 - A contour plot using &#039;Dynamics&#039; calculations, r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;+1 pm, r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; and the momenta p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 0 g.mol&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;|none]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q4. Complete the table above by adding the total energy, whether the trajectory is reactive or unreactive, and provide a plot of the trajectory and a small description for what happens along the trajectory. What can you conclude from the table?&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
It has been concluded that trajectories with the following initial conditions are always reactive: r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; =74 pm, r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 200 pm, with -3.1 &amp;lt; p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1 &amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; / g.mol&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt; &amp;lt; -1.6 and p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = -5.1 g.mol&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;. This is supported by the results of the trajectories in the first two rows of the table. The data in the table below (all table trajectories run with r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; =74 pm and r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 200 pm) shows that trajectories with the same positions but higher values of momenta are not necessarily reactive. The trajectory in the fourth row has higher values of momenta, and thus higher kinetic energy, but is unreactive. Although the reactants have enough energy to cross the energy barrier, the products re-cross it and return to reactants.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
{| class=&amp;quot;wikitable&amp;quot; border=1&lt;br /&gt;
! p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;/&amp;amp;nbsp;g.mol&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt; !! p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;/&amp;amp;nbsp;g.mol&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt; !! E&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;tot&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; / kJ mol-1 !! Reactive? !! Description of the dynamics !! Illustration of the trajectory&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
| -2.56 || -5.1  ||-414.280||Reactive||The reactants have more translational energy and less vibrational energy. They react and pass through the transition state to form the products. The products have less translational energy and more vibrational energy as illustrated by the oscillations in Figure 4.||[[File:01509561_table,image1.png|300px|thumb|Figure 4]]&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
| -3.1  || -4.1  ||-420.077||Unreactive||The reactants get closer together but do not have enough energy to form the transition state and move further away from each other again. No reaction occurs. The hydrogen molecule maintains the same level of oscillation throughout.||[[File:01509561_table,image2.png|300px|thumb|Figure 5]]&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
| -3.1  || -5.1  ||-413.977||Reactive||The reactants have enough energy to form the transition state and go on to form products in a successful reaction. The product molecule has oscillates to a slightly greater degree than the reactant molecule. ||[[File:01509561_table,image3.png|300px|thumb|Figure 6]]&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
| -5.1  || -10.1 ||-357.277||Unreactive||The reactants cross the energy barrier to form products but then re-cross the barrier back to reactants. The reactants begin with a large amount of translational energy, which is converted into vibrational energy of the the product molecule and the end reactant molecule after re-crossing the energy barrier.||[[File:01509561_table,image4.png|300px|thumb|Figure 7]]&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
| -5.1  || -10.6 ||-349.477||Reactive||The reactants have a large amount of translational energy, with a small level of vibrational energy, and cross the energy barrier to form products in a successful reaction. There is a lot of oscillation between a reactant-resembling structure and a product-resembling structure as the atoms undergo the reaction and before finally forming the products. The product molecule has a lot of vibrational energy and less translational energy.||[[File:01509561_table,image5.png|300px|thumb|Figure 8]]&lt;br /&gt;
|}&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q5.&#039;&#039;&#039; &#039;&#039;&#039;Given the results you have obtained, how will Transition State Theory predictions for reaction rate values compare with experimental values?&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Transition State theory relies on a number of assumptions in order to predict the rate of a reaction. These assumptions include: the reactant molecules follow the Maxwell-Boltzmann distribution in terms of their energy distribution; even when there is no equilibrium present, the distribution of activated complexes forming products are still in accordance with the Maxwell-Boltzmann laws; quantum effects, such as quantum tunnelling, are ignored; motion in the transition state can be classically treated and separated from other motions; and, arguably the most crucial of assumptions, once reactants have passed through the transition state to form products, they cannot re-cross the energy barrier to reactants again.&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;2,3&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Overall, these assumptions result in the overestimation of reaction rate values, when compared to the experimental values. This is predominantly due to the assumption that once a system has crossed the energy barrier, it cannot re-cross and return to reactants. Therefore, if you have a certain number of barrier crossings, Transition State Theory assumes that 100% of these will result in a successful reaction and the formation of products. However, in reality, the proportion would be less than 100% as some systems would re-cross the barrier resulting in an unsuccessful reaction. Thus, the rate of the reaction would, in reality, be slightly less than the Transition State Theory prediction.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Exercise 2 ==&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q6.&#039;&#039;&#039; &#039;&#039;&#039;By inspecting the potential energy surfaces, classify the F + H&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; and H + HF reactions according to their energetics (endothermic or exothermic). How does this relate to the bond strength of the chemical species involved?&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The potential energy surface for F + H&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; shows that the exit channel of the products is lower in potential energy than the entry channel of the reactants, so the reaction is exothermic. The potential energy surface for H + HF shows that the exit channel of the products is higher in potential energy than the entry channel of the reactants, so the reaction is endothermic. This means that H-F is a stronger bond than H-H, as the energy required to break H-H is less than the energy released when H-F is formed, in the case of F + H&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;, making it exothermic. In the case of H + Hf, the reverse is true.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q7.&#039;&#039;&#039; &#039;&#039;&#039;Locate the approximate position of the transition state.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The position of the transition state correlates to r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 74 pm and r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 181.4 pm.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q8.&#039;&#039;&#039; &#039;&#039;&#039;Report the activation energy for both reactions.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
F+H2, Ea=&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
H + HF, Ea=&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q9.&#039;&#039;&#039; &#039;&#039;&#039;In light of the fact that energy is conserved, discuss the mechanism of release of the reaction energy. Explain how this could be confirmed experimentally.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The reactants start off with a small amount of vibrational energy; most of their energy &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q10.&#039;&#039;&#039; &#039;&#039;&#039;Discuss how the distribution of energy between different modes (translation and vibration) affect the efficiency of the reaction, and how this is influenced by the position of the transition state.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
answer&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== References ==&lt;br /&gt;
1.&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>Sns18</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://chemwiki.ch.ic.ac.uk/index.php?title=01509561&amp;diff=805378</id>
		<title>01509561</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://chemwiki.ch.ic.ac.uk/index.php?title=01509561&amp;diff=805378"/>
		<updated>2020-05-15T19:21:30Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;Sns18: &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;= Molecular Reaction Dynamics Report =&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;by Sharifa Sheikh&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Exercise 1 ==&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q1. On a potential energy surface diagram, how is the transition state mathematically defined? How can the transition state be identified, and how can it be distinguished from a local minimum of the potential energy surface?&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
On a potential energy surface (PES) diagram, the transition state is mathematically defined as the saddle point. The transition state corresponds to the point of maximum potential energy on the minimum energy pathway.&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
In order to identify a transition state, begin a reactant trajectory at the estimated transition state position, with zero momentum, and it should not move in any direction. To distinguish the transition state from a local minimum on the PES, change the trajectory parameters so that it starts close to the transition state, and the path should move away as it goes &#039;down&#039; the PES, away from the maximum, and the potential energy decreases as it is converted to kinetic energy. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q2. Report your best estimate of the transition state position (r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;) and explain your reasoning illustrating it with a “Internuclear Distances vs Time” plot for a relevant trajectory.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
For the reaction, H + H&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;, the transition state position was found to be r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 90.75 pm. Referring to the reactants, A is the incoming hydrogen atom; B and C are the two atoms in the hydrogen molecule. For the trajectory starting at the transition state, Figure 1 shows a graph of Internuclear Distance against Time. As can be seen, the lines for the distances A-B and B-C are flat, showing that as time progresses the atoms are not getting closer or further away from each other, but rather their internuclear distances remain constant. There is no gradient at the transition state, and the atoms have no momentum, so they remain in the same place.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q3. Comment on how the mep and the trajectory you just calculated differ.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Below, Figures 2 and 3 show the results of two calculations with the same initial conditions. Figure 2 uses an MEP calculation type and Figure 3 uses a Dynamics calculation type.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Figure 2 shows the trajectory where at each step the momentum is reset to zero, meaning the path taken is that of the minimum energy, where the descent in potential energy is the steepest.&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt; This differs from Figure 3, which is a more realistic calculation as it does not reset the momentum. The trajectory shown in Figure 3 shows a more wavy path, corresponding to the vibrational energy in the molecule, resulting in oscillation of the atoms in the molecule.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[File:01509561_bc=91.75,MEP.png|thumb|Figure 2 - A contour plot showing the minimum energy path, r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;+1 pm,  r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; and the momenta p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 0 g.mol&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;|none]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[File:01509561_bc=91.75,Dynamics.png|thumb|Figure 3 - A contour plot using &#039;Dynamics&#039; calculations, r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;+1 pm, r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; and the momenta p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 0 g.mol&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;|none]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q4. Complete the table above by adding the total energy, whether the trajectory is reactive or unreactive, and provide a plot of the trajectory and a small description for what happens along the trajectory. What can you conclude from the table?&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
It has been concluded that trajectories with the following initial conditions are always reactive: r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; =74 pm, r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 200 pm, with -3.1 &amp;lt; p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1 &amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; / g.mol&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt; &amp;lt; -1.6 and p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = -5.1 g.mol&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;. This is supported by the results of the trajectories in the first two rows of the table. The data in the table below (all table trajectories run with r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; =74 pm and r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 200 pm) shows that trajectories with the same positions but higher values of momenta are not necessarily reactive. The trajectory in the fourth row has higher values of momenta, and thus higher kinetic energy, but is unreactive. Although the reactants have enough energy to cross the energy barrier, the products re-cross it and return to reactants.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
{| class=&amp;quot;wikitable&amp;quot; border=1&lt;br /&gt;
! p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;/&amp;amp;nbsp;g.mol&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt; !! p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;/&amp;amp;nbsp;g.mol&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt; !! E&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;tot&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; / kJ mol-1 !! Reactive? !! Description of the dynamics !! Illustration of the trajectory&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
| -2.56 || -5.1  ||-414.280||Reactive||The reactants have more translational energy and less vibrational energy. They react and pass through the transition state to form the products. The products have less translational energy and more vibrational energy as illustrated by the oscillations in Figure 4.||[[File:01509561_table,image1.png|300px|thumb|Figure 4]]&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
| -3.1  || -4.1  ||-420.077||Unreactive||The reactants get closer together but do not have enough energy to form the transition state and move further away from each other again. No reaction occurs. The hydrogen molecule maintains the same level of oscillation throughout.||[[File:01509561_table,image2.png|300px|thumb|Figure 5]]&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
| -3.1  || -5.1  ||-413.977||Reactive||The reactants have enough energy to form the transition state and go on to form products in a successful reaction. The product molecule has oscillates to a slightly greater degree than the reactant molecule. ||[[File:01509561_table,image3.png|300px|thumb|Figure 6]]&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
| -5.1  || -10.1 ||-357.277||Unreactive||The reactants cross the energy barrier to form products but then re-cross the barrier back to reactants. The reactants begin with a large amount of translational energy, which is converted into vibrational energy of the the product molecule and the end reactant molecule after re-crossing the energy barrier.||[[File:01509561_table,image4.png|300px|thumb|Figure 7]]&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
| -5.1  || -10.6 ||-349.477||Reactive||The reactants have a large amount of translational energy, with a small level of vibrational energy, and cross the energy barrier to form products in a successful reaction. There is a lot of oscillation between a reactant-resembling structure and a product-resembling structure as the atoms undergo the reaction and before finally forming the products. The product molecule has a lot of vibrational energy and less translational energy.||[[File:01509561_table,image5.png|300px|thumb|Figure 8]]&lt;br /&gt;
|}&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q5.&#039;&#039;&#039; &#039;&#039;&#039;Given the results you have obtained, how will Transition State Theory predictions for reaction rate values compare with experimental values?&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Transition State theory relies on a number of assumptions in order to predict the rate of a reaction. These assumptions include: the reactant molecules follow the Maxwell-Boltzmann distribution in terms of their energy distribution; even when there is no equilibrium present, the distribution of activated complexes forming products are still in accordance with the Maxwell-Boltzmann laws; quantum effects, such as quantum tunnelling, are ignored; motion in the transition state can be classically treated and separated from other motions; and, arguably the most crucial of assumptions, once reactants have passed through the transition state to form products, they cannot re-cross the energy barrier to reactants again.&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;2,3&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Overall, these assumptions result in the overestimation of reaction rate values, when compared to the experimental values. This is predominantly due to the assumption that once a system has crossed the energy barrier, it cannot re-cross and return to reactants. Therefore, if you have a certain number of barrier crossings, Transition State Theory assumes that 100% of these will result in a successful reaction and the formation of products. However, in reality, the proportion would be less than 100% as some systems would re-cross the barrier resulting in an unsuccessful reaction. Thus, the rate of the reaction would, in reality, be slightly less than the Transition State Theory prediction.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Exercise 2 ==&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q6.&#039;&#039;&#039; &#039;&#039;&#039;By inspecting the potential energy surfaces, classify the F + H&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; and H + HF reactions according to their energetics (endothermic or exothermic). How does this relate to the bond strength of the chemical species involved?&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The potential energy surface for F + H&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; shows that the exit channel of the products is lower in potential energy than the entry channel of the reactants, so the reaction is exothermic. The potential energy surface for H + HF shows that the exit channel of the products is higher in potential energy than the entry channel of the reactants, so the reaction is endothermic. This means that H-F is a stronger bond than H-H, as the energy required to break H-H is less than the energy released when H-F is formed, in the case of F + H&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;, making it exothermic. In the case of H + Hf, the reverse is true.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
 Considerable amount of E released passes into vibrational energy of HF. E mainly passes into translational energy of HL&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
F+H2: ab=230, -5.1. bc=74, -3.1&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q7.&#039;&#039;&#039; &#039;&#039;&#039;Locate the approximate position of the transition state.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
r2=181.4,r1=74, momenta=0&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q8.&#039;&#039;&#039; &#039;&#039;&#039;Report the activation energy for both reactions.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
F+H2, Ea=&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
H + HF, Ea=&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q9.&#039;&#039;&#039; &#039;&#039;&#039;In light of the fact that energy is conserved, discuss the mechanism of release of the reaction energy. Explain how this could be confirmed experimentally.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The reactants start off with a small amount of vibrational energy; most of their energy &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q10.&#039;&#039;&#039; &#039;&#039;&#039;Discuss how the distribution of energy between different modes (translation and vibration) affect the efficiency of the reaction, and how this is influenced by the position of the transition state.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
answer&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== References ==&lt;br /&gt;
1.&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>Sns18</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://chemwiki.ch.ic.ac.uk/index.php?title=01509561&amp;diff=805294</id>
		<title>01509561</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://chemwiki.ch.ic.ac.uk/index.php?title=01509561&amp;diff=805294"/>
		<updated>2020-05-15T18:55:56Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;Sns18: &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;= Molecular Reaction Dynamics Report =&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;by Sharifa Sheikh&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Exercise 1 ==&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q1. On a potential energy surface diagram, how is the transition state mathematically defined? How can the transition state be identified, and how can it be distinguished from a local minimum of the potential energy surface?&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
On a potential energy surface (PES) diagram, the transition state is mathematically defined as the saddle point. The transition state corresponds to the point of maximum potential energy on the minimum energy pathway.&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
In order to identify a transition state, begin a reactant trajectory at the estimated transition state position, with zero momentum, and it should not move in any direction. To distinguish the transition state from a local minimum on the PES, change the trajectory parameters so that it starts close to the transition state, and the path should move away as it goes &#039;down&#039; the PES, away from the maximum, and the potential energy decreases as it is converted to kinetic energy. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q2. Report your best estimate of the transition state position (r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;) and explain your reasoning illustrating it with a “Internuclear Distances vs Time” plot for a relevant trajectory.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
For the reaction, H + H&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;, the transition state position was found to be r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 90.75 pm. Referring to the reactants, A is the incoming hydrogen atom; B and C are the two atoms in the hydrogen molecule. For the trajectory starting at the transition state, Figure 1 shows a graph of Internuclear Distance against Time. As can be seen, the lines for the distances A-B and B-C are flat, showing that as time progresses the atoms are not getting closer or further away from each other, but rather their internuclear distances remain constant. There is no gradient at the transition state, and the atoms have no momentum, so they remain in the same place.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q3. Comment on how the mep and the trajectory you just calculated differ.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Below, Figures 2 and 3 show the results of two calculations with the same initial conditions. Figure 2 uses an MEP calculation type and Figure 3 uses a Dynamics calculation type.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Figure 2 shows the trajectory where at each step the momentum is reset to zero, meaning the path taken is that of the minimum energy, where the descent in potential energy is the steepest.&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt; This differs from Figure 3, which is a more realistic calculation as it does not reset the momentum. The trajectory shown in Figure 3 shows a more wavy path, corresponding to the vibrational energy in the molecule, resulting in oscillation of the atoms in the molecule.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[File:01509561_bc=91.75,MEP.png|thumb|Figure 2 - A contour plot showing the minimum energy path, r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;+1 pm,  r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; and the momenta p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 0 g.mol&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;|none]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[File:01509561_bc=91.75,Dynamics.png|thumb|Figure 3 - A contour plot using &#039;Dynamics&#039; calculations, r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;+1 pm, r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; and the momenta p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 0 g.mol&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;|none]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q4. Complete the table above by adding the total energy, whether the trajectory is reactive or unreactive, and provide a plot of the trajectory and a small description for what happens along the trajectory. What can you conclude from the table?&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
It has been concluded that trajectories with the following initial conditions are always reactive: r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; =74 pm, r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 200 pm, with -3.1 &amp;lt; p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1 &amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; / g.mol&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt; &amp;lt; -1.6 and p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = -5.1 g.mol&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;. This is supported by the results of the trajectories in the first two rows of the table. The data in the table below (all table trajectories run with r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; =74 pm and r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 200 pm) shows that trajectories with the same positions but higher values of momenta are not necessarily reactive. The trajectory in the fourth row has higher values of momenta, and thus higher kinetic energy, but is unreactive. Although the reactants have enough energy to cross the energy barrier, the products re-cross it and return to reactants.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
{| class=&amp;quot;wikitable&amp;quot; border=1&lt;br /&gt;
! p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;/&amp;amp;nbsp;g.mol&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt; !! p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;/&amp;amp;nbsp;g.mol&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt; !! E&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;tot&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; / kJ mol-1 !! Reactive? !! Description of the dynamics !! Illustration of the trajectory&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
| -2.56 || -5.1  ||-414.280||Reactive||The reactants have more translational energy and less vibrational energy. They react and pass through the transition state to form the products. The products have less translational energy and more vibrational energy as illustrated by the oscillations in Figure 4.||[[File:01509561_table,image1.png|300px|thumb|Figure 4]]&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
| -3.1  || -4.1  ||-420.077||Unreactive||The reactants get closer together but do not have enough energy to form the transition state and move further away from each other again. No reaction occurs. The hydrogen molecule maintains the same level of oscillation throughout.||[[File:01509561_table,image2.png|300px|thumb|Figure 5]]&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
| -3.1  || -5.1  ||-413.977||Reactive||The reactants have enough energy to form the transition state and go on to form products in a successful reaction. The product molecule has oscillates to a slightly greater degree than the reactant molecule. ||[[File:01509561_table,image3.png|300px|thumb|Figure 6]]&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
| -5.1  || -10.1 ||-357.277||Unreactive||The reactants cross the energy barrier to form products but then re-cross the barrier back to reactants. The reactants begin with a large amount of translational energy, which is converted into vibrational energy of the the product molecule and the end reactant molecule after re-crossing the energy barrier.||[[File:01509561_table,image4.png|300px|thumb|Figure 7]]&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
| -5.1  || -10.6 ||-349.477||Reactive||The reactants have a large amount of translational energy, with a small level of vibrational energy, and cross the energy barrier to form products in a successful reaction. There is a lot of oscillation between a reactant-resembling structure and a product-resembling structure as the atoms undergo the reaction and before finally forming the products. The product molecule has a lot of vibrational energy and less translational energy.||[[File:01509561_table,image5.png|300px|thumb|Figure 8]]&lt;br /&gt;
|}&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q5.&#039;&#039;&#039; &#039;&#039;&#039;Given the results you have obtained, how will Transition State Theory predictions for reaction rate values compare with experimental values?&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Transition State theory relies on a number of assumptions in order to predict the rate of a reaction. These assumptions include: the reactant molecules follow the Maxwell-Boltzmann distribution in terms of their energy distribution; even when there is no equilibrium present, the distribution of activated complexes forming products are still in accordance with the Maxwell-Boltzmann laws; quantum effects, such as quantum tunnelling, are ignored; motion in the transition state can be classically treated and separated from other motions; and, arguably the most crucial of assumptions, once reactants have passed through the transition state to form products, they cannot re-cross the energy barrier to reactants again.&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;2,3&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Overall, these assumptions result in the overestimation of reaction rate values, when compared to the experimental values. This is predominantly due to the assumption that once a system has crossed the energy barrier, it cannot re-cross and return to reactants. Therefore, if you have a certain number of barrier crossings, Transition State Theory assumes that 100% of these will result in a successful reaction and the formation of products. However, in reality, the proportion would be less than 100% as some systems would re-cross the barrier resulting in an unsuccessful reaction. Thus, the rate of the reaction would, in reality, be slightly less than the Transition State Theory prediction.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Exercise 2 ==&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q6.&#039;&#039;&#039; &#039;&#039;&#039;By inspecting the potential energy surfaces, classify the F + H&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; and H + HF reactions according to their energetics (endothermic or exothermic). How does this relate to the bond strength of the chemical species involved?&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
F + H2 is exothermic. Considerable amount of E released passes into vibrational energy of HF. E mainly passes into translational energy of HL&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
F+H2: ab=230, -5.1. bc=74, -3.1&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q7.&#039;&#039;&#039; &#039;&#039;&#039;Locate the approximate position of the transition state.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
r2=181.4,r1=74, momenta=0&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q8.&#039;&#039;&#039; &#039;&#039;&#039;Report the activation energy for both reactions.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
F+H2, Ea=&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
H + HF, Ea=&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q9.&#039;&#039;&#039; &#039;&#039;&#039;In light of the fact that energy is conserved, discuss the mechanism of release of the reaction energy. Explain how this could be confirmed experimentally.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The reactants start off with a small amount of vibrational energy; most of their energy &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q10.&#039;&#039;&#039; &#039;&#039;&#039;Discuss how the distribution of energy between different modes (translation and vibration) affect the efficiency of the reaction, and how this is influenced by the position of the transition state.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
answer&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== References ==&lt;br /&gt;
1.&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>Sns18</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://chemwiki.ch.ic.ac.uk/index.php?title=01509561&amp;diff=805284</id>
		<title>01509561</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://chemwiki.ch.ic.ac.uk/index.php?title=01509561&amp;diff=805284"/>
		<updated>2020-05-15T18:53:25Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;Sns18: &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;= Molecular Reaction Dynamics Report =&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;by Sharifa Sheikh&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Exercise 1 ==&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q1. On a potential energy surface diagram, how is the transition state mathematically defined? How can the transition state be identified, and how can it be distinguished from a local minimum of the potential energy surface?&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
On a potential energy surface (PES) diagram, the transition state is mathematically defined as the saddle point. The transition state corresponds to the point of maximum potential energy on the minimum energy pathway.&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
In order to identify a transition state, begin a reactant trajectory at the estimated transition state position, with zero momentum, and it should not move in any direction. To distinguish the transition state from a local minimum on the PES, change the trajectory parameters so that it starts close to the transition state, and the path should move away as it goes &#039;down&#039; the PES, away from the maximum, and the potential energy decreases as it is converted to kinetic energy. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q2. Report your best estimate of the transition state position (r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;) and explain your reasoning illustrating it with a “Internuclear Distances vs Time” plot for a relevant trajectory.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
For the reaction, H + H&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;, the transition state position was found to be r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 90.75 pm. Referring to the reactants, A is the incoming hydrogen atom; B and C are the two atoms in the hydrogen molecule. For the trajectory starting at the transition state, Figure 1 shows a graph of Internuclear Distance against Time. As can be seen, the lines for the distances A-B and B-C are flat, showing that as time progresses the atoms are not getting closer or further away from each other, but rather their internuclear distances remain constant. There is no gradient at the transition state, and the atoms have no momentum, so they remain in the same place.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q3. Comment on how the mep and the trajectory you just calculated differ.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Below, Figures 2 and 3 show the results of two calculations with the same initial conditions. Figure 2 uses an MEP calculation type and Figure 3 uses a Dynamics calculation type.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Figure 2 shows the trajectory where at each step the momentum is reset to zero, meaning the path taken is that of the minimum energy, where the descent in potential energy is the steepest.&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt; This differs from Figure 3, which is a more realistic calculation as it does not reset the momentum. The trajectory shown in Figure 3 shows a more wavy path, corresponding to the vibrational energy in the molecule, resulting in oscillation of the atoms in the molecule.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[File:01509561_bc=91.75,MEP.png|thumb|Figure 2 - A contour plot showing the minimum energy path, r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;+1 pm,  r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; and the momenta p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 0 g.mol&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;|none]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[File:01509561_bc=91.75,Dynamics.png|thumb|Figure 3 - A contour plot using &#039;Dynamics&#039; calculations, r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;+1 pm, r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; and the momenta p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 0 g.mol&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;|none]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q4. Complete the table above by adding the total energy, whether the trajectory is reactive or unreactive, and provide a plot of the trajectory and a small description for what happens along the trajectory. What can you conclude from the table?&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
It has been concluded that trajectories with the following initial conditions are always reactive: r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; =74 pm, r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 200 pm, with -3.1 &amp;lt; p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1 &amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; / g.mol&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt; &amp;lt; -1.6 and p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = -5.1 g.mol&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;. This is supported by the results of the trajectories in the first two rows of the table. The data in the table below (all table trajectories run with r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; =74 pm and r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 200 pm) shows that trajectories with the same positions but higher values of momenta are not necessarily reactive. The trajectory in the fourth row has higher values of momenta, and thus higher kinetic energy, but is unreactive. Although the reactants have enough energy to cross the energy barrier, the products re-cross it and return to reactants.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
{| class=&amp;quot;wikitable&amp;quot; border=1&lt;br /&gt;
! p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;/&amp;amp;nbsp;g.mol&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt; !! p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;/&amp;amp;nbsp;g.mol&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt; !! E&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;tot&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; / kJ mol-1 !! Reactive? !! Description of the dynamics !! Illustration of the trajectory&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
| -2.56 || -5.1  ||-414.280||Reactive||The reactants have more translational energy and less vibrational energy. They react and pass through the transition state to form the products. The products have less translational energy and more vibrational energy as illustrated by the oscillations in Figure 4.||[[File:01509561_table,image1.png|300px|thumb|Figure 4]]&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
| -3.1  || -4.1  ||-420.077||Unreactive||The reactants get closer together but do not have enough energy to form the transition state and move further away from each other again. No reaction occurs. The hydrogen molecule maintains the same level of oscillation throughout.||[[File:01509561_table,image2.png|300px|thumb|Figure 5]]&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
| -3.1  || -5.1  ||-413.977||Reactive||The reactants have enough energy to form the transition state and go on to form products in a successful reaction. The product molecule has oscillates to a slightly greater degree than the reactant molecule. ||[[File:01509561_table,image3.png|300px|thumb|Figure 6]]&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
| -5.1  || -10.1 ||-357.277||Unreactive||The reactants cross the energy barrier to form products but then re-cross the barrier back to reactants. The reactants begin with a large amount of translational energy, which is converted into vibrational energy of the the product molecule and the end reactant molecule after re-crossing the energy barrier.||[[File:01509561_table,image4.png|300px|thumb|Figure 7]]&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
| -5.1  || -10.6 ||-349.477||Reactive||The reactants have a large amount of translational energy, with a small level of vibrational energy, and cross the energy barrier to form products in a successful reaction. There is a lot of oscillation between a reactant-resembling structure and a product-resembling structure as the atoms undergo the reaction and before finally forming the products. The product molecule has a lot of vibrational energy and less translational energy.||[[File:01509561_table,image5.png|300px|thumb|Figure 8]]&lt;br /&gt;
|}&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q5.&#039;&#039;&#039; &#039;&#039;&#039;Given the results you have obtained, how will Transition State Theory predictions for reaction rate values compare with experimental values?&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Transition State theory relies on a number of assumptions in order to predict the rate of a reaction. These assumptions include: the reactant molecules follow the Maxwell-Boltzmann distribution in terms of their energy distribution; even when there is no equilibrium present, the distribution of activated complexes forming products are still in accordance with the Maxwell-Boltzmann laws; quantum effects, such as quantum tunnelling, are ignored; motion in the transition state can be classically treated and separated from other motions; and, arguably the most crucial of assumptions, once reactants have passed through the transition state to form products, they cannot re-cross the energy barrier to reactants again.&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;2,3&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Overall, these assumptions result in the overestimation of reaction rate values, when compared to the experimental values. This is predominantly due to the assumption that once a system has crossed the energy barrier, it cannot re-cross and return to reactants. Therefore, if you have a certain number of barrier crossings, Transition State Theory assumes that 100% of these will result in a successful reaction and the formation of products. However, in reality, the proportion would be less than 100% as some systems would re-cross the barrier resulting in an unsuccessful reaction. Thus the rate of the reaction would in reality be slightly less than the Transition State Theory prediction.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Exercise 2 ==&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q6.&#039;&#039;&#039; &#039;&#039;&#039;By inspecting the potential energy surfaces, classify the F + H&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; and H + HF reactions according to their energetics (endothermic or exothermic). How does this relate to the bond strength of the chemical species involved?&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
F + H2 is exothermic. Considerable amount of E released passes into vibrational energy of HF. E mainly passes into translational energy of HL&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
F+H2: ab=230, -5.1. bc=74, -3.1&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q7.&#039;&#039;&#039; &#039;&#039;&#039;Locate the approximate position of the transition state.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
r2=181.4,r1=74, momenta=0&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q8.&#039;&#039;&#039; &#039;&#039;&#039;Report the activation energy for both reactions.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
F+H2, Ea=&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
H + HF, Ea=&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q9.&#039;&#039;&#039; &#039;&#039;&#039;In light of the fact that energy is conserved, discuss the mechanism of release of the reaction energy. Explain how this could be confirmed experimentally.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The reactants start off with a small amount of vibrational energy; most of their energy &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q10.&#039;&#039;&#039; &#039;&#039;&#039;Discuss how the distribution of energy between different modes (translation and vibration) affect the efficiency of the reaction, and how this is influenced by the position of the transition state.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
answer&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== References ==&lt;br /&gt;
1.&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>Sns18</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://chemwiki.ch.ic.ac.uk/index.php?title=01509561&amp;diff=805280</id>
		<title>01509561</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://chemwiki.ch.ic.ac.uk/index.php?title=01509561&amp;diff=805280"/>
		<updated>2020-05-15T18:52:27Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;Sns18: &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;= Molecular Reaction Dynamics Report =&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;by Sharifa Sheikh&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Exercise 1 ==&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q1. On a potential energy surface diagram, how is the transition state mathematically defined? How can the transition state be identified, and how can it be distinguished from a local minimum of the potential energy surface?&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
On a potential energy surface (PES) diagram, the transition state is mathematically defined as the saddle point. The transition state corresponds to the point of maximum potential energy on the minimum energy pathway.&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
In order to identify a transition state, begin a reactant trajectory at the estimated transition state position, with zero momentum, and it should not move in any direction. To distinguish the transition state from a local minimum on the PES, change the trajectory parameters so that it starts close to the transition state, and the path should move away as it goes &#039;down&#039; the PES, away from the maximum, and the potential energy decreases as it is converted to kinetic energy. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q2. Report your best estimate of the transition state position (r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;) and explain your reasoning illustrating it with a “Internuclear Distances vs Time” plot for a relevant trajectory.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
For the reaction, H + H&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;, the transition state position was found to be r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 90.75 pm. Referring to the reactants, A is the incoming hydrogen atom; B and C are the two atoms in the hydrogen molecule. For the trajectory starting at the transition state, Figure 1 shows a graph of Internuclear Distance against Time. As can be seen, the lines for the distances A-B and B-C are flat, showing that as time progresses the atoms are not getting closer or further away from each other, but rather their internuclear distances remain constant. There is no gradient at the transition state, and the atoms have no momentum, so they remain in the same place.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q3. Comment on how the mep and the trajectory you just calculated differ.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Below, Figures 2 and 3 show the results of two calculations with the same initial conditions. Figure 2 uses an MEP calculation type and Figure 3 uses a Dynamics calculation type.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Figure 2 shows the trajectory where at each step the momentum is reset to zero, meaning the path taken is that of the minimum energy, where the descent in potential energy is the steepest.&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt; This differs from Figure 3, which is a more realistic calculation as it does not reset the momentum. The trajectory shown in Figure 3 shows a more wavy path, corresponding to the vibrational energy in the molecule, resulting in oscillation of the atoms in the molecule.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[File:01509561_bc=91.75,MEP.png|thumb|Figure 2 - A contour plot showing the minimum energy path, r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;+1 pm,  r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; and the momenta p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 0 g.mol&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;|none]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[File:01509561_bc=91.75,Dynamics.png|thumb|Figure 3 - A contour plot using &#039;Dynamics&#039; calculations, r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;+1 pm, r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; and the momenta p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 0 g.mol&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;|none]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q4. Complete the table above by adding the total energy, whether the trajectory is reactive or unreactive, and provide a plot of the trajectory and a small description for what happens along the trajectory. What can you conclude from the table?&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
It has been concluded that trajectories with the following initial conditions are always reactive: r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; =74 pm, r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 200 pm, with -3.1 &amp;lt; p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1 &amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; / g.mol&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt; &amp;lt; -1.6 and p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = -5.1 g.mol&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;. This is supported by the results of the trajectories in the first two rows of the table. The data in the table below (all table trajectories run with r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; =74 pm and r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 200 pm) shows that trajectories with the same positions but higher values of momenta are not necessarily reactive. The trajectory in the fourth row has higher values of momenta, and thus higher kinetic energy, but is unreactive. Although the reactants have enough energy to cross the energy barrier, the products re-cross it and return to reactants.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
{| class=&amp;quot;wikitable&amp;quot; border=1&lt;br /&gt;
! p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;/&amp;amp;nbsp;g.mol&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt; !! p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;/&amp;amp;nbsp;g.mol&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt; !! E&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;tot&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; / kJ mol-1 !! Reactive? !! Description of the dynamics !! Illustration of the trajectory&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
| -2.56 || -5.1  ||-414.280||Reactive||The reactants have more translational energy and less vibrational energy. They react and pass through the transition state to form the products. The products have less translational energy and more vibrational energy as illustrated by the oscillations in Figure 4.||[[File:01509561_table,image1.png|300px|thumb|Figure 4]]&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
| -3.1  || -4.1  ||-420.077||Unreactive||The reactants get closer together but do not have enough energy to form the transition state and move further away from each other again. No reaction occurs. The hydrogen molecule maintains the same level of oscillation throughout.||[[File:01509561_table,image2.png|300px|thumb|Figure 5]]&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
| -3.1  || -5.1  ||-413.977||Reactive||The reactants have enough energy to form the transition state and go on to form products in a successful reaction. The product molecule has oscillates to a slightly greater degree than the reactant molecule. ||[[File:01509561_table,image3.png|300px|thumb|Figure 6]]&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
| -5.1  || -10.1 ||-357.277||Unreactive||The reactants cross the energy barrier to form products but then re-cross the barrier back to reactants. The reactants begin with a large amount of translational energy, which is converted into vibrational energy of the the product molecule and the end reactant molecule after re-crossing the energy barrier.||[[File:01509561_table,image4.png|300px|thumb|Figure 7]]&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
| -5.1  || -10.6 ||-349.477||Reactive||The reactants have a large amount of translational energy, with a small level of vibrational energy, and cross the energy barrier to form products in a successful reaction. There is a lot of oscillation between a reactant-resembling structure and a product-resembling structure as the atoms undergo the reaction and before finally forming the products. The product molecule has a lot of vibrational energy and less translational energy.||[[File:01509561_table,image5.png|300px|thumb|Figure 8]]&lt;br /&gt;
|}&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q5.&#039;&#039;&#039; &#039;&#039;&#039;Given the results you have obtained, how will Transition State Theory predictions for reaction rate values compare with experimental values?&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Transition State theory relies on a number of assumptions in order to predict the rate of a reaction. These assumptions include: the reactant molecules follow the Maxwell-Boltzmann distribution in terms of their energy distribution; even when there is no equilibrium present, the distribution of activated complexes forming products are still in accordance with the Maxwell-Boltzmann laws; quantum effects, such as quantum tunnelling, are ignored; motion in the transition state can be classically treated and separated from other motions; and, arguably the most crucial of assumptions, once reactants have passed through the transition state to form products, they cannot re-cross the energy barrier to reactants again.ref2,3&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Overall, these assumptions result in the overestimation of reaction rate values, when compared to the experimental values. This is predominantly due to the assumption that once a system has crossed the energy barrier, it cannot re-cross and return to reactants. Therefore, if you have a certain number of barrier crossings, Transition State Theory assumes that 100% of these will result in a successful reaction and the formation of products. However, in reality, the proportion would be less than 100% as some systems would re-cross the barrier resulting in an unsuccessful reaction. Thus the rate of the reaction would in reality be slightly less than the Transition State Theory prediction.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Exercise 2 ==&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q6.&#039;&#039;&#039; &#039;&#039;&#039;By inspecting the potential energy surfaces, classify the F + H&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; and H + HF reactions according to their energetics (endothermic or exothermic). How does this relate to the bond strength of the chemical species involved?&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
F + H2 is exothermic. Considerable amount of E released passes into vibrational energy of HF. E mainly passes into translational energy of HL&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
F+H2: ab=230, -5.1. bc=74, -3.1&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q7.&#039;&#039;&#039; &#039;&#039;&#039;Locate the approximate position of the transition state.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
r2=181.4,r1=74, momenta=0&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q8.&#039;&#039;&#039; &#039;&#039;&#039;Report the activation energy for both reactions.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
F+H2, Ea=&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
H + HF, Ea=&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q9.&#039;&#039;&#039; &#039;&#039;&#039;In light of the fact that energy is conserved, discuss the mechanism of release of the reaction energy. Explain how this could be confirmed experimentally.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The reactants start off with a small amount of vibrational energy; most of their energy &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q10.&#039;&#039;&#039; &#039;&#039;&#039;Discuss how the distribution of energy between different modes (translation and vibration) affect the efficiency of the reaction, and how this is influenced by the position of the transition state.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
answer&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== References ==&lt;br /&gt;
1.&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>Sns18</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://chemwiki.ch.ic.ac.uk/index.php?title=01509561&amp;diff=805182</id>
		<title>01509561</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://chemwiki.ch.ic.ac.uk/index.php?title=01509561&amp;diff=805182"/>
		<updated>2020-05-15T18:19:14Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;Sns18: &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;= Molecular Reaction Dynamics Report =&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;by Sharifa Sheikh&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Exercise 1 ==&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q1. On a potential energy surface diagram, how is the transition state mathematically defined? How can the transition state be identified, and how can it be distinguished from a local minimum of the potential energy surface?&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
On a potential energy surface (PES) diagram, the transition state is mathematically defined as the saddle point. The transition state corresponds to the point of maximum potential energy on the minimum energy pathway.&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
In order to identify a transition state, begin a reactant trajectory at the estimated transition state position, with zero momentum, and it should not move in any direction. To distinguish the transition state from a local minimum on the PES, change the trajectory parameters so that it starts close to the transition state, and the path should move away as it goes &#039;down&#039; the PES, away from the maximum, and the potential energy decreases as it is converted to kinetic energy. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q2. Report your best estimate of the transition state position (r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;) and explain your reasoning illustrating it with a “Internuclear Distances vs Time” plot for a relevant trajectory.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
For the reaction, H + H&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;, the transition state position was found to be r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 90.75 pm. Referring to the reactants, A is the incoming hydrogen atom; B and C are the two atoms in the hydrogen molecule. For the trajectory starting at the transition state, Figure 1 shows a graph of Internuclear Distance against Time. As can be seen, the lines for the distances A-B and B-C are flat, showing that as time progresses the atoms are not getting closer or further away from each other, but rather their internuclear distances remain constant. There is no gradient at the transition state, and the atoms have no momentum, so they remain in the same place.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q3. Comment on how the mep and the trajectory you just calculated differ.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Below, Figures 2 and 3 show the results of two calculations with the same initial conditions. Figure 2 uses an MEP calculation type and Figure 3 uses a Dynamics calculation type.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Figure 2 shows the trajectory where at each step the momentum is reset to zero, meaning the path taken is that of the minimum energy, where the descent in potential energy is the steepest.&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt; This differs from Figure 3, which is a more realistic calculation as it does not reset the momentum. The trajectory shown in Figure 3 shows a more wavy path, corresponding to the vibrational energy in the molecule, resulting in oscillation of the atoms in the molecule.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[File:01509561_bc=91.75,MEP.png|thumb|Figure 2 - A contour plot showing the minimum energy path, r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;+1 pm,  r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; and the momenta p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 0 g.mol&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;|none]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[File:01509561_bc=91.75,Dynamics.png|thumb|Figure 3 - A contour plot using &#039;Dynamics&#039; calculations, r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;+1 pm, r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; and the momenta p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 0 g.mol&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;|none]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q4. Complete the table above by adding the total energy, whether the trajectory is reactive or unreactive, and provide a plot of the trajectory and a small description for what happens along the trajectory. What can you conclude from the table?&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
It has been concluded that trajectories with the following initial conditions are always reactive: r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; =74 pm, r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 200 pm, with -3.1 &amp;lt; p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1 &amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; / g.mol&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt; &amp;lt; -1.6 and p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = -5.1 g.mol&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;. This is supported by the results of the trajectories in the first two rows of the table. The data in the table below (all table trajectories run with r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; =74 pm and r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 200 pm) shows that trajectories with the same positions but higher values of momenta are not necessarily reactive. The trajectory in the fourth row has higher values of momenta, and thus higher kinetic energy, but is unreactive. Although the reactants have enough energy to cross the energy barrier, the products re-cross it and return to reactants.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
{| class=&amp;quot;wikitable&amp;quot; border=1&lt;br /&gt;
! p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;/&amp;amp;nbsp;g.mol&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt; !! p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;/&amp;amp;nbsp;g.mol&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt; !! E&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;tot&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; / kJ mol-1 !! Reactive? !! Description of the dynamics !! Illustration of the trajectory&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
| -2.56 || -5.1  ||-414.280||Reactive||The reactants have more translational energy and less vibrational energy. They react and pass through the transition state to form the products. The products have less translational energy and more vibrational energy as illustrated by the oscillations in Figure 4.||[[File:01509561_table,image1.png|300px|thumb|Figure 4]]&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
| -3.1  || -4.1  ||-420.077||Unreactive||The reactants get closer together but do not have enough energy to form the transition state and move further away from each other again. No reaction occurs. The hydrogen molecule maintains the same level of oscillation throughout.||[[File:01509561_table,image2.png|300px|thumb|Figure 5]]&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
| -3.1  || -5.1  ||-413.977||Reactive||The reactants have enough energy to form the transition state and go on to form products in a successful reaction. The product molecule has oscillates to a slightly greater degree than the reactant molecule. ||[[File:01509561_table,image3.png|300px|thumb|Figure 6]]&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
| -5.1  || -10.1 ||-357.277||Unreactive||The reactants cross the energy barrier to form products but then re-cross the barrier back to reactants. The reactants begin with a large amount of translational energy, which is converted into vibrational energy of the the product molecule and the end reactant molecule after re-crossing the energy barrier.||[[File:01509561_table,image4.png|300px|thumb|Figure 7]]&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
| -5.1  || -10.6 ||-349.477||Reactive||The reactants have a large amount of translational energy, with a small level of vibrational energy, and cross the energy barrier to form products in a successful reaction. There is a lot of oscillation between a reactant-resembling structure and a product-resembling structure as the atoms undergo the reaction and before finally forming the products. The product molecule has a lot of vibrational energy and less translational energy.||[[File:01509561_table,image5.png|300px|thumb|Figure 8]]&lt;br /&gt;
|}&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q5.&#039;&#039;&#039; &#039;&#039;&#039;Given the results you have obtained, how will Transition State Theory predictions for reaction rate values compare with experimental values?&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Transition State theory relies on a number of assumptions in order to predict the rate of a reaction; these assumptions result in the overestimation of the rate values. Therefore, Transition State Theory predictions for reaction rate values will be slightly larger than the corresponding experimental values. The main assumption Transition State Theory relies on is the once the reactants have crossed the energy barrier of the transition state, they will form products and the reaction will be successful. It assumes that they never re-cross the barrier back to reactants.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
(Chem Kinetics, Keith Laidler)Assumptions: 1. Molecular systems that have surmounted the col in the direction of products cannot turn back and form reactant molecules again.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
2. The energy distribution among the reactant molecules is in accordance with the Maxwell-Boltzmann distribution. Furthermore, it is assumed that even when the whole system is not at equilibrium, the concentration of those activate complexes that are becoming products can also be calculated using equilibrium theory.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
3. It is permissible to separate the motion of the system over the col from the other motions associated with the activated complex.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
4. A chemical reaction can be satisfactorily treated in terms of classical motion over the barrier, quantum effects being ignored.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Exercise 2 ==&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q6.&#039;&#039;&#039; &#039;&#039;&#039;By inspecting the potential energy surfaces, classify the F + H&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; and H + HF reactions according to their energetics (endothermic or exothermic). How does this relate to the bond strength of the chemical species involved?&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
F + H2 is exothermic. Considerable amount of E released passes into vibrational energy of HF. E mainly passes into translational energy of HL&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
F+H2: ab=230, -5.1. bc=74, -3.1&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q7.&#039;&#039;&#039; &#039;&#039;&#039;Locate the approximate position of the transition state.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
r2=181.4,r1=74, momenta=0&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q8.&#039;&#039;&#039; &#039;&#039;&#039;Report the activation energy for both reactions.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
F+H2, Ea=&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
H + HF, Ea=&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q9.&#039;&#039;&#039; &#039;&#039;&#039;In light of the fact that energy is conserved, discuss the mechanism of release of the reaction energy. Explain how this could be confirmed experimentally.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The reactants start off with a small amount of vibrational energy; most of their energy &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q10.&#039;&#039;&#039; &#039;&#039;&#039;Discuss how the distribution of energy between different modes (translation and vibration) affect the efficiency of the reaction, and how this is influenced by the position of the transition state.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
answer&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== References ==&lt;br /&gt;
1.&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>Sns18</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://chemwiki.ch.ic.ac.uk/index.php?title=01509561&amp;diff=805148</id>
		<title>01509561</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://chemwiki.ch.ic.ac.uk/index.php?title=01509561&amp;diff=805148"/>
		<updated>2020-05-15T18:09:56Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;Sns18: &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;= Molecular Reaction Dynamics Report =&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;by Sharifa Sheikh&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Exercise 1 ==&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q1. On a potential energy surface diagram, how is the transition state mathematically defined? How can the transition state be identified, and how can it be distinguished from a local minimum of the potential energy surface?&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
On a potential energy surface (PES) diagram, the transition state is mathematically defined as the saddle point. The transition state corresponds to the point of maximum potential energy on the minimum energy pathway.&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
In order to identify a transition state, begin a reactant trajectory at the estimated transition state position, with zero momentum, and it should not move in any direction. To distinguish the transition state from a local minimum on the PES, change the trajectory parameters so that it starts close to the transition state, and the path should move away as it goes &#039;down&#039; the PES, away from the maximum, and the potential energy decreases as it is converted to kinetic energy. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q2. Report your best estimate of the transition state position (r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;) and explain your reasoning illustrating it with a “Internuclear Distances vs Time” plot for a relevant trajectory.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
For the reaction, H + H&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;, the transition state position was found to be r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 90.75 pm. Referring to the reactants, A is the incoming hydrogen atom; B and C are the two atoms in the hydrogen molecule. For the trajectory starting at the transition state, Figure 1 shows a graph of Internuclear Distance against Time. As can be seen, the lines for the distances A-B and B-C are flat, showing that as time progresses the atoms are not getting closer or further away from each other, but rather their internuclear distances remain constant. There is no gradient at the transition state, and the atoms have no momentum, so they remain in the same place.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q3. Comment on how the mep and the trajectory you just calculated differ.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Below, Figures 2 and 3 show the results of two calculations with the same initial conditions. Figure 2 uses an MEP calculation type and Figure 3 uses a Dynamics calculation type.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Figure 2 shows the trajectory where at each step the momentum is reset to zero, meaning the path taken is that of the minimum energy, where the descent in potential energy is the steepest.&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt; This differs from Figure 3, which is a more realistic calculation as it does not reset the momentum. The trajectory shown in Figure 3 shows a more wavy path, corresponding to the vibrational energy in the molecule, resulting in oscillation of the atoms in the molecule.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[File:01509561_bc=91.75,MEP.png|thumb|Figure 2 - A contour plot showing the minimum energy path, r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;+1 pm,  r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; and the momenta p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 0 g.mol&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;|none]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[File:01509561_bc=91.75,Dynamics.png|thumb|Figure 3 - A contour plot using &#039;Dynamics&#039; calculations, r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;+1 pm, r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; and the momenta p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 0 g.mol&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;|none]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q4. Complete the table above by adding the total energy, whether the trajectory is reactive or unreactive, and provide a plot of the trajectory and a small description for what happens along the trajectory. What can you conclude from the table?&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
It has been concluded that trajectories with the following initial conditions are always reactive: r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; =74 pm, r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 200 pm, with -3.1 &amp;lt; p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1 &amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; / g.mol&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt; &amp;lt; -1.6 and p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = -5.1 g.mol&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;. (The top row trajectory in the table below fits these conditions and is reactive.) The data in the table below (all table trajectories run with r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; =74 pm and r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 200 pm)shows that trajectories with the same positions but higher values of momenta are not necessarily reactive.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
{| class=&amp;quot;wikitable&amp;quot; border=1&lt;br /&gt;
! p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;/&amp;amp;nbsp;g.mol&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt; !! p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;/&amp;amp;nbsp;g.mol&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt; !! E&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;tot&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; / kJ mol-1 !! Reactive? !! Description of the dynamics !! Illustration of the trajectory&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
| -2.56 || -5.1  ||-414.280||Reactive||The reactants have more translational energy and less vibrational energy. They react and pass through the transition state to form the products. The products have less translational energy and more vibrational energy as illustrated by the oscillations in Figure 4.||[[File:01509561_table,image1.png|300px|thumb|Figure 4]]&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
| -3.1  || -4.1  ||-420.077||Unreactive||The reactants get closer together but do not have enough energy to form the transition state and move further away from each other again. No reaction occurs. The hydrogen molecule maintains the same level of oscillation throughout.||[[File:01509561_table,image2.png|300px|thumb|Figure 5]]&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
| -3.1  || -5.1  ||-413.977||Reactive||The reactants have enough energy to form the transition state and go on to form products in a successful reaction. The product molecule has oscillates to a slightly greater degree than the reactant molecule. ||[[File:01509561_table,image3.png|300px|thumb|Figure 6]]&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
| -5.1  || -10.1 ||-357.277||Unreactive||The reactants cross the energy barrier to form products but then re-cross the barrier back to reactants. The reactants begin with a large amount of translational energy, which is converted into vibrational energy of the the product molecule and the end reactant molecule after re-crossing the energy barrier.||[[File:01509561_table,image4.png|300px|thumb|Figure 7]]&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
| -5.1  || -10.6 ||-349.477||Reactive||The reactants have a large amount of translational energy, with a small level of vibrational energy, and cross the energy barrier to form products in a successful reaction. There is a lot of oscillation between a reactant-resembling structure and a product-resembling structure as the atoms undergo the reaction and before finally forming the products. The product molecule has a lot of vibrational energy and less translational energy.||[[File:01509561_table,image5.png|300px|thumb|Figure 8]]&lt;br /&gt;
|}&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q5.&#039;&#039;&#039; &#039;&#039;&#039;Given the results you have obtained, how will Transition State Theory predictions for reaction rate values compare with experimental values?&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Transition State theory relies on a number of assumptions in order to predict the rate of a reaction; these assumptions result in the overestimation of the rate values. Therefore, Transition State Theory predictions for reaction rate values will be slightly larger than the corresponding experimental values. The main assumption Transition State Theory relies on is the once the reactants have crossed the energy barrier of the transition state, they will form products and the reaction will be successful. It assumes that they never re-cross the barrier back to reactants.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
(Chem Kinetics, Keith Laidler)Assumptions: 1. Molecular systems that have surmounted the col in the direction of products cannot turn back and form reactant molecules again.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
2. The energy distribution among the reactant molecules is in accordance with the Maxwell-Boltzmann distribution. Furthermore, it is assumed that even when the whole system is not at equilibrium, the concentration of those activate complexes that are becoming products can also be calculated using equilibrium theory.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
3. It is permissible to separate the motion of the system over the col from the other motions associated with the activated complex.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
4. A chemical reaction can be satisfactorily treated in terms of classical motion over the barrier, quantum effects being ignored.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Exercise 2 ==&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q6.&#039;&#039;&#039; &#039;&#039;&#039;By inspecting the potential energy surfaces, classify the F + H&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; and H + HF reactions according to their energetics (endothermic or exothermic). How does this relate to the bond strength of the chemical species involved?&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
F + H2 is exothermic. Considerable amount of E released passes into vibrational energy of HF. E mainly passes into translational energy of HL&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
F+H2: ab=230, -5.1. bc=74, -3.1&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q7.&#039;&#039;&#039; &#039;&#039;&#039;Locate the approximate position of the transition state.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
r2=181.4,r1=74, momenta=0&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q8.&#039;&#039;&#039; &#039;&#039;&#039;Report the activation energy for both reactions.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
F+H2, Ea=&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
H + HF, Ea=&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q9.&#039;&#039;&#039; &#039;&#039;&#039;In light of the fact that energy is conserved, discuss the mechanism of release of the reaction energy. Explain how this could be confirmed experimentally.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The reactants start off with a small amount of vibrational energy; most of their energy &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q10.&#039;&#039;&#039; &#039;&#039;&#039;Discuss how the distribution of energy between different modes (translation and vibration) affect the efficiency of the reaction, and how this is influenced by the position of the transition state.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
answer&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== References ==&lt;br /&gt;
1.&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>Sns18</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://chemwiki.ch.ic.ac.uk/index.php?title=01509561&amp;diff=805142</id>
		<title>01509561</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://chemwiki.ch.ic.ac.uk/index.php?title=01509561&amp;diff=805142"/>
		<updated>2020-05-15T18:05:46Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;Sns18: &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;= Molecular Reaction Dynamics Report =&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;by Sharifa Sheikh&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Exercise 1 ==&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q1. On a potential energy surface diagram, how is the transition state mathematically defined? How can the transition state be identified, and how can it be distinguished from a local minimum of the potential energy surface?&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
On a potential energy surface (PES) diagram, the transition state is mathematically defined as the saddle point. The transition state corresponds to the point of maximum potential energy on the minimum energy pathway.&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
In order to identify a transition state, begin a reactant trajectory at the estimated transition state position, with zero momentum, and it should not move in any direction. To distinguish the transition state from a local minimum on the PES, change the trajectory parameters so that it starts close to the transition state, and the path should move away as it goes &#039;down&#039; the PES, away from the maximum, and the potential energy decreases as it is converted to kinetic energy. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q2. Report your best estimate of the transition state position (r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;) and explain your reasoning illustrating it with a “Internuclear Distances vs Time” plot for a relevant trajectory.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
For the reaction, H + H&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;, the transition state position was found to be r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 90.75 pm. Referring to the reactants, A is the incoming hydrogen atom; B and C are the two atoms in the hydrogen molecule. For the trajectory starting at the transition state, Figure 1 shows a graph of Internuclear Distance against Time. As can be seen, the lines for the distances A-B and B-C are flat, showing that as time progresses the atoms are not getting closer or further away from each other, but rather their internuclear distances remain constant. There is no gradient at the transition state, and the atoms have no momentum, so they remain in the same place.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q3. Comment on how the mep and the trajectory you just calculated differ.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Below, Figures 2 and 3 show the results of two calculations with the same initial conditions. Figure 2 uses an MEP calculation type and Figure 3 uses a Dynamics calculation type.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Figure 2 shows the trajectory where at each step the momentum is reset to zero, meaning the path taken is that of the minimum energy, where the descent in potential energy is the steepest.&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt; This differs from Figure 3, which is a more realistic calculation as it does not reset the momentum. The trajectory shown in Figure 3 shows a more wavy path, corresponding to the vibrational energy in the molecule, resulting in oscillation of the atoms in the molecule.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[File:01509561_bc=91.75,MEP.png|thumb|Figure 2 - A contour plot showing the minimum energy path, r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;+1 pm,  r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; and the momenta p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 0 g.mol&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;|none]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[File:01509561_bc=91.75,Dynamics.png|thumb|Figure 3 - A contour plot using &#039;Dynamics&#039; calculations, r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;+1 pm, r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; and the momenta p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 0 g.mol&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;|none]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q4. Complete the table above by adding the total energy, whether the trajectory is reactive or unreactive, and provide a plot of the trajectory and a small description for what happens along the trajectory. What can you conclude from the table?&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
It has been concluded that trajectories with the following initial conditions are always reactive: r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; =74 pm, r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 200 pm, with -3.1 &amp;lt; p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1 &amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; / g.mol&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt; &amp;lt; -1.6 and p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = -5.1 g.mol&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
{| class=&amp;quot;wikitable&amp;quot; border=1&lt;br /&gt;
! p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;/&amp;amp;nbsp;g.mol&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt; !! p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;/&amp;amp;nbsp;g.mol&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt; !! E&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;tot&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; / kJ mol-1 !! Reactive? !! Description of the dynamics !! Illustration of the trajectory&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
| -2.56 || -5.1  ||-414.280||Reactive||The reactants have more translational energy and less vibrational energy. They react and pass through the transition state to form the products. The products have less translational energy and more vibrational energy as illustrated by the oscillations in Figure 4.||[[File:01509561_table,image1.png|300px|thumb|Figure 4]]&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
| -3.1  || -4.1  ||-420.077||Unreactive||The reactants get closer together but do not have enough energy to form the transition state and move further away from each other again. No reaction occurs. The hydrogen molecule maintains the same level of oscillation throughout.||[[File:01509561_table,image2.png|300px|thumb|Figure 5]]&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
| -3.1  || -5.1  ||-413.977||Reactive||The reactants have enough energy to form the transition state and go on to form products in a successful reaction. The product molecule has oscillates to a slightly greater degree than the reactant molecule. ||[[File:01509561_table,image3.png|300px|thumb|Figure 6]]&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
| -5.1  || -10.1 ||-357.277||Unreactive||The reactants cross the energy barrier to form products but then re-cross the barrier back to reactants. The reactants begin with a large amount of translational energy, which is converted into vibrational energy of the the product molecule and the end reactant molecule after re-crossing the energy barrier.||[[File:01509561_table,image4.png|300px|thumb|Figure 7]]&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
| -5.1  || -10.6 ||-349.477||Reactive||The reactants have a large amount of translational energy, with a small level of vibrational energy, and cross the energy barrier to form products in a successful reaction. There is a lot of oscillation between a reactant-resembling structure and a product-resembling structure as the atoms undergo the reaction and before finally forming the products. The product molecule has a lot of vibrational energy and less translational energy.||[[File:01509561_table,image5.png|300px|thumb|Figure 8]]&lt;br /&gt;
|}&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q5.&#039;&#039;&#039; &#039;&#039;&#039;Given the results you have obtained, how will Transition State Theory predictions for reaction rate values compare with experimental values?&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Transition State theory relies on a number of assumptions in order to predict the rate of a reaction; these assumptions result in the overestimation of the rate values. Therefore, Transition State Theory predictions for reaction rate values will be slightly larger than the corresponding experimental values. The main assumption Transition State Theory relies on is the once the reactants have crossed the energy barrier of the transition state, they will form products and the reaction will be successful. It assumes that they never re-cross the barrier back to reactants.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
(Chem Kinetics, Keith Laidler)Assumptions: 1. Molecular systems that have surmounted the col in the direction of products cannot turn back and form reactant molecules again.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
2. The energy distribution among the reactant molecules is in accordance with the Maxwell-Boltzmann distribution. Furthermore, it is assumed that even when the whole system is not at equilibrium, the concentration of those activate complexes that are becoming products can also be calculated using equilibrium theory.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
3. It is permissible to separate the motion of the system over the col from the other motions associated with the activated complex.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
4. A chemical reaction can be satisfactorily treated in terms of classical motion over the barrier, quantum effects being ignored.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Exercise 2 ==&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q6.&#039;&#039;&#039; &#039;&#039;&#039;By inspecting the potential energy surfaces, classify the F + H&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; and H + HF reactions according to their energetics (endothermic or exothermic). How does this relate to the bond strength of the chemical species involved?&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
F + H2 is exothermic. Considerable amount of E released passes into vibrational energy of HF. E mainly passes into translational energy of HL&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
F+H2: ab=230, -5.1. bc=74, -3.1&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q7.&#039;&#039;&#039; &#039;&#039;&#039;Locate the approximate position of the transition state.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
r2=181.4,r1=74, momenta=0&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q8.&#039;&#039;&#039; &#039;&#039;&#039;Report the activation energy for both reactions.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
F+H2, Ea=&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
H + HF, Ea=&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q9.&#039;&#039;&#039; &#039;&#039;&#039;In light of the fact that energy is conserved, discuss the mechanism of release of the reaction energy. Explain how this could be confirmed experimentally.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The reactants start off with a small amount of vibrational energy; most of their energy &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q10.&#039;&#039;&#039; &#039;&#039;&#039;Discuss how the distribution of energy between different modes (translation and vibration) affect the efficiency of the reaction, and how this is influenced by the position of the transition state.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
answer&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== References ==&lt;br /&gt;
1.&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>Sns18</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://chemwiki.ch.ic.ac.uk/index.php?title=01509561&amp;diff=805054</id>
		<title>01509561</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://chemwiki.ch.ic.ac.uk/index.php?title=01509561&amp;diff=805054"/>
		<updated>2020-05-15T17:40:52Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;Sns18: &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;= Molecular Reaction Dynamics Report =&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;by Sharifa Sheikh&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Exercise 1 ==&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q1. On a potential energy surface diagram, how is the transition state mathematically defined? How can the transition state be identified, and how can it be distinguished from a local minimum of the potential energy surface?&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
On a potential energy surface (PES) diagram, the transition state is mathematically defined as the saddle point. The transition state corresponds to the point of maximum potential energy on the minimum energy pathway.&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
In order to identify a transition state, begin a reactant trajectory at the estimated transition state position, with zero momentum, and it should not move in any direction. To distinguish the transition state from a local minimum on the PES, change the trajectory parameters so that it starts close to the transition state, and the path should move away as it goes &#039;down&#039; the PES, away from the maximum, and the potential energy decreases as it is converted to kinetic energy. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q2. Report your best estimate of the transition state position (r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;) and explain your reasoning illustrating it with a “Internuclear Distances vs Time” plot for a relevant trajectory.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
For the reaction, H + H&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;, the transition state position was found to be r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 90.75 pm. Referring to the reactants, A is the incoming hydrogen atom; B and C are the two atoms in the hydrogen molecule. For the trajectory starting at the transition state, Figure 1 shows a graph of Internuclear Distance against Time. As can be seen, the lines for the distances A-B and B-C are flat, showing that as time progresses the atoms are not getting closer or further away from each other, but rather their internuclear distances remain constant. There is no gradient at the transition state, and the atoms have no momentum, so they remain in the same place.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q3. Comment on how the mep and the trajectory you just calculated differ.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Below, Figures 2 and 3 show the results of two calculations with the same initial conditions. Figure 2 uses an MEP calculation type and Figure 3 uses a Dynamics calculation type.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Figure 2 shows the trajectory where at each step the momentum is reset to zero, meaning the path taken is that of the minimum energy, where the descent in potential energy is the steepest.&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt; This differs from Figure 3, which is a more realistic calculation as it does not reset the momentum. The trajectory shown in Figure 3 shows a more wavy path, corresponding to the vibrational energy in the molecule, resulting in oscillation of the atoms in the molecule.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[File:01509561_bc=91.75,MEP.png|thumb|Figure 2 - A contour plot showing the minimum energy path, r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;+1 pm,  r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; and the momenta p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 0 g.mol&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;|none]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[File:01509561_bc=91.75,Dynamics.png|thumb|Figure 3 - A contour plot using &#039;Dynamics&#039; calculations, r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;+1 pm, r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; and the momenta p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 0 g.mol&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;|none]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
NOT BLUE:&#039;&#039;&#039;Take note of the final values of the positions r1(t) r2(t) and  p1(t) p2(t) for your trajectory for large enough t. &#039;&#039;&#039;Stup a calculation where the initial positions correspond to the final positions of the trajectory you calculated above, the same final momenta values but with their signs reversed.&lt;br /&gt;
What do you observe?&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
All for t=230.4. r1(t)=69.96, r2(t)=1724.46, p1(t)=2.64681, p2(t)=5.08444&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q4. Complete the table above by adding the total energy, whether the trajectory is reactive or unreactive, and provide a plot of the trajectory and a small description for what happens along the trajectory. What can you conclude from the table?&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
{| class=&amp;quot;wikitable&amp;quot; border=1&lt;br /&gt;
! p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;/&amp;amp;nbsp;g.mol&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt; !! p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;/&amp;amp;nbsp;g.mol&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt; !! E&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;tot&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; / kJ mol-1 !! Reactive? !! Description of the dynamics !! Illustration of the trajectory&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
| -2.56 || -5.1  ||-414.280||Reactive||The reactants have more translational energy and less vibrational energy. They react and pass through the transition state to form the products. The products have less translational energy and more vibrational energy as illustrated by the oscillations in Figure 4.||[[File:01509561_table,image1.png|300px|thumb|Figure 4]]&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
| -3.1  || -4.1  ||-420.077||Unreactive||The reactants get closer together but do not have enough energy to form the transition state and move further away from each other again. No reaction occurs. The hydrogen molecule maintains the same level of oscillation throughout.||[[File:01509561_table,image2.png|300px|thumb|Figure 5]]&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
| -3.1  || -5.1  ||-413.977||Reactive||The reactants have enough energy to form the transition state and go on to form products in a successful reaction. The product molecule has oscillates to a slightly greater degree than the reactant molecule. ||[[File:01509561_table,image3.png|300px|thumb|Figure 6]]&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
| -5.1  || -10.1 ||-357.277||Unreactive||The reactants cross the energy barrier to form products but then re-cross the barrier back to reactants. The reactants begin with a large amount of translational energy, which is converted into vibrational energy of the the product molecule and the end reactant molecule after re-crossing the energy barrier.||[[File:01509561_table,image4.png|300px|thumb|Figure 7]]&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
| -5.1  || -10.6 ||-349.477||Reactive||The reactants have a large amount of translational energy, with a small level of vibrational energy, and cross the energy barrier to form products in a successful reaction. There is a lot of oscillation between a reactant-resembling structure and a product-resembling structure as the atoms undergo the reaction and before finally forming the products. The product molecule has a lot of vibrational energy and less translational energy.||[[File:01509561_table,image5.png|300px|thumb|Figure 8]]&lt;br /&gt;
|}&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q5.&#039;&#039;&#039; &#039;&#039;&#039;Given the results you have obtained, how will Transition State Theory predictions for reaction rate values compare with experimental values?&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Transition State theory relies on a number of assumptions in order to predict the rate of a reaction; these assumptions result in the overestimation of the rate values. Therefore, Transition State Theory predictions for reaction rate values will be slightly larger than the corresponding experimental values. The main assumption Transition State Theory relies on is the once the reactants have crossed the energy barrier of the transition state, they will form products and the reaction will be successful. It assumes that they never re-cross the barrier back to reactants.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
(Chem Kinetics, Keith Laidler)Assumptions: 1. Molecular systems that have surmounted the col in the direction of products cannot turn back and form reactant molecules again.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
2. The energy distribution among the reactant molecules is in accordance with the Maxwell-Boltzmann distribution. Furthermore, it is assumed that even when the whole system is not at equilibrium, the concentration of those activate complexes that are becoming products can also be calculated using equilibrium theory.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
3. It is permissible to separate the motion of the system over the col from the other motions associated with the activated complex.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
4. A chemical reaction can be satisfactorily treated in terms of classical motion over the barrier, quantum effects being ignored.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Exercise 2 ==&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q6.&#039;&#039;&#039; &#039;&#039;&#039;By inspecting the potential energy surfaces, classify the F + H&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; and H + HF reactions according to their energetics (endothermic or exothermic). How does this relate to the bond strength of the chemical species involved?&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
F + H2 is exothermic. Considerable amount of E released passes into vibrational energy of HF. E mainly passes into translational energy of HL&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
F+H2: ab=230, -5.1. bc=74, -3.1&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q7.&#039;&#039;&#039; &#039;&#039;&#039;Locate the approximate position of the transition state.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
r2=181.4,r1=74, momenta=0&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q8.&#039;&#039;&#039; &#039;&#039;&#039;Report the activation energy for both reactions.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
F+H2, Ea=&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
H + HF, Ea=&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q9.&#039;&#039;&#039; &#039;&#039;&#039;In light of the fact that energy is conserved, discuss the mechanism of release of the reaction energy. Explain how this could be confirmed experimentally.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The reactants start off with a small amount of vibrational energy; most of their energy &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q10.&#039;&#039;&#039; &#039;&#039;&#039;Discuss how the distribution of energy between different modes (translation and vibration) affect the efficiency of the reaction, and how this is influenced by the position of the transition state.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
answer&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== References ==&lt;br /&gt;
1.&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>Sns18</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://chemwiki.ch.ic.ac.uk/index.php?title=01509561&amp;diff=805012</id>
		<title>01509561</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://chemwiki.ch.ic.ac.uk/index.php?title=01509561&amp;diff=805012"/>
		<updated>2020-05-15T17:21:42Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;Sns18: /* by Sharifa Sheikh */&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;= Molecular Reaction Dynamics Report =&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;by Sharifa Sheikh&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Exercise 1 ==&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q1. On a potential energy surface diagram, how is the transition state mathematically defined? How can the transition state be identified, and how can it be distinguished from a local minimum of the potential energy surface?&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
On a potential energy surface (PES) diagram, the transition state is mathematically defined as the saddle point. The transition state corresponds to the point of maximum potential energy on the minimum energy pathway.&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
In order to identify a transition state, begin a reactant trajectory at the estimated transition state position, with zero momentum, and it should not move in any direction. To distinguish the transition state from a local minimum on the PES, change the trajectory parameters so that it starts close to the transition state, and the path should move away as it goes &#039;down&#039; the PES, away from the maximum, and the potential energy decreases as it is converted to kinetic energy. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q2. Report your best estimate of the transition state position (r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;) and explain your reasoning illustrating it with a “Internuclear Distances vs Time” plot for a relevant trajectory.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
For the reaction, H + H&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;, the transition state position was found to be r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 90.75 pm. Referring to the reactants, A is the incoming hydrogen atom; B and C are the two atoms in the hydrogen molecule. For the trajectory starting at the transition state, Figure 1 shows a graph of Internuclear Distance against Time. As can be seen, the lines for the distances A-B and B-C are flat, showing that as time progresses the atoms are not getting closer or further away from each other, but rather their internuclear distances remain constant. There is no gradient at the transition state, and the atoms have no momentum, so they remain in the same place.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q3. Comment on how the mep and the trajectory you just calculated differ.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Below, Figures 2 and 3 show the results of two calculations with the same initial conditions. Figure 2 uses an MEP calculation type and Figure 3 uses a Dynamics calculation type.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Figure 2 shows the trajectory where at each step the momentum is reset to zero, meaning the path taken is that of the minimum energy, where the descent in potential energy is the steepest.&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt; This differs from Figure 3, which is a more realistic calculation as it does not reset the momentum. The trajectory shown in Figure 3 shows a more wavy path, corresponding to the vibrational energy in the molecule, resulting in oscillation of the atoms in the molecule.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[File:01509561_bc=91.75,MEP.png|thumb|Figure 2 - A contour plot showing the minimum energy path, r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;+1 pm,  r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; and the momenta p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 0 g.mol&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;|none]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[File:01509561_bc=91.75,Dynamics.png|thumb|Figure 3 - A contour plot using &#039;Dynamics&#039; calculations, r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;+1 pm, r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; and the momenta p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 0 g.mol&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;|none]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
NOT BLUE:&#039;&#039;&#039;Take note of the final values of the positions r1(t) r2(t) and  p1(t) p2(t) for your trajectory for large enough t. &#039;&#039;&#039;Stup a calculation where the initial positions correspond to the final positions of the trajectory you calculated above, the same final momenta values but with their signs reversed.&lt;br /&gt;
What do you observe?&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
All for t=230.4. r1(t)=69.96, r2(t)=1724.46, p1(t)=2.64681, p2(t)=5.08444&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q4. Complete the table above by adding the total energy, whether the trajectory is reactive or unreactive, and provide a plot of the trajectory and a small description for what happens along the trajectory. What can you conclude from the table?&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
{| class=&amp;quot;wikitable&amp;quot; border=1&lt;br /&gt;
! p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;/&amp;amp;nbsp;g.mol&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt; !! p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;/&amp;amp;nbsp;g.mol&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt; !! E&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;tot&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; / kJ mol-1 !! Reactive? !! Description of the dynamics !! Illustration of the trajectory&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
| -2.56 || -5.1  ||-414.280||Reactive||The reactants have more translational energy and less vibrational energy. They react and pass through the transition state to form the products. The products have less translational energy and more vibrational energy as illustrated by the oscillations in Figure 4.||[[File:01509561_table,image1.png|300px|thumb|Figure 4]]&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
| -3.1  || -4.1  ||419.761||Unreactive|| ||[[File:01509561_table,image2.png|300px|thumb|Figure 5]]&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
| -3.1  || -5.1  ||413.574||Reactive|| ||[[File:01509561_table,image3.png|300px|thumb|Figure 6]]&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
| -5.1  || -10.1 ||356.358||Unreactive|| ||[[File:01509561_table,image4.png|300px|thumb|Figure 7]]&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
| -5.1  || -10.6 ||349.826||Reactive|| ||[[File:01509561_table,image5.png|300px|thumb|Figure 8]]&lt;br /&gt;
|}&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q5.&#039;&#039;&#039; &#039;&#039;&#039;Given the results you have obtained, how will Transition State Theory predictions for reaction rate values compare with experimental values?&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Transition State theory relies on a number of assumptions in order to predict the rate of a reaction; these assumptions result in the overestimation of the rate values. Therefore, Transition State Theory predictions for reaction rate values will be slightly larger than the corresponding experimental values. The main assumption Transition State Theory relies on is the once the reactants have crossed the energy barrier of the transition state, they will form products and the reaction will be successful. It assumes that they never re-cross the barrier back to reactants.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
(Chem Kinetics, Keith Laidler)Assumptions: 1. Molecular systems that have surmounted the col in the direction of products cannot turn back and form reactant molecules again.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
2. The energy distribution among the reactant molecules is in accordance with the Maxwell-Boltzmann distribution. Furthermore, it is assumed that even when the whole system is not at equilibrium, the concentration of those activate complexes that are becoming products can also be calculated using equilibrium theory.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
3. It is permissible to separate the motion of the system over the col from the other motions associated with the activated complex.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
4. A chemical reaction can be satisfactorily treated in terms of classical motion over the barrier, quantum effects being ignored.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Exercise 2 ==&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q6.&#039;&#039;&#039; &#039;&#039;&#039;By inspecting the potential energy surfaces, classify the F + H&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; and H + HF reactions according to their energetics (endothermic or exothermic). How does this relate to the bond strength of the chemical species involved?&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
F + H2 is exothermic. Considerable amount of E released passes into vibrational energy of HF. E mainly passes into translational energy of HL&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
F+H2: ab=230, -5.1. bc=74, -3.1&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q7.&#039;&#039;&#039; &#039;&#039;&#039;Locate the approximate position of the transition state.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
r2=181.4,r1=74, momenta=0&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q8.&#039;&#039;&#039; &#039;&#039;&#039;Report the activation energy for both reactions.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
F+H2, Ea=&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
H + HF, Ea=&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q9.&#039;&#039;&#039; &#039;&#039;&#039;In light of the fact that energy is conserved, discuss the mechanism of release of the reaction energy. Explain how this could be confirmed experimentally.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The reactants start off with a small amount of vibrational energy; most of their energy &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q10.&#039;&#039;&#039; &#039;&#039;&#039;Discuss how the distribution of energy between different modes (translation and vibration) affect the efficiency of the reaction, and how this is influenced by the position of the transition state.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
answer&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== References ==&lt;br /&gt;
1.&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>Sns18</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://chemwiki.ch.ic.ac.uk/index.php?title=01509561&amp;diff=805008</id>
		<title>01509561</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://chemwiki.ch.ic.ac.uk/index.php?title=01509561&amp;diff=805008"/>
		<updated>2020-05-15T17:20:19Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;Sns18: &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;= Molecular Reaction Dynamics Report =&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== by Sharifa Sheikh ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Exercise 1 ==&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q1. On a potential energy surface diagram, how is the transition state mathematically defined? How can the transition state be identified, and how can it be distinguished from a local minimum of the potential energy surface?&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
On a potential energy surface (PES) diagram, the transition state is mathematically defined as the saddle point. The transition state corresponds to the point of maximum potential energy on the minimum energy pathway.&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
In order to identify a transition state, begin a reactant trajectory at the estimated transition state position, with zero momentum, and it should not move in any direction. To distinguish the transition state from a local minimum on the PES, change the trajectory parameters so that it starts close to the transition state, and the path should move away as it goes &#039;down&#039; the PES, away from the maximum, and the potential energy decreases as it is converted to kinetic energy. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q2. Report your best estimate of the transition state position (r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;) and explain your reasoning illustrating it with a “Internuclear Distances vs Time” plot for a relevant trajectory.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
For the reaction, H + H&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;, the transition state position was found to be r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 90.75 pm. Referring to the reactants, A is the incoming hydrogen atom; B and C are the two atoms in the hydrogen molecule. For the trajectory starting at the transition state, Figure 1 shows a graph of Internuclear Distance against Time. As can be seen, the lines for the distances A-B and B-C are flat, showing that as time progresses the atoms are not getting closer or further away from each other, but rather their internuclear distances remain constant. There is no gradient at the transition state, and the atoms have no momentum, so they remain in the same place.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q3. Comment on how the mep and the trajectory you just calculated differ.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Below, Figures 2 and 3 show the results of two calculations with the same initial conditions. Figure 2 uses an MEP calculation type and Figure 3 uses a Dynamics calculation type.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Figure 2 shows the trajectory where at each step the momentum is reset to zero, meaning the path taken is that of the minimum energy, where the descent in potential energy is the steepest.&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt; This differs from Figure 3, which is a more realistic calculation as it does not reset the momentum. The trajectory shown in Figure 3 shows a more wavy path, corresponding to the vibrational energy in the molecule, resulting in oscillation of the atoms in the molecule.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[File:01509561_bc=91.75,MEP.png|thumb|Figure 2 - A contour plot showing the minimum energy path, r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;+1 pm,  r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; and the momenta p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 0 g.mol&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;|none]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[File:01509561_bc=91.75,Dynamics.png|thumb|Figure 3 - A contour plot using &#039;Dynamics&#039; calculations, r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;+1 pm, r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; and the momenta p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 0 g.mol&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;|none]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
NOT BLUE:&#039;&#039;&#039;Take note of the final values of the positions r1(t) r2(t) and  p1(t) p2(t) for your trajectory for large enough t. &#039;&#039;&#039;Stup a calculation where the initial positions correspond to the final positions of the trajectory you calculated above, the same final momenta values but with their signs reversed.&lt;br /&gt;
What do you observe?&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
All for t=230.4. r1(t)=69.96, r2(t)=1724.46, p1(t)=2.64681, p2(t)=5.08444&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q4. Complete the table above by adding the total energy, whether the trajectory is reactive or unreactive, and provide a plot of the trajectory and a small description for what happens along the trajectory. What can you conclude from the table?&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
{| class=&amp;quot;wikitable&amp;quot; border=1&lt;br /&gt;
! p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;/&amp;amp;nbsp;g.mol&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt; !! p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;/&amp;amp;nbsp;g.mol&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt; !! E&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;tot&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; / kJ mol-1 !! Reactive? !! Description of the dynamics !! Illustration of the trajectory&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
| -2.56 || -5.1  ||-414.280||Reactive||The reactants have more translational energy and less vibrational energy. They react and pass through the transition state to form the products. The products have less translational energy and more vibrational energy as illustrated by the oscillations in Figure 4.||[[File:01509561_table,image1.png|300px]]&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
| -3.1  || -4.1  ||419.761||Unreactive|| ||[[File:01509561_table,image2.png|300px]]&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
| -3.1  || -5.1  ||413.574||Reactive|| ||[[File:01509561_table,image3.png|300px]]&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
| -5.1  || -10.1 ||356.358||Unreactive|| ||[[File:01509561_table,image4.png|300px]]&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
| -5.1  || -10.6 ||349.826||Reactive|| ||[[File:01509561_table,image5.png|300px]]&lt;br /&gt;
|}&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q5.&#039;&#039;&#039; &#039;&#039;&#039;Given the results you have obtained, how will Transition State Theory predictions for reaction rate values compare with experimental values?&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Transition State theory relies on a number of assumptions in order to predict the rate of a reaction; these assumptions result in the overestimation of the rate values. Therefore, Transition State Theory predictions for reaction rate values will be slightly larger than the corresponding experimental values. The main assumption Transition State Theory relies on is the once the reactants have crossed the energy barrier of the transition state, they will form products and the reaction will be successful. It assumes that they never re-cross the barrier back to reactants.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
(Chem Kinetics, Keith Laidler)Assumptions: 1. Molecular systems that have surmounted the col in the direction of products cannot turn back and form reactant molecules again.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
2. The energy distribution among the reactant molecules is in accordance with the Maxwell-Boltzmann distribution. Furthermore, it is assumed that even when the whole system is not at equilibrium, the concentration of those activate complexes that are becoming products can also be calculated using equilibrium theory.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
3. It is permissible to separate the motion of the system over the col from the other motions associated with the activated complex.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
4. A chemical reaction can be satisfactorily treated in terms of classical motion over the barrier, quantum effects being ignored.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Exercise 2 ==&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q6.&#039;&#039;&#039; &#039;&#039;&#039;By inspecting the potential energy surfaces, classify the F + H&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; and H + HF reactions according to their energetics (endothermic or exothermic). How does this relate to the bond strength of the chemical species involved?&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
F + H2 is exothermic. Considerable amount of E released passes into vibrational energy of HF. E mainly passes into translational energy of HL&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
F+H2: ab=230, -5.1. bc=74, -3.1&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q7.&#039;&#039;&#039; &#039;&#039;&#039;Locate the approximate position of the transition state.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
r2=181.4,r1=74, momenta=0&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q8.&#039;&#039;&#039; &#039;&#039;&#039;Report the activation energy for both reactions.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
F+H2, Ea=&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
H + HF, Ea=&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q9.&#039;&#039;&#039; &#039;&#039;&#039;In light of the fact that energy is conserved, discuss the mechanism of release of the reaction energy. Explain how this could be confirmed experimentally.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The reactants start off with a small amount of vibrational energy; most of their energy &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q10.&#039;&#039;&#039; &#039;&#039;&#039;Discuss how the distribution of energy between different modes (translation and vibration) affect the efficiency of the reaction, and how this is influenced by the position of the transition state.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
answer&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== References ==&lt;br /&gt;
1.&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>Sns18</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://chemwiki.ch.ic.ac.uk/index.php?title=01509561&amp;diff=804961</id>
		<title>01509561</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://chemwiki.ch.ic.ac.uk/index.php?title=01509561&amp;diff=804961"/>
		<updated>2020-05-15T17:05:13Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;Sns18: &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;= Molecular Reaction Dynamics Report =&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== by Sharifa Sheikh ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Exercise 1 ==&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q1. On a potential energy surface diagram, how is the transition state mathematically defined? How can the transition state be identified, and how can it be distinguished from a local minimum of the potential energy surface?&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
On a potential energy surface (PES) diagram, the transition state is mathematically defined as the saddle point. The transition state corresponds to the point of maximum potential energy on the minimum energy pathway.&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
In order to identify a transition state, begin a reactant trajectory at the estimated transition state position, with zero momentum, and it should not move in any direction. To distinguish the transition state from a local minimum on the PES, change the trajectory parameters so that it starts close to the transition state, and the path should move away as it goes &#039;down&#039; the PES, away from the maximum, and the potential energy decreases as it is converted to kinetic energy. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q2. Report your best estimate of the transition state position (r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;) and explain your reasoning illustrating it with a “Internuclear Distances vs Time” plot for a relevant trajectory.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
For the reaction, H + H&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;, the transition state position was found to be r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 90.75 pm. Referring to the reactants, A is the incoming hydrogen atom; B and C are the two atoms in the hydrogen molecule. For the trajectory starting at the transition state, Figure 1 shows a graph of Internuclear Distance against Time. As can be seen, the lines for the distances A-B and B-C are flat, showing that as time progresses the atoms are not getting closer or further away from each other, but rather their internuclear distances remain constant. There is no gradient at the transition state, and the atoms have no momentum, so they remain in the same place.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q3. Comment on how the mep and the trajectory you just calculated differ.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Below, Figures 2 and 3 show the results of two calculations with the same initial conditions. Figure 2 uses an MEP calculation type and Figure 3 uses a Dynamics calculation type.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Figure 2 shows the trajectory where at each step the momentum is reset to zero, meaning the path taken is that of the minimum energy, where the descent in potential energy is the steepest.&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt; This differs from Figure 3, which is a more realistic calculation as it does not reset the momentum. The trajectory shown in Figure 3 shows a more wavy path, corresponding to the vibrational energy in the molecule, resulting in oscillation of the atoms in the molecule.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[File:01509561_bc=91.75,MEP.png|thumb|Figure 2 - A contour plot showing the minimum energy path, r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;+1 pm,  r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; and the momenta p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 0 g.mol&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;|none]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[File:01509561_bc=91.75,Dynamics.png|thumb|Figure 3 - A contour plot using &#039;Dynamics&#039; calculations, r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;+1 pm, r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; and the momenta p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 0 g.mol&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;|none]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
NOT BLUE:&#039;&#039;&#039;Take note of the final values of the positions r1(t) r2(t) and  p1(t) p2(t) for your trajectory for large enough t. &#039;&#039;&#039;Stup a calculation where the initial positions correspond to the final positions of the trajectory you calculated above, the same final momenta values but with their signs reversed.&lt;br /&gt;
What do you observe?&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
All for t=230.4. r1(t)=69.96, r2(t)=1724.46, p1(t)=2.64681, p2(t)=5.08444&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q4. Complete the table above by adding the total energy, whether the trajectory is reactive or unreactive, and provide a plot of the trajectory and a small description for what happens along the trajectory. What can you conclude from the table?&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
{| class=&amp;quot;wikitable&amp;quot; border=1&lt;br /&gt;
! p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;/&amp;amp;nbsp;g.mol&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt; !! p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;/&amp;amp;nbsp;g.mol&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt; !! E&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;tot&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; / kJ mol-1 !! Reactive? !! Description of the dynamics !! Illustration of the trajectory&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
| -2.56 || -5.1  ||415.708||Reactive|| ||[[File:01509561_table,image1.png|300px]]&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
| -3.1  || -4.1  ||419.761||Unreactive|| ||[[File:01509561_table,image2.png|300px]]&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
| -3.1  || -5.1  ||413.574||Reactive|| ||[[File:01509561_table,image3.png|300px]]&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
| -5.1  || -10.1 ||356.358||Unreactive|| ||[[File:01509561_table,image4.png|300px]]&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
| -5.1  || -10.6 ||349.826||Reactive|| ||[[File:01509561_table,image5.png|300px]]&lt;br /&gt;
|}&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q5.&#039;&#039;&#039; &#039;&#039;&#039;Given the results you have obtained, how will Transition State Theory predictions for reaction rate values compare with experimental values?&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Transition State theory relies on a number of assumptions in order to predict the rate of a reaction; these assumptions result in the overestimation of the rate values. Therefore, Transition State Theory predictions for reaction rate values will be slightly larger than the corresponding experimental values. The main assumption Transition State Theory relies on is the once the reactants have crossed the energy barrier of the transition state, they will form products and the reaction will be successful. It assumes that they never re-cross the barrier back to reactants.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
(Chem Kinetics, Keith Laidler)Assumptions: 1. Molecular systems that have surmounted the col in the direction of products cannot turn back and form reactant molecules again.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
2. The energy distribution among the reactant molecules is in accordance with the Maxwell-Boltzmann distribution. Furthermore, it is assumed that even when the whole system is not at equilibrium, the concentration of those activate complexes that are becoming products can also be calculated using equilibrium theory.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
3. It is permissible to separate the motion of the system over the col from the other motions associated with the activated complex.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
4. A chemical reaction can be satisfactorily treated in terms of classical motion over the barrier, quantum effects being ignored.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Exercise 2 ==&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q6.&#039;&#039;&#039; &#039;&#039;&#039;By inspecting the potential energy surfaces, classify the F + H&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; and H + HF reactions according to their energetics (endothermic or exothermic). How does this relate to the bond strength of the chemical species involved?&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
F + H2 is exothermic. Considerable amount of E released passes into vibrational energy of HF. E mainly passes into translational energy of HL&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
F+H2: ab=230, -5.1. bc=74, -3.1&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q7.&#039;&#039;&#039; &#039;&#039;&#039;Locate the approximate position of the transition state.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
r2=181.4,r1=74, momenta=0&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q8.&#039;&#039;&#039; &#039;&#039;&#039;Report the activation energy for both reactions.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
F+H2, Ea=&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
H + HF, Ea=&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q9.&#039;&#039;&#039; &#039;&#039;&#039;In light of the fact that energy is conserved, discuss the mechanism of release of the reaction energy. Explain how this could be confirmed experimentally.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The reactants start off with a small amount of vibrational energy; most of their energy &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q10.&#039;&#039;&#039; &#039;&#039;&#039;Discuss how the distribution of energy between different modes (translation and vibration) affect the efficiency of the reaction, and how this is influenced by the position of the transition state.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
answer&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== References ==&lt;br /&gt;
1.&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>Sns18</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://chemwiki.ch.ic.ac.uk/index.php?title=01509561&amp;diff=804960</id>
		<title>01509561</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://chemwiki.ch.ic.ac.uk/index.php?title=01509561&amp;diff=804960"/>
		<updated>2020-05-15T17:03:13Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;Sns18: /* Exercise 1 */&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;= Molecular Reaction Dynamics Report =&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== by Sharifa Sheikh ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Exercise 1 ==&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q1.&#039;&#039;&#039; &#039;&#039;&#039;On a potential energy surface diagram, how is the transition state mathematically defined? How can the transition state be identified, and how can it be distinguished from a local minimum of the potential energy surface?&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
On a potential energy surface (PES) diagram, the transition state is mathematically defined as the saddle point. The transition state corresponds to the point of maximum potential energy on the minimum energy pathway.&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
In order to identify a transition state, begin a reactant trajectory at the estimated transition state position, with zero momentum, and it should not move in any direction. To distinguish the transition state from a local minimum on the PES, change the trajectory parameters so that it starts close to the transition state, and the path should move away as it goes &#039;down&#039; the PES, away from the maximum, and the potential energy decreases as it is converted to kinetic energy. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q2. Report your best estimate of the transition state position (r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;) and explain your reasoning illustrating it with a “Internuclear Distances vs Time” plot for a relevant trajectory.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
For the reaction, H + H&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;, the transition state position was found to be r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 90.75 pm. Referring to the reactants, A is the incoming hydrogen atom; B and C are the two atoms in the hydrogen molecule. For the trajectory starting at the transition state, Figure 1 shows a graph of Internuclear Distance against Time. As can be seen, the lines for the distances A-B and B-C are flat, showing that as time progresses the atoms are not getting closer or further away from each other, but rather their internuclear distances remain constant. There is no gradient at the transition state, and the atoms have no momentum, so they remain in the same place.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q3. Comment on how the mep and the trajectory you just calculated differ.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Below, Figures 2 and 3 show the results of two calculations with the same initial conditions. Figure 2 uses an MEP calculation type and Figure 3 uses a Dynamics calculation type.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Figure 2 shows the trajectory where at each step the momentum is reset to zero, meaning the path taken is that of the minimum energy, where the descent in potential energy is the steepest.&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt; This differs from Figure 3, which is a more realistic calculation as it does not reset the momentum. The trajectory shown in Figure 3 shows a more wavy path, corresponding to the vibrational energy in the molecule, resulting in oscillation of the atoms in the molecule.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[File:01509561_bc=91.75,MEP.png|thumb|Figure 2 - A contour plot showing the minimum energy path, r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;+1 pm,  r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; and the momenta p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 0 g.mol&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;|none]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[File:01509561_bc=91.75,Dynamics.png|thumb|Figure 3 - A contour plot using &#039;Dynamics&#039; calculations, r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;+1 pm, r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; and the momenta p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 0 g.mol&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;|none]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
NOT BLUE:&#039;&#039;&#039;Take note of the final values of the positions r1(t) r2(t) and  p1(t) p2(t) for your trajectory for large enough t. &#039;&#039;&#039;Stup a calculation where the initial positions correspond to the final positions of the trajectory you calculated above, the same final momenta values but with their signs reversed.&lt;br /&gt;
What do you observe?&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
All for t=230.4. r1(t)=69.96, r2(t)=1724.46, p1(t)=2.64681, p2(t)=5.08444&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Q4. &#039;&#039;&#039;Complete the table above by adding the total energy, whether the trajectory is reactive or unreactive, and provide a plot of the trajectory and a small description for what happens along the trajectory. What can you conclude from the table?&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
{| class=&amp;quot;wikitable&amp;quot; border=1&lt;br /&gt;
! p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;/&amp;amp;nbsp;g.mol&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt; !! p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;/&amp;amp;nbsp;g.mol&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt; !! E&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;tot&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; / kJ mol-1 !! Reactive? !! Description of the dynamics !! Illustration of the trajectory&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
| -2.56 || -5.1  ||415.708||Reactive|| ||[[File:01509561_table,image1.png|300px]]&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
| -3.1  || -4.1  ||419.761||Unreactive|| ||[[File:01509561_table,image2.png|300px]]&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
| -3.1  || -5.1  ||413.574||Reactive|| ||[[File:01509561_table,image3.png|300px]]&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
| -5.1  || -10.1 ||356.358||Unreactive|| ||[[File:01509561_table,image4.png|300px]]&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
| -5.1  || -10.6 ||349.826||Reactive|| ||[[File:01509561_table,image5.png|300px]]&lt;br /&gt;
|}&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q5.&#039;&#039;&#039; &#039;&#039;&#039;Given the results you have obtained, how will Transition State Theory predictions for reaction rate values compare with experimental values?&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Transition State theory relies on a number of assumptions in order to predict the rate of a reaction; these assumptions result in the overestimation of the rate values. Therefore, Transition State Theory predictions for reaction rate values will be slightly larger than the corresponding experimental values. The main assumption Transition State Theory relies on is the once the reactants have crossed the energy barrier of the transition state, they will form products and the reaction will be successful. It assumes that they never re-cross the barrier back to reactants.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
(Chem Kinetics, Keith Laidler)Assumptions: 1. Molecular systems that have surmounted the col in the direction of products cannot turn back and form reactant molecules again.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
2. The energy distribution among the reactant molecules is in accordance with the Maxwell-Boltzmann distribution. Furthermore, it is assumed that even when the whole system is not at equilibrium, the concentration of those activate complexes that are becoming products can also be calculated using equilibrium theory.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
3. It is permissible to separate the motion of the system over the col from the other motions associated with the activated complex.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
4. A chemical reaction can be satisfactorily treated in terms of classical motion over the barrier, quantum effects being ignored.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Exercise 2 ==&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q6.&#039;&#039;&#039; &#039;&#039;&#039;By inspecting the potential energy surfaces, classify the F + H&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; and H + HF reactions according to their energetics (endothermic or exothermic). How does this relate to the bond strength of the chemical species involved?&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
F + H2 is exothermic. Considerable amount of E released passes into vibrational energy of HF. E mainly passes into translational energy of HL&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
F+H2: ab=230, -5.1. bc=74, -3.1&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q7.&#039;&#039;&#039; &#039;&#039;&#039;Locate the approximate position of the transition state.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
r2=181.4,r1=74, momenta=0&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q8.&#039;&#039;&#039; &#039;&#039;&#039;Report the activation energy for both reactions.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
F+H2, Ea=&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
H + HF, Ea=&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q9.&#039;&#039;&#039; &#039;&#039;&#039;In light of the fact that energy is conserved, discuss the mechanism of release of the reaction energy. Explain how this could be confirmed experimentally.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The reactants start off with a small amount of vibrational energy; most of their energy &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q10.&#039;&#039;&#039; &#039;&#039;&#039;Discuss how the distribution of energy between different modes (translation and vibration) affect the efficiency of the reaction, and how this is influenced by the position of the transition state.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
answer&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== References ==&lt;br /&gt;
1.&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>Sns18</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://chemwiki.ch.ic.ac.uk/index.php?title=01509561&amp;diff=804949</id>
		<title>01509561</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://chemwiki.ch.ic.ac.uk/index.php?title=01509561&amp;diff=804949"/>
		<updated>2020-05-15T16:57:01Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;Sns18: &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;= Molecular Reaction Dynamics Report =&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== by Sharifa Sheikh ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Exercise 1 ==&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q1.&#039;&#039;&#039; &#039;&#039;&#039;On a potential energy surface diagram, how is the transition state mathematically defined? How can the transition state be identified, and how can it be distinguished from a local minimum of the potential energy surface?&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
On a potential energy surface (PES) diagram, the transition state is mathematically defined as the saddle point. The transition state corresponds to the point of maximum potential energy on the minimum energy pathway.&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
In order to identify a transition state, begin a reactant trajectory at the estimated transition state position, with zero momentum, and it should not move in any direction. To distinguish the transition state from a local minimum on the PES, change the trajectory parameters so that it starts close to the transition state, and the path should move away as it goes &#039;down&#039; the PES, away from the maximum, and the potential energy decreases as it is converted to kinetic energy. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q2. Report your best estimate of the transition state position (r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;) and explain your reasoning illustrating it with a “Internuclear Distances vs Time” plot for a relevant trajectory.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
For the reaction, H + H&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;, the transition state position was found to be r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 90.75 pm. Referring to the reactants, A is the incoming hydrogen atom; B and C are the two atoms in the hydrogen molecule. For the trajectory starting at the transition state, Figure 1 shows a graph of Internuclear Distance against Time. As can be seen, the lines for the distances A-B and B-C are flat, showing that as time progresses the atoms are not getting closer or further away from each other, but rather their internuclear distances remain constant. There is no gradient at the transition state, and the atoms have no momentum, so they remain in the same place.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q3. Comment on how the mep and the trajectory you just calculated differ.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;ul&amp;gt;&amp;lt;/ul&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Comment on how the mep and the trajectory you just calculated differ.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Below Figures 2 and 3 show the results of a calculation with the same initial conditions. However, Figure 2 uses an MEP calculation type and Figure 3 uses a Dynamics calculation type.&lt;br /&gt;
gure 2 shows the trajectory where at each step the momentum is reset to zero, meaning the route taken is that of the minimum energy. The path taken is that where the descent in potential energy is the steepest.&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[File:01509561_bc=91.75,MEP.png|thumb|Figure 2 - A contour plot showing the minimum energy path, r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;+1 pm,  r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; and the momenta p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 0 g.mol&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;|none]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[File:01509561_bc=91.75,Dynamics.png|thumb|Figure 3 - A contour plot using &#039;Dynamics&#039; calculations, r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;+1 pm, r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; and the momenta p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 0 g.mol&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;|none]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
NOT BLUE:&#039;&#039;&#039;Take note of the final values of the positions r1(t) r2(t) and  p1(t) p2(t) for your trajectory for large enough t. &#039;&#039;&#039;Stup a calculation where the initial positions correspond to the final positions of the trajectory you calculated above, the same final momenta values but with their signs reversed.&lt;br /&gt;
What do you observe?&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
All for t=230.4. r1(t)=69.96, r2(t)=1724.46, p1(t)=2.64681, p2(t)=5.08444&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Q4. &#039;&#039;&#039;Complete the table above by adding the total energy, whether the trajectory is reactive or unreactive, and provide a plot of the trajectory and a small description for what happens along the trajectory. What can you conclude from the table?&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
{| class=&amp;quot;wikitable&amp;quot; border=1&lt;br /&gt;
! p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;/&amp;amp;nbsp;g.mol&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt; !! p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;/&amp;amp;nbsp;g.mol&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt; !! E&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;tot&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; / kJ mol-1 !! Reactive? !! Description of the dynamics !! Illustration of the trajectory&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
| -2.56 || -5.1  ||415.708||Reactive|| ||[[File:01509561_table,image1.png|300px]]&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
| -3.1  || -4.1  ||419.761||Unreactive|| ||[[File:01509561_table,image2.png|300px]]&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
| -3.1  || -5.1  ||413.574||Reactive|| ||[[File:01509561_table,image3.png|300px]]&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
| -5.1  || -10.1 ||356.358||Unreactive|| ||[[File:01509561_table,image4.png|300px]]&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
| -5.1  || -10.6 ||349.826||Reactive|| ||[[File:01509561_table,image5.png|300px]]&lt;br /&gt;
|}&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q5.&#039;&#039;&#039; &#039;&#039;&#039;Given the results you have obtained, how will Transition State Theory predictions for reaction rate values compare with experimental values?&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Transition State theory relies on a number of assumptions in order to predict the rate of a reaction; these assumptions result in the overestimation of the rate values. Therefore, Transition State Theory predictions for reaction rate values will be slightly larger than the corresponding experimental values. The main assumption Transition State Theory relies on is the once the reactants have crossed the energy barrier of the transition state, they will form products and the reaction will be successful. It assumes that they never re-cross the barrier back to reactants.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
(Chem Kinetics, Keith Laidler)Assumptions: 1. Molecular systems that have surmounted the col in the direction of products cannot turn back and form reactant molecules again.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
2. The energy distribution among the reactant molecules is in accordance with the Maxwell-Boltzmann distribution. Furthermore, it is assumed that even when the whole system is not at equilibrium, the concentration of those activate complexes that are becoming products can also be calculated using equilibrium theory.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
3. It is permissible to separate the motion of the system over the col from the other motions associated with the activated complex.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
4. A chemical reaction can be satisfactorily treated in terms of classical motion over the barrier, quantum effects being ignored.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Exercise 2 ==&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q6.&#039;&#039;&#039; &#039;&#039;&#039;By inspecting the potential energy surfaces, classify the F + H&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; and H + HF reactions according to their energetics (endothermic or exothermic). How does this relate to the bond strength of the chemical species involved?&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
F + H2 is exothermic. Considerable amount of E released passes into vibrational energy of HF. E mainly passes into translational energy of HL&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
F+H2: ab=230, -5.1. bc=74, -3.1&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q7.&#039;&#039;&#039; &#039;&#039;&#039;Locate the approximate position of the transition state.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
r2=181.4,r1=74, momenta=0&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q8.&#039;&#039;&#039; &#039;&#039;&#039;Report the activation energy for both reactions.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
F+H2, Ea=&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
H + HF, Ea=&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q9.&#039;&#039;&#039; &#039;&#039;&#039;In light of the fact that energy is conserved, discuss the mechanism of release of the reaction energy. Explain how this could be confirmed experimentally.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The reactants start off with a small amount of vibrational energy; most of their energy &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Q10.&#039;&#039;&#039; &#039;&#039;&#039;Discuss how the distribution of energy between different modes (translation and vibration) affect the efficiency of the reaction, and how this is influenced by the position of the transition state.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
answer&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== References ==&lt;br /&gt;
1.&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>Sns18</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://chemwiki.ch.ic.ac.uk/index.php?title=01509561&amp;diff=804914</id>
		<title>01509561</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://chemwiki.ch.ic.ac.uk/index.php?title=01509561&amp;diff=804914"/>
		<updated>2020-05-15T16:47:28Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;Sns18: &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;== &#039;&#039;&#039;Molecular Reaction Dynamics Report&#039;&#039;&#039; ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== by Sharifa Sheikh ===&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;On a potential energy surface diagram, how is the transition state mathematically defined? How can the transition state be identified, and how can it be distinguished from a local minimum of the potential energy surface?&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
On a potential energy surface (PES) diagram, the transition state is mathematically defined as the saddle point. The transition state corresponds to the point of maximum potential energy on the minimum energy pathway.&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
In order to identify a transition state, begin a reactant trajectory at the estimated transition state position, with zero momentum, and it should not move in any direction. To distinguish the transition state from a local minimum on the PES, change the trajectory parameters so that it starts close to the transition state, and the path should move away as it goes &#039;down&#039; the PES, away from the maximum, and the potential energy decreases as it is converted to kinetic energy. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Report your best estimate of the transition state position (r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;) and explain your reasoning illustrating it with a “Internuclear Distances vs Time” plot for a relevant trajectory.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
For the reaction, H + H&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;, the transition state position was found to be r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 90.75 pm. Referring to the reactants, A is the incoming hydrogen atom; B and C are the two atoms in the hydrogen molecule. For the trajectory starting at the transition state, Figure 1 shows a graph of Internuclear Distance against Time. As can be seen, the lines for the distances A-B and B-C are flat, showing that as time progresses the atoms are not getting closer or further away from each other, but rather their internuclear distances remain constant. There is no gradient at the transition state, and the atoms have no momentum, so they remain in the same place.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;ul&amp;gt;[[File:01509561_r=90.75.png|thumb|Figure 1 - A graph of Internuclear Distance against Time where r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 90.75 pm and p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 0.00 g.mol&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;|none]]&amp;lt;/ul&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Comment on how the mep and the trajectory you just calculated differ.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Below Figures 2 and 3 show the results of a calculation with the same initial conditions. However, Figure 2 uses an MEP calculation type and Figure 3 uses a Dynamics calculation type.&lt;br /&gt;
Figure 2 shows the trajectory where at each step the momentum is reset to zero, meaning the route taken is that of the minimum energy. The path taken is that where the descent in potential energy is the steepest.&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[File:01509561_bc=91.75,MEP.png|thumb|Figure 2 - A contour plot showing the minimum energy path, r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;+1 pm,  r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; and the momenta p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 0 g.mol&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;|none]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[File:01509561_bc=91.75,Dynamics.png|thumb|Figure 3 - A contour plot using &#039;Dynamics&#039; calculations, r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;+1 pm, r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; and the momenta p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 0 g.mol&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;|none]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
NOT BLUE:&#039;&#039;&#039;Take note of the final values of the positions r1(t) r2(t) and  p1(t) p2(t) for your trajectory for large enough t.&lt;br /&gt;
Setup a calculation where the initial positions correspond to the final positions of the trajectory you calculated above, the same final momenta values but with their signs reversed.&lt;br /&gt;
What do you observe?&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
All for t=230.4. r1(t)=69.96, r2(t)=1724.46, p1(t)=2.64681, p2(t)=5.08444&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Complete the table above by adding the total energy, whether the trajectory is reactive or unreactive, and provide a plot of the trajectory and a small description for what happens along the trajectory. What can you conclude from the table?&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
{| class=&amp;quot;wikitable&amp;quot; border=1&lt;br /&gt;
! p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;/&amp;amp;nbsp;g.mol&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt; !! p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;/&amp;amp;nbsp;g.mol&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt; !! E&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;tot&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; / kJ mol-1 !! Reactive? !! Description of the dynamics !! Illustration of the trajectory&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
| -2.56 || -5.1  ||415.708||Reactive|| ||[[File:01509561_table,image1.png|300px]]&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
| -3.1  || -4.1  ||419.761||Unreactive|| ||[[File:01509561_table,image2.png|300px]]&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
| -3.1  || -5.1  ||413.574||Reactive|| ||[[File:01509561_table,image3.png|300px]]&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
| -5.1  || -10.1 ||356.358||Unreactive|| ||[[File:01509561_table,image4.png|300px]]&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
| -5.1  || -10.6 ||349.826||Reactive|| ||[[File:01509561_table,image5.png|300px]]&lt;br /&gt;
|}&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Given the results you have obtained, how will Transition State Theory predictions for reaction rate values compare with experimental values?&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Transition State theory relies on a number of assumptions in order to predict the rate of a reaction; these assumptions result in the overestimation of the rate values. Therefore, Transition State Theory predictions for reaction rate values will be slightly larger than the corresponding experimental values. The main assumption Transition State Theory relies on is the once the reactants have crossed the energy barrier of the transition state, they will form products and the reaction will be successful. It assumes that they never re-cross the barrier back to reactants.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
(Chem Kinetics, Keith Laidler)Assumptions: 1. Molecular systems that have surmounted the col in the direction of products cannot turn back and form reactant molecules again.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
2. The energy distribution among the reactant molecules is in accordance with the Maxwell-Boltzmann distribution. Furthermore, it is assumed that even when the whole system is not at equilibrium, the concentration of those activate complexes that are becoming products can also be calculated using equilibrium theory.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
3. It is permissible to separate the motion of the system over the col from the other motions associated with the activated complex.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
4. A chemical reaction can be satisfactorily treated in terms of classical motion over the barrier, quantum effects being ignored.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Exercise 2&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;By inspecting the potential energy surfaces, classify the F + H&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; and H + HF reactions according to their energetics (endothermic or exothermic). How does this relate to the bond strength of the chemical species involved?&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
F + H2 is exothermic. Considerable amount of E released passes into vibrational energy of HF. E mainly passes into translational energy of HL&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
F+H2: ab=230, -5.1. bc=74, -3.1&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Locate the approximate position of the transition state.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
r2=181.4,r1=74, momenta=0&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Report the activation energy for both reactions.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
F+H2, Ea=&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
H + HF, Ea=&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;In light of the fact that energy is conserved, discuss the mechanism of release of the reaction energy. Explain how this could be confirmed experimentally.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The reactants start off with a small amount of vibrational energy; most of their energy &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Discuss how the distribution of energy between different modes (translation and vibration) affect the efficiency of the reaction, and how this is influenced by the position of the transition state.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
answer&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== References ===&lt;br /&gt;
1.&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>Sns18</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://chemwiki.ch.ic.ac.uk/index.php?title=01509561&amp;diff=804840</id>
		<title>01509561</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://chemwiki.ch.ic.ac.uk/index.php?title=01509561&amp;diff=804840"/>
		<updated>2020-05-15T16:32:02Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;Sns18: &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;== &#039;&#039;&#039;Molecular Reaction Dynamics Report&#039;&#039;&#039; ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== by Sharifa Sheikh ===&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;On a potential energy surface diagram, how is the transition state mathematically defined? How can the transition state be identified, and how can it be distinguished from a local minimum of the potential energy surface?&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
On a potential energy surface (PES) diagram, the transition state is mathematically defined as the saddle point. The transition state corresponds to the point of maximum potential energy on the minimum energy pathway. ref1&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
In order to identify a transition state, begin a reactant trajectory at the estimated transition state position, with zero momentum, and it should not move in any direction. To distinguish the transition state from a local minimum on the PES, change the trajectory parameters so that it starts close to the transition state, and the path should move away as it goes &#039;down&#039; the PES, away from the maximum, and the potential energy decreases as it is converted to kinetic energy. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Report your best estimate of the transition state position (r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;) and explain your reasoning illustrating it with a “Internuclear Distances vs Time” plot for a relevant trajectory.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
For the reaction, H + H&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;, the transition state position was found to be r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 90.75 pm. Referring to the reactants, A is the incoming hydrogen atom; B and C are the two atoms in the hydrogen molecule. For the trajectory starting at the transition state, Figure 1 shows a graph of Internuclear Distance against Time. As can be seen, the lines for the distances A-B and B-C are flat, showing that as time progresses the atoms are not getting closer or further away from each other, but rather their internuclear distances remain constant. There is no gradient at the transition state, and the atoms have no momentum, so they remain in the same place.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;ul&amp;gt;[[File:01509561_r=90.75.png|thumb|Figure 1 - A graph of Internuclear Distance against Time where r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 90.75 pm and p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 0.00 g.mol&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;|none]]&amp;lt;/ul&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Comment on how the mep and the trajectory you just calculated differ.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
explain explain figs 2 and 3&lt;br /&gt;
[[File:01509561_bc=91.75,MEP.png|thumb|Figure 2 - A contour plot showing the minimum energy path, r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;+1 pm,  r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; and the momenta p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 0 g.mol&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;|none]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[File:01509561_bc=91.75,Dynamics.png|thumb|Figure 3 - A contour plot using &#039;Dynamics&#039; calculations, r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; and the momenta p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 0 g.mol&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;|none]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
NOT BLUE:&#039;&#039;&#039;Take note of the final values of the positions r1(t) r2(t) and  p1(t) p2(t) for your trajectory for large enough t.&lt;br /&gt;
Setup a calculation where the initial positions correspond to the final positions of the trajectory you calculated above, the same final momenta values but with their signs reversed.&lt;br /&gt;
What do you observe?&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
All for t=230.4. r1(t)=69.96, r2(t)=1724.46, p1(t)=2.64681, p2(t)=5.08444&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Complete the table above by adding the total energy, whether the trajectory is reactive or unreactive, and provide a plot of the trajectory and a small description for what happens along the trajectory. What can you conclude from the table?&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
{| class=&amp;quot;wikitable&amp;quot; border=1&lt;br /&gt;
! p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;/&amp;amp;nbsp;g.mol&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt; !! p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;/&amp;amp;nbsp;g.mol&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt; !! E&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;tot&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; / kJ mol-1 !! Reactive? !! Description of the dynamics !! Illustration of the trajectory&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
| -2.56 || -5.1  ||415.708||Reactive|| ||[[File:01509561_table,image1.png|300px]]&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
| -3.1  || -4.1  ||419.761||Unreactive|| ||[[File:01509561_table,image2.png|300px]]&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
| -3.1  || -5.1  ||413.574||Reactive|| ||[[File:01509561_table,image3.png|300px]]&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
| -5.1  || -10.1 ||356.358||Unreactive|| ||[[File:01509561_table,image4.png|300px]]&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
| -5.1  || -10.6 ||349.826||Reactive|| ||[[File:01509561_table,image5.png|300px]]&lt;br /&gt;
|}&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Given the results you have obtained, how will Transition State Theory predictions for reaction rate values compare with experimental values?&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Transition State theory relies on a number of assumptions in order to predict the rate of a reaction; these assumptions result in the overestimation of the rate values. Therefore, Transition State Theory predictions for reaction rate values will be slightly larger than the corresponding experimental values. The main assumption Transition State Theory relies on is the once the reactants have crossed the energy barrier of the transition state, they will form products and the reaction will be successful. It assumes that they never re-cross the barrier back to reactants.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
(Chem Kinetics, Keith Laidler)Assumptions: 1. Molecular systems that have surmounted the col in the direction of products cannot turn back and form reactant molecules again.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
2. The energy distribution among the reactant molecules is in accordance with the Maxwell-Boltzmann distribution. Furthermore, it is assumed that even when the whole system is not at equilibrium, the concentration of those activate complexes that are becoming products can also be calculated using equilibrium theory.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
3. It is permissible to separate the motion of the system over the col from the other motions associated with the activated complex.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
4. A chemical reaction can be satisfactorily treated in terms of classical motion over the barrier, quantum effects being ignored.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Exercise 2&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;By inspecting the potential energy surfaces, classify the F + H&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; and H + HF reactions according to their energetics (endothermic or exothermic). How does this relate to the bond strength of the chemical species involved?&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
F + H2 is exothermic. Considerable amount of E released passes into vibrational energy of HF. E mainly passes into translational energy of HL&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
F+H2: ab=230, -5.1. bc=74, -3.1&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Locate the approximate position of the transition state.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
r2=181.4,r1=74, momenta=0&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Report the activation energy for both reactions.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
F+H2, Ea=&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
H + HF, Ea=&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;In light of the fact that energy is conserved, discuss the mechanism of release of the reaction energy. Explain how this could be confirmed experimentally.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The reactants start off with a small amount of vibrational energy; most of their energy &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Discuss how the distribution of energy between different modes (translation and vibration) affect the efficiency of the reaction, and how this is influenced by the position of the transition state.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
answer&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== References ===&lt;br /&gt;
1.&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>Sns18</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://chemwiki.ch.ic.ac.uk/index.php?title=01509561&amp;diff=804818</id>
		<title>01509561</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://chemwiki.ch.ic.ac.uk/index.php?title=01509561&amp;diff=804818"/>
		<updated>2020-05-15T16:21:26Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;Sns18: &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;== &#039;&#039;&#039;Molecular Reaction Dynamics Report&#039;&#039;&#039; ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== by Sharifa Sheikh ===&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;On a potential energy surface diagram, how is the transition state mathematically defined? How can the transition state be identified, and how can it be distinguished from a local minimum of the potential energy surface?&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
On a potential energy surface (PES) diagram, the transition state is mathematically defined as the saddle point. The transition state corresponds to the point of maximum potential energy on the minimum energy pathway. ref1&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
In order to identify a transition state, begin a reactant trajectory at the estimated transition state position, with zero momentum, and it should not move in any direction. To distinguish the transition state from a local minimum on the PES, change the trajectory parameters so that it starts close to the transition state, and the path should move away as it goes &#039;down&#039; the PES, away from the maximum, and the potential energy decreases as it is converted to kinetic energy. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Report your best estimate of the transition state position (r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;) and explain your reasoning illustrating it with a “Internuclear Distances vs Time” plot for a relevant trajectory.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 90.75 pm. explain explain fig 1&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;ul&amp;gt;[[File:01509561_r=90.75.png|thumb|Figure 1 - A graph of Internuclear Distance against Time where r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 90.75 pm and p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 0.00 g.mol&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;|none]]&amp;lt;/ul&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Comment on how the mep and the trajectory you just calculated differ.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
explain explain figs 2 and 3&lt;br /&gt;
[[File:01509561_bc=91.75,MEP.png|thumb|Figure 2 - A contour plot showing the minimum energy path, r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;+1 pm,  r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; and the momenta p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 0 g.mol&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;|none]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[File:01509561_bc=91.75,Dynamics.png|thumb|Figure 3 - A contour plot using &#039;Dynamics&#039; calculations, r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; and the momenta p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 0 g.mol&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;|none]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
NOT BLUE:&#039;&#039;&#039;Take note of the final values of the positions r1(t) r2(t) and  p1(t) p2(t) for your trajectory for large enough t.&lt;br /&gt;
Setup a calculation where the initial positions correspond to the final positions of the trajectory you calculated above, the same final momenta values but with their signs reversed.&lt;br /&gt;
What do you observe?&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
All for t=230.4. r1(t)=69.96, r2(t)=1724.46, p1(t)=2.64681, p2(t)=5.08444&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Complete the table above by adding the total energy, whether the trajectory is reactive or unreactive, and provide a plot of the trajectory and a small description for what happens along the trajectory. What can you conclude from the table?&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
{| class=&amp;quot;wikitable&amp;quot; border=1&lt;br /&gt;
! p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;/&amp;amp;nbsp;g.mol&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt; !! p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;/&amp;amp;nbsp;g.mol&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt; !! E&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;tot&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; / kJ mol-1 !! Reactive? !! Description of the dynamics !! Illustration of the trajectory&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
| -2.56 || -5.1  ||415.708||Reactive|| ||[[File:01509561_table,image1.png|300px]]&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
| -3.1  || -4.1  ||419.761||Unreactive|| ||[[File:01509561_table,image2.png|300px]]&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
| -3.1  || -5.1  ||413.574||Reactive|| ||[[File:01509561_table,image3.png|300px]]&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
| -5.1  || -10.1 ||356.358||Unreactive|| ||[[File:01509561_table,image4.png|300px]]&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
| -5.1  || -10.6 ||349.826||Reactive|| ||[[File:01509561_table,image5.png|300px]]&lt;br /&gt;
|}&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Given the results you have obtained, how will Transition State Theory predictions for reaction rate values compare with experimental values?&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Transition State theory relies on a number of assumptions in order to predict the rate of a reaction; these assumptions result in the overestimation of the rate values. Therefore, Transition State Theory predictions for reaction rate values will be slightly larger than the corresponding experimental values. The main assumption Transition State Theory relies on is the once the reactants have crossed the energy barrier of the transition state, they will form products and the reaction will be successful. It assumes that they never re-cross the barrier back to reactants.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
(Chem Kinetics, Keith Laidler)Assumptions: 1. Molecular systems that have surmounted the col in the direction of products cannot turn back and form reactant molecules again.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
2. The energy distribution among the reactant molecules is in accordance with the Maxwell-Boltzmann distribution. Furthermore, it is assumed that even when the whole system is not at equilibrium, the concentration of those activate complexes that are becoming products can also be calculated using equilibrium theory.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
3. It is permissible to separate the motion of the system over the col from the other motions associated with the activated complex.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
4. A chemical reaction can be satisfactorily treated in terms of classical motion over the barrier, quantum effects being ignored.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Exercise 2&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;By inspecting the potential energy surfaces, classify the F + H&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; and H + HF reactions according to their energetics (endothermic or exothermic). How does this relate to the bond strength of the chemical species involved?&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
F + H2 is exothermic. Considerable amount of E released passes into vibrational energy of HF. E mainly passes into translational energy of HL&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
F+H2: ab=230, -5.1. bc=74, -3.1&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Locate the approximate position of the transition state.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
r2=181.4,r1=74, momenta=0&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Report the activation energy for both reactions.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
F+H2, Ea=&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
H + HF, Ea=&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;In light of the fact that energy is conserved, discuss the mechanism of release of the reaction energy. Explain how this could be confirmed experimentally.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The reactants start off with a small amount of vibrational energy; most of their energy &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Discuss how the distribution of energy between different modes (translation and vibration) affect the efficiency of the reaction, and how this is influenced by the position of the transition state.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
answer&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== References ===&lt;br /&gt;
1.&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>Sns18</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://chemwiki.ch.ic.ac.uk/index.php?title=01509561&amp;diff=804313</id>
		<title>01509561</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://chemwiki.ch.ic.ac.uk/index.php?title=01509561&amp;diff=804313"/>
		<updated>2020-05-15T12:55:58Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;Sns18: &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;&#039;&#039;&#039;You should explicitly address questions highlighted in blue in the script and backup your answers with results and illustrations of calculations you perform using the program. 10 Qs&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;On a potential energy surface diagram, how is the transition state mathematically defined? How can the transition state be identified, and how can it be distinguished from a local minimum of the potential energy surface?&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
On a potential energy surface diagram, the transition state is mathematically defined as a saddle point, which is a type of stationary point (∂V(&#039;&#039;&#039;r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;i&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;&#039;&#039;&#039;)/∂&#039;&#039;&#039;r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;i&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;&#039;&#039;&#039;=0). Along the reaction pathway, the reactants go through a maximum potential energy to reach the products - this maximum is the transition state. If a reactant trajectory is started at the transition state, it should not move, as long as there is no initial momentum - this is one way to identify the transition state.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Report your best estimate of the transition state position (r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;) and explain your reasoning illustrating it with a “Internuclear Distances vs Time” plot for a relevant trajectory.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 90.75 pm. explain explain fig 1&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;ul&amp;gt;[[File:01509561_r=90.75.png|thumb|Figure 1 - A graph of Internuclear Distance against Time where r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 90.75 pm and p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 0.00 g.mol&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;|none]]&amp;lt;/ul&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Comment on how the mep and the trajectory you just calculated differ.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
explain explain figs 2 and 3&lt;br /&gt;
[[File:01509561_bc=91.75,MEP.png|thumb|Figure 2 - A contour plot showing the minimum energy path, r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;+1 pm,  r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; and the momenta p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 0 g.mol&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;|none]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[File:01509561_bc=91.75,Dynamics.png|thumb|Figure 3 - A contour plot using &#039;Dynamics&#039; calculations, r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; and the momenta p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 0 g.mol&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;|none]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
NOT BLUE:&#039;&#039;&#039;Take note of the final values of the positions r1(t) r2(t) and  p1(t) p2(t) for your trajectory for large enough t.&lt;br /&gt;
Setup a calculation where the initial positions correspond to the final positions of the trajectory you calculated above, the same final momenta values but with their signs reversed.&lt;br /&gt;
What do you observe?&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
All for t=230.4. r1(t)=69.96, r2(t)=1724.46, p1(t)=2.64681, p2(t)=5.08444&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Complete the table above by adding the total energy, whether the trajectory is reactive or unreactive, and provide a plot of the trajectory and a small description for what happens along the trajectory. What can you conclude from the table?&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
{| class=&amp;quot;wikitable&amp;quot; border=1&lt;br /&gt;
! p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;/&amp;amp;nbsp;g.mol&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt; !! p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;/&amp;amp;nbsp;g.mol&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt; !! E&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;tot&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; / kJ mol-1 !! Reactive? !! Description of the dynamics !! Illustration of the trajectory&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
| -2.56 || -5.1  ||415.708||Reactive|| ||[[File:01509561_table,image1.png|300px]]&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
| -3.1  || -4.1  ||419.761||Unreactive|| ||[[File:01509561_table,image2.png|300px]]&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
| -3.1  || -5.1  ||413.574||Reactive|| ||[[File:01509561_table,image3.png|300px]]&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
| -5.1  || -10.1 ||356.358||Unreactive|| ||[[File:01509561_table,image4.png|300px]]&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
| -5.1  || -10.6 ||349.826||Reactive|| ||[[File:01509561_table,image5.png|300px]]&lt;br /&gt;
|}&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Given the results you have obtained, how will Transition State Theory predictions for reaction rate values compare with experimental values?&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Transition State theory relies on a number of assumptions in order to predict the rate of a reaction; these assumptions result in the overestimation of the rate values. Therefore, Transition State Theory predictions for reaction rate values will be slightly larger than the corresponding experimental values. The main assumption Transition State Theory relies on is the once the reactants have crossed the energy barrier of the transition state, they will form products and the reaction will be successful. It assumes that they never re-cross the barrier back to reactants.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
(Chem Kinetics, Keith Laidler)Assumptions: 1. Molecular systems that have surmounted the col in the direction of products cannot turn back and form reactant molecules again.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
2. The energy distribution among the reactant molecules is in accordance with the Maxwell-Boltzmann distribution. Furthermore, it is assumed that even when the whole system is not at equilibrium, the concentration of those activate complexes that are becoming products can also be calculated using equilibrium theory.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
3. It is permissible to separate the motion of the system over the col from the other motions associated with the activated complex.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
4. A chemical reaction can be satisfactorily treated in terms of classical motion over the barrier, quantum effects being ignored.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Exercise 2&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;By inspecting the potential energy surfaces, classify the F + H&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; and H + HF reactions according to their energetics (endothermic or exothermic). How does this relate to the bond strength of the chemical species involved?&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
F + H2 is exothermic. Considerable amount of E released passes into vibrational energy of HF. E mainly passes into translational energy of HL&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
F+H2: ab=230, -5.1. bc=74, -3.1&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Locate the approximate position of the transition state.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
r2=181.4,r1=74, momenta=0&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Report the activation energy for both reactions.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
F+H2, Ea=&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
H + HF, Ea=&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;In light of the fact that energy is conserved, discuss the mechanism of release of the reaction energy. Explain how this could be confirmed experimentally.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The reactants start off with a small amount of vibrational energy; most of their energy &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Discuss how the distribution of energy between different modes (translation and vibration) affect the efficiency of the reaction, and how this is influenced by the position of the transition state.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
answer&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>Sns18</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://chemwiki.ch.ic.ac.uk/index.php?title=01509561&amp;diff=803870</id>
		<title>01509561</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://chemwiki.ch.ic.ac.uk/index.php?title=01509561&amp;diff=803870"/>
		<updated>2020-05-15T08:33:36Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;Sns18: &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;&#039;&#039;&#039;You should explicitly address questions highlighted in blue in the script and backup your answers with results and illustrations of calculations you perform using the program. 10 Qs&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;On a potential energy surface diagram, how is the transition state mathematically defined? How can the transition state be identified, and how can it be distinguished from a local minimum of the potential energy surface?&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
On a potential energy surface diagram, the transition state is mathematically defined as a saddle point, which is a type of stationary point (∂V(&#039;&#039;&#039;r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;i&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;&#039;&#039;&#039;)/∂&#039;&#039;&#039;r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;i&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;&#039;&#039;&#039;=0). Along the reaction pathway, the reactants go through a maximum potential energy to reach the products - this maximum is the transition state. If a reactant trajectory is started at the transition state, it should not move, as long as there is no initial momentum - this is one way to identify the transition state.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Report your best estimate of the transition state position (r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;) and explain your reasoning illustrating it with a “Internuclear Distances vs Time” plot for a relevant trajectory.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 90.75 pm. explain explain fig 1&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;ul&amp;gt;[[File:01509561_r=90.75.png|thumb|Figure 1 - A graph of Internuclear Distance against Time where r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 90.75 pm and p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 0.00 g.mol&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;|none]]&amp;lt;/ul&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Comment on how the mep and the trajectory you just calculated differ.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
explain explain figs 2 and 3&lt;br /&gt;
[[File:01509561_bc=91.75,MEP.png|thumb|Figure 2 - A contour plot showing the minimum energy path, r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;+1 pm,  r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; and the momenta p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 0 g.mol&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;|none]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[File:01509561_bc=91.75,Dynamics.png|thumb|Figure 3 - A contour plot using &#039;Dynamics&#039; calculations, r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; and the momenta p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 0 g.mol&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;|none]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
NOT BLUE:&#039;&#039;&#039;Take note of the final values of the positions r1(t) r2(t) and  p1(t) p2(t) for your trajectory for large enough t.&lt;br /&gt;
Setup a calculation where the initial positions correspond to the final positions of the trajectory you calculated above, the same final momenta values but with their signs reversed.&lt;br /&gt;
What do you observe?&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
All for t=230.4. r1(t)=69.96, r2(t)=1724.46, p1(t)=2.64681, p2(t)=5.08444&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Complete the table above by adding the total energy, whether the trajectory is reactive or unreactive, and provide a plot of the trajectory and a small description for what happens along the trajectory. What can you conclude from the table?&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
{| class=&amp;quot;wikitable&amp;quot; border=1&lt;br /&gt;
! p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;/&amp;amp;nbsp;g.mol&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt; !! p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;/&amp;amp;nbsp;g.mol&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt; !! E&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;tot&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; / kJ mol-1 !! Reactive? !! Description of the dynamics !! Illustration of the trajectory&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
| -2.56 || -5.1  ||415.708||Reactive|| ||[[File:01509561_table,image1.png|300px]]&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
| -3.1  || -4.1  ||419.761||Unreactive|| ||[[File:01509561_table,image2.png|300px]]&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
| -3.1  || -5.1  ||413.574||Reactive|| ||[[File:01509561_table,image3.png|300px]]&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
| -5.1  || -10.1 ||356.358||Unreactive|| ||[[File:01509561_table,image4.png|300px]]&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
| -5.1  || -10.6 ||349.826||Reactive|| ||[[File:01509561_table,image5.png|300px]]&lt;br /&gt;
|}&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Given the results you have obtained, how will Transition State Theory predictions for reaction rate values compare with experimental values?&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Transition State theory relies on a number of assumptions in order to predict the rate of a reaction; these assumptions result in the overestimation of the rate values. Therefore, Transition State Theory predictions for reaction rate values will be slightly larger than the corresponding experimental values. The main assumption Transition State Theory relies on is the once the reactants have crossed the energy barrier of the transition state, they will form products and the reaction will be successful. It assumes that they never re-cross the barrier back to reactants.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
(Chem Kinetics, Keith Laidler)Assumptions: 1. Molecular systems that have surmounted the col in the direction of products cannot turn back and form reactant molecules again.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
2. The energy distribution among the reactant molecules is in accordance with the Maxwell-Boltzmann distribution. Furthermore, it is assumed that even when the whole system is not at equilibrium, the concentration of those activate complexes that are becoming products can also be calculated using equilibrium theory.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
3. It is permissible to separate the motion of the system over the col from the other motions associated with the activated complex.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
4. A chemical reaction can be satisfactorily treated in terms of classical motion over the barrier, quantum effects being ignored.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Exercise 2&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;By inspecting the potential energy surfaces, classify the F + H&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; and H + HF reactions according to their energetics (endothermic or exothermic). How does this relate to the bond strength of the chemical species involved?&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
answer&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Locate the approximate position of the transition state.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
answer&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Report the activation energy for both reactions.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
answer&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;In light of the fact that energy is conserved, discuss the mechanism of release of the reaction energy. Explain how this could be confirmed experimentally.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
answer&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Discuss how the distribution of energy between different modes (translation and vibration) affect the efficiency of the reaction, and how this is influenced by the position of the transition state.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
answer&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>Sns18</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://chemwiki.ch.ic.ac.uk/index.php?title=01509561&amp;diff=803862</id>
		<title>01509561</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://chemwiki.ch.ic.ac.uk/index.php?title=01509561&amp;diff=803862"/>
		<updated>2020-05-15T07:56:21Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;Sns18: &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;&#039;&#039;&#039;You should explicitly address questions highlighted in blue in the script and backup your answers with results and illustrations of calculations you perform using the program. 10 Qs&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;On a potential energy surface diagram, how is the transition state mathematically defined? How can the transition state be identified, and how can it be distinguished from a local minimum of the potential energy surface?&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
On a potential energy surface diagram, the transition state is mathematically defined as a saddle point, which is a type of stationary point (∂V(&#039;&#039;&#039;r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;i&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;&#039;&#039;&#039;)/∂&#039;&#039;&#039;r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;i&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;&#039;&#039;&#039;=0). Along the reaction pathway, the reactants go through a maximum potential energy to reach the products - this maximum is the transition state. If a reactant trajectory is started at the transition state, it should not move, as long as there is no initial momentum - this is one way to identify the transition state.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Report your best estimate of the transition state position (r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;) and explain your reasoning illustrating it with a “Internuclear Distances vs Time” plot for a relevant trajectory.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 90.75 pm. explain explain fig 1&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;ul&amp;gt;[[File:01509561_r=90.75.png|thumb|Figure 1 - A graph of Internuclear Distance against Time where r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 90.75 pm and p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 0.00 g.mol&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;|none]]&amp;lt;/ul&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Comment on how the mep and the trajectory you just calculated differ.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
explain explain figs 2 and 3&lt;br /&gt;
[[File:01509561_bc=91.75,MEP.png|thumb|Figure 2 - A contour plot showing the minimum energy path, r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;+1 pm,  r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; and the momenta p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 0 g.mol&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;|none]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[File:01509561_bc=91.75,Dynamics.png|thumb|Figure 3 - A contour plot using &#039;Dynamics&#039; calculations, r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; and the momenta p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 0 g.mol&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;|none]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
NOT BLUE:&#039;&#039;&#039;Take note of the final values of the positions r1(t) r2(t) and  p1(t) p2(t) for your trajectory for large enough t.&lt;br /&gt;
Setup a calculation where the initial positions correspond to the final positions of the trajectory you calculated above, the same final momenta values but with their signs reversed.&lt;br /&gt;
What do you observe?&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
All for t=230.4. r1(t)=69.96, r2(t)=1724.46, p1(t)=2.64681, p2(t)=5.08444&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Complete the table above by adding the total energy, whether the trajectory is reactive or unreactive, and provide a plot of the trajectory and a small description for what happens along the trajectory. What can you conclude from the table?&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
{| class=&amp;quot;wikitable&amp;quot; border=1&lt;br /&gt;
! p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;/&amp;amp;nbsp;g.mol&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt; !! p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;/&amp;amp;nbsp;g.mol&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt; !! E&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;tot&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; / kJ mol-1 !! Reactive? !! Description of the dynamics !! Illustration of the trajectory&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
| -2.56 || -5.1  ||415.708||Reactive|| ||[[File:01509561_table,image1.png|300px]]&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
| -3.1  || -4.1  ||419.761||Unreactive|| ||[[File:01509561_table,image2.png|300px]]&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
| -3.1  || -5.1  ||413.574||Reactive|| ||[[File:01509561_table,image3.png|300px]]&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
| -5.1  || -10.1 ||356.358||Unreactive|| ||[[File:01509561_table,image4.png|300px]]&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
| -5.1  || -10.6 ||349.826||Reactive|| ||[[File:01509561_table,image5.png|300px]]&lt;br /&gt;
|}&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Given the results you have obtained, how will Transition State Theory predictions for reaction rate values compare with experimental values?&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Transition State theory relies on a number of assumptions in order to predict the rate of a reaction; these assumptions result in the overestimation of the rate values. Therefore, Transition State Theory predictions for reaction rate values will be slightly larger than the corresponding experimental values. The main assumption Transition State Theory relies on is the once the reactants have crossed the energy barrier of the transition state, they will form products and the reaction will be successful. It assumes that they never re-cross the barrier back to reactants.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Exercise 2&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;By inspecting the potential energy surfaces, classify the F + H&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; and H + HF reactions according to their energetics (endothermic or exothermic). How does this relate to the bond strength of the chemical species involved?&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
answer&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Locate the approximate position of the transition state.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
answer&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Report the activation energy for both reactions.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
answer&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;In light of the fact that energy is conserved, discuss the mechanism of release of the reaction energy. Explain how this could be confirmed experimentally.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
answer&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Discuss how the distribution of energy between different modes (translation and vibration) affect the efficiency of the reaction, and how this is influenced by the position of the transition state.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
answer&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>Sns18</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://chemwiki.ch.ic.ac.uk/index.php?title=01509561&amp;diff=803767</id>
		<title>01509561</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://chemwiki.ch.ic.ac.uk/index.php?title=01509561&amp;diff=803767"/>
		<updated>2020-05-14T23:07:59Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;Sns18: &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;&#039;&#039;&#039;You should explicitly address questions highlighted in blue in the script and backup your answers with results and illustrations of calculations you perform using the program. 10 Qs&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;On a potential energy surface diagram, how is the transition state mathematically defined? How can the transition state be identified, and how can it be distinguished from a local minimum of the potential energy surface?&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
On a potential energy surface diagram, the transition state is mathematically defined as a saddle point, which is a type of stationary point (∂V(&#039;&#039;&#039;r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;i&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;&#039;&#039;&#039;)/∂&#039;&#039;&#039;r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;i&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;&#039;&#039;&#039;=0). Along the reaction pathway, the reactants go through a maximum potential energy to reach the products - this maximum is the transition state. If a reactant trajectory is started at the transition state, it should not move, as long as there is no initial momentum - this is one way to identify the transition state.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Report your best estimate of the transition state position (r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;) and explain your reasoning illustrating it with a “Internuclear Distances vs Time” plot for a relevant trajectory.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 90.75 pm. explain explain fig 1&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;ul&amp;gt;[[File:01509561_r=90.75.png|thumb|Figure 1 - A graph of Internuclear Distance against Time where r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 90.75 pm and p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 0.00 g.mol&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;|none]]&amp;lt;/ul&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Comment on how the mep and the trajectory you just calculated differ.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
explain explain figs 2 and 3&lt;br /&gt;
[[File:01509561_bc=91.75,MEP.png|thumb|Figure 2 - A contour plot showing the minimum energy path, r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;+1 pm,  r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; and the momenta p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 0 g.mol&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;|none]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[File:01509561_bc=91.75,Dynamics.png|thumb|Figure 3 - A contour plot using &#039;Dynamics&#039; calculations, r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; and the momenta p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 0 g.mol&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;|none]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
NOT BLUE:&#039;&#039;&#039;Take note of the final values of the positions r1(t) r2(t) and  p1(t) p2(t) for your trajectory for large enough t.&lt;br /&gt;
Setup a calculation where the initial positions correspond to the final positions of the trajectory you calculated above, the same final momenta values but with their signs reversed.&lt;br /&gt;
What do you observe?&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
All for t=230.4. r1(t)=69.96, r2(t)=1724.46, p1(t)=2.64681, p2(t)=5.08444&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Complete the table above by adding the total energy, whether the trajectory is reactive or unreactive, and provide a plot of the trajectory and a small description for what happens along the trajectory. What can you conclude from the table?&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
{| class=&amp;quot;wikitable&amp;quot; border=1&lt;br /&gt;
! p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;/&amp;amp;nbsp;g.mol&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt; !! p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;/&amp;amp;nbsp;g.mol&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt; !! E&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;tot&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; / kJ mol-1 !! Reactive? !! Description of the dynamics !! Illustration of the trajectory&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
| -2.56 || -5.1  ||415.708||Reactive|| ||[[File:01509561_table,image1.png|300px]]&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
| -3.1  || -4.1  ||419.761||Unreactive|| ||[[File:01509561_table,image2.png|300px]]&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
| -3.1  || -5.1  ||413.574||Reactive|| ||[[File:01509561_table,image3.png|300px]]&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
| -5.1  || -10.1 ||356.358||Unreactive|| ||[[File:01509561_table,image4.png|300px]]&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
| -5.1  || -10.6 ||349.826||Reactive|| ||[[File:01509561_table,image5.png|300px]]&lt;br /&gt;
|}&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Given the results you have obtained, how will Transition State Theory predictions for reaction rate values compare with experimental values?&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Transition State theory relies on a number of assumptions in order to predict the rate of a reaction; these assumptions result in the overestimation of the rate values. Therefore, Transition State Theory predictions for reaction rate values will be slightly larger than the corresponding experimental values.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Exercise 2&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;By inspecting the potential energy surfaces, classify the F + H&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; and H + HF reactions according to their energetics (endothermic or exothermic). How does this relate to the bond strength of the chemical species involved?&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
answer&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Locate the approximate position of the transition state.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
answer&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Report the activation energy for both reactions.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
answer&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;In light of the fact that energy is conserved, discuss the mechanism of release of the reaction energy. Explain how this could be confirmed experimentally.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
answer&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Discuss how the distribution of energy between different modes (translation and vibration) affect the efficiency of the reaction, and how this is influenced by the position of the transition state.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
answer&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>Sns18</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://chemwiki.ch.ic.ac.uk/index.php?title=01509561&amp;diff=803751</id>
		<title>01509561</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://chemwiki.ch.ic.ac.uk/index.php?title=01509561&amp;diff=803751"/>
		<updated>2020-05-14T22:51:56Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;Sns18: &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;&#039;&#039;&#039;You should explicitly address questions highlighted in blue in the script and backup your answers with results and illustrations of calculations you perform using the program. 10 Qs&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;On a potential energy surface diagram, how is the transition state mathematically defined? How can the transition state be identified, and how can it be distinguished from a local minimum of the potential energy surface?&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
On a potential energy surface diagram, the transition state is mathematically defined as a saddle point, which is a type of stationary point (∂V(&#039;&#039;&#039;r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;i&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;&#039;&#039;&#039;)/∂&#039;&#039;&#039;r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;i&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;&#039;&#039;&#039;=0). Along the reaction pathway, the reactants go through a maximum potential energy to reach the products - this maximum is the transition state. If a reactant trajectory is started at the transition state, it should not move, as long as there is no initial momentum - this is one way to identify the transition state.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Report your best estimate of the transition state position (r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;) and explain your reasoning illustrating it with a “Internuclear Distances vs Time” plot for a relevant trajectory.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 90.75 pm. explain explain fig 1&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;ul&amp;gt;[[File:01509561_r=90.75.png|thumb|Figure 1 - A graph of Internuclear Distance against Time where r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 90.75 pm and p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 0.00 g.mol&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;|none]]&amp;lt;/ul&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Comment on how the mep and the trajectory you just calculated differ.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
explain explain figs 2 and 3&lt;br /&gt;
[[File:01509561_bc=91.75,MEP.png|thumb|Figure 2 - A contour plot showing the minimum energy path, r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;+1 pm,  r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; and the momenta p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 0 g.mol&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;|none]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[File:01509561_bc=91.75,Dynamics.png|thumb|Figure 3 - A contour plot using &#039;Dynamics&#039; calculations, r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; and the momenta p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 0 g.mol&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;|none]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
NOT BLUE:&#039;&#039;&#039;Take note of the final values of the positions r1(t) r2(t) and  p1(t) p2(t) for your trajectory for large enough t.&lt;br /&gt;
Setup a calculation where the initial positions correspond to the final positions of the trajectory you calculated above, the same final momenta values but with their signs reversed.&lt;br /&gt;
What do you observe?&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
All for t=230.4. r1(t)=69.96, r2(t)=1724.46, p1(t)=2.64681, p2(t)=5.08444&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Complete the table above by adding the total energy, whether the trajectory is reactive or unreactive, and provide a plot of the trajectory and a small description for what happens along the trajectory. What can you conclude from the table?&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
{| class=&amp;quot;wikitable&amp;quot; border=1&lt;br /&gt;
! p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;/&amp;amp;nbsp;g.mol&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt; !! p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;/&amp;amp;nbsp;g.mol&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt; !! E&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;tot&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; !! Reactive? !! Description of the dynamics !! Illustration of the trajectory&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
| -2.56 || -5.1  ||||Reactive|| ||[[File:01509561_table,image1.png|300px]]&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
| -3.1  || -4.1  || ||Unreactive|| ||[[File:01509561_table,image2.png|300px]]&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
| -3.1  || -5.1  || ||Reactive|| ||[[File:01509561_table,image3.png|300px]]&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
| -5.1  || -10.1 || ||Unreactive|| ||[[File:01509561_table,image4.png|300px]]&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
| -5.1  || -10.6 || ||Reactive|| ||[[File:01509561_table,image5.png|300px]]&lt;br /&gt;
|}&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Given the results you have obtained, how will Transition State Theory predictions for reaction rate values compare with experimental values?&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Transition State theory relies on a number of assumptions in order to predict the rate of a reaction; these assumptions result in the overestimation of the rate values. Therefore, Transition State Theory predictions for reaction rate values will be slightly larger than the corresponding experimental values.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Exercise 2&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;By inspecting the potential energy surfaces, classify the F + H&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; and H + HF reactions according to their energetics (endothermic or exothermic). How does this relate to the bond strength of the chemical species involved?&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
answer&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Locate the approximate position of the transition state.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
answer&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Report the activation energy for both reactions.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
answer&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;In light of the fact that energy is conserved, discuss the mechanism of release of the reaction energy. Explain how this could be confirmed experimentally.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
answer&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Discuss how the distribution of energy between different modes (translation and vibration) affect the efficiency of the reaction, and how this is influenced by the position of the transition state.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
answer&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>Sns18</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://chemwiki.ch.ic.ac.uk/index.php?title=01509561&amp;diff=803750</id>
		<title>01509561</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://chemwiki.ch.ic.ac.uk/index.php?title=01509561&amp;diff=803750"/>
		<updated>2020-05-14T22:50:45Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;Sns18: &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;&#039;&#039;&#039;You should explicitly address questions highlighted in blue in the script and backup your answers with results and illustrations of calculations you perform using the program. 10 Qs&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;On a potential energy surface diagram, how is the transition state mathematically defined? How can the transition state be identified, and how can it be distinguished from a local minimum of the potential energy surface?&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
On a potential energy surface diagram, the transition state is mathematically defined as a saddle point, which is a type of stationary point (∂V(&#039;&#039;&#039;r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;i&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;&#039;&#039;&#039;)/∂&#039;&#039;&#039;r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;i&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;&#039;&#039;&#039;=0). Along the reaction pathway, the reactants go through a maximum potential energy to reach the products - this maximum is the transition state. If a reactant trajectory is started at the transition state, it should not move, as long as there is no initial momentum - this is one way to identify the transition state.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Report your best estimate of the transition state position (r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;) and explain your reasoning illustrating it with a “Internuclear Distances vs Time” plot for a relevant trajectory.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 90.75 pm. explain explain fig 1&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;ul&amp;gt;[[File:01509561_r=90.75.png|thumb|Figure 1 - A graph of Internuclear Distance against Time where r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 90.75 pm and p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 0.00 g.mol&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;|none]]&amp;lt;/ul&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Comment on how the mep and the trajectory you just calculated differ.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
explain explain figs 2 and 3&lt;br /&gt;
[[File:01509561_bc=91.75,MEP.png|thumb|Figure 2 - A contour plot showing the minimum energy path, r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;+1 pm,  r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; and the momenta p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 0 g.mol&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;|none]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[File:01509561_bc=91.75,Dynamics.png|thumb|Figure 3 - A contour plot using &#039;Dynamics&#039; calculations, r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; and the momenta p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 0 g.mol&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;|none]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
NOT BLUE:&#039;&#039;&#039;Take note of the final values of the positions r1(t) r2(t) and  p1(t) p2(t) for your trajectory for large enough t.&lt;br /&gt;
Setup a calculation where the initial positions correspond to the final positions of the trajectory you calculated above, the same final momenta values but with their signs reversed.&lt;br /&gt;
What do you observe?&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
All for t=230.4. r1(t)=69.96, r2(t)=1724.46, p1(t)=2.64681, p2(t)=5.08444&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Complete the table above by adding the total energy, whether the trajectory is reactive or unreactive, and provide a plot of the trajectory and a small description for what happens along the trajectory. What can you conclude from the table?&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
{| class=&amp;quot;wikitable&amp;quot; border=1&lt;br /&gt;
! p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;/&amp;amp;nbsp;g.mol&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt; !! p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;/&amp;amp;nbsp;g.mol&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt; !! E&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;tot&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; !! Reactive? !! Description of the dynamics !! Illustration of the trajectory&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
| -2.56 || -5.1  ||||Reactive|| ||[[File:01509561_table,image1.png|300px]]&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
| -3.1  || -4.1  || ||Unreactive|| ||[[File:01509561_table,image2.png|300px]]&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
| -3.1  || -5.1  || ||Reactive|| ||[[File:01509561_table,image3.png|300px]]&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
| -5.1  || -10.1 || || || ||[[File:01509561_table,image4.png|300px]]&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
| -5.1  || -10.6 || || || ||[[File:01509561_table,image5.png|300px]]&lt;br /&gt;
|}&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Given the results you have obtained, how will Transition State Theory predictions for reaction rate values compare with experimental values?&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Transition State theory relies on a number of assumptions in order to predict the rate of a reaction; these assumptions result in the overestimation of the rate values. Therefore, Transition State Theory predictions for reaction rate values will be slightly larger than the corresponding experimental values.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Exercise 2&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;By inspecting the potential energy surfaces, classify the F + H&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; and H + HF reactions according to their energetics (endothermic or exothermic). How does this relate to the bond strength of the chemical species involved?&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
answer&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Locate the approximate position of the transition state.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
answer&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Report the activation energy for both reactions.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
answer&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;In light of the fact that energy is conserved, discuss the mechanism of release of the reaction energy. Explain how this could be confirmed experimentally.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
answer&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Discuss how the distribution of energy between different modes (translation and vibration) affect the efficiency of the reaction, and how this is influenced by the position of the transition state.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
answer&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>Sns18</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://chemwiki.ch.ic.ac.uk/index.php?title=01509561&amp;diff=803748</id>
		<title>01509561</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://chemwiki.ch.ic.ac.uk/index.php?title=01509561&amp;diff=803748"/>
		<updated>2020-05-14T22:43:48Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;Sns18: &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;&#039;&#039;&#039;You should explicitly address questions highlighted in blue in the script and backup your answers with results and illustrations of calculations you perform using the program. 10 Qs&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;On a potential energy surface diagram, how is the transition state mathematically defined? How can the transition state be identified, and how can it be distinguished from a local minimum of the potential energy surface?&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
On a potential energy surface diagram, the transition state is mathematically defined as a saddle point, which is a type of stationary point (∂V(&#039;&#039;&#039;r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;i&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;&#039;&#039;&#039;)/∂&#039;&#039;&#039;r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;i&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;&#039;&#039;&#039;=0). Along the reaction pathway, the reactants go through a maximum potential energy to reach the products - this maximum is the transition state. If a reactant trajectory is started at the transition state, it should not move, as long as there is no initial momentum - this is one way to identify the transition state.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Report your best estimate of the transition state position (r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;) and explain your reasoning illustrating it with a “Internuclear Distances vs Time” plot for a relevant trajectory.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 90.75 pm. explain explain fig 1&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;ul&amp;gt;[[File:01509561_r=90.75.png|thumb|Figure 1 - A graph of Internuclear Distance against Time where r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 90.75 pm and p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 0.00 g.mol&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;|none]]&amp;lt;/ul&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Comment on how the mep and the trajectory you just calculated differ.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
explain explain figs 2 and 3&lt;br /&gt;
[[File:01509561_bc=91.75,MEP.png|thumb|Figure 2 - A contour plot showing the minimum energy path, r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;+1 pm,  r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; and the momenta p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 0 g.mol&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;|none]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[File:01509561_bc=91.75,Dynamics.png|thumb|Figure 3 - A contour plot using &#039;Dynamics&#039; calculations, r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; and the momenta p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 0 g.mol&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;|none]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
NOT BLUE:&#039;&#039;&#039;Take note of the final values of the positions r1(t) r2(t) and  p1(t) p2(t) for your trajectory for large enough t.&lt;br /&gt;
Setup a calculation where the initial positions correspond to the final positions of the trajectory you calculated above, the same final momenta values but with their signs reversed.&lt;br /&gt;
What do you observe?&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
All for t=230.4. r1(t)=69.96, r2(t)=1724.46, p1(t)=2.64681, p2(t)=5.08444&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Complete the table above by adding the total energy, whether the trajectory is reactive or unreactive, and provide a plot of the trajectory and a small description for what happens along the trajectory. What can you conclude from the table?&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
{| class=&amp;quot;wikitable&amp;quot; border=1&lt;br /&gt;
! p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;/&amp;amp;nbsp;g.mol&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt; !! p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;/&amp;amp;nbsp;g.mol&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt; !! E&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;tot&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; !! Reactive? !! Description of the dynamics !! Illustration of the trajectory&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
| -2.56 || -5.1  |||| || ||[[File:01509561_table,image1.png|300px]]&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
| -3.1  || -4.1  || || || ||[[File:01509561_table,image2.png|300px]]&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
| -3.1  || -5.1  || || || ||[[File:01509561_table,image3.png|300px]]&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
| -5.1  || -10.1 || || || ||[[File:01509561_table,image4.png|300px]]&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
| -5.1  || -10.6 || || || ||[[File:01509561_table,image5.png|300px]]&lt;br /&gt;
|}&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Given the results you have obtained, how will Transition State Theory predictions for reaction rate values compare with experimental values?&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Transition State theory relies on a number of assumptions in order to predict the rate of a reaction; these assumptions result in the overestimation of the rate values. Therefore, Transition State Theory predictions for reaction rate values will be slightly larger than the corresponding experimental values.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Exercise 2&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;By inspecting the potential energy surfaces, classify the F + H&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; and H + HF reactions according to their energetics (endothermic or exothermic). How does this relate to the bond strength of the chemical species involved?&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
answer&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Locate the approximate position of the transition state.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
answer&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Report the activation energy for both reactions.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
answer&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;In light of the fact that energy is conserved, discuss the mechanism of release of the reaction energy. Explain how this could be confirmed experimentally.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
answer&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Discuss how the distribution of energy between different modes (translation and vibration) affect the efficiency of the reaction, and how this is influenced by the position of the transition state.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
answer&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>Sns18</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://chemwiki.ch.ic.ac.uk/index.php?title=01509561&amp;diff=803745</id>
		<title>01509561</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://chemwiki.ch.ic.ac.uk/index.php?title=01509561&amp;diff=803745"/>
		<updated>2020-05-14T22:39:53Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;Sns18: &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;&#039;&#039;&#039;You should explicitly address questions highlighted in blue in the script and backup your answers with results and illustrations of calculations you perform using the program. 10 Qs&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;On a potential energy surface diagram, how is the transition state mathematically defined? How can the transition state be identified, and how can it be distinguished from a local minimum of the potential energy surface?&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
On a potential energy surface diagram, the transition state is mathematically defined as a saddle point, which is a type of stationary point (∂V(&#039;&#039;&#039;r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;i&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;&#039;&#039;&#039;)/∂&#039;&#039;&#039;r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;i&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;&#039;&#039;&#039;=0). Along the reaction pathway, the reactants go through a maximum potential energy to reach the products - this maximum is the transition state. If a reactant trajectory is started at the transition state, it should not move, as long as there is no initial momentum - this is one way to identify the transition state.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Report your best estimate of the transition state position (r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;) and explain your reasoning illustrating it with a “Internuclear Distances vs Time” plot for a relevant trajectory.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 90.75 pm. explain explain fig 1&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;ul&amp;gt;[[File:01509561_r=90.75.png|thumb|Figure 1 - A graph of Internuclear Distance against Time where r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 90.75 pm and p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 0.00 g.mol&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;|none]]&amp;lt;/ul&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Comment on how the mep and the trajectory you just calculated differ.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
explain explain figs 2 and 3&lt;br /&gt;
[[File:01509561_bc=91.75,MEP.png|thumb|Figure 2 - A contour plot showing the minimum energy path, r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;+1 pm,  r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; and the momenta p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 0 g.mol&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;|none]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[File:01509561_bc=91.75,Dynamics.png|thumb|Figure 3 - A contour plot using &#039;Dynamics&#039; calculations, r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; and the momenta p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 0 g.mol&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;|none]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
NOT BLUE:&#039;&#039;&#039;Take note of the final values of the positions r1(t) r2(t) and  p1(t) p2(t) for your trajectory for large enough t.&lt;br /&gt;
Setup a calculation where the initial positions correspond to the final positions of the trajectory you calculated above, the same final momenta values but with their signs reversed.&lt;br /&gt;
What do you observe?&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
All for t=230.4. r1(t)=69.96, r2(t)=1724.46, p1(t)=2.64681, p2(t)=5.08444&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Complete the table above by adding the total energy, whether the trajectory is reactive or unreactive, and provide a plot of the trajectory and a small description for what happens along the trajectory. What can you conclude from the table?&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
{| class=&amp;quot;wikitable&amp;quot; border=1&lt;br /&gt;
! p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;/&amp;amp;nbsp;g.mol&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt; !! p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;/&amp;amp;nbsp;g.mol&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt; !! E&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;tot&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; !! Reactive? !! Description of the dynamics !! Illustration of the trajectory&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
| -2.56 || -5.1  |||| ||[[File:01509561_table,image1.png]] ||&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
| -3.1  || -4.1  || || || ||&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
| -3.1  || -5.1  || || || ||&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
| -5.1  || -10.1 || || || ||&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
| -5.1  || -10.6 || || || ||&lt;br /&gt;
|}&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Given the results you have obtained, how will Transition State Theory predictions for reaction rate values compare with experimental values?&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Transition State theory relies on a number of assumptions in order to predict the rate of a reaction; these assumptions result in the overestimation of the rate values. Therefore, Transition State Theory predictions for reaction rate values will be slightly larger than the corresponding experimental values.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Exercise 2&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;By inspecting the potential energy surfaces, classify the F + H&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; and H + HF reactions according to their energetics (endothermic or exothermic). How does this relate to the bond strength of the chemical species involved?&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
answer&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Locate the approximate position of the transition state.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
answer&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Report the activation energy for both reactions.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
answer&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;In light of the fact that energy is conserved, discuss the mechanism of release of the reaction energy. Explain how this could be confirmed experimentally.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
answer&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Discuss how the distribution of energy between different modes (translation and vibration) affect the efficiency of the reaction, and how this is influenced by the position of the transition state.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
answer&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>Sns18</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://chemwiki.ch.ic.ac.uk/index.php?title=File:01509561_table,image5.png&amp;diff=803740</id>
		<title>File:01509561 table,image5.png</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://chemwiki.ch.ic.ac.uk/index.php?title=File:01509561_table,image5.png&amp;diff=803740"/>
		<updated>2020-05-14T22:33:49Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;Sns18: &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>Sns18</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://chemwiki.ch.ic.ac.uk/index.php?title=File:01509561_table,image4.png&amp;diff=803738</id>
		<title>File:01509561 table,image4.png</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://chemwiki.ch.ic.ac.uk/index.php?title=File:01509561_table,image4.png&amp;diff=803738"/>
		<updated>2020-05-14T22:31:46Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;Sns18: &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>Sns18</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://chemwiki.ch.ic.ac.uk/index.php?title=File:01509561_table,image3.png&amp;diff=803734</id>
		<title>File:01509561 table,image3.png</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://chemwiki.ch.ic.ac.uk/index.php?title=File:01509561_table,image3.png&amp;diff=803734"/>
		<updated>2020-05-14T22:30:57Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;Sns18: &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>Sns18</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://chemwiki.ch.ic.ac.uk/index.php?title=File:01509561_table,image2.png&amp;diff=803732</id>
		<title>File:01509561 table,image2.png</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://chemwiki.ch.ic.ac.uk/index.php?title=File:01509561_table,image2.png&amp;diff=803732"/>
		<updated>2020-05-14T22:29:28Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;Sns18: &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>Sns18</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://chemwiki.ch.ic.ac.uk/index.php?title=File:01509561_table,image1.png&amp;diff=803711</id>
		<title>File:01509561 table,image1.png</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://chemwiki.ch.ic.ac.uk/index.php?title=File:01509561_table,image1.png&amp;diff=803711"/>
		<updated>2020-05-14T22:04:36Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;Sns18: &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>Sns18</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://chemwiki.ch.ic.ac.uk/index.php?title=01509561&amp;diff=803630</id>
		<title>01509561</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://chemwiki.ch.ic.ac.uk/index.php?title=01509561&amp;diff=803630"/>
		<updated>2020-05-14T21:02:08Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;Sns18: &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;&#039;&#039;&#039;You should explicitly address questions highlighted in blue in the script and backup your answers with results and illustrations of calculations you perform using the program. 10 Qs&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;On a potential energy surface diagram, how is the transition state mathematically defined? How can the transition state be identified, and how can it be distinguished from a local minimum of the potential energy surface?&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
On a potential energy surface diagram, the transition state is mathematically defined as a saddle point, which is a type of stationary point (∂V(&#039;&#039;&#039;r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;i&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;&#039;&#039;&#039;)/∂&#039;&#039;&#039;r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;i&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;&#039;&#039;&#039;=0). Along the reaction pathway, the reactants go through a maximum potential energy to reach the products - this maximum is the transition state. If a reactant trajectory is started at the transition state, it should not move, as long as there is no initial momentum - this is one way to identify the transition state.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Report your best estimate of the transition state position (r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;) and explain your reasoning illustrating it with a “Internuclear Distances vs Time” plot for a relevant trajectory.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 90.75 pm. explain explain fig 1&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;ul&amp;gt;[[File:01509561_r=90.75.png|thumb|Figure 1 - A graph of Internuclear Distance against Time where r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 90.75 pm and p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 0.00 g.mol&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;|none]]&amp;lt;/ul&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Comment on how the mep and the trajectory you just calculated differ.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
explain explain figs 2 and 3&lt;br /&gt;
[[File:01509561_bc=91.75,MEP.png|thumb|Figure 2 - A contour plot showing the minimum energy path, r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;+1 pm,  r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; and the momenta p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 0 g.mol&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;|none]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[File:01509561_bc=91.75,Dynamics.png|thumb|Figure 3 - A contour plot using &#039;Dynamics&#039; calculations, r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; and the momenta p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 0 g.mol&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;|none]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
NOT BLUE:&#039;&#039;&#039;Take note of the final values of the positions r1(t) r2(t) and  p1(t) p2(t) for your trajectory for large enough t.&lt;br /&gt;
Setup a calculation where the initial positions correspond to the final positions of the trajectory you calculated above, the same final momenta values but with their signs reversed.&lt;br /&gt;
What do you observe?&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
All for t=230.4. r1(t)=69.96, r2(t)=1724.46, p1(t)=2.64681, p2(t)=5.08444&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Complete the table above by adding the total energy, whether the trajectory is reactive or unreactive, and provide a plot of the trajectory and a small description for what happens along the trajectory. What can you conclude from the table?&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
{| class=&amp;quot;wikitable&amp;quot; border=1&lt;br /&gt;
! p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;/&amp;amp;nbsp;g.mol&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt; !! p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;/&amp;amp;nbsp;g.mol&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt; !! E&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;tot&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; !! Reactive? !! Description of the dynamics !! Illustration of the trajectory&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
| -2.56 || -5.1  |||| || ||&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
| -3.1  || -4.1  || || || ||&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
| -3.1  || -5.1  || || || ||&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
| -5.1  || -10.1 || || || ||&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
| -5.1  || -10.6 || || || ||&lt;br /&gt;
|}&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Given the results you have obtained, how will Transition State Theory predictions for reaction rate values compare with experimental values?&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Transition State theory relies on a number of assumptions in order to predict the rate of a reaction; these assumptions result in the overestimation of the rate values. Therefore, Transition State Theory predictions for reaction rate values will be slightly larger than the corresponding experimental values.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Exercise 2&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;By inspecting the potential energy surfaces, classify the F + H&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; and H + HF reactions according to their energetics (endothermic or exothermic). How does this relate to the bond strength of the chemical species involved?&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
answer&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Locate the approximate position of the transition state.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
answer&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Report the activation energy for both reactions.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
answer&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;In light of the fact that energy is conserved, discuss the mechanism of release of the reaction energy. Explain how this could be confirmed experimentally.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
answer&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Discuss how the distribution of energy between different modes (translation and vibration) affect the efficiency of the reaction, and how this is influenced by the position of the transition state.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
answer&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>Sns18</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://chemwiki.ch.ic.ac.uk/index.php?title=01509561&amp;diff=803570</id>
		<title>01509561</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://chemwiki.ch.ic.ac.uk/index.php?title=01509561&amp;diff=803570"/>
		<updated>2020-05-14T20:08:21Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;Sns18: &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;&#039;&#039;&#039;You should explicitly address questions highlighted in blue in the script and backup your answers with results and illustrations of calculations you perform using the program.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;On a potential energy surface diagram, how is the transition state mathematically defined? How can the transition state be identified, and how can it be distinguished from a local minimum of the potential energy surface?&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
On a potential energy surface diagram, the transition state is mathematically defined as a saddle point, which is a type of stationary point (∂V(&#039;&#039;&#039;r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;i&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;&#039;&#039;&#039;)/∂&#039;&#039;&#039;r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;i&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;&#039;&#039;&#039;=0). Along the reaction pathway, the reactants go through a maximum potential energy to reach the products - this maximum is the transition state. If a reactant trajectory is started at the transition state, it should not move, as long as there is no initial momentum - this is one way to identify the transition state.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Report your best estimate of the transition state position (r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;) and explain your reasoning illustrating it with a “Internuclear Distances vs Time” plot for a relevant trajectory.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 90.75 pm. explain explain fig 1&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;ul&amp;gt;[[File:01509561_r=90.75.png|thumb|Figure 1 - A graph of Internuclear Distance against Time where r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 90.75 pm and p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 0.00 g.mol&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;|none]]&amp;lt;/ul&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Comment on how the mep and the trajectory you just calculated differ.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
explain explain figs 2 and 3&lt;br /&gt;
[[File:01509561_bc=91.75,MEP.png|thumb|Figure 2 - A contour plot showing the minimum energy path, r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;+1 pm,  r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; and the momenta p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 0 g.mol&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;|none]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[File:01509561_bc=91.75,Dynamics.png|thumb|Figure 3 - A contour plot using &#039;Dynamics&#039; calculations, r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; and the momenta p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 0 g.mol&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;|none]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
NOT BLUE:&#039;&#039;&#039;Take note of the final values of the positions r1(t) r2(t) and  p1(t) p2(t) for your trajectory for large enough t.&lt;br /&gt;
Setup a calculation where the initial positions correspond to the final positions of the trajectory you calculated above, the same final momenta values but with their signs reversed.&lt;br /&gt;
What do you observe?&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
All for t=230.4. r1(t)=69.96, r2(t)=1724.46, p1(t)=2.64681, p2(t)=5.08444&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Complete the table above by adding the total energy, whether the trajectory is reactive or unreactive, and provide a plot of the trajectory and a small description for what happens along the trajectory. What can you conclude from the table?&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
{| class=&amp;quot;wikitable&amp;quot; border=1&lt;br /&gt;
! p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;/&amp;amp;nbsp;g.mol&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt; !! p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;/&amp;amp;nbsp;g.mol&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt; !! E&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;tot&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; !! Reactive? !! Description of the dynamics !! Illustration of the trajectory&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
| -2.56 || -5.1  || || || ||&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
| -3.1  || -4.1  || || || ||&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
| -3.1  || -5.1  || || || ||&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
| -5.1  || -10.1 || || || ||&lt;br /&gt;
|-&lt;br /&gt;
| -5.1  || -10.6 || || || ||&lt;br /&gt;
|}&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>Sns18</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://chemwiki.ch.ic.ac.uk/index.php?title=01509561&amp;diff=803566</id>
		<title>01509561</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://chemwiki.ch.ic.ac.uk/index.php?title=01509561&amp;diff=803566"/>
		<updated>2020-05-14T20:05:08Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;Sns18: &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;&#039;&#039;&#039;You should explicitly address questions highlighted in blue in the script and backup your answers with results and illustrations of calculations you perform using the program.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;On a potential energy surface diagram, how is the transition state mathematically defined? How can the transition state be identified, and how can it be distinguished from a local minimum of the potential energy surface?&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
On a potential energy surface diagram, the transition state is mathematically defined as a saddle point, which is a type of stationary point (∂V(&#039;&#039;&#039;r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;i&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;&#039;&#039;&#039;)/∂&#039;&#039;&#039;r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;i&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;&#039;&#039;&#039;=0). Along the reaction pathway, the reactants go through a maximum potential energy to reach the products - this maximum is the transition state. If a reactant trajectory is started at the transition state, it should not move, as long as there is no initial momentum - this is one way to identify the transition state.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Report your best estimate of the transition state position (r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;) and explain your reasoning illustrating it with a “Internuclear Distances vs Time” plot for a relevant trajectory.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 90.75 pm. explain explain fig 1&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;ul&amp;gt;[[File:01509561_r=90.75.png|left|thumb|Figure 1 - A graph of Internuclear Distance against Time where r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 90.75 pm and p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 0.00 g.mol&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;]]&amp;lt;/ul&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Comment on how the mep and the trajectory you just calculated differ.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
explain explain figs 2 and 3&lt;br /&gt;
[[File:01509561_bc=91.75,MEP.png|left|thumb|Figure 2 - A contour plot showing the minimum energy path, r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;+1 pm,  r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; and the momenta p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 0 g.mol&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[File:01509561_bc=91.75,Dynamics.png|left|thumb|Figure 3 - A contour plot using &#039;Dynamics&#039; calculations, r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; and the momenta p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 0 g.mol&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Take note of the final values of the positions r1(t) r2(t) and  p1(t) p2(t) for your trajectory for large enough t.&lt;br /&gt;
Setup a calculation where the initial positions correspond to the final positions of the trajectory you calculated above, the same final momenta values but with their signs reversed.&lt;br /&gt;
What do you observe?&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
All for t=230.4. r1(t)=69.96, r2(t)=1724.46, p1(t)=2.64681, p2(t)=5.08444&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Complete the table above by adding the total energy, whether the trajectory is reactive or unreactive, and provide a plot of the trajectory and a small description for what happens along the trajectory. What can you conclude from the table?&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>Sns18</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://chemwiki.ch.ic.ac.uk/index.php?title=01509561&amp;diff=803559</id>
		<title>01509561</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://chemwiki.ch.ic.ac.uk/index.php?title=01509561&amp;diff=803559"/>
		<updated>2020-05-14T20:01:40Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;Sns18: &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;&#039;&#039;&#039;You should explicitly address questions highlighted in blue in the script and backup your answers with results and illustrations of calculations you perform using the program.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;On a potential energy surface diagram, how is the transition state mathematically defined? How can the transition state be identified, and how can it be distinguished from a local minimum of the potential energy surface?&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
On a potential energy surface diagram, the transition state is mathematically defined as a saddle point, which is a type of stationary point (∂V(&#039;&#039;&#039;r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;i&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;&#039;&#039;&#039;)/∂&#039;&#039;&#039;r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;i&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;&#039;&#039;&#039;=0). Along the reaction pathway, the reactants go through a maximum potential energy to reach the products - this maximum is the transition state. If a reactant trajectory is started at the transition state, it should not move, as long as there is no initial momentum - this is one way to identify the transition state.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Report your best estimate of the transition state position (r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;) and explain your reasoning illustrating it with a “Internuclear Distances vs Time” plot for a relevant trajectory.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 90.75 pm. explain explain fig 1&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;p&amp;gt;[[File:01509561_r=90.75.png|left|thumb|Figure 1 - A graph of Internuclear Distance against Time where r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 90.75 pm and p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 0.00 g.mol&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;]]&amp;lt;/p&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Comment on how the mep and the trajectory you just calculated differ.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
explain explain figs 2 and 3&lt;br /&gt;
[[File:01509561_bc=91.75,MEP.png|left|thumb|Figure 2 - A contour plot showing the minimum energy path, r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;+1 pm,  r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; and the momenta p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 0 g.mol&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[File:01509561_bc=91.75,Dynamics.png|left|thumb|Figure 3 - A contour plot using &#039;Dynamics&#039; calculations, r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; and the momenta p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 0 g.mol&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Take note of the final values of the positions r1(t) r2(t) and  p1(t) p2(t) for your trajectory for large enough t.&lt;br /&gt;
Setup a calculation where the initial positions correspond to the final positions of the trajectory you calculated above, the same final momenta values but with their signs reversed.&lt;br /&gt;
What do you observe?&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
All for t=230.4. r1(t)=69.96, r2(t)=1724.46, p1(t)=2.64681, p2(t)=5.08444&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Complete the table above by adding the total energy, whether the trajectory is reactive or unreactive, and provide a plot of the trajectory and a small description for what happens along the trajectory. What can you conclude from the table?&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>Sns18</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://chemwiki.ch.ic.ac.uk/index.php?title=01509561&amp;diff=803557</id>
		<title>01509561</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://chemwiki.ch.ic.ac.uk/index.php?title=01509561&amp;diff=803557"/>
		<updated>2020-05-14T20:01:22Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;Sns18: &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;&#039;&#039;&#039;You should explicitly address questions highlighted in blue in the script and backup your answers with results and illustrations of calculations you perform using the program.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;On a potential energy surface diagram, how is the transition state mathematically defined? How can the transition state be identified, and how can it be distinguished from a local minimum of the potential energy surface?&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
On a potential energy surface diagram, the transition state is mathematically defined as a saddle point, which is a type of stationary point (∂V(&#039;&#039;&#039;r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;i&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;&#039;&#039;&#039;)/∂&#039;&#039;&#039;r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;i&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;&#039;&#039;&#039;=0). Along the reaction pathway, the reactants go through a maximum potential energy to reach the products - this maximum is the transition state. If a reactant trajectory is started at the transition state, it should not move, as long as there is no initial momentum - this is one way to identify the transition state.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Report your best estimate of the transition state position (r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;) and explain your reasoning illustrating it with a “Internuclear Distances vs Time” plot for a relevant trajectory.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 90.75 pm. explain explain fig 1&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;p&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
[[File:01509561_r=90.75.png|left|thumb|Figure 1 - A graph of Internuclear Distance against Time where r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 90.75 pm and p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 0.00 g.mol&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;]]&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;/p&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Comment on how the mep and the trajectory you just calculated differ.&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
explain explain figs 2 and 3&lt;br /&gt;
[[File:01509561_bc=91.75,MEP.png|left|thumb|Figure 2 - A contour plot showing the minimum energy path, r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;+1 pm,  r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; and the momenta p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 0 g.mol&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[File:01509561_bc=91.75,Dynamics.png|left|thumb|Figure 3 - A contour plot using &#039;Dynamics&#039; calculations, r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = r&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;ts&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; and the momenta p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = p&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; = 0 g.mol&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;.pm.fs&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;-1&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Take note of the final values of the positions r1(t) r2(t) and  p1(t) p2(t) for your trajectory for large enough t.&lt;br /&gt;
Setup a calculation where the initial positions correspond to the final positions of the trajectory you calculated above, the same final momenta values but with their signs reversed.&lt;br /&gt;
What do you observe?&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
All for t=230.4. r1(t)=69.96, r2(t)=1724.46, p1(t)=2.64681, p2(t)=5.08444&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Complete the table above by adding the total energy, whether the trajectory is reactive or unreactive, and provide a plot of the trajectory and a small description for what happens along the trajectory. What can you conclude from the table?&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>Sns18</name></author>
	</entry>
</feed>