<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Joining up the pieces. Peroxidation of ethyne.</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.ch.imperial.ac.uk/rzepa/blog/?feed=rss2&#038;p=7027" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.ch.imperial.ac.uk/rzepa/blog/?p=7027</link>
	<description>Chemistry with a twist</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 13 Jun 2013 15:16:09 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.5.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Qadir Timerghazin</title>
		<link>http://www.ch.imperial.ac.uk/rzepa/blog/?p=7027&#038;cpage=1#comment-10009</link>
		<dc:creator>Qadir Timerghazin</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 13 Jul 2012 17:54:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ch.imperial.ac.uk/rzepa/blog/?p=7027#comment-10009</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[This example nicely illustrates a very important point that using only gas-phase calculations or making only single-point corrections for solvation free energy may be highly misleading. Things are just too different in vacuum: intermolecular interactions are exaggerated, charge separation is hindered, etc. So, the potential energy surface may have very different profile, and even the wavefunction character may change: I&#039;ve seen open-shell singlets, stable in the gas phase, collapsed in continuum solvent. 

I begin to think that if the system one works on is in solution, everything should be done with continuum solvent model applied. Fortunately, unlike not too long ago, there are some very robust implementations of continuum models available out there. Warts and all, it&#039;s still better than doing calculations in vacuum. 

This of course brings a contentious issue of doing vibrational frequency calculations with PCM-type models and using them to get thermodynamic data, a truly heretic idea for some researchers. Although I think I do understand their logic, form the experience we&#039;ve seen many times that it works fine. 

Indeed, for species that don&#039;t change much in solution the frequencies and thermodynamic values hardly differ in the gas phase and in solution. In fact, a recent paper from Cramer and Truhlar groups have shown just that: DOI:10.1021/jp205508z]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This example nicely illustrates a very important point that using only gas-phase calculations or making only single-point corrections for solvation free energy may be highly misleading. Things are just too different in vacuum: intermolecular interactions are exaggerated, charge separation is hindered, etc. So, the potential energy surface may have very different profile, and even the wavefunction character may change: I&#8217;ve seen open-shell singlets, stable in the gas phase, collapsed in continuum solvent. </p>
<p>I begin to think that if the system one works on is in solution, everything should be done with continuum solvent model applied. Fortunately, unlike not too long ago, there are some very robust implementations of continuum models available out there. Warts and all, it&#8217;s still better than doing calculations in vacuum. </p>
<p>This of course brings a contentious issue of doing vibrational frequency calculations with PCM-type models and using them to get thermodynamic data, a truly heretic idea for some researchers. Although I think I do understand their logic, form the experience we&#8217;ve seen many times that it works fine. </p>
<p>Indeed, for species that don&#8217;t change much in solution the frequencies and thermodynamic values hardly differ in the gas phase and in solution. In fact, a recent paper from Cramer and Truhlar groups have shown just that: DOI:10.1021/jp205508z</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: More joining up of pieces. Stereocontrol in the ring opening of cyclopropenes. &#171; Henry Rzepa</title>
		<link>http://www.ch.imperial.ac.uk/rzepa/blog/?p=7027&#038;cpage=1#comment-10005</link>
		<dc:creator>More joining up of pieces. Stereocontrol in the ring opening of cyclopropenes. &#171; Henry Rzepa</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 12 Jul 2012 15:05:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ch.imperial.ac.uk/rzepa/blog/?p=7027#comment-10005</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[[...] Henry Rzepa Chemistry with a twist      &#171; Joining up the pieces. Peroxidation of ethyne. [...]]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Henry Rzepa Chemistry with a twist      &laquo; Joining up the pieces. Peroxidation of ethyne. [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

<!-- Performance optimized by W3 Total Cache. Learn more: http://www.w3-edge.com/wordpress-plugins/

 Served from: www.ch.imperial.ac.uk @ 2013-06-19 15:42:57 by W3 Total Cache -->