Timeline for How to explain to a five year old why "DFT with local exchange–correlation functionals do(es) not describe van der Waals interactions accurately"?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
4 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 5, 2022 at 0:31 | history | edited | Susi Lehtola | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
\exp instead of exp in math mode
|
| Apr 3, 2022 at 7:16 | comment | added | wzkchem5 | Because although many people take the vdW force as a synonym of the dispersion force, still many other people would define the vdW force as a sum of the dispersion force, the Debye force, and the Keesom force. Semilocal functionals only have problems with the dispersion force, but not with the latter two. See my answer at mattermodeling.stackexchange.com/questions/6208/… | |
| Apr 2, 2022 at 21:48 | comment | added | uhoh | Thank you for such a thorough and in-depth answer! It will take a while for my "five year old" brain to go through it in detail, but can you help me understand why attempts to model the attractive force between the two layers of a bilayer graphene material within the context of DFT might be better described as dispersion than a van der Walls force? Does that have a quickie explanation or is it better asked as a separate question? I'm always up for a follow-on question post :-) | |
| Apr 2, 2022 at 20:49 | history | answered | wzkchem5 | CC BY-SA 4.0 |