From elewars@alchemy.chem.utoronto.ca  Thu Apr 28 14:32:25 1994
Received: from alchemy.chem.utoronto.ca  for elewars@alchemy.chem.utoronto.ca
	by www.ccl.net (8.6.4/930601.1506) id OAA28169; Thu, 28 Apr 1994 14:04:09 -0400
Received: from localhost (elewars@localhost) by alchemy.chem.utoronto.ca (8.6.4/8.6.4) id OAA15578 for chemistry@ccl.net; Thu, 28 Apr 1994 14:03:22 -0400
Date: Thu, 28 Apr 1994 14:03:22 -0400
From: "E. Lewars" <elewars@alchemy.chem.utoronto.ca>
Message-Id: <199404281803.OAA15578@alchemy.chem.utoronto.ca>
To: chemistry@ccl.net
Subject: symmetry again, re staggered ethene


Peter Shenkin wites: "...consider ethane in the staggered conformation.  This
conf is an energetic minimum, and point-group symmetry.  If I simply stretch
or compress the C-C bond, I do not change the point group, but I am no longer
at a minimum, nor at any other stationary point.
    Doesn't this demonstrate that symmetric structures need not be stationary
points?"
Yes, but wer're not really asking if a symmetric structure of *arbitrary*
geometry is a stationary point, but rather if such a structure, optimized
within the limits of its symmetry (keeping the Sch:/nfliess point group, e.g.
C2v, Cs, etc) must go to a stationary point.
===