From chemistry-request@server.ccl.net  Wed Aug  2 04:05:13 2000
Received: from vytautas.vdu.lt (mail@vytautas.vdu.lt [193.219.38.33])
	by server.ccl.net (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id EAA30789
	for <chemistry@ccl.net>; Wed, 2 Aug 2000 04:05:05 -0400
Received: from vaidila.vdu.lt ([193.219.38.52] ident=root)
	by vytautas.vdu.lt with esmtp
	for chemistry@ccl.net
	id 13JtVy-000233-00; Wed, 02 Aug 2000 10:04:34 +0200
Received: from vaidila.vdu.lt (vejas.vdu.lt [193.219.38.82])
	by vaidila.vdu.lt (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id KAA16016
	for <chemistry@ccl.net>; Wed, 2 Aug 2000 10:04:33 +0200 (GMT)
Message-ID: <39885619.249374E8@vaidila.vdu.lt>
Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2000 10:10:50 -0700
From: "art'" <Arturas.Ziemys@vaidila.vdu.lt>
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (Win98; I)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
CC: Computational Chemistry List <chemistry@ccl.net>
Subject: CCL: Atomic charges
References: <Pine.SOL.4.10.10007071547200.29957-100000@shiva.hunter.cuny.edu>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=koi8-r
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Hi CCLers,

Your opinion is interesting  about what method from Gaussian is the best to
reproduce atomic charges. Does anybody knows, how sensitive atomic charges are to
geometry optimisation?

I know that Mulliken routin is very basis set sensitive and the best it is use with
minimal basis sets (Mulliken). How about other methods?

Best wishes to all
A.Ziemys

*Vytautas Magnus Universitu          Ins. of Biochemistry
Dept. of Biology                             Lab. of Enzymatic chemistry
Vileikos 8                                       Mokslininku 12
LT-3035, Kaunas                           Vilnius
Lithuania                                         Lithuania