Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
The photophysical properties of a series of ruthenium trisbipyridine complexes covalently linked to aromatic chromophores of the type [Ru(bpy) 2 (4-methyl-4‘-(2-arylethyl)-2,2‘-bipyridine)] 2+ (ClO 4 ) 2, where aryl = 2-naphthyl ([Ru]-naphthalene), 1-pyrenyl ([Ru]-pyrene), and 9-anthryl ([Ru]-anthracene) have been investigated at room temperature and at 77 K. The photophysical properties of these bichromophores are determined by intramolecular energy-transfer processes that are governed by the relative positions of the various singlet and triplet energy levels. As a result, fluorescence from each of the pendant aromatic chromophores is completely quenched following their photoexcitation. For [Ru]-naphthalene the initial excitation energy is localized on the [Ru]-centered 3 MLCT state, whereas for [Ru]-anthracene the energy is localized on the anthracene triplet state. Since the [Ru]-centered 3 MLCT state and the lowest energy pyrene triplet state are isoenergetic, an equilibrium is established resulting in a long-lived room-temperature 3 MLCT emission from [Ru]-pyrene (τ = 5.23 μs). At 77 K dual emission is observed from this bichromophore comprising pyrene phosphorescence and 3 MLCT emission, the relative proportions of which vary with time after the laser pulse.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Wilson et al. (1997) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: