Kasha's rule 2026-11-05
Kasha's rule states that appreciable luminescence normally originates from the lowest excited electronic state of a given spin multiplicity. In the familiar molecular notation, fluorescence is usually associated with and phosphorescence with , even when absorption initially prepares a higher state. The rule is a spectroscopic regularity, rather than a guarantee that all excited molecules emit.
Michael Kasha presented the underlying classification of electronic transitions in 1950, discussing the connection between radiationless conversion and the lowest emitting level.[ref] Molecular internal conversion provides a route from a higher electronic state to a lower state of the same multiplicity before appreciable higher-state emission occurs.
An original rate-competition model makes the condition quantitative. For an initially populated state, let be conversion to , upper-state radiative decay and other loss. The fraction emitting directly from is
With stipulated , and no other loss, this fraction is about . Fast conversion suppresses upper-state emission even though the molecule absorbs into that state. If conversion is slowed until it competes with radiation, appreciable higher-state emission becomes possible. These values illustrate kinetics, not universal molecular constants.
The rule concerns the emitting electronic state. It does not by itself assert an excitation-wavelength-independent fluorescence quantum yield; that is the separate Kasha-Vavilov rule. Competing photochemistry, intersystem crossing and state preparation can affect the number of emitted photons even when the eventual fluorescence band comes from .
A proposed experimental test compares emission spectra after excitation into different absorption bands, correcting for absorbed photon counts and detector response. Similar emission-band shapes support a common emitting state, while time-resolved measurements test whether a fast relaxation precedes emission. A different band requires checking sample purity, distinct species and instrumental artifacts before assigning emission from a higher electronic state.
The rate argument also explains why a rigid drawing of one downward arrow is insufficient evidence. Measure which states are populated, how fast they exchange population and which transitions radiate. This connects an empirical rule with a falsifiable kinetic model, while preserving the distinction between a common behaviour and an exception-free law.
Michael Kasha 2026-11-05
Michael Kasha connected molecular light emission with the structure and competing relaxation of excited states. His 1950 paper formulated the spectroscopic regularity now called Kasha's rule: emission of a given spin multiplicity normally comes from the lowest excited level of that multiplicity.[ref]
The argument involves rates, rather than a prohibition on preparing a higher excited state. In an original model, a higher state has radiative rate and competing molecular internal conversion rate . Its probability of emitting before conversion is
Choosing and gives approximately . Most molecules can therefore reach the lower state before emitting even when absorption initially populates the higher state. These are illustrative rates, not measured constants assigned to the 1950 paper. A rate competition also explains why the regularity has conditions and exceptions.
Kasha later coauthored the 1979 investigation with Pradeep K. Sengupta of 3-Hydroxyflavone and quercetin fluorescence. Comparing solution spectra, rigid low-temperature matrices, excitation spectra and isotope substitution supported formation of an emitting tautomer through excited-state proton transfer.[ref] This distinguishes the electronic state initially reached by absorption from the molecular form that eventually emits. The lesson is experimental: emission colour and lifetime can identify competing pathways that a molecular formula alone cannot reveal.
Molecular internal conversion is a radiationless transition between electronic states of the same spin multiplicity. Electronic and vibrational energy are redistributed without emission of a photon in the transition itself. IUPAC describes the step as isoenergetic: a lower electronic state can be reached with increased vibrational excitation, followed by subsequent relaxation.[ref]
This is distinct from intersystem crossing, which connects states of different multiplicity, and from vibrational relaxation within an electronic state. It is also distinct from nuclear internal conversion. A molecular singlet-to-singlet transition such as fits the molecular definition; the energy need not be immediately transferred as heat to a surrounding solvent.
An original population model separates internal conversion from later decay. Suppose an impulsive excitation places population in , transfer to occurs at rate , and loses population at total rate :
For ,
The lower-state population first rises and later decays. If only part of is radiative, fluorescence intensity is proportional to that radiative rate times , not simply to the loss rate of .
Figure 1.
Original sequential-population model with a 1 ps upper-state transfer scale and a 10 ns lower-state lifetime; no measured molecular rates are implied
. Details.
For stipulated and , the transfer time scale is 1 ps while the lower-state lifetime is 10 ns. A fast population transfer can therefore precede much slower emission. These are model constants, not measured values assigned to every molecule.
An informative experiment resolves the time dependence of upper- and lower-state signals after a pulse and tests whether the proposed transfer accounts for both. A decay trace alone can have several explanations; spectral assignment and competing channels matter. Sequential excited-state population kinetics is one model to test against those measurements.
Michael Kasha's 1950 analysis linked radiationless transitions among like-multiplicity states to emission from the lowest excited level of a given multiplicity.[ref] The rate competition supplies a physical motivation for Kasha's rule, while leaving room for molecules whose competing pathways behave differently.