Can the Sigma Be Removed from the Normalization Equation for a Wavefunction?

  • Thread starter Thread starter zahra95
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Wavefunction
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around normalizing a wavefunction and determining the role of the sigma notation in the normalization equation. Participants are exploring the implications of including or excluding sigma in their calculations.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Assumption checking, Mathematical reasoning

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants are attempting to find the normalization constant A and are questioning whether sigma can be ignored in the normalization process. There are discussions about deriving expressions for the norm of the wavefunction and the validity of certain equations.

Discussion Status

The conversation is ongoing, with some participants providing guidance on exploring simpler cases and suggesting further investigation into sums of reciprocal powers. There is no explicit consensus yet, as multiple interpretations and approaches are being considered.

Contextual Notes

Participants are working under the constraints of homework rules, which may limit the information they can use or the methods they can apply. There is uncertainty regarding the correctness of certain expressions and the presence of potential typos in the original posts.

zahra95
Messages
3
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


the wavefunction
upload_2016-1-30_13-3-48.png


where <
upload_2016-1-30_13-0-34.png
|
upload_2016-1-30_13-1-16.png
> =
upload_2016-1-30_13-0-5.png
. I want to normalize it and find constant normalization A. A is real number.

Homework Equations

The Attempt at a Solution


I know that for normalizing the wave function

upload_2016-1-30_13-6-58.png

but what happen for sigma? can I remove it from equation?
 

Attachments

  • upload_2016-1-30_12-56-9.png
    upload_2016-1-30_12-56-9.png
    278 bytes · Views: 447
  • upload_2016-1-30_12-56-17.png
    upload_2016-1-30_12-56-17.png
    220 bytes · Views: 426
  • upload_2016-1-30_12-56-59.png
    upload_2016-1-30_12-56-59.png
    278 bytes · Views: 439
  • upload_2016-1-30_13-2-42.png
    upload_2016-1-30_13-2-42.png
    687 bytes · Views: 481
  • upload_2016-1-30_13-4-26.png
    upload_2016-1-30_13-4-26.png
    808 bytes · Views: 479
Physics news on Phys.org
You can't just ignore the sigma! First, can you find an expression for ##||\phi||^2##?
 
I think the equation is :
upload_2016-1-30_13-49-39.png
because <
upload_2016-1-30_13-0-34-png.png
|
upload_2016-1-30_13-1-16-png.png
> =
upload_2016-1-30_13-0-5-png.png
is it correct? I'm not sure!
but what I do after that?
 

Attachments

  • upload_2016-1-30_13-44-25.png
    upload_2016-1-30_13-44-25.png
    839 bytes · Views: 466
zahra95 said:
I think the equation is :View attachment 95040because <
upload_2016-1-30_13-0-34-png.png
|
upload_2016-1-30_13-1-16-png.png
> =
upload_2016-1-30_13-0-5-png.png
is it correct? I'm not sure!
but what I do after that?

That's obviously not right. If you're stuck with an infinite sum, try a simple sum and see what happens. Try:
##\phi = A(\phi_0 + \frac{\phi_1}{3^4})##
 
upload_2016-1-30_14-35-2.png
and
upload_2016-1-30_14-40-12.png
for n = 0,1
= A^2(1+1/3^8 + 1/5^8 + 1/7^8 + ... )
then it is true that = A^2(1/(2n+1)^8) isn't it?
 

Attachments

  • upload_2016-1-30_14-34-18.png
    upload_2016-1-30_14-34-18.png
    367 bytes · Views: 440
  • upload_2016-1-30_14-35-29.png
    upload_2016-1-30_14-35-29.png
    318 bytes · Views: 432
  • upload_2016-1-30_14-36-2.png
    upload_2016-1-30_14-36-2.png
    233 bytes · Views: 428
  • upload_2016-1-30_14-36-6.png
    upload_2016-1-30_14-36-6.png
    233 bytes · Views: 453
  • upload_2016-1-30_14-36-19.png
    upload_2016-1-30_14-36-19.png
    233 bytes · Views: 453
  • upload_2016-1-30_14-38-1.png
    upload_2016-1-30_14-38-1.png
    529 bytes · Views: 449
  • upload_2016-1-30_14-38-45.png
    upload_2016-1-30_14-38-45.png
    314 bytes · Views: 426
  • upload_2016-1-30_14-39-44.png
    upload_2016-1-30_14-39-44.png
    543 bytes · Views: 408
Was that integral sign in post #3 a typo?

For the next bit, trying googling "sums of reciprocal powers".
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: zahra95

Similar threads

  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
4K
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
5K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
4K