How Does Feynman Normalize CII in the Ammonia Molecule States?

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around the normalization of the coefficient CII in the context of the ammonia molecule states as explained in Feynman's Lectures on Physics. Participants are examining the mathematical relationships and matrix elements involved in this normalization process.

Discussion Character

  • Mathematical reasoning, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants are attempting to derive the normalization condition for CII and are exploring the implications of matrix elements in their calculations. There is a focus on understanding the relationships between CII, C1, and C2, as well as the significance of state transitions.

Discussion Status

Some participants have provided clarifications regarding the mathematical steps involved, while others express confusion about the matrix elements and their contributions to the normalization process. There is ongoing exploration of the assumptions made in the calculations, but no consensus has been reached on the correct approach.

Contextual Notes

Participants are grappling with the definitions and roles of the coefficients C1, C2, and CII, as well as the nature of the matrix elements involved in the normalization process. There is an acknowledgment of varying levels of understanding regarding state transitions and the mathematical framework being discussed.

harpf
Messages
12
Reaction score
0
I'm trying to follow Feynman's explanation on page 9-3 of Volume 3 of The Feynman Lectures on Physics. I've attached a copy of the section in question.

To normalize CII he notes that
< II | II > = < II | 1 >< 1 | II > + < II | 2 >< 2 | II > = 1
I am not clear how he derives the conclusion
CII = 1/√2 (C1 + C2)

I tried to solve the first equation unsuccessfully like this-
< II | 1 >< 1 | II > + < II | 2 >< 2 | II > = 1
CII C1 + CII C2 = 1
[1/√2 (C1 + C2)] C1 + {1/√2 (C1 + C2)} C2 = 1
[1/√2 (C1 + C2)] (C1 + C2) = 1
1/√2 (C1 + C2) (C1 + C2) = 1
which isn’t working for me.

Thank you for clarifying.
 

Attachments

Physics news on Phys.org
The step from the first to the second line of your attempt is wrong. You've lost half of the matrix elements.
 
Thank you for your response, M Quack, which is clear and helpful.

If CII = < II | Φ >, I’m assuming I can substitute it for both < II | 1 > and < II | 2 >. You can see I’ve taken the same approach with C1 and C2. I suspect to go further I may have to use C1 = C2 and possibly C1*, which I am frankly weak on, and < 2 | 1 > = < 1 | 2 > = 1 / 2.

The source of my confusion may be a basic misunderstanding of state transitions and the meaning of the coefficients, C1, C2, and CII. I am really struggling to move forward. Thank you.
 
<ii | 1> <1 | ii> = (cii^* c1) (c1^* cii)

= (1/√2 (c1+c2)^* c1) (c1^* 1/√2 (c1+c2)[/color]
= 1/2 (c1^* c1 + c2^*c1) (c1^*c1+c1^*c2)
= 1/2 (1 + 0) (1 + 0)

Do you see what I mean when I say you dropped half the matrix elements?

(Please don't ask me why preview insists on making everything lowercase)
 
That’s really helpful. The fog begins to lift. Thanks again.

I now realize the difference between < II | Φ >, which is CII, and < II | 1 >, which is the product of | 1 > and < II |.
Also, < II | = | II >* = CII*.

No, I can’t say I see what you mean about the matrix elements (although implying I was able to identify half of them seems generous).
 
<II|i> is nothing else than a matrix element between the old and new wave functions. Maybe that is speaking a bit loosely as usually a matrix element is <x|M|x> where |x> is the wave function or state, and M some operator or matrix, depending on the notation.
 
I appreciate your help.
 

Similar threads

Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
8
Views
8K
Replies
5
Views
6K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K