Intro to Quantum Mechanics - Formalism normalisation

Click For Summary
The discussion centers on the normalization of the coefficient c1 in quantum mechanics, specifically why it is expressed as i/sqrt(2). The presence of the complex number i arises from the relationship c1 = i c0, which is necessary to solve for c0 given the constraints of the problem. Participants clarify that without this relationship, there would be two unknowns with only one equation, complicating the normalization process. The exponential function is also linked to the complex number, illustrating how e^(iπ/2) simplifies to i. Understanding these relationships is crucial for grasping the formalism of quantum mechanics.
Graham87
Messages
72
Reaction score
16
Homework Statement
See pic
Relevant Equations
See pic
I can't figure out how they get i/sqrt(2) for normalisation of c1. Why is it a complex number? If I normalise c1 I just get 1/sqrt(2) because i disappears in the absolute value squared.

Thanks

1.png
 
Physics news on Phys.org
It looks like you left out other information from the problem, but apparently, there was the relation ##c_1 = i c_0##. That's where the ##i## comes from. Note that you had to have this relationship to solve for ##c_0##
otherwise you'd have two unknowns but only one equation.
 
  • Like
Likes topsquark and Graham87
vela said:
It looks like you left out other information from the problem, but apparently, there was the relation ##c_1 = i c_0##. That's where the ##i## comes from. Note that you had to have this relationship to solve for ##c_0##
otherwise you'd have two unknowns but only one equation.

There was this relation:

1.png


Aha, so the exponential is also interpreted as i then. Thanks, got it!
 
##e^{i\pi/2}= \cos (\pi/2) + i \sin(\pi/2) = i##
##e^{iv}= \cos (v) + i \sin(v) ##
 
  • Like
Likes SammyS, topsquark and Graham87
At first, I derived that: $$\nabla \frac 1{\mu}=-\frac 1{{\mu}^3}\left((1-\beta^2)+\frac{\dot{\vec\beta}\cdot\vec R}c\right)\vec R$$ (dot means differentiation with respect to ##t'##). I assume this result is true because it gives valid result for magnetic field. To find electric field one should also derive partial derivative of ##\vec A## with respect to ##t##. I've used chain rule, substituted ##\vec A## and used derivative of product formula. $$\frac {\partial \vec A}{\partial t}=\frac...

Similar threads