Say you have two energy eigenstates ##\phi_1## and ##\phi_2##, corresponding to energies ##E_1## and ##E_2##. The particle has a 50% chance of having each energy. The wavefunction would thus be(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});

##\psi=\frac{\phi_1}{\sqrt{2}}+\frac{\phi_2}{\sqrt{2}}##

Even though the coefficients are normalized (i.e. ##\sum_n c_n=1##), is the wavfefunction normalized? My thought would be no. If ##|\psi|^2=\frac{|\phi_1|^2}{2}+\frac{|\phi_2|^2}{2}## then it would be, but it seems like we would have an extra term. So, the wavefunction would really be

##\psi=A\left(\frac{\phi_1}{\sqrt{2}}+\frac{\phi_2}{\sqrt{2}}\right)##

Where A is a constant satisfying normalization. But, even with the A out front, the probability of the particle having the energy ##E_1## would still be ##\left|\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\right|^2## and the same thing for ##E_2##. Is this all correct?

If this is all true, would it be common practice to leave the wavefunction in that form so you can distinguish the coefficients representing the probability amplitude of a particle having a certain energy (in this case both were ##\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}##) from the coefficient normalizing the wavefunction (in this case denoted by A)?

Thanks!

**Physics Forums - The Fusion of Science and Community**

The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

# I Normalizing a discrete sum

Have something to add?

Draft saved
Draft deleted

Loading...

Similar Threads - Normalizing discrete | Date |
---|---|

A Classical Mechanics: Continuous or Discrete universe | Mar 6, 2018 |

A Defining Krauss operators with normal distribution | Jan 22, 2018 |

A Normalization of 4x4 matrix | Dec 14, 2017 |

A Srednicki's normalization choice for lie algebra generators | Jul 9, 2017 |

I Constraints on potential for normalizable wavefunction | Apr 10, 2017 |

**Physics Forums - The Fusion of Science and Community**