my question is similar to this older one, but I have not enough privileges to answer it or comment on it.
I do realize that the question has received detailed answers by Selene Routley, and I sort of get them.
My concern is for high school students who barely know integrals, let alone distributions or quantum mechanics.
Our textbook does not mention photons in this context. Light is simply described as a linearly polarized transverse wave, and Malus' Law is given. Unpolarized light is described as a (uniform) superposition of polarized waves with random uncorrelated polarization planes.
From time to time our textbook tries to make contact between physics and maths. In this instance it goes like "In order to prove the 1/2 factor in the transmitted intensity, let us calculate the average over the polarization angles" and then proceeds with the integration over the angles.
Personally, I find this a bit confusing, perhaps due to excessive conciseness. Why an average? I have a bunch of electromagnetic waves hitting a surface. I should be summing their intensities, not averaging them.
I thought we could reason as follows. The light hitting the polarizer is a superposition of linearly polarized waves, with random polarization angles. It is reasonable to assume that the overall intensity of light at a given polarization angle $S_\theta$ does not depend on such angle. Therefore the intensity $S_i$ of the overall incident light is obtained as the sum (integral) $$S_i = \int_0^{2\pi} S_\theta d\theta = 2\pi S_\theta $$ Since each polarized wave is subject to Malus Law, it is transmitted with intensity $S_{t\theta} = S_{\theta} \cos^2(\theta)$. Therefore the overall transmitted intensity is $$S_t = \int_0^{2\pi} S_\theta \cos^2(\theta) d\theta = 2\pi S_\theta \frac{1}{2} $$
Upon eliminating $S_\theta$, these results entail $$S_t = \frac{1}{2} S_i $$
I do realize that, mathematically, this is equivalent to calculating an average. One can say: let us assume that the incident light contains $N$ waves with the same intensity $S_{i1}$. Then, $S_i=N S_{i1}$. By definition of average, the overall transmitted intensity can be written as $S_t = N \bar S_{t1}$, where $$ \bar S_{t1} = \frac{1}{2\pi}\int_0^{2\pi} S_{i1} \cos^2 \theta d\theta = \frac{S_{i1}}{2} $$ is the average transmitted intensity for an individual wave. Multiplying both hands of this equation by $N$ gives once again $S_t = S_i/2$.
In my opinion this less concise argument is better than the hasty one by our textbook. However I still think the first one I made is better, especially when this is an "excuse" to put the recently learned tool of integration to use. Of course, one can subsequently point out the relation with averaging.
But what is the reason for choosing an approach based on the averaging procedure?
Thanks for any insight on this Francesco