Why standard normal samples multiplied by sd are samples from a normal dist with that sd This answer notes that if a programming language/libraries provide a procedure that returns random samples from a standard normal distribution, we can generate samples from another normal distribution with the same mean by multiplying the samples by the standard deviation $\sigma$ of the desired distribution.  
This seems to work.  For example, in R, these histograms produced by these two lines of code using the rnorm function, which generates samples from a normal distribution, are visually indistinguishable:
hist(rnorm(100000, sd=0.5), xlim=c(-3,3), breaks=50)
hist(0.5*rnorm(100000),     xlim=c(-3,3), breaks=50)

I don't understand why it works.  
In both the normal probability density function and the cumulative distribution function, $\sigma$ appears, squared, in the argument of an exponential function.
Why should simply multiplying by standard deviation turns samples of the standard normal into samples of a distribution with that standard deviation?  (It's not surprising that multiplying the standard normal PDF by a constant doesn't produce a PDF of the normal distribution with that standard deviation.)
(If the answer is closely related: For what classes of probability distributions does multiplying samples by a constant generate samples with a distribution whose standard deviation is that multiple of the original distribution's sd?)
 A: Assume that $X$ has a normal distribution with mean $\mu=0$ and variance $\sigma^2$.  Then the probability density function (pdf) of the random variable $X$ is given by:
\begin{eqnarray*}
f_X(x)=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2\pi}\sigma}e^{-\frac{x^{2}}{2\sigma^{2}}}
\end{eqnarray*}
for $-\infty<x<\infty$ and $\sigma>0$.
Now, when $Z$ has a standard normal distribution, $\mu=0$ and $\sigma^2=1$, so, it's pdf is given by:
\begin{eqnarray*}
f_Z(z)=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2\pi}}e^{-\frac{x^{2}}{2}}
\end{eqnarray*}
for $-\infty<z<\infty$.
If we then multiply $Z$ by the standard deviation $\sigma$ and let that be equal to the function $g(Z)$, (i.e. $Y=g(Z)=\sigma Z$) we can use the formula for transforming functions of random variables (see Casella and Berger (2002), Theorem 2.1.8):
\begin{eqnarray*}
{f_Y(y)=f_Z(z)(g^{-1}(y))}{{d\over{dy}}{g^{-1}(y)}}
\end{eqnarray*}
First we find $Z=g^{-1}(y)={y\over{\sigma}}$ and ${d\over{dy}}{g^{-1}(y)}={1\over{\sigma}}$.
So, substituting these terms, we have:
\begin{eqnarray*}
f_{Y}(y) & = & f_{Z}\left(g^{-1}(y)\right){\frac{d}{{dy}}{g^{-1}(y)}}\\
 & = & f_{Z}\left(\frac{y}{\sigma}\right)\frac{1}{\sigma}\\
 & = & \frac{1}{{\sqrt{2\pi}}}{e^{-}\frac{\left(\frac{y}{\sigma}\right)^{2}}{{2}}}\left(\frac{1}{\sigma}\right)\\
 & = & \frac{1}{{\sqrt{2\pi}}}\left(\frac{1}{\sigma}\right){e^{-}\frac{y^2}{{2\sigma^{2}}}}\\
 & = & \frac{1}{{\sqrt{2\pi}\sigma}}{e^{-\frac{y^2}{{2\sigma^{2}}}}}
\end{eqnarray*}
This PDF is identical to the PDF of $f_X$ given at the beginning of the proof which is simply the pdf of a normal random variable with mean $\mu=0$ and variance $\sigma^2$.  Hence, $Y\sim N(0, \sigma^2)$.  So if you look closely back through the proof, you'll see that the squared $\sigma$ exponent term is introduced through the original squared $x$ term via composite functions with the inner function being the inverse of transformation.  So this is how multiplying by $\sigma$ introduces $\sigma^2$ into the the pdf.
A: The normal CDF can be written as $$p=\frac{1}{2}\left[1+\text{erf}\left(\frac{x-\mu}{\sigma\sqrt{2}}\right)\right]$$
where $\text{erf}$ is the error function.  For a standard normal, $\mu=0$ and $\sigma=1$. If you were to multiply your random variate $x$ by constant $a$, the only way in which you could keep the cumulative probability $p$ from changing would be to multiply the same constant by the standard deviation.  $$p=\frac{1}{2}\left[1+\text{erf}\left(\frac{a(x-\mu)}{a \sigma\sqrt{2}}\right)\right]$$
A: The standard normal distribution has zero mean and one sd. So, if we multiply the distribution by a factor lets say 2, the sd will be now 2. The reason is if the distribution is multiplied by 2,the values will get doubled so as the distance from the mean will be doubled too, henceforth the sd too will get doubled.
The other way around, if the numbers are multiplied by a factor, the same factor will be affecting the sd.
