Challenges
Datasets
Workspaces
Papers
Discussions
Leaderboard
Log inSign up
Challenges
Datasets
Workspaces
Papers
Discussions
Leaderboard
Blog
Job Board
Q3AS

© 2026 Aqora Quantum S.A.S.

TermsPrivacyLegal Notice

arXiv:1303.6181

Tunneling time problem: At the intersection of quantum mechanics, classical probability theory and special relativity

Nikolay Leonidovich Chuprikov

Published Mar 22, 2013• 4 citations
arXivHTMLPDF

Abstract

After the review by Hauge and Stovneng the old question of "How long does it take to tunnel through the barrier?" has not still lost its relevance. As before, there is no clear answer to this question even for the one-dimensional completed scattering (OCS). In this paper we show that this seemingly simple question stands alongside with such fundamental problems of quantum mechanics (QM) as the Schrodinger's-cat and and EPR-Bohm paradoxes. Their common feature is that the states of a scattered particle, a radioactive atom and electron EPR-pair represent pure {\it micro-cat} states. It is widely accepted that the EPR-Bohm paradox implies the non-existence of local hidden variables (LHVs), the cat paradox represents a macro-objectification problem and the tunneling time is an observer-dependent quantity whose definitions must be 'operational'. At the same time, according to the probabilistic approach (Accardi, Khrennikov, Philipp, Hess {\it et al.}) to Bell's inequality that underlies the EPR-Bohm experiments, its experimental violation means simply that it contains probability distributions associated with mutually incompatible statistical data. We argue that this approach must be extended onto micro-cat states because they describe, too, mutually incompatible statistical data. The current practice to interpret the squared modulus of a micro-cat state as the probability density should be recognized as erroneous. It is this practice that makes QM incompatible with classical physical theories and, thereby, makes the micro-world 'unspeakable'. The known 'operational' tunneling-time concepts, elaborated in line with this practice, are logically inconsistent. We argue that the TTP and the cat paradox must be solved at the level of single electrons and atoms, without resorting to environment and measurement contexts. We present a new model of the OCS and solve the TTP on its basis.

DOI
10.48550/arxiv.1303.6181

Related papers

What is wrong in the current models of tunneling

Nikolay Leonidovich Chuprikov

After the review by Hauge and Stovneng the old question of How long does it take to tunnel through the barrier? has not still lost its relevance. As before, there is no clear answer to this question even for the one-dimensional completed scattering (OCS). In this paper we show that this seemingly simple question stands alongside with such fundamental problems of quantum mechanics (QM) as the Schrodinger's-cat and and EPR-Bohm paradoxes. Their common feature is that the states of a scattered particle, a radioactive atom and electron EPR-pair represent pure {\it micro-cat} states. It is widely accepted that the EPR-Bohm paradox implies the non-existence of local hidden variables (LHVs), the cat paradox represents a macro-objectification problem and the tunneling time is an observer-dependent quantity whose definitions must be 'operational'. At the same time, according to the probabilistic approach (Accardi, Khrennikov, Philipp, Hess {\it et al.}) to Bell's inequality that underlies the EPR-Bohm experiments, its experimental violation means simply that it contains probability distributions associated with mutually incompatible statistical data. We argue that this approach must be extended onto micro-cat states because they describe, too, mutually incompatible statistical data. The current practice to interpret the squared modulus of a micro-cat state as the probability density should be recognized as erroneous. It is this practice that makes QM incompatible with classical physical theories and, thereby, makes the micro-world 'unspeakable'. The known 'operational' tunneling-time concepts, elaborated in line with this practice, are logically inconsistent. We argue that the TTP and the cat paradox must be solved at the level of single electrons and atoms, without resorting to environment and measurement contexts. We present a new model of the OCS and solve the TTP on its basis.

•Mar 22, 2013•1 citation

EPR Paradox, Locality and Completeness of Quantum Theory

Marian Kupczyński, Guillaume Adenier, Andrei Yu. Khrennikov +3 more

The quantum theory (QT) and new stochastic approaches have no deterministic prediction for a single measurement or for a single time‐series of events observed for a trapped ion, electron or any other individual physical system. The predictions of QT being of probabilistic character apply to the statistical distribution of the results obtained in various experiments. The Copenhagen interpretation (CI) of QT acknowledged the abstract and statistical character of the predictions of QT but at the same time claimed that a state vector Ψ provided complete description of each individual physical system. The assigning the state vector to an individual physical system together with a postulate of its instantaneous reduction in the measurements was shown by Einstein Podolski and Rosen to lead to so called EPR paradox for the experiments with the entangled pairs of the particles. EPR concluded that a state vector could not provide a complete description of the individual systems and the question arose whether the probabilistic predictions of QT could be derived from some more fundamental spatio‐temporal deterministic description of the invisible sub‐phenomena by introduction of supplementary parameters. The experimental violation of the Bell inequalities in the spin polarization correlation experiments (SPCE) which were the implementations of Bohm and EPR gedanken experiments eliminated so called local and realistic models of the sub‐phenomena. Quite often the violation of these inequalities has been incorrectly interpreted as a proof of the completeness of QT or as the violation of the locality and causality in the micro‐world. The local and realistic models overlooked the fact that an experimental outcome is only the information about a particular system‐system or system‐instrument interaction. Namely the quantum phenomena are described in terms of the probabilities. It is well known that the probability distribution is not an attribute of a dice but it is a characteristic of a whole random experiment: “rolling a dice”. In this paper we will underline: that the quantum probabilities do not describe the lack of knowledge about the physical systems but the lack of knowledge about the experiments and therefore they are “contextual” and that the statistical long range correlations between two random variables X and Y are not a proof of any causal relation between these variables. Moreover any probabilistic model used to described a random experiment is consistent only with a specific protocol telling how the random experiment has to be performed. The probabilistic model used to prove Bell inequalities implied a protocol completely inappropriate and impossible to implement for SPCE . We conclude that the meaningful question about the predictable completeness of QT is still open and it should be answered by a careful and unconventional analysis of the experimental data. The correct understanding of statistical and contextual character of QT is essential for the research in the domain of quantum information and quantum computing.

arXiv:0710.3510•AIP conference proceedings•Jan 1, 2007•20 citations

New Model of One-dimensional Completed Scattering and the Problem of Quantum Nonlocality

Nikolay Leonidovich Chuprikov

The origin of nonlocality in quantum mechanics (QM) is analyzed from the viewpoint of our new model of a one-dimensional (1D) completed scattering. Our study of quantum nonlocality complements those carried out by Volovich and Khrennikov. They pointed to an unphysical character of nonlocality in Bell's theorem whose context does not contain the very structure of the space-time. However, there is another reason leading to nonlocality in QM. The existing model of a 1D completed scattering evidences that QM, as it stands, even with a proper space-time context, contradicts special relativity. By our model this scattering process represents an entanglement of two coherently evolved alternative sub-processes, transmission and reflection; whose characteristics are measured well after the scattering event. Quantum nonlocality appears in this problem due to the inconsistency of the superposition principle with the corpuscular properties of a particle. It can take part only in one of the sub-processes. However the superposition principle allows introducing observables common for them. In the fresh wording, this principle must forbid introducing observables for entangled states.

arXiv:quant-ph/0609069•AIP conference proceedings•Jan 1, 2007•0 citations

Tunneling time and superposition principle

Nikolay Leonidovich Chuprikov

We show that scattering a quantum particle on a one-dimensional potential barrier as well as scattering the electromagnetic wave on a quasi-one-dimensional layered structure (both represent scattering problems with one 'source' and two 'sinks') violate the superposition principle; the role of nonlinear elements is played here by the potential barrier and the layered structure, splitting the incident (probability and electromagnetic) wave into two parts (transmitted and reflected). This explains why all attempts to solve the tunneling time problem within the framework of the standard (linear) models of these processes, both in quantum mechanics and in classical electrodynamics, have been unsuccessful. We revise the traditional formulation of the superposition principle, present a new (nonlinear) wave model, by the example of the quantum-mechanical scattering process, and show that concepts of the tunneling time developed on its basis are free from the Hartman paradox.

arXiv:1705.00897•May 2, 2017•0 citations

Realistic solution to the tunneling time problem

Guowen Wang

There remains the old question of how long a quantum particle takes to tunnel through a potential barrier higher than its incident kinetic energy. In this article a solution of the question is proposed on the basis of a realistic explanation of quantum mechanics. The explanation implies that the tunneling particle has a certain chance to borrow enough energy from self-interference to high-jump over the barrier. The root-mean-square velocity and the effective tunneling time of an electron tunneling through a rectangular barrier are numerically calculated. No superluminal effect (Hartman effect) is found for the tunneling electron. Heisenberg's energy-time uncertainty relation for the tunneling effect is verified by calculating an introduced coefficient representing uncertainty. The present author argues that phase time, dwell time and Bütticker-Landauer time are not appropriate expressions for the actual transit time in a tunneling process. A quantum high-jumping model is presented to resolve the paradox that kinetic energy of the tunneling particle is negative and its momentum is imaginary.

arXiv:0706.3510•Jun 24, 2007•0 citations

On the status of quantum tunnelling time

Grace E. Field

Abstract How long does a quantum particle take to traverse a classically forbidden energy barrier? In other words, what is the correct expression for quantum tunnelling time? This seemingly simple question has inspired widespread debate in the physics literature. I argue that we should not expect the orthodox interpretation of quantum mechanics to provide a unique correct expression for quantum tunnelling time, because to do so it would have to provide a unique correct answer to a question whose assumptions are in tension with its core interpretational commitments. I explain how this conclusion connects to time’s special status in quantum mechanics, the meaningfulness of classically inspired concepts in different interpretations of quantum mechanics, the prospect of constructing experimental tests to distinguish between different interpretations, and the status of weak measurement in resolving questions about the histories of subensembles.

European Journal for Philosophy of Science•Sep 27, 2022•10 citations
After the review by Hauge and Stovneng the old question of "How long does it take to tunnel through the barrier?" has not still lost its relevance. As before, there is no clear answer to this question even for the one-dimensional completed scattering (OCS). In this paper we show that this seemingly simple question stands alongside with such fundamental problems of quantum mechanics (QM) as the Schrodinger's-cat and and EPR-Bohm paradoxes. Their common feature is that the states of a scattered particle, a radioactive atom and electron EPR-pair represent pure {\it micro-cat} states. It is widely accepted that the EPR-Bohm paradox implies the non-existence of local hidden variables (LHVs), the cat paradox represents a macro-objectification problem and the tunneling time is an observer-dependent quantity whose definitions must be 'operational'. At the same time, according to the probabilistic approach (Accardi, Khrennikov, Philipp, Hess {\it et al.}) to Bell's inequality that underlies the EPR-Bohm experiments, its experimental violation means simply that it contains probability distributions associated with mutually incompatible statistical data. We argue that this approach must be extended onto micro-cat states because they describe, too, mutually incompatible statistical data. The current practice to interpret the squared modulus of a micro-cat state as the probability density should be recognized as erroneous. It is this practice that makes QM incompatible with classical physical theories and, thereby, makes the micro-world 'unspeakable'. The known 'operational' tunneling-time concepts, elaborated in line with this practice, are logically inconsistent. We argue that the TTP and the cat paradox must be solved at the level of single electrons and atoms, without resorting to environment and measurement contexts. We present a new model of the OCS and solve the TTP on its basis.
After the review by Hauge and Stovneng the old question of How long does it take to tunnel through the barrier? has not still lost its relevance. As before, there is no clear answer to this question even for the one-dimensional completed scattering (OCS). In this paper we show that this seemingly simple question stands alongside with such fundamental problems of quantum mechanics (QM) as the Schrodinger's-cat and and EPR-Bohm paradoxes. Their common feature is that the states of a scattered particle, a radioactive atom and electron EPR-pair represent pure {\it micro-cat} states. It is widely accepted that the EPR-Bohm paradox implies the non-existence of local hidden variables (LHVs), the cat paradox represents a macro-objectification problem and the tunneling time is an observer-dependent quantity whose definitions must be 'operational'. At the same time, according to the probabilistic approach (Accardi, Khrennikov, Philipp, Hess {\it et al.}) to Bell's inequality that underlies the EPR-Bohm experiments, its experimental violation means simply that it contains probability distributions associated with mutually incompatible statistical data. We argue that this approach must be extended onto micro-cat states because they describe, too, mutually incompatible statistical data. The current practice to interpret the squared modulus of a micro-cat state as the probability density should be recognized as erroneous. It is this practice that makes QM incompatible with classical physical theories and, thereby, makes the micro-world 'unspeakable'. The known 'operational' tunneling-time concepts, elaborated in line with this practice, are logically inconsistent. We argue that the TTP and the cat paradox must be solved at the level of single electrons and atoms, without resorting to environment and measurement contexts. We present a new model of the OCS and solve the TTP on its basis.
The quantum theory (QT) and new stochastic approaches have no deterministic prediction for a single measurement or for a single time‐series of events observed for a trapped ion, electron or any other individual physical system. The predictions of QT being of probabilistic character apply to the statistical distribution of the results obtained in various experiments. The Copenhagen interpretation (CI) of QT acknowledged the abstract and statistical character of the predictions of QT but at the same time claimed that a state vector Ψ provided complete description of each individual physical system. The assigning the state vector to an individual physical system together with a postulate of its instantaneous reduction in the measurements was shown by Einstein Podolski and Rosen to lead to so called EPR paradox for the experiments with the entangled pairs of the particles. EPR concluded that a state vector could not provide a complete description of the individual systems and the question arose whether the probabilistic predictions of QT could be derived from some more fundamental spatio‐temporal deterministic description of the invisible sub‐phenomena by introduction of supplementary parameters. The experimental violation of the Bell inequalities in the spin polarization correlation experiments (SPCE) which were the implementations of Bohm and EPR gedanken experiments eliminated so called local and realistic models of the sub‐phenomena. Quite often the violation of these inequalities has been incorrectly interpreted as a proof of the completeness of QT or as the violation of the locality and causality in the micro‐world. The local and realistic models overlooked the fact that an experimental outcome is only the information about a particular system‐system or system‐instrument interaction. Namely the quantum phenomena are described in terms of the probabilities. It is well known that the probability distribution is not an attribute of a dice but it is a characteristic of a whole random experiment: “rolling a dice”. In this paper we will underline: that the quantum probabilities do not describe the lack of knowledge about the physical systems but the lack of knowledge about the experiments and therefore they are “contextual” and that the statistical long range correlations between two random variables X and Y are not a proof of any causal relation between these variables. Moreover any probabilistic model used to described a random experiment is consistent only with a specific protocol telling how the random experiment has to be performed. The probabilistic model used to prove Bell inequalities implied a protocol completely inappropriate and impossible to implement for SPCE . We conclude that the meaningful question about the predictable completeness of QT is still open and it should be answered by a careful and unconventional analysis of the experimental data. The correct understanding of statistical and contextual character of QT is essential for the research in the domain of quantum information and quantum computing.
The origin of nonlocality in quantum mechanics (QM) is analyzed from the viewpoint of our new model of a one-dimensional (1D) completed scattering. Our study of quantum nonlocality complements those carried out by Volovich and Khrennikov. They pointed to an unphysical character of nonlocality in Bell's theorem whose context does not contain the very structure of the space-time. However, there is another reason leading to nonlocality in QM. The existing model of a 1D completed scattering evidences that QM, as it stands, even with a proper space-time context, contradicts special relativity. By our model this scattering process represents an entanglement of two coherently evolved alternative sub-processes, transmission and reflection; whose characteristics are measured well after the scattering event. Quantum nonlocality appears in this problem due to the inconsistency of the superposition principle with the corpuscular properties of a particle. It can take part only in one of the sub-processes. However the superposition principle allows introducing observables common for them. In the fresh wording, this principle must forbid introducing observables for entangled states.
We show that scattering a quantum particle on a one-dimensional potential barrier as well as scattering the electromagnetic wave on a quasi-one-dimensional layered structure (both represent scattering problems with one 'source' and two 'sinks') violate the superposition principle; the role of nonlinear elements is played here by the potential barrier and the layered structure, splitting the incident (probability and electromagnetic) wave into two parts (transmitted and reflected). This explains why all attempts to solve the tunneling time problem within the framework of the standard (linear) models of these processes, both in quantum mechanics and in classical electrodynamics, have been unsuccessful. We revise the traditional formulation of the superposition principle, present a new (nonlinear) wave model, by the example of the quantum-mechanical scattering process, and show that concepts of the tunneling time developed on its basis are free from the Hartman paradox.
There remains the old question of how long a quantum particle takes to tunnel through a potential barrier higher than its incident kinetic energy. In this article a solution of the question is proposed on the basis of a realistic explanation of quantum mechanics. The explanation implies that the tunneling particle has a certain chance to borrow enough energy from self-interference to high-jump over the barrier. The root-mean-square velocity and the effective tunneling time of an electron tunneling through a rectangular barrier are numerically calculated. No superluminal effect (Hartman effect) is found for the tunneling electron. Heisenberg's energy-time uncertainty relation for the tunneling effect is verified by calculating an introduced coefficient representing uncertainty. The present author argues that phase time, dwell time and Bütticker-Landauer time are not appropriate expressions for the actual transit time in a tunneling process. A quantum high-jumping model is presented to resolve the paradox that kinetic energy of the tunneling particle is negative and its momentum is imaginary.
Abstract How long does a quantum particle take to traverse a classically forbidden energy barrier? In other words, what is the correct expression for quantum tunnelling time? This seemingly simple question has inspired widespread debate in the physics literature. I argue that we should not expect the orthodox interpretation of quantum mechanics to provide a unique correct expression for quantum tunnelling time, because to do so it would have to provide a unique correct answer to a question whose assumptions are in tension with its core interpretational commitments. I explain how this conclusion connects to time’s special status in quantum mechanics, the meaningfulness of classically inspired concepts in different interpretations of quantum mechanics, the prospect of constructing experimental tests to distinguish between different interpretations, and the status of weak measurement in resolving questions about the histories of subensembles.