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

Springer eBooks

Quantum Traversal Time, Path Integrals and “Superluminal” Tunnelling

D. Sokolovski

Published Nov 29, 2007• 5 citations
Publisher
DOI
10.1007/978-3-540-73473-4_7

Related papers

Superluminal velocity, tunneling traversal time and causality

M. Ya. Azbel

Solid State Communications•Aug 1, 1994•15 citations

Quantum Traversal Time and Path Integrals

D. Sokolovski

Springer eBooks•Aug 3, 2007•3 citations

Path integrals and the quantum traversal time problem

D. Sokolovski

•Jan 1, 1997•3 citations

Complex-time path-integral formalism for quantum tunneling

Hideaki Aoyama, Toshiyuki Harano

arXiv:hep-th/9412093•Nuclear Physics B•Jul 1, 1995•7 citations

Path-Integral Resolution of the Tunneling-Time Controversy

Henrique Coelho Barbosa

The time a quantum particle spends traversing a classically forbidden region has resisted un-ambiguous definition since the earliest analyses of wave-packet tunneling, and the proliferation ofmutually incompatible “clocks”—the Wigner phase time, the Büttiker–Landauer traversal time, theLarmor time, and the path-integral complex time among them—has kept the question open fordecades. The controversy has been sharpened, not settled, by the advent of attosecond angular-streaking metrology, in which competing analyses of tunnel ionization continue to disagree over theexistence of a finite delay. Here we show that these rival definitions are not alternative answersto a single question but distinct cumulants of one traversal-time quasi-distribution, generated bythe exact rectangular-barrier transmission amplitude when the latter is promoted to a cumulantgenerating functional through a barrier-height counting field. The first cumulant unifies the Wignerphase time and the Larmor/Büttiker–Landauer time as the real and imaginary parts of a singlecomplex traversal time, recovering the celebrated Hartman saturation as the width-independentvalue ℏ/V0 of its real part. The second cumulant—which, to our knowledge, has not previouslybeen enlisted as a tunneling-time observable—yields a traversal-time variance that entirely evadesthe Hartman saturation and instead grows linearly with the barrier width d. The standard devia-tion of the tunneling time therefore scales as στ ∝ √d: rather than becoming superluminally sharpfor thick barriers, the tunneling time grows progressively more uncertain, in direct opposition tothe naive superluminal reading of the Hartman effect. This parameter-free scaling, independentof the O(1) coefficient that fixes its magnitude, constitutes a falsifiable prediction: attosecond an-gular streaking, which resolves the full arrival-time distribution of tunneled electrons rather thanmerely its centroid, should register a temporal spread broadening as √d even where the mean delaysaturates. We thereby recast a nearly century-old semantic dispute as a concrete experimentalquestion.

•Jul 7, 2026•0 citations

Trajectories and Traversal Times in Quantum Tunneling

Zhi Hong Huang

•Jan 1, 1989•0 citations
The time a quantum particle spends traversing a classically forbidden region has resisted un-ambiguous definition since the earliest analyses of wave-packet tunneling, and the proliferation ofmutually incompatible “clocks”—the Wigner phase time, the Büttiker–Landauer traversal time, theLarmor time, and the path-integral complex time among them—has kept the question open fordecades. The controversy has been sharpened, not settled, by the advent of attosecond angular-streaking metrology, in which competing analyses of tunnel ionization continue to disagree over theexistence of a finite delay. Here we show that these rival definitions are not alternative answersto a single question but distinct cumulants of one traversal-time quasi-distribution, generated bythe exact rectangular-barrier transmission amplitude when the latter is promoted to a cumulantgenerating functional through a barrier-height counting field. The first cumulant unifies the Wignerphase time and the Larmor/Büttiker–Landauer time as the real and imaginary parts of a singlecomplex traversal time, recovering the celebrated Hartman saturation as the width-independentvalue ℏ/V0 of its real part. The second cumulant—which, to our knowledge, has not previouslybeen enlisted as a tunneling-time observable—yields a traversal-time variance that entirely evadesthe Hartman saturation and instead grows linearly with the barrier width d. The standard devia-tion of the tunneling time therefore scales as στ ∝ √d: rather than becoming superluminally sharpfor thick barriers, the tunneling time grows progressively more uncertain, in direct opposition tothe naive superluminal reading of the Hartman effect. This parameter-free scaling, independentof the O(1) coefficient that fixes its magnitude, constitutes a falsifiable prediction: attosecond an-gular streaking, which resolves the full arrival-time distribution of tunneled electrons rather thanmerely its centroid, should register a temporal spread broadening as √d even where the mean delaysaturates. We thereby recast a nearly century-old semantic dispute as a concrete experimentalquestion.