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

Physica E Low-dimensional Systems and Nanostructures

Time: And time again

Kimberly R. Chapin, Marlan O. Scully, Muhammad Suhail Zubairy

Published Jun 26, 2009• 1 citation
Publisher
DOI
10.1016/j.physe.2009.06.035

Related papers

Tunneling time in attosecond experiments, intrinsic-type of time. Keldysh, and Mandelstam–Tamm time

Ossama Kullie

Abstract Tunneling time in attosecond and strong-field experiments is one of the most controversial issues in current research, because of its importance to the theory of time, the time operator and the time–energy uncertainty relation in quantum mechanics. In Kullie (2015 Phys. Rev. A 92 052118 ) we derived an estimation of the (real) tunneling time, which shows an excellent agreement with the time measured in attosecond experiments, our derivation is found by utilizing the time–energy uncertainty relation, and it represents a quantum clock. In this work, we show different aspects of the tunneling time in attosecond experiments, we discuss and compare the different views and approaches, which are used to calculate the tunneling time, i.e. Keldysh time (as a real or imaginary quantity), Mandelstam–Tamm time, the classical view of the time measurement and our tunneling time relation(s). We draw some conclusions concerning the validity and the relation between the different types of the tunneling time with the hope that they will help to answer the question put forward by Orlando et al (2014 J. Phys. B 47 204002 , 2014 Phys. Rev. A 89 014102 ): tunneling time, what does it mean? However, as we will see, the important question is a more general one: how to understand the time and the measurement of the time of a quantum system? In respect to our result, the time in quantum mechanics can be, in more general fashion, classified in two types, intrinsic dynamically connected, and external dynamically not connected to the system, and consequently (perhaps only) classical Newtonian time remains as a parametric type of time.

Journal of Physics B Atomic Molecular and Optical Physics•Apr 13, 2016•14 citations

A loop in time

Miriam Frankel

The New Scientist•Jun 1, 2024•0 citations

Time and Events

Ph. Blanchard, Arkadiusz Jadczyk

arXiv:quant-ph/9702018•International Journal of Theoretical Physics•Jan 1, 1998•13 citations

Time Operator, Real Tunneling Time in Strong Field Interaction and the Attoclock

Ossama Kullie

Attosecond science, beyond its importance from application point of view, is of a fundamental interest in physics. The measurement of tunneling time in attosecond experiments offers a fruitful opportunity to understand the role of time in quantum mechanics. In the present work, we show that our real T-time relation derived in earlier works can be derived from an observable or a time operator, which obeys an ordinary commutation relation. Moreover, we show that our real T-time can also be constructed, inter alia, from the well-known Aharonov–Bohm time operator. This shows that the specific form of the time operator is not decisive, and dynamical time operators relate identically to the intrinsic time of the system. It contrasts the famous Pauli theorem, and confirms the fact that time is an observable, i.e., the existence of time operator and that the time is not a parameter in quantum mechanics. Furthermore, we discuss the relations with different types of tunneling times, such as Eisenbud–Wigner time, dwell time, and the statistically or probabilistic defined tunneling time. We conclude with the hotly debated interpretation of the attoclock measurement and the advantage of the real T-time picture versus the imaginary one.

Quantum Reports•Apr 7, 2020•3 citations

Right About Time?

Sean Gryb, Flavio Mercati

arXiv:1301.1538•The frontiers collection•Jan 1, 2015•2 citations

Spontaneous decoherence as a result of randomness in the flow of time

Lev I. Rozonoer

The hypothesis of the random flow of time is considered. To do this, the concepts of microscopic random time and macroscopic mean time, as well as random modular time are introduced. The possibilities of experimental verification of the hypothesis of the random flow of time are discussed. The possibility of interpreting the time-like fifth coordinate (introduced by V.A. Fock) as absolute time is considered and the question of the reality of absolute time is discussed. The absolute time, which manifests itself as the proper time of the particles, is assumed to be random.

arXiv:2110.11343•Oct 20, 2021•0 citations
Abstract Tunneling time in attosecond and strong-field experiments is one of the most controversial issues in current research, because of its importance to the theory of time, the time operator and the time–energy uncertainty relation in quantum mechanics. In Kullie (2015 Phys. Rev. A 92 052118 ) we derived an estimation of the (real) tunneling time, which shows an excellent agreement with the time measured in attosecond experiments, our derivation is found by utilizing the time–energy uncertainty relation, and it represents a quantum clock. In this work, we show different aspects of the tunneling time in attosecond experiments, we discuss and compare the different views and approaches, which are used to calculate the tunneling time, i.e. Keldysh time (as a real or imaginary quantity), Mandelstam–Tamm time, the classical view of the time measurement and our tunneling time relation(s). We draw some conclusions concerning the validity and the relation between the different types of the tunneling time with the hope that they will help to answer the question put forward by Orlando et al (2014 J. Phys. B 47 204002 , 2014 Phys. Rev. A 89 014102 ): tunneling time, what does it mean? However, as we will see, the important question is a more general one: how to understand the time and the measurement of the time of a quantum system? In respect to our result, the time in quantum mechanics can be, in more general fashion, classified in two types, intrinsic dynamically connected, and external dynamically not connected to the system, and consequently (perhaps only) classical Newtonian time remains as a parametric type of time.
Attosecond science, beyond its importance from application point of view, is of a fundamental interest in physics. The measurement of tunneling time in attosecond experiments offers a fruitful opportunity to understand the role of time in quantum mechanics. In the present work, we show that our real T-time relation derived in earlier works can be derived from an observable or a time operator, which obeys an ordinary commutation relation. Moreover, we show that our real T-time can also be constructed, inter alia, from the well-known Aharonov–Bohm time operator. This shows that the specific form of the time operator is not decisive, and dynamical time operators relate identically to the intrinsic time of the system. It contrasts the famous Pauli theorem, and confirms the fact that time is an observable, i.e., the existence of time operator and that the time is not a parameter in quantum mechanics. Furthermore, we discuss the relations with different types of tunneling times, such as Eisenbud–Wigner time, dwell time, and the statistically or probabilistic defined tunneling time. We conclude with the hotly debated interpretation of the attoclock measurement and the advantage of the real T-time picture versus the imaginary one.
The hypothesis of the random flow of time is considered. To do this, the concepts of microscopic random time and macroscopic mean time, as well as random modular time are introduced. The possibilities of experimental verification of the hypothesis of the random flow of time are discussed. The possibility of interpreting the time-like fifth coordinate (introduced by V.A. Fock) as absolute time is considered and the question of the reality of absolute time is discussed. The absolute time, which manifests itself as the proper time of the particles, is assumed to be random.