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

Reviews of Modern Physics

Barrier interaction time in tunneling

Rolf W. Landauer, Th. Martin

Published Jan 1, 1994• 769 citations
Publisher

Abstract

Over sixty years ago, it was suggested that there is a time associated with the passage of a particle under a tunneling barrier. The existence of such a time is now well accepted; in fact the time has been measured experimentally. There is no clear consensus, however, about the existence of a simple expression for this time, and the exact nature of that expression. The proposed expressions fall into three main classes. The authors argue that expressions based on following a feature of a wave packet through the barrier have little physical significance. A second class tries to identify a set of classical paths associated with the quantum-mechanical motion and then tries to average over these. This class is too diverse to permit assessment as a single entity. The third class invokes a physical clock involving degrees of freedom in addition to that involved in tunneling. This not only is a prescription for the derivation of expressions for the traversal time but also leads to a direct relationship to experiment.

DOI
10.1103/revmodphys.66.217

Related papers

On the status of quantum tunneling times

Grace E. Field

How long does a quantum particle take to traverse a classically forbidden energy barrier? In other words, what is the correct expression for quantum tunneling time? This seemingly simple question has inspired widespread debate in the physics literature. By drawing an analogy with the double-slit experiment, I argue that we should not even expect the standard interpretation of quantum mechanics to provide an expression for quantum tunneling time. 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, and the prospect of constructing experimental tests to distinguish between different interpretations.

•May 21, 2020•0 citations

Traversal Times for Resonant Tunneling

Uri Peskin, Michael Galperin, Abraham Nitzan

The tunneling time of a particle through a given barrier is commonly defined in terms of “internal clocks” that effectively measure the interaction time with internal degrees of freedom of the barrier. It is known that this definition of the time scale for tunneling is not unique in the sense that it depends on the clock used to define it. For the case of resonance tunneling, a particular choice that in the limit of a high/broad square barrier yields the original result of Büttiker and Landauer ( Phys. Rev. Lett. 1982, 49, 1739) is correlated to the lifetime of the resonance state. This is illustrated for analytically solvable one-dimensional double barrier models and for a realistic model of electron tunneling through a static water barrier. The latter calculation constitutes a novel application of this concept to a 3-dimensional model, and the observed structure in the energy dependence of the computed traversal time reflects the existence of transient tunneling resonances associated with instantaneous water structures. These models, characterized by the existence of shape resonances in the barrier, make it possible to examine different internal clocks that were proposed for measuring tunneling times in situations where a “clock independent” intrinsic time scale (the resonance lifetime) for the tunneling time exists. It is argued that this time may be used in order to estimate the relative importance of dynamical barrier processes that affect the tunneling probability.

The Journal of Physical Chemistry B•Jul 9, 2002•7 citations

Traversal Time in Tunneling

Rolf W. Landauer

Abstract Traversal time in tunneling has become a somewhat controversial subject, and this note presents a personal perspective on some of these discussions. There is a widely invoked linear relationship yielding dwell time as a weighted average of traversal time and reflection time. I assert that it is totally without basis. Many authors follow wave packets through barriers. The results of such calculations are hard to correlate with experiment. Stevens has provided a wave packet approach which avoids some of the problems typically faced by such analyses; nevertheless its analytical details are questioned. The significance of complex traversal times, favored by some investigators, is questioned. The relative merit of various possible “clocks” in the analysis of traversal time is discussed, but without definitive conclusions.

Berichte der Bunsengesellschaft für physikalische Chemie•Mar 1, 1991•65 citations

Traversal times for resonant tunneling

Uri Peskin, Michael Galperin, Abraham Nitzan

The tunneling time of particle through given barrier is commonly defined in terms of "internal clocks" which effectively measure the interaction time with internal degrees of freedom of the barrier. It is known that this definition of the time scale for tunneling is not unique in the sense that it depends on the clock used to define it. For the case of resonance tunneling, a particular choice that in the limit of a high/broad square barrier yields the original result of Buttiker and Landauer (Phys. Rev. Lett. 1982, 49, 1739) is correlated to the lifetime of the resonance state. This is illustrated for analytically solvable one-dimensional double barrier models and for a realistic model of electron tunneling through a static water barrier. The latter calculation constitutes a novel application of this concept to a 3-dimensional model, and the observed structure in the energy dependence of the computed traversal time reflects the existence of transient tunneling resonances associated with instantaneous water structures. These models, characterized by the existence of shape resonances in the barrier, make it possible to examine different internal clocks that were proposed for measuring tunneling times in situations where a "clock independent" intrinsic time scale (the resonance life time) for the tunneling time exists. It is argued that this time may be used in order to estimate the relative importance of dynamical barrier processes that affect the tunneling probability.

arXiv:cond-mat/0207019•Jun 30, 2002•0 citations

Tunneling Effect Based on N elson's Quantum Stochastic Process Approach -Estimation of Tunneling Time-

毅雄 友村, 貴明 橋本, Takeo Tomomura +1 more

The problem of tunneling time associated with the passage of a particle through a tunneling barrier seems very simple. But it turns out to be very deceptive by the lack of a time operator and there is no clear consensus about simple expression for the tunneling time. In this paper we evaluate the tunneling time based on Nelson's quantum stochastic process approach. This approach describes the motion of a particle by a stochastic differentia1 equation and gives a sample paths. The ensemble of the paths reproduce the predictions given by ordinary quantum mechanics in an average. Each sample path has its own time dependent history, which enables us make a virtual quantum experiment. We formulate the tunneling time based on this approach and compare it with the Larmor time estimated from an experimental measurement of Larmor precession angles of tunneling neutrons.

•Mar 1, 2000•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
Over sixty years ago, it was suggested that there is a time associated with the passage of a particle under a tunneling barrier. The existence of such a time is now well accepted; in fact the time has been measured experimentally. There is no clear consensus, however, about the existence of a simple expression for this time, and the exact nature of that expression. The proposed expressions fall into three main classes. The authors argue that expressions based on following a feature of a wave packet through the barrier have little physical significance. A second class tries to identify a set of classical paths associated with the quantum-mechanical motion and then tries to average over these. This class is too diverse to permit assessment as a single entity. The third class invokes a physical clock involving degrees of freedom in addition to that involved in tunneling. This not only is a prescription for the derivation of expressions for the traversal time but also leads to a direct relationship to experiment.
How long does a quantum particle take to traverse a classically forbidden energy barrier? In other words, what is the correct expression for quantum tunneling time? This seemingly simple question has inspired widespread debate in the physics literature. By drawing an analogy with the double-slit experiment, I argue that we should not even expect the standard interpretation of quantum mechanics to provide an expression for quantum tunneling time. 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, and the prospect of constructing experimental tests to distinguish between different interpretations.
The tunneling time of a particle through a given barrier is commonly defined in terms of “internal clocks” that effectively measure the interaction time with internal degrees of freedom of the barrier. It is known that this definition of the time scale for tunneling is not unique in the sense that it depends on the clock used to define it. For the case of resonance tunneling, a particular choice that in the limit of a high/broad square barrier yields the original result of Büttiker and Landauer ( Phys. Rev. Lett. 1982, 49, 1739) is correlated to the lifetime of the resonance state. This is illustrated for analytically solvable one-dimensional double barrier models and for a realistic model of electron tunneling through a static water barrier. The latter calculation constitutes a novel application of this concept to a 3-dimensional model, and the observed structure in the energy dependence of the computed traversal time reflects the existence of transient tunneling resonances associated with instantaneous water structures. These models, characterized by the existence of shape resonances in the barrier, make it possible to examine different internal clocks that were proposed for measuring tunneling times in situations where a “clock independent” intrinsic time scale (the resonance lifetime) for the tunneling time exists. It is argued that this time may be used in order to estimate the relative importance of dynamical barrier processes that affect the tunneling probability.
Abstract Traversal time in tunneling has become a somewhat controversial subject, and this note presents a personal perspective on some of these discussions. There is a widely invoked linear relationship yielding dwell time as a weighted average of traversal time and reflection time. I assert that it is totally without basis. Many authors follow wave packets through barriers. The results of such calculations are hard to correlate with experiment. Stevens has provided a wave packet approach which avoids some of the problems typically faced by such analyses; nevertheless its analytical details are questioned. The significance of complex traversal times, favored by some investigators, is questioned. The relative merit of various possible “clocks” in the analysis of traversal time is discussed, but without definitive conclusions.
The tunneling time of particle through given barrier is commonly defined in terms of "internal clocks" which effectively measure the interaction time with internal degrees of freedom of the barrier. It is known that this definition of the time scale for tunneling is not unique in the sense that it depends on the clock used to define it. For the case of resonance tunneling, a particular choice that in the limit of a high/broad square barrier yields the original result of Buttiker and Landauer (Phys. Rev. Lett. 1982, 49, 1739) is correlated to the lifetime of the resonance state. This is illustrated for analytically solvable one-dimensional double barrier models and for a realistic model of electron tunneling through a static water barrier. The latter calculation constitutes a novel application of this concept to a 3-dimensional model, and the observed structure in the energy dependence of the computed traversal time reflects the existence of transient tunneling resonances associated with instantaneous water structures. These models, characterized by the existence of shape resonances in the barrier, make it possible to examine different internal clocks that were proposed for measuring tunneling times in situations where a "clock independent" intrinsic time scale (the resonance life time) for the tunneling time exists. It is argued that this time may be used in order to estimate the relative importance of dynamical barrier processes that affect the tunneling probability.
The problem of tunneling time associated with the passage of a particle through a tunneling barrier seems very simple. But it turns out to be very deceptive by the lack of a time operator and there is no clear consensus about simple expression for the tunneling time. In this paper we evaluate the tunneling time based on Nelson's quantum stochastic process approach. This approach describes the motion of a particle by a stochastic differentia1 equation and gives a sample paths. The ensemble of the paths reproduce the predictions given by ordinary quantum mechanics in an average. Each sample path has its own time dependent history, which enables us make a virtual quantum experiment. We formulate the tunneling time based on this approach and compare it with the Larmor time estimated from an experimental measurement of Larmor precession angles of tunneling neutrons.
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.