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

Physical Review A

Modulated barrier approach to the interaction time in tunneling for arbitrary potentials

Th. Martin, Rolf W. Landauer

Published Mar 1, 1993• 33 citations
Publisher

Abstract

The time that a transmitted particle interacts with a tunneling barrier is evaluated in one of the principal existing approaches by considering a small oscillatory perturbation added to the static barrier. The modulation frequency, at which a serious deviation from quasistatic behavior appears, is indicative of the traversal time. This approach is extended here, to a long region including the barrier, and utilizing a modulation potential which is spatially uniform throughout this region, except in the incident region ahead of the actual barrier, where it is made sufficiently smooth to avoid reflections. The resulting traversal time is \ensuremath{\Elzxh}\ensuremath{\partial} ln[\ensuremath{\partial}t/\ensuremath{\partial}E]/\ensuremath{\partial}E, where the complex transmission coefficient t(E) is defined as the ratio of the wave function at the far end to that at the point of incidence. This answer applies to arbitrary potentials and to all energies, including both propagation and tunneling in a single framework. This result is closely related to, but not identical to, that obtained by another earlier approach in which the potential is fixed, but the incident amplitude is modulated.

DOI
10.1103/physreva.47.2023

Related papers

Traversal Time for Tunneling

Μ. Büttiker, Rolf W. Landauer

The time required for decay of a metastable state, through tunneling, is a well settled subject. During this lifetime of the initial state, the particle oscillates within its initial well. By contrast, questions about the duration of the actual tunneling process, when it finally occurs, have led to widely divergent answers. In recent years, Jonson, Stevens, and we, have, through independent approaches, pointed out that there is an effective barrier traversal velocity obtained by dividing the magnitude of the imaginary momentum, under the barrier, by the particle mass. Here we present a fourth approach to this earlier answer, by considering a time modulated stream incident on the barrier. At low modulation frequencies the transmitted beam reproduces the incident modulation without lag, and without change in modulation depth. As the modulation frequency is increased we eventually depart from this simple behavior, and that is taken as a measure of the transversal time. We also provide some of the details omitted in our earlier analysis.

Physica Scripta•Oct 1, 1985•215 citations

Traversal Time for Tunneling

Μ. Büttiker, Rolf W. Landauer

One of several contradictory existing results for the time a tunneling particle interacts with its barrier is confirmed, by considering tunneling through a time-modulated barrier. At low modulation frequencies the traversing particle sees a static barrier. At high frequencies the particle tunnels through the time-averaged potential, but can do it inelastically, losing or gaining modulation quanta. The transition between the two regimes yields $\ensuremath{\int}\mathrm{dx}{[\frac{m}{2(V\ensuremath{-}E)}]}^{\frac{1}{2}}$ for the traversal time.

Physical Review Letters•Dec 6, 1982•1,117 citations

ON THE PATH INTEGRAL APPROACH TO THE TUNNELING TIME

Thierry Martin

The path integral formulation of the traversal time in tunneling utilizes a restricted Feynman amplitude. We present a derivation based on the Fisher Lee formula to compute the average time and the integrated distribution for arbitrary potentials. The (complex) tunneling time can be expressed as a derivative with respect to a potential which surrounds the region over which the particle is “detected”, and a correspondence with other tunneling time scales which depend on energy derivatives of the transmission coefficient is found. A semiclassical treatment confirms that there are two time scales associated with this measurement procedure. The imaginary component is related to the multiple instanton bounces in the inverted potential. The issue of positive times is found to depend crucially on the behavior of the transmission coefficient for asymptotic limits of the measurement potential. The calculation of higher moments of the distribution allows to define a positive barrier interaction time, without appealing to any regularization procedure.

International Journal of Modern Physics B•Dec 15, 1996•10 citations

Determination of barrier traversal time by modulation of the incident wave

Mark J. Hagmann

The semiclassical expression for barrier traversal time results from a variety of theoretical procedures, but it appears that an opaque barrier is required in each derivation. Following Büttiker and Landauer [IBM J. Res. Dev. 30, 451 (1986)], we use two interfering plane waves as the incident wave and determine the traversal time by attributing differences in the transmitted and incident waves to the ratio of dispersion in the transit time to the modulation period. Calculations are made for rectangular barriers with different sizes. There is essentially agreement with Büttiker and Landauer for opaque barriers which they considered, but the present solution does not diverge for energies near the top of the barrier.

Applied Physics Letters•Jan 11, 1993•11 citations

Tunneling times

Partha Ghose

Introduction In classical physics it is meaningful to ask the question, ‘How much time does a particle take to pass through a given region?’ The interesting question in quantum mechanics is: does a particle take a definite time to tunnel through a classically forbidden region? The question has been debated ever since the idea that there was such a time in quantum theory was first put forward by MacColl way back in 1932 [253]. A plethora of times has since then been proposed, and the answer seems to depend on the interpretation of quantum mechanics one uses. A reliable answer is clearly of great importance for the design of high-frequency quantum devices, tunnelling phenomena (as, for example, in scanning tunneling microscopy), nuclear and chemical reactions and, of course, for purely conceptual reasons. Most of the controversies centre around simple and intuitive notions in idealized one-dimensional models in a scattering configuration in which a particle (usually represented by a wave packet) is incident on a potential barrier localized in the interval [ a, b ]. Three kinds of time have been defined in this context. One, called the transmission time τ T ( a, b ), is the average time spent within the barrier region by the particles that are eventually transmitted. Similarly, the reflection time τ R ( a, b ) is the average time spent within the barrier region by the particles that are eventually reflected.

Cambridge University Press eBooks•Apr 29, 1999•0 citations

Tunnelling through a time-modulated barrier-relation to tunnelling times

Antti‐Pekka Jauho, M. Jonson

The authors analyse tunnelling through time-modulated barriers. The numerical results for the transmitted sideband intensities, obtained with wave-packet simulations, are in quantitative agreement with the analytical results of Buttiker and Landauer (1982, 1985). For opaque barriers the asymmetry of the sideband intensities can be characterized with a single frequency whose inverse Buttiker and Landauer interpret as the traversal time. This simple behaviour does not hold in general, and the authors discuss some of the difficulties one meets in an attempt to generalise the one-parameter description to arbitrary barriers. Furthermore, they examine analytically the transmitted wavefunction in the adiabatic limit, and show that the related density and current involve both the dwell time and the Buttiker time, defined in the context of a Larmor clock. This suggests the possibility that experiments probing different aspects of the transmitted wavefunction may yield different, but complementary, information about the tunnelling process.

Journal of Physics Condensed Matter•Nov 13, 1989•28 citations
The time that a transmitted particle interacts with a tunneling barrier is evaluated in one of the principal existing approaches by considering a small oscillatory perturbation added to the static barrier. The modulation frequency, at which a serious deviation from quasistatic behavior appears, is indicative of the traversal time. This approach is extended here, to a long region including the barrier, and utilizing a modulation potential which is spatially uniform throughout this region, except in the incident region ahead of the actual barrier, where it is made sufficiently smooth to avoid reflections. The resulting traversal time is \ensuremath{\Elzxh}\ensuremath{\partial} ln[\ensuremath{\partial}t/\ensuremath{\partial}E]/\ensuremath{\partial}E, where the complex transmission coefficient t(E) is defined as the ratio of the wave function at the far end to that at the point of incidence. This answer applies to arbitrary potentials and to all energies, including both propagation and tunneling in a single framework. This result is closely related to, but not identical to, that obtained by another earlier approach in which the potential is fixed, but the incident amplitude is modulated.
The time required for decay of a metastable state, through tunneling, is a well settled subject. During this lifetime of the initial state, the particle oscillates within its initial well. By contrast, questions about the duration of the actual tunneling process, when it finally occurs, have led to widely divergent answers. In recent years, Jonson, Stevens, and we, have, through independent approaches, pointed out that there is an effective barrier traversal velocity obtained by dividing the magnitude of the imaginary momentum, under the barrier, by the particle mass. Here we present a fourth approach to this earlier answer, by considering a time modulated stream incident on the barrier. At low modulation frequencies the transmitted beam reproduces the incident modulation without lag, and without change in modulation depth. As the modulation frequency is increased we eventually depart from this simple behavior, and that is taken as a measure of the transversal time. We also provide some of the details omitted in our earlier analysis.
One of several contradictory existing results for the time a tunneling particle interacts with its barrier is confirmed, by considering tunneling through a time-modulated barrier. At low modulation frequencies the traversing particle sees a static barrier. At high frequencies the particle tunnels through the time-averaged potential, but can do it inelastically, losing or gaining modulation quanta. The transition between the two regimes yields $\ensuremath{\int}\mathrm{dx}{[\frac{m}{2(V\ensuremath{-}E)}]}^{\frac{1}{2}}$ for the traversal time.
The path integral formulation of the traversal time in tunneling utilizes a restricted Feynman amplitude. We present a derivation based on the Fisher Lee formula to compute the average time and the integrated distribution for arbitrary potentials. The (complex) tunneling time can be expressed as a derivative with respect to a potential which surrounds the region over which the particle is “detected”, and a correspondence with other tunneling time scales which depend on energy derivatives of the transmission coefficient is found. A semiclassical treatment confirms that there are two time scales associated with this measurement procedure. The imaginary component is related to the multiple instanton bounces in the inverted potential. The issue of positive times is found to depend crucially on the behavior of the transmission coefficient for asymptotic limits of the measurement potential. The calculation of higher moments of the distribution allows to define a positive barrier interaction time, without appealing to any regularization procedure.
The semiclassical expression for barrier traversal time results from a variety of theoretical procedures, but it appears that an opaque barrier is required in each derivation. Following Büttiker and Landauer [IBM J. Res. Dev. 30, 451 (1986)], we use two interfering plane waves as the incident wave and determine the traversal time by attributing differences in the transmitted and incident waves to the ratio of dispersion in the transit time to the modulation period. Calculations are made for rectangular barriers with different sizes. There is essentially agreement with Büttiker and Landauer for opaque barriers which they considered, but the present solution does not diverge for energies near the top of the barrier.
Introduction In classical physics it is meaningful to ask the question, ‘How much time does a particle take to pass through a given region?’ The interesting question in quantum mechanics is: does a particle take a definite time to tunnel through a classically forbidden region? The question has been debated ever since the idea that there was such a time in quantum theory was first put forward by MacColl way back in 1932 [253]. A plethora of times has since then been proposed, and the answer seems to depend on the interpretation of quantum mechanics one uses. A reliable answer is clearly of great importance for the design of high-frequency quantum devices, tunnelling phenomena (as, for example, in scanning tunneling microscopy), nuclear and chemical reactions and, of course, for purely conceptual reasons. Most of the controversies centre around simple and intuitive notions in idealized one-dimensional models in a scattering configuration in which a particle (usually represented by a wave packet) is incident on a potential barrier localized in the interval [ a, b ]. Three kinds of time have been defined in this context. One, called the transmission time τ T ( a, b ), is the average time spent within the barrier region by the particles that are eventually transmitted. Similarly, the reflection time τ R ( a, b ) is the average time spent within the barrier region by the particles that are eventually reflected.
The authors analyse tunnelling through time-modulated barriers. The numerical results for the transmitted sideband intensities, obtained with wave-packet simulations, are in quantitative agreement with the analytical results of Buttiker and Landauer (1982, 1985). For opaque barriers the asymmetry of the sideband intensities can be characterized with a single frequency whose inverse Buttiker and Landauer interpret as the traversal time. This simple behaviour does not hold in general, and the authors discuss some of the difficulties one meets in an attempt to generalise the one-parameter description to arbitrary barriers. Furthermore, they examine analytically the transmitted wavefunction in the adiabatic limit, and show that the related density and current involve both the dwell time and the Buttiker time, defined in the context of a Larmor clock. This suggests the possibility that experiments probing different aspects of the transmitted wavefunction may yield different, but complementary, information about the tunnelling process.