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

Physics Letters A

Comment on: “Questions concerning the generalized Hartman effect” [Phys. Lett. A 375 (2011) 3259]

Vitomir Milanović, J. Radovanović

Published Mar 1, 2012• 9 citations
Publisher
DOI
10.1016/j.physleta.2012.03.020

Related papers

Reply to “Comment on: ‘Questions concerning the generalized Hartman effect’ [Phys. Lett. A 375 (2011) 3259]”

Shoju Kudaka, Shuichi Matsumoto

Physics Letters A•Mar 1, 2012•9 citations

Questions concerning the generalized Hartman effect

Shoju Kudaka, Shuichi Matsumoto

Physics Letters A•Jul 26, 2011•20 citations

Comment on “Variations on the Aharonov–Bohm effect” [Am. J. Phys. 59 (12), 1080–1085 (1991)]

Stanley A. Bruce

American Journal of Physics•Dec 1, 1998•4 citations

A mathematically rigorous approach raises questions concerning the generalized Hartman effect

Shoju Kudaka, Shuichi Matsumoto

With reference to a particle tunneling through two successive barriers, it seems to have been generally accepted that the tunneling time does not depend on the separation distance between the barriers. This phenomenon has been called the {\it generalized Hartman effect}. In this letter, we point out a lack of mathematical rigour in the reasoning by which this effect was deduced about ten years ago. A mathematically rigorous treatment shows us that the tunneling time does indeed depend on the length of the free space between the barriers.

arXiv:1105.2159•May 11, 2011•0 citations

Role of PT-symmetry in understanding Hartman effect

Mohammad Hasan, Vibhav Narayan Singh, Bhabani Prasad Mandal

arXiv:2004.14815•The European Physical Journal Plus•Aug 1, 2020•15 citations

Comment on ``Integrability and Coherence of Hopping between 1D Correlated Electron Systems''

Clarke, David, Steven P. Strong

We comment on recent numerical studies concerning coupled 1D electron liquids (F. Mila and D. Poilblanc, Phys. Rev. Lett. 76, 287 (1996)). In particular, we point out that the importance of integrability observed in the results of these authors for the quantity $P(t)$ is really an indication of the importance of integrability for questions of ergodicity, rather than questions of coherence. We discuss why this is so, and why the quantity $< δN (t) >$ is a more appropriate function for determining whether or not interliquid hopping is coherent.

arXiv:cond-mat/9612087•Dec 10, 1996•0 citations
With reference to a particle tunneling through two successive barriers, it seems to have been generally accepted that the tunneling time does not depend on the separation distance between the barriers. This phenomenon has been called the {\it generalized Hartman effect}. In this letter, we point out a lack of mathematical rigour in the reasoning by which this effect was deduced about ten years ago. A mathematically rigorous treatment shows us that the tunneling time does indeed depend on the length of the free space between the barriers.
We comment on recent numerical studies concerning coupled 1D electron liquids (F. Mila and D. Poilblanc, Phys. Rev. Lett. 76, 287 (1996)). In particular, we point out that the importance of integrability observed in the results of these authors for the quantity P(t)P(t)P(t) is really an indication of the importance of integrability for questions of ergodicity, rather than questions of coherence. We discuss why this is so, and why the quantity <δN(t)>< δN (t) ><δN(t)> is a more appropriate function for determining whether or not interliquid hopping is coherent.