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 Letters

Speakable and Unspeakable in the Tunneling Time Problem

Norifumi Yamada

Published Oct 25, 1999• 61 citations
Publisher

Abstract

A simple solution is given to the tunneling time problem from the viewpoint of interfering alternatives. Using Gell-Mann and Hartle's decoherence functional for real time Feynman histories, it is shown that (i) the probability distribution of tunneling times cannot be defined for ``resident time'' type but (ii) the range of values of the time is definable. The range turns out to be so broad for opaque barriers that a unique tunneling time cannot be considered even in a loose sense.

DOI
10.1103/physrevlett.83.3350

Related papers

Equivalence between the real-time Feynman histories and the quantum-shutter approaches for the “passage time” in tunneling

Gastón García‐Calderón, Jorge Villavicencio, Norifumi Yamada

We show the equivalence of the functions ${G}_{\mathrm{p}}(t)$ and $|\ensuremath{\Psi}(d,t){|}^{2}$ for the ``passage time'' in tunneling. The former, obtained within the framework of the real-time Feynman histories approach to the tunneling time problem, uses the Gell-Mann and Hartle's decoherence functional, and the latter involves an exact analytical solution to the time-dependent Schr\"odinger equation for cutoff initial waves.

arXiv:quant-ph/0302096•Physical Review A•May 27, 2003•27 citations

Unified Derivation of Tunneling Times from Decoherence Functionals

Norifumi Yamada

The four tunneling times, the Larmor time, the Büttiker-Landauer time, the Bohm-Wigner time, and the Pollak-Miller time, originally obtained from very different physical models, are derived in a unified manner from the Gell-Mann-Hartle decoherence functionals. The origin of the two types of derivatives in the expressions for these tunneling times is clarified at the level of Feynman paths.

Physical Review Letters•Oct 18, 2004•71 citations

Decoherent-history approach to the probability distribution of tunneling time

Sutee Boonchui, Virulh Sa‐Yakanit

We show that the probability distribution of tunneling time can be defined, although the decoherence functional does not satisfy the weak decoherence condition. However, the weak decoherence condition holds whenever the measuring device as defined by von Neumann exists as a part of the system. The resultant tunneling time probability distribution does not contain any information on the height of the potential.

Physical Review A•Apr 2, 2008•7 citations

Decoherent histories approach to tunneling times and its implication

Norifumi Yamada

Decoherent histories approach to quantum mechanics assigns probabilities to events that are not restricted to a single moment of time, provided that the decoherence condition holds for the set of events. The condition is however hardly satisfied in general, which has been considered to limit the usefulness of the histories approach. The present paper applies the histories approach to the tunneling time problem to show that, although the decoherence condition does not hold, the histories approach is still useful in predicting the central tendency and the dispersion of resident times. We consider such quantities that would become the average and the standard deviation of resident times if the decoherence condition held. Since the condition does not actually hold, they are not regarded as the true average and the true standard deviation. Nevertheless, a quantum clock approach allows us to interpret these quantities as a central value and a dispersion of resident times within the time resolution of the clock.

Journal of Physics Conference Series•May 1, 2007•0 citations

Tunneling times: a critical review

E. H. Hauge, Jon Andreas Støvneng

The old question of "How long does it take to tunnel through a barrier?" has acquired new urgency with the advent of techniques for the fabrication of semiconductor structures in the nanometer range. For the restricted problem of tunneling in a scattering configuration, a coherent picture is now emerging. The dwell time ${\ensuremath{\tau}}_{D}$ has the status of an exact statement of the time spent in a region of space, averaged over all incoming particles. The phase times ${\ensuremath{\tau}}_{T}^{\ensuremath{\phi}}$ and ${\ensuremath{\tau}}_{R}^{\ensuremath{\phi}}$ are defined separately for transmitted and reflected particles. They are asymptotic statements on completed scattering events and include self-interference delays as well as the time spent in the barrier. Consequently, neither the dwell time nor the phase times can answer the question of how much time a transmitted (alternatively, reflected) particle spent in the barrier region. Our discussion of this question relies on a few simple criteria: (1) The average duration of a physical process must be real. (2) Since transmission and reflection are mutually exclusive events, the times ${\ensuremath{\tau}}_{T}$ and ${\ensuremath{\tau}}_{R}$ spent in the barrier region are, if they exist, conditional averages. Consequently, they must obey the identity ${\ensuremath{\tau}}_{D}=T{\ensuremath{\tau}}_{T}+R{\ensuremath{\tau}}_{R}$, where $T$ and $R$ are the transmission and reflection probabilities, respectively. The existence of this identity distinguishes tunneling in a scattering configuration from tunneling out of a metastable state. (3) Any proposed ${\ensuremath{\tau}}_{T}$ and ${\ensuremath{\tau}}_{R}$ must meet every requirement that can be constructed from ${\ensuremath{\tau}}_{D}$. On the basis of (2), the naively extrapolated phase times, as well as the B\"uttiker-Landauer time, must be rejected. The local Larmor times, as introduced by Baz', satisfy (2), but not every criterion of type (3). The local Larmor clock is therefore unreliable. The asymptotic Larmor clock shows the phase times, as it should. Finally, the inverse characteristic frequency of an oscillating barrier cannot always be defined. It is shown not to represent the duration of the tunneling process. This leaves the dwell time and the phase times as the only well-established times in this context. It also leaves open the question of the length of time a transmitted particle spends in the barrier region. It is not clear that a generally valid answer to this question exists.

Reviews of Modern Physics•Oct 1, 1989•1,074 citations

Time-of-arrival probabilities and quantum measurements. II. Application to tunneling times

Charis Anastopoulos, Ntina Savvidou

We formulate quantum tunneling as a time-of-arrival problem: we determine the detection probability for particles passing through a barrier at a detector located a distance L from the tunneling region. For this purpose, we use a positive-operator-valued measure (POVM) for the time of arrival determined in C. Anastopoulos and N. Savvidou, J. Math. Phys. 47, 122106 (2006). This only depends on the initial state, the Hamiltonian, and the location of the detector. The POVM above provides a well-defined probability density and an unambiguous interpretation of all quantities involved. We demonstrate that for a class of localized initial states, the detection probability allows for an identification of tunneling time with the classic phase time. We also establish limits to the definability of tunneling time. We then generalize these results to a sequential measurement setup: the phase-space properties of the particles are determined by an unsharp sampling before their attempt to cross the barrier. For such measurements the tunneling time is defined as a genuine observable. This allows us to construct a probability distribution for its values that is definable for all initial states and potentials. We also identify a regime in which these probabilities correspond to a tunneling-time operator.

arXiv:0706.2492•Journal of Mathematical Physics•Feb 1, 2008•16 citations
A simple solution is given to the tunneling time problem from the viewpoint of interfering alternatives. Using Gell-Mann and Hartle's decoherence functional for real time Feynman histories, it is shown that (i) the probability distribution of tunneling times cannot be defined for ``resident time'' type but (ii) the range of values of the time is definable. The range turns out to be so broad for opaque barriers that a unique tunneling time cannot be considered even in a loose sense.
We show the equivalence of the functions Gp(t){G}_{\mathrm{p}}(t)Gp​(t) and $|\ensuremath{\Psi}(d,t){|}^{2}$ for the ``passage time'' in tunneling. The former, obtained within the framework of the real-time Feynman histories approach to the tunneling time problem, uses the Gell-Mann and Hartle's decoherence functional, and the latter involves an exact analytical solution to the time-dependent Schr\"odinger equation for cutoff initial waves.
Decoherent histories approach to quantum mechanics assigns probabilities to events that are not restricted to a single moment of time, provided that the decoherence condition holds for the set of events. The condition is however hardly satisfied in general, which has been considered to limit the usefulness of the histories approach. The present paper applies the histories approach to the tunneling time problem to show that, although the decoherence condition does not hold, the histories approach is still useful in predicting the central tendency and the dispersion of resident times. We consider such quantities that would become the average and the standard deviation of resident times if the decoherence condition held. Since the condition does not actually hold, they are not regarded as the true average and the true standard deviation. Nevertheless, a quantum clock approach allows us to interpret these quantities as a central value and a dispersion of resident times within the time resolution of the clock.
The old question of "How long does it take to tunnel through a barrier?" has acquired new urgency with the advent of techniques for the fabrication of semiconductor structures in the nanometer range. For the restricted problem of tunneling in a scattering configuration, a coherent picture is now emerging. The dwell time ${\ensuremath{\tau}}_{D}$ has the status of an exact statement of the time spent in a region of space, averaged over all incoming particles. The phase times ${\ensuremath{\tau}}_{T}^{\ensuremath{\phi}}$ and ${\ensuremath{\tau}}_{R}^{\ensuremath{\phi}}$ are defined separately for transmitted and reflected particles. They are asymptotic statements on completed scattering events and include self-interference delays as well as the time spent in the barrier. Consequently, neither the dwell time nor the phase times can answer the question of how much time a transmitted (alternatively, reflected) particle spent in the barrier region. Our discussion of this question relies on a few simple criteria: (1) The average duration of a physical process must be real. (2) Since transmission and reflection are mutually exclusive events, the times ${\ensuremath{\tau}}_{T}$ and ${\ensuremath{\tau}}_{R}$ spent in the barrier region are, if they exist, conditional averages. Consequently, they must obey the identity ${\ensuremath{\tau}}_{D}=T{\ensuremath{\tau}}_{T}+R{\ensuremath{\tau}}_{R}$, where TTT and RRR are the transmission and reflection probabilities, respectively. The existence of this identity distinguishes tunneling in a scattering configuration from tunneling out of a metastable state. (3) Any proposed ${\ensuremath{\tau}}_{T}$ and ${\ensuremath{\tau}}_{R}$ must meet every requirement that can be constructed from ${\ensuremath{\tau}}_{D}$. On the basis of (2), the naively extrapolated phase times, as well as the B\"uttiker-Landauer time, must be rejected. The local Larmor times, as introduced by Baz', satisfy (2), but not every criterion of type (3). The local Larmor clock is therefore unreliable. The asymptotic Larmor clock shows the phase times, as it should. Finally, the inverse characteristic frequency of an oscillating barrier cannot always be defined. It is shown not to represent the duration of the tunneling process. This leaves the dwell time and the phase times as the only well-established times in this context. It also leaves open the question of the length of time a transmitted particle spends in the barrier region. It is not clear that a generally valid answer to this question exists.
We formulate quantum tunneling as a time-of-arrival problem: we determine the detection probability for particles passing through a barrier at a detector located a distance L from the tunneling region. For this purpose, we use a positive-operator-valued measure (POVM) for the time of arrival determined in C. Anastopoulos and N. Savvidou, J. Math. Phys. 47, 122106 (2006). This only depends on the initial state, the Hamiltonian, and the location of the detector. The POVM above provides a well-defined probability density and an unambiguous interpretation of all quantities involved. We demonstrate that for a class of localized initial states, the detection probability allows for an identification of tunneling time with the classic phase time. We also establish limits to the definability of tunneling time. We then generalize these results to a sequential measurement setup: the phase-space properties of the particles are determined by an unsharp sampling before their attempt to cross the barrier. For such measurements the tunneling time is defined as a genuine observable. This allows us to construct a probability distribution for its values that is definable for all initial states and potentials. We also identify a regime in which these probabilities correspond to a tunneling-time operator.