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

Barrier Tunneling and Reflection in the Time and Energy Domains: The Battle of the Exponentials

Neepa T. Maitra, Eric J. Heller

Published Apr 21, 1997• 88 citations
Publisher

Abstract

The issue of quantum barrier crossing and reflection in the time domain is addressed. We find that (1) classically forbidden barrier tunneling and above-barrier reflection are well-defined and important processes in the time domain, (2) classically forbidden processes can overshadow allowed ones when both are present, and (3) classically allowed trajectories in the time domain are not, in general, sufficient to explain tunneling amplitudes in the energy domain. We also make clear the essential distinction of barriers which flatten out at large distance and those which do not.

DOI
10.1103/physrevlett.78.3035

Related papers

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

Transient time-domain resonances and the time scale for tunneling

Gastón García‐Calderón, Jorge Villavicencio

Transient time-domain resonances found recently in time-dependent solutions to Schr\"odinger's equation are used to investigate the issue of the tunneling time in rectangular potential barriers. In general, a time-frequency analysis shows that these transients have frequencies above the cutoff frequency associated with the barrier height, and hence correspond to nontunneling processes. We find, however, a regime characterized by the barrier opacity, where the peak maximum ${t}_{\mathrm{max}}$ of the time-domain resonance corresponds to under-the-barrier tunneling. We argue that ${t}_{\mathrm{max}}$ represents the relevant tunneling time scale through the classically forbidden region.

arXiv:quant-ph/0311175•Physical Review A•Nov 17, 2003•11 citations

Reflection above the barrier as tunneling in momentum space

R. L. Jaffe

Quantum mechanics predicts an exponentially small probability that a particle with energy greater than the height of a potential barrier will reflect from the barrier in violation of classical expectations. This process can be regarded as tunneling in momentum space, leading to a simple derivation of the reflection probability.

arXiv:0910.4564•American Journal of Physics•May 12, 2010•14 citations

Some important aspects of the tunneling phenomenon through quantum structures

E. Polatdemir

Tunneling phenomenon is one of the wondrous events that take place particularly in quantum mechanics and it has no counterpart in classical physics. We focus on its two important implications : tunneling time and tunneling probability. There has been no consensus on tunneling times among the tunneling time community for last seven decades. So far, most of the attempts to calculate tunneling times have apparently been centered on a simple rectangular barrier example. We implement the tunneling times with the most widely accepted approach, which is using physical Larmor clock, into a nonsymmetrical barrier and a double barrier. It results in different and unique insights into the usual understanding of tunneling time. Three characteristics tunneling time expressions are thoroughly studied in these quantum structures. The difference between dwell time and phase-delay time is once again approved. The unique characteristics of the phase-delay time, which was thought to be exactly similar to dwell time when we assign higher energies to the particles, is also revealed in the nonsymmetrical barrier that it should actually be regarded as a distinct feature from the dwell time. The singularity of reflection time in rectangular barrier is no longer valid in nonsymmetrical barrier. The finiteness of reflection time fairly shows that different quantum structures might bear some taboo breaking results. Since a double barrier involves much more complicated features and calculations, the calculation of tunneling times under this barrier is praiseworthy. The dwell time is the most crucial, troublesome and distinctive tunneling time element to look into for a double barrier. Besides the dwell and phase-delay time, we also calculate the three characteristic times as well as the reflection time for a double barrier. Another area that we study within the context of tunneling phenomenon is the tunneling probability. Recently, there has been ground shaking attempts in modifying the conventional WKB formulae. We follow one of the modified versions of WKB formulae in order to be able to calculate the tunneling probability through different quantum structures where conventional WKB formulae fail. These generalized WKB connection formulae are applied to some complex quantum potentials by seeking aid from the Green's function and the path integral approach. One of the biggest problems in quantum mechanics (visualization) is partially overcome through implementing the method of diagrammatic representations that make the life easier in understanding the events happening in the quantum world when we attempt to calculate the transmission and reflection probabilities. This part therefore has a pedagogical sense too in terms of interpreting the results in a diagrammatic way with the help of the path integral approach.

•Jan 1, 2002•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

Tunneling and reflection of long waves

Michael J. Moritz

We investigate tunneling through a barrier and reflection over a step potential in the limit of long waves, i.e., near the base of the barrier, or for barriers with a small action integral over the forbidden region, and at the top of the ramp where the usual semiclassical approximation breaks down systematically. General approximations of the probability of transmission and reflection are given and compared to competing ones showing that the present approach based on the comparison method can give far better results.

Physical Review A•Aug 1, 1999•8 citations
The issue of quantum barrier crossing and reflection in the time domain is addressed. We find that (1) classically forbidden barrier tunneling and above-barrier reflection are well-defined and important processes in the time domain, (2) classically forbidden processes can overshadow allowed ones when both are present, and (3) classically allowed trajectories in the time domain are not, in general, sufficient to explain tunneling amplitudes in the energy domain. We also make clear the essential distinction of barriers which flatten out at large distance and those which do not.
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.
Transient time-domain resonances found recently in time-dependent solutions to Schr\"odinger's equation are used to investigate the issue of the tunneling time in rectangular potential barriers. In general, a time-frequency analysis shows that these transients have frequencies above the cutoff frequency associated with the barrier height, and hence correspond to nontunneling processes. We find, however, a regime characterized by the barrier opacity, where the peak maximum tmax{t}_{\mathrm{max}}tmax​ of the time-domain resonance corresponds to under-the-barrier tunneling. We argue that tmax{t}_{\mathrm{max}}tmax​ represents the relevant tunneling time scale through the classically forbidden region.
Tunneling phenomenon is one of the wondrous events that take place particularly in quantum mechanics and it has no counterpart in classical physics. We focus on its two important implications : tunneling time and tunneling probability. There has been no consensus on tunneling times among the tunneling time community for last seven decades. So far, most of the attempts to calculate tunneling times have apparently been centered on a simple rectangular barrier example. We implement the tunneling times with the most widely accepted approach, which is using physical Larmor clock, into a nonsymmetrical barrier and a double barrier. It results in different and unique insights into the usual understanding of tunneling time. Three characteristics tunneling time expressions are thoroughly studied in these quantum structures. The difference between dwell time and phase-delay time is once again approved. The unique characteristics of the phase-delay time, which was thought to be exactly similar to dwell time when we assign higher energies to the particles, is also revealed in the nonsymmetrical barrier that it should actually be regarded as a distinct feature from the dwell time. The singularity of reflection time in rectangular barrier is no longer valid in nonsymmetrical barrier. The finiteness of reflection time fairly shows that different quantum structures might bear some taboo breaking results. Since a double barrier involves much more complicated features and calculations, the calculation of tunneling times under this barrier is praiseworthy. The dwell time is the most crucial, troublesome and distinctive tunneling time element to look into for a double barrier. Besides the dwell and phase-delay time, we also calculate the three characteristic times as well as the reflection time for a double barrier. Another area that we study within the context of tunneling phenomenon is the tunneling probability. Recently, there has been ground shaking attempts in modifying the conventional WKB formulae. We follow one of the modified versions of WKB formulae in order to be able to calculate the tunneling probability through different quantum structures where conventional WKB formulae fail. These generalized WKB connection formulae are applied to some complex quantum potentials by seeking aid from the Green's function and the path integral approach. One of the biggest problems in quantum mechanics (visualization) is partially overcome through implementing the method of diagrammatic representations that make the life easier in understanding the events happening in the quantum world when we attempt to calculate the transmission and reflection probabilities. This part therefore has a pedagogical sense too in terms of interpreting the results in a diagrammatic way with the help of the path integral approach.
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 investigate tunneling through a barrier and reflection over a step potential in the limit of long waves, i.e., near the base of the barrier, or for barriers with a small action integral over the forbidden region, and at the top of the ramp where the usual semiclassical approximation breaks down systematically. General approximations of the probability of transmission and reflection are given and compared to competing ones showing that the present approach based on the comparison method can give far better results.