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 The singularity of reflection time in rectangular barrier is no longer valid in nonsymmetrical barrier.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.
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.
Various approaches have been used to calculate the quantum-mechanical tunneling time through potential barriers including the phase-delay method first introduced by Bohm and Wigner, Buttiker's analysis of the Larmor clock and its generalization, the dwell time of Smith, and numerical studies of wavepacket propagation through potential barriers among others. Most of those previous estimates have only dealt with the tunneling time through simple obstacles, including delta-potential scatterers and simple rectangular barriers under zero bias condition. Even for these simple cases, the agreement among the various estimates is far from being satisfactory. In this manuscript, the transmission line technique is employed to solve the time-dependent Schrodinger equation and an expression of the quantum-mechanical tunneling time is derived for an arbitrary potential profile under non zero bias condition. An exact analytical expression of the tunneling time through a rectangular barrier is derived and shown to be identical to the one obtained recently by Spiller et. al. using the Bohm's quantum potential approach. The tunneling time through resonant tunneling structures under zero bias is also calculated and is shown to be minimum at the quasi-boundstate energy. Finally, the quantum-mechanical tunneling time through the emitter-base junction of a typical heterojunction bipolar transistor is shown to be larger than its semiclassical counterpart.
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.
In a recent review paper [{\em Phys. Reports} {\bf 214} (1992) 339] we proposed, within conventional quantum mechanics, new definitions for the sub-barrier tunnelling and reflection times. \ Aims of the present paper are: \ (i) presenting and analysing the results of various numerical calculations (based on our equations) on the penetration and return times ,, during tunnelling {\em inside} a rectangular potential barrier, for various penetration depths xf; \ (ii) putting forth and discussing suitable definitions, besides of the mean values, also of the {\em variances} (or dispersions) DτT and DτR for the time durations of transmission and reflection processes; \ (iii) mentioning, moreover, that our definition $$ for the average transmission time results to constitute an {\em improvement} of the ordinary dwell--time ${\ove τ}^{\rm Dw}$ formula: \ (iv) commenting, at last, on the basis of our {\em new} numerical results, upon some recent criticism by C.R.Leavens. \ \ We stress that our numerical evaluations {\em confirm} that our approach implied, and implies, the existence of the {\em Hartman effect}: an effect that in these days (due to the theoretical connections between tunnelling and evanescent--wave propagation) is receiving ---at Cologne, Berkeley, Florence and Vienna--- indirect, but quite interesting, experimental verifications. \ Eventually, we briefly analyze some other definitions of tunnelling times.
We demonstrate that although the well-known analogy between the time-independent solutions for two-dimensional tunneling (e.g., frustrated total internal reflection) and tunneling through a one-dimensional potential barrier cannot, in general, be extended to the time domain, there are certain limits in which the delay times for the two problems obey a simple relationship. In particular, when an effective mass is chosen such that mc2=\ensuremath{\Elzxh}\ensuremath{\omega}, the ``classical'' traversal times for allowed transmission become identical for a photon of energy \ensuremath{\Elzxh}\ensuremath{\omega} traversing an air gap between regions of index n and for a particle of mass m traversing the analogous square barrier of height V0 in one dimension. The quantum-mechanical group delays are also identical, given this effective mass, both for E\ensuremath{\approxeq}V0 (\ensuremath{\theta}\ensuremath{\approxeq}${\mathrm{\ensuremath{\theta}}}_{\mathit{c}}$) and for E\ensuremath{\gg}V0 (\ensuremath{\theta}\ensuremath{\ll}${\mathrm{\ensuremath{\theta}}}_{\mathit{c}}$). (For a smoothly varying potential or index of refraction, the agreement persists for all values of E where the WKB approximation applies.) The same relation serves to equate the quantum-mechanical ``dwell'' times for any values of E and V0. On the other hand, in the ``deep tunneling'' limit, E\ensuremath{\ll}V0 (\ensuremath{\theta}\ensuremath{\approxeq}\ensuremath{\pi}/2), one must choose mc2=n2\ensuremath{\Elzxh}\ensuremath{\omega} in order to make the group delays equal for the two problems. These equivalences simplify certain calculations, and the two-dimensional analogy may also be useful for geometrically visualizing the tunneling process and the anomalously small group delays known to occur in the opaque limit. We also demonstrate that the equality of the group delays for transmission and reflection for lossless barriers follows from a simple intuitive argument based on time-reversal invariance, and discuss the extension of the result to the case of lossy barriers.
As was shown in quant-ph/0405028, the state of a tunneling particle can be uniquely presented as a coherent superposition of two states to describe alternative sub-processes, transmission and reflection. In this paper, on the basis of the stationary wave functions for these sub-processes, we give new definitions of the dwell times for transmission and reflection. In the case of rectangular potential barriers the dwell times are obtained explicitly. In contrast with the well-known Büttiker's dwell-time, our dwell time for transmission increases exponentially, for the under-barrier tunneling, with increasing the barrier's width. By our approach the well-known Hartman effect is rather an artifact resulted from an improper interpretation of the wave-packet tunneling and experimental data, but not a real physical effect accompanying the tunneling phenomenon.
The desire to minimize the response time of tunneling devices has led to renewed interest in the unresolved fundamental question How much time, on average, does an incident electron that is ultimately transmitted spend inside a one-dimensional potential barrier? In addition to this transmission time ⊤t ·,there are two other times of interest: the reflection time ⊤r for electrons that are ultimately reflected and the dwell time TD, which is the average time spent inside the barrier regardless of the ultimate fate of the incident particle. An exact expression for TD and the time-modulated barrier, Feynman path, Larmor clock, and wave-packet evolution approaches for calculating ⊤t and ⊤r arc discussed. It is argued that none of these approaches is completely satisfactory because they all lead to transmission and reflection times that either are complex or, if real, do not satisfy: all of a few reasonable (but not universally accepted) criteria, such as consistency with the exact expression for the dwell time.