A {\it completed} scattering of a particle on a static one-dimensional (1D) potential barrier is a combined quantum process to consist from two elementary sub-processes (transmission and reflection) evolved coherently at all stages of scattering and macroscopically distinct at the final stage. The existing model of the process is clearly inadequate to its nature: all one-particle "observables" and "tunneling times", introduced as quantities to be common for the sub-processes, cannot be experimentally measured and, consequently, have no physical meaning; on the contrary, quantities introduced for either sub-process have no basis, for the time evolution of either sub-process is unknown in this model. We show that the wave function to describe a completed scattering can be uniquely presented as the sum of two solutions to the Schrödinger equation, which describe separately the sub-processes at all stages of scattering. For symmetric potential barriers such solutions are found explicitly. For either sub-process we define the time spent, on the average, by a particle in the barrier region. We define it as the Larmor time. As it turned out, this time is just Buttiker's dwell time averaged over the corresponding localized state. Thus, firstly, we justify the known definition of the local dwell time introduced by Hauge and co-workers as well by Leavens and Aers, for now this time can be measured; secondly, we confirm that namely Buttiker's dwell time gives the energy-distribution for the tunneling time; thirdly, we state that all the definitions are valid only if they are based on the wave functions for transmission and reflection found in our paper. Besides, we define the exact and asymptotic group times to be auxiliary in timing the scattering process.
A {\it completed} scattering of a particle on a static one-dimensional (1D) potential barrier is a combined quantum process to consist from two elementary sub-processes (transmission and reflection) evolved coherently at all stages of scattering and macroscopically distinct at the final stage. The existing model of the process is clearly inadequate to its nature: all one-particle "observables" and "tunneling times", introduced as quantities to be common for the sub-processes, cannot be experimentally measured and, consequently, have no physical meaning; on the contrary, quantities introduced for either sub-process have no basis, for the time evolution of either sub-process is unknown in this model. We show that the wave function to describe a completed scattering can be uniquely presented as the sum of two solutions to the Schrödinger equation, which describe separately the sub-processes at all stages of scattering. For symmetric potential barriers such solutions are found explicitly. For either sub-process we define the time spent, on the average, by a particle in the barrier region. We define it as the Larmor time. As it turned out, this time is just Buttiker's dwell time averaged over the corresponding localized state. Thus, firstly, we justify the known definition of the local dwell time introduced by Hauge and co-workers as well by Leavens and Aers, for now this time can be measured; secondly, we confirm that namely Buttiker's dwell time gives the energy-distribution for the tunneling time; thirdly, we state that all the definitions are valid only if they are based on the wave functions for transmission and reflection found in our paper. Besides, we define the exact and asymptotic group times to be auxiliary in timing the scattering process.
Entanglement is usually associated with compound systems. We first show that a one-dimensional (1D) completed scattering of a particle on a static potential barrier represents an entanglement of two alternative one-particle sub-processes, transmission and reflection, macroscopically distinct at the final stage of scattering. The wave function for the whole ensemble of scattering particles can be uniquely presented as the sum of two isometrically evolved wave packets to describe the (to-be-)transmitted and (to-be-)reflected subensembles of particles at all stages of scattering. A noninvasive Larmor-clock timing procedure adapted to either subensemble shows that namely the dwell time gives the time spent, on the average, by a particle in the barrier region, and it denies the Hartman effect. As regards the group time, it cannot be measured and hence it cannot be accepted as a measure of the tunneling time. We argue that nonlocality of entangled states appears in quantum mechanics due to inconsistency of its superposition principle with the corpuscular properties of a particle. For example, this principle associates a 1D completed scattering with a single (one-way) process, while a particle, as an indivisible object, cannot take part in transmission and reflection, simultaneously.
We present a renewed wave-packet analysis based on the following ideas: if a quantum one-particle scattering process and the corresponding state are described by an indivisible wave packet to move as a whole at all stages of scattering, then they are elementary; otherwise, they are combined; each combined process consists from several alternative elementary ones to proceed simultaneously; the corresponding (normed) state can be uniquely presented as the sum of elementary ones whose (constant) norms give unit, in sum; Born's formula intended for calculating the {\it expectation} values of physical observables, as well as the standard timing procedure are valid only for elementary states and processes; only an elementary time-dependent state can be considered as the quantum counterpart to some classical one-particle rajectory. By our approach, tunneling a non-relativistic particle through a static one-dimensional potential barrier is a combined process consisting from two elementary ones, transmission and reflection. In the standard setting of the problem, we find an unique pair of solutions to the Schrödinger equation, which describe separately transmission and reflection. On this basis we introduce (exact and asymptotic) characteristic times for transmission and reflection.
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.
It is shown that in the case of the one-particle one-dimensional scattering problem for a given time-independent potential, for each state of the whole quantum ensemble of identically prepared particles, there is an unique pair of (subensemble's) solutions to the Schrödinger equation, which, as we postulate, describe separately transmission and reflection: in the case of nonstationary states, for any instant of time, these functions are orthogonal and their sum describes the state of all particles; evolving with constant norms, one of them approaches at late times the transmitted wave packet and another approaches the reflected packet. Both for transmission and reflection, 1) well before and after the scattering event, the average kinetic energy of particles is the same, 2) the average starting point differs, in the general case, from that for all particles. It is shown that for reflection, in the case of symmetric potential barriers, the domain of the motion of particles is bounded by the midpoint of the barrier region. We define (exact and asymptotic) transmission and reflection times and show that the basic results of our formalism can be, in principle, checked experimentally.
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.
We develop a new quantum-mechanical approach to scattering a particle on a one-dimensional (1D) system of two identical rectangular potential barriers, which implies modelling the dynamics of its subprocesses -- transmission and reflection -- at all stages of scattering. On its basis we define, for each subprocess, the dwell time as well as the local (exact) and asymptotic (extrapolated) group times. Our concept of the asymptotic transmission group time confirms the validity of the Wigner phase time in the opaque limit, as well as the existence of the usual and generalized Hartman effects predicted on its basis. On the energy scale, this concept is valid everywhere in the high energy region as well as in the low energy region, excepting resonance points and their neighborhoods. On the contrary, the Buttiker dwell time is valid, as the transmission time, just only at the resonance points. Our concept of the transmission dwell time predicts monotonous growth of the tunneling time when the distance between the opaque barriers increases. By our approach only this time scale yields the true time spent, on average, by transmitted particles in the region occupied by the system. We explain why the asymptotic and local transmission group times cannot play this role and why the concept of {\it transmission group} velocity lies beyond the scope of special relativity. And else, all the transmission times admit only indirect measurements. Hence the unambiguous interpretation of all tunneling-time experiments is impossible when the transmission dynamics at all stages of scattering is unknown.