Abstract
AbstractHow long does a quantum particle take to traverse a classically forbidden energy barrier? In other words, what is the correct expression for quantum tunnelling time? This seemingly simple question has inspired widespread debate in the physics literature. I argue that we should not expect the orthodox interpretation of quantum mechanics to provide a unique correct expression for quantum tunnelling time, because to do so it would have to provide a unique correct answer to a question whose assumptions are in tension with its core interpretational commitments. I explain how this conclusion connects to time’s special status in quantum mechanics, the meaningfulness of classically inspired concepts in different interpretations of quantum mechanics, the prospect of constructing experimental tests to distinguish between different interpretations, and the status of weak measurement in resolving questions about the histories of subensembles.
Funder
Harding Distinguished Postgraduate Scholars Programme
SSHRC Doctoral Fellowship
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Subject
History and Philosophy of Science,Philosophy
Reference66 articles.
1. Abolhasani, M., & Golshani, M. (2000). Tunneling times in the Copenhagen interpretation of quantum mechanics. Physical Review A, 62(012106), 1–7.
2. Acuña, P. (2019). Charting the landscape of interpretation, theory rivalry, and underdetermination in quantum mechanics. Synthese, 1–30. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11229-019-02159-z.
3. Aharonov, Y., & Vaidman, L. (1990). Properties of a quantum system during the time interval between two measurements. Physical Review A, 41(1), 11–20.
4. Aharonov, Y., Albert, D.Z., & Vaidman, L. (1988). How the result of a measurement of a component of the spin of a spin-1/2 particle can turn out to be 100. Physical Review Letters, 60(14), 1351–1354.
5. Baz’, A. J. (1967). Soviet Journal of Nuclear Physics, 4(182).
Cited by
2 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献