Series

Tunnelling — the series

5 essays on one idea, from the one that introduces it to the one that assumes the rest.
  1. A wavefunction crossing a barrier it has not the energy for. An electron of 2 electronvolts meeting a 3 electronvolt barrier 0.3 nanometres wide, with the four matching conditions solved rather than sketched. Left of the barrier the incident and reflected waves add to a standing pattern; inside it the amplitude decays exponentially; to the right a travelling wave continues with amplitude 0.3912 of the incident one, so 15.3 per cent of the electrons get through. Classically none of them do.

    The wall that is not quite a wall

    A particle without enough energy to climb a barrier sometimes appears on the other side of it. The probability falls exponentially with the barrier's width, which is why the effect is invisible at ordinary scales and why it can be turned into a microscope.

    part 1 · quantum
  2. Twenty-four decades of lifetime from a factor of two in energy. The half-lives of 7 alpha emitters against the reciprocal square root of the alpha's energy — the Geiger–Nuttall coordinates — with the measured values as points and a one-line tunnelling model as the open ones. The energies span a factor of 2.2 and the half-lives span 24 decades, which is what an exponent does. The model has no fitted parameter in it and reproduces every lifetime to within 0.5 decades — bad arithmetic by any ordinary standard, and a hundred-thousandth of the range it is predicting.

    A wall that a factor of two makes impassable

    Polonium-212 lives three tenths of a microsecond. Thorium-232 lives fourteen billion years. The alpha particles they emit differ in energy by a factor of two, and the lifetimes differ by twenty-four decades — because the quantity that decides is not the energy but an exponent built from it, and an exponent is where small differences go to become enormous.

    part 2 · quantum
  3. A current that falls by a decade for every ångström. Tunnelling current against the width of a vacuum gap, on a logarithmic scale, for three work functions covering the range of clean metal surfaces. The curves are straight because the transmission is an exponential in the gap, and their slopes are 0.833, 0.944, 1.044 decades per ångström — fitted to the drawn curves and agreeing with 2κ/ln 10 to a part in a million. At 4.5 electronvolts a change of ten picometres, a tenth of an atomic radius, changes the current by 24 per cent. That is the sensitivity a scanning tunnelling microscope lives on, and it is why the instrument measures height by holding the current fixed and recording what the piezo had to do: the current is far too steep a function of height to be read as one.

    The last atom does all the seeing

    A tunnelling rate falls by a factor of eight for every tenth of a nanometre of extra barrier, which is normally quoted as the reason nothing ever tunnels anywhere. Read the other way it is a microscope: the second-nearest atom of a blunt metal tip carries a two-hundredth of the current the nearest one does, so a tip nobody sharpened resolves a single atom, and the resolution comes from an exponential rather than from any piece of engineering.

    part 3 · quantum
  4. Two barriers, and the energies at which they stop being barriers. Transmission against energy on a logarithmic scale, for one barrier of width 0.9 and height 20, and for two of them separated by a well of width 2. Below the top of the barrier the single one transmits an exponentially small amount and does so smoothly. The pair does not: at particular energies the transmission climbs by orders of magnitude and reaches 1.000000 — one, to every digit the arithmetic has — even though each barrier on its own passes 3.9e-2 of what arrives. Multiplying the two single-barrier transmissions would give 1.5e-3, which is wrong by 6e+2: amplitudes are what compose, not probabilities, and the region between the barriers is a box whose quasi-bound levels are where the amplitudes reinforce. The resonances sit at 6.438, 13.915 and the levels of an infinite well of the same width are at 2.467, 9.870 — near, and not equal, because a well with leaky walls has states that are not quite bound.

    Two walls that let more through than one

    Put a second barrier behind the first and the transmission does not fall — at particular energies it rises to exactly one, through a pair of walls each of which stops all but a few per cent. Probabilities cannot do that. Amplitudes can, and the region between the barriers is a box whose levels say where.

    part 4 · quantum
  5. The delay that stops caring how thick the wall is. The Wigner phase time — how late the transmitted packet's peak arrives, compared with a free particle covering the same distance — for an electron under a 3 eV barrier, at 0.2 nm, 0.5 nm, 1 nm thick. 0.2 nm: 0.3728 fs at half the barrier height; 0.5 nm: 0.4372 fs at half the barrier height; 1 nm: 0.4388 fs at half the barrier height. The widths span a factor of 5.0 and the times span 1.18. A thicker barrier is exponentially harder to cross and the delay in crossing it barely moves — which is either a remarkable fact about tunnelling or a sign that the phase time is not a traversal time, and the rest of the essay is about which.

    How long the crossing takes

    Tunnelling has a probability, and asking how long it takes turns out to be a different kind of question. The delay a transmitted packet shows stops growing once the barrier is opaque, so a thicker wall is crossed in the same time — and several defensible clocks give several different answers.

    part 5 · quantum

All series