• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Don't suppose any physicists are awake at this time to answer a question?

Pretender

Banned
Alright, I know this question really doesn't grasp the material and I am slightly over my head here (not my fault, it's my darn HS physics' teacher's fault for a number of reasons). Anyway, to put it simply:

1) How is the possibility of quantum tunneling occuring determined? Is there an algebraic equation (I've searched and come up with nada so I'm guessing no) to represent this probability, or is it just loosely based on the wavelength (lambda=h/mv) and the potential well?

Also, am I right in saying that alpha/beta decay are examples of quantum tunneling, or are they simply a similar phenomenon?
 


<< Ummm, just go to bed, sounds FAR to complicated 🙂 >>

I agree completely, but I have to present this stuff as if I know it. I am in high school physics, this quantum stuff is blowing my mind ...
 
wavelengths as in the representation of matter as waves....


ack, now I'm starting to sound like I know what I'm talking about, this can't be good...
 


<< I am in high school physics, this quantum stuff is blowing my mind ... >>



as i recall a prominent Quantum Physicist stated that when thinking/reading about quantum mechanics, if you head wasnt swimming then you arent understanding it
 


<<

<< I am in high school physics, this quantum stuff is blowing my mind ... >>



as i recall a prominent Quantum Physicist stated that when thinking/reading about quantum mechanics, if you head wasnt swimming then you arent understanding it
>>



I believe you are refering to Niels Bohr.

&quot;Anyone who is not shocked by Quantum Theory has not understood it.&quot; - Niels Bohr
 
I think TheOverlord was thinking of this quote:

&quot;If anyone says he can think about quantum problems without getting giddy, that only shows that he has not understood the first thing about them.&quot; -Niels Bohr

-or-

&quot;...I think I can safely say that nobody understands quantum mechanics.&quot; -Richard Feynman
 
As I understand it quantum tunneling referes to the fact that the guassian distrobution is tunneled through , so when you plot the data you see a tunnel through the distrobution curve. Its all in the probability functions
 
Wah, i have taken 3 semesters of College physics(mechanics, E&amp;M, heat&amp;optics) and have not ever heard of quantum mechanics, lol. I feel stupid.
 
exp,

Oh yeah, I forgot about Feynman's quote. Just out of curiosity, where did you hear that version of Bohr's quote? I haven't heard it before. I pulled mine from my copy of In Search of Schr&ouml;dinger's Cat by John Gibbins.

Your version seems much more accurate though. 🙂
 
a more important question: what the h3ll kinda highschool are you going to man?!?

we did hardly any advanced physics, just newtonian stuff, even in AP physics. you must be a BC type.
 


<< exp,

Oh yeah, I forgot about Feynman's quote. Just out of curiosity, where did you hear that version of Bohr's quote? I haven't heard it before. I pulled mine from my copy of In Search of Schr&ouml;dinger's Cat by John Gibbins.

Your version seems much more accurate though. 🙂
>>



Well...now you have got me wondering exactly how accurate my version really is. 🙂 Originally I had pulled it from a Cornell University web-page. But having done some more digging I found another site that attributes the quote to Max Planck. Take your pick, I guess. 😉
 


<< a more important question: what the h3ll kinda highschool are you going to man?!? >>



LOL My thoughts exactly. I had trouble with quantum mechanics in college, I can't imagine how tough it must be to tackle it in high school. Do the parents know that some sicko is running around teaching quantum mechanics to children? 😀
 


<< Well...now you have got me wondering exactly how accurate my version really is. Originally I had pulled it from a Cornell University web-page. But having done some more digging I found another site that attributes the quote to Max Planck. Take your pick, I guess. >>



😕 Oh well, whatever works. 😉



<<

<< a more important question: what the h3ll kinda highschool are you going to man?!? >>



LOL My thoughts exactly. I had trouble with quantum mechanics in college, I can't imagine how tough it must be to tackle it in high school. Do the parents know that some sicko is running around teaching quantum mechanics to children? 😀
>>


:Q😀
 
this might help

&quot;The phenomenon of tunneling has many important applications. For example, it describes a type of radioactive decay in which a nucleus emits an alpha particle (a helium nucleus). According to the quantum explanation given independently by George Gamow and by Ronald W. Gurney and Edward Condon in 1928, the alpha particle is confined before the decay by a potential. For a given nuclear species, it is possible to measure the energy E of the emitted alpha particle and the average lifetime of the nucleus before decay. The lifetime of the nucleus is a measure of the probability of tunneling through the barrier--the shorter the lifetime, the higher the probability.&quot;
 
It's one of those advanced schools...if you live in New York City you'll know what Hunter College HS is, otherwise it'll just be another name. In class we didn't learn any quantum physics, simply the newtonian stuff, waves/magnetism/electricity. But for our final project of the year is a 'modern physics presentation' where we have to research and present a part of modern physics to the class. From the list quantum tunneling looked interesting, and that was my first fateful mistake...
 
Alright, I stayed up too late finishing the project so I overslept and missed class. So I've had the chance to put some finishing touches on it and be prepared.

One final (long) questions: In all the information I find on Quantum Mechanical Tunneling, often potential wells or potential barriers are part of the description. From what I've surmised, potential refers to potential energy and the tendency for all things to naturally want to go from high to low potential energy. Would this be a correct assumption to make? And as for understanding what the two things are, would I be correct in saying that a potential barrier is akin to a wall, whereas a potential well is like a pit in the ground?

Sorry if I seem like I'm trying to pawn my homework off on you guys, but refrences online and at the library all seem to assume that the reader has mastered calculus and have a background in Quantum physics, of which I have done neither.
 
A potential well is kind of like a pit in the ground, but instead of height you have potential energy. So clasically, a particle in the well that doesn't have enough energy to get out (get up to the height of the hole from being inside it) will not be able to, period. But in reality (quantum physics) there is a wave function that describes the particle's probability of being anywhere, and it extends outside of the well, so there is a possibility that the particle can in fact be outside.

A potential barrier is just like a one sided potential well of infinite height.

To answer your question the probability of quantum tunneling occuring is determined by the wave function. (I just finished my 3rd semester of physics and we were always just given the wave function.) Anyway the function is just some arbitrary looking function that has lots of magnitude inside the potential well and approaches zero as you get out of it. So if you square and integrate the wave function over some distance, you get the probability of the particle being somewhere in that space.

Hope that made sense.
Someone feel free to correct me if I got anything wrong.
 
Where's Schr&ouml;dinger when you need him? 😛 Sounds like your refering to a Particle in the Box problem...

Errr....bad memories of Physical Chemistry!

-sp
 
glaHHg, did a pretty good job explaining it. Except his discription of a potential barrier I believe is wrong. I think he was thinking of an infinite potential well.

I'm not a Physicist, but I'm an EE student and we covered this in properties of materials which is just another name for Quantum Physics for EE students.

A potential well graph looks like a line that is flat at some PE (potential energy) then goes down to a PE of 0 and then back up to the same hight as before. An infinite potential well has a PE of infinity at the top. In my class we dealt with electrons in a potential well. Inside the well V=0 and outside V=infinity. The electron is confined to the region 0 < x < a. Outside the region 0 < x < a the probablity of finding the electron per unit volume is 0 and inside it is given by Schrodinger's equation.

[edit: oops, the probability above is the square of the magnitude of Schrodinger's equation. Noticed my typo when I reread the posts above.]

To describe tunneling (aka quantum leak) I will look at it using an electron (because I'm EE). In the region 0 < x < a, the electron is moving with an energy E and since inside the potential well the PE is 0, E must be entirely made up of KE (Kinetic energy). When the electron encounters a potential barrier of &quot;hight&quot; V0, which is greater than E at a = 0. The width of the potential barrier is given by b. On the other side of the barrier (a + b) the PE is also 0.

Each of the three areas 1) left side of barrier x < a, 2) barrier a < x < a + b, and 3) right side of barrier x > a + b have a wavefunction given by Schrodinger's equation

psi1(x) = A1 exp(jkx) + A2 exp(-jkx)
psi2(x) = B1 exp(alpha*x) + B2 exp(-alpha*x)
psi3(x) = C1 exp(jkx) + C2 exp(-jkx)

where:

k^2 = 2mE/h-bar^2

The probability of tunneling through is given by:

T = T0 * exp(-2(alpha)b).

where:

T0 = ( 16 * E (V0 - E) ) / V0^2

alpha^2 = 2m (V0 - e)/h-bar^2

Both k and alpha are positive numbers.

The probability of reflextion is given by the Reflection coefficient:

R = A2^2/A1^2 = 1 - T

Hope this helps. I'm not a quantum physicist so take everything I say with a large grain of salt. I'm pretty sure it's correct though.
 
Back
Top