New Experiment Could Settle 100 Years-Old Debate about Quantum Tunneling 

Free El Chapo 😂

I think you mean hamas

😂😂 lol that's true

​@@drkzillanah you don't get it

@@Luofeng222 help me

+

Excellent 👌

It's indigenous to all german speaking homo sapiens. We're born with it. Popular examples are....wait, no, I'm not gonna go there 💀

I think you meant entangled. ;)

It is probably AI generated, I don't think she bought a dozen of the same sweatshirt for video shoots.

It's always like that 😂

i just tunneled in.. and out again here... you know during the tunnel.. no connection..

but such results aren't predicted, and neither have been observed. The whole point of the experiment is to limit the outcomes to exactly 2 with opposite meanings. What I mean by observed are observed outcomes of previous experiments that are components of the new experiment. This experiment isn't something entirely new, but a mix of experiments that have already been done and we have observed these before, just not all at the same time. The only thing that I can possibly imagine that would fit what you describe would be if the particle that doesn't pass a barrier somehow travels faster than the other one, but only if it started synced with another one. This wouldn't make any sense with anything we know so far, but such is physics sometime.

Sounds like someone might be messing with our data you know? 😏 Three Body Problem style

my interpretation is that the earlier probabilities are more likely to pass through than the later probabilities. this would move the peak forward as observed, but still preserve the speed of light. the reflected wave therefore contains more of the later probabilities, but this is impossible to tell, since there is nothing to compare it to. but thats just my interpretation of this setup/observation..

This sounds like its straight out of Futurama, and I'm all about it.

@@TheAero1221 It's part of a diatribe by the protesters Broomfondle and Magicthighs. Objecting to the super computer Deep Thought.

@@TheAero1221 It's from the Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy

Douglass Adams

Once again, her gesture is wondrous to behold. 🤩

She is fluent in Italian.

@@artysanmobile 🤣😂Finally I know, why I love Italians!

Intended to post the same sentiment. Really neat, that we are able to use quantum effects in every day life.

That is actually fascinating. Thank you for sharing

Another good example of quantum tunneling in action is how radio communications, including wifi and cellular data, manage to make it through walls inside your house. Those microwave photons quantum tunnel through the walls!

@@calyodelphi124 No, we cannot say that Wi-Fi and radio signals quantum tunnel through walls. Wi-Fi and radio signals are examples of electromagnetic waves, which propagate through space and can penetrate or pass through walls due to their wavelengths and the properties of the materials they encounter. Quantum tunneling is a different phenomenon that occurs at the quantum scale, involving particles such as electrons. In quantum tunneling, a particle passes through a potential energy barrier that it classically shouldn't be able to surmount. This effect is a consequence of the wave-like nature of particles and the probabilistic nature of quantum mechanics. Wi-Fi and radio signals pass through walls primarily due to the following reasons: Wave Propagation: Electromagnetic waves can penetrate materials to varying degrees depending on the frequency of the wave and the material's properties. Lower frequency waves, like those used in radio signals, have longer wavelengths and can penetrate walls more effectively than higher frequency waves. Material Properties: The composition, thickness, and density of the wall material affect how much of the signal is absorbed, reflected, or transmitted. Materials like concrete and metal tend to block signals more than materials like wood or drywall. Diffraction and Reflection: Electromagnetic waves can bend around obstacles (diffraction) and reflect off surfaces, allowing them to reach locations that are not in a direct line of sight. Quantum tunneling does not play a role in the behavior of Wi-Fi and radio signals passing through walls, as this phenomenon is relevant to particles at the atomic and subatomic levels, not macroscopic electromagnetic waves.

No, they absolutely do not, for the most part.

As fine as an analogy ever gets. But the QUESTION here is whether a "halfway up" pole vaulter takes LESS TIME to cross the bar than one with more strength/energy, who passes their entire completely above the bar at once. Lotsa clever-sounding guesses, but nobody knows the answer for certain.

@@ProfessorJayTee I like the Analogy too. It reminds me of dialog in the movie “The Matrix”. Spoon boy: Do not try and bend the spoon. That's impossible. Instead... only try to realize the truth. Neo: What truth? Spoon boy: There is no spoon. Neo: There is no spoon? Spoon boy: Then you'll see, that it is not the spoon that bends, it is only yourself. Schrodinger: Do not try and climb the barrier. That's impossible. Instead... only try to realize the truth. Electron: What truth? Schrödinger: There is no barrier. Electron: There is no barrier? Schrödinger: Then you'll see, that it is not the barrier that bends, it is only yourself.

Isn't there a problem that at no point particle that has passed the barrier was passing the barrier?

It was a remote viewing program, I highly doubt anyone actually ran at a wall hoping to pass through it.

​@@AdastraRecordingsmescaline made me try once...

The thing is, quantum physics allows for them to pass through the wall, but only after failing to do so vigintillions of times.

After a vingintillion times the wall will have been destroyed. So no need.

Kung Fu Monk Performing ｜Shaolin Kung Fu posted by Wang's Gong Fu

Fun fact - The speed of light is a constant only by definition, as in, the speed of light in a vacuum is based on the distance of a meter at the speed light in a vacuum verses the time of a second of a meter at the speed of light in a vacuum. There is no current way to know if it is a literal constant.

​@@entombedlamb5356Nice one. And do we even know what we mean by "at the same time" at the two ends of the metre stick?

She is only one person in a team. With many people cooperating, more things become possible.

Scriptwriters + teleprompter operator + multiple editors + sound guy + she's only narrating = conveyorbeltlike operation. Cookiecutter sharks got nothing on them.

Not to forget, lots of hard work.

@@jeffryborror4883 ..and a.i.

Damn so even if oxide layer exists , it still conducts , assuming with a added sudo resistance

Yes, same with a copper cable and oxide layer.

nope , sometimes electrons go crazy even through some layer of ceramics , it only means that you need to have a certain thickness of the material to stop them

@@mr.mirror1213 - You mean "pseudo" (not sudo). Google is your friend. And spell checking is usually the default, on most devices. Just being lazy !

I doubt that. That is not how electricity works. Electricity operates as a wave and what you are getting is an induction current.

RU-vidr: Sets up walls to measure which ones a car can drive through

You programmed index of refraction. Tunnel requires that the kinetic energy in the barrier is negative.

You should model tunneling with basin, in which surface ripples overcome obstacles through extradimensions of surface, i.e. through underwater. Yes, underwater waves are faster than surface ripples, but they mediate energy across obstacles in indeterministic way.

I made a tunnel diode in school. It worked fine, but it was only a on/off device (2-electrode), useful as an oscillator mostly. It was not capable of making a NAND logical function. As soon as FETs became manufacturable, these devices became obsolete. Also, to make the tunneling happen, it took several milliamperes of current. Modern 3-electrode switches can do this with nanoamperes of current, or less. Tunneling FETlike structures are possible, but they are actually slow now, similar to quantum dots and quantum logic. Not ready for prime time yet.

Quantum tunneling did revolutionize electronics, just not because of that. Flash memory only works because of tunneling.

i'm happy when a show goes without a higgsup.

Are you Catholic?

I'm a well-rehearsed mass debater.

It seems to me tha rhe faŕaday wave can exchange energy non locally with the droplet as the Bush and Couder hidrodynamic analogs experiments show

Just because the *peak* is further ahead than where it should have been doesn't mean anything is FTL. That's ridiculous. Does any part of the tunnelled amplitude exceed any part of the uninterrupted wave amplitude? No, so then it's a Bayesian problem.

There is only one mathematically rigorous and accepted "textbook" definition of subluminality, namely the one consistent with relativistic causality (everything propagates within its "light cone envelope"). It is then easy to show that no superluminality in quantum tunneling happens. This internal "wave" clock is not relevant to probe relativistic causality, as correctly pointed out in many works. if you are looking for "closure", try to take a look at "Subluminality of relativistic quantum tunneling" Phys. Rev. A 107 (2023), there is also the free version on arXiv

🍍

but then what does it mean for the phase shift to result in an average location further ahead than it should be? Because it seems like the same issue pops up where the average particle location is too far ahead of what it should be.

How is energy produced if the current passes the nanometer thick junction faster than light?

@@badabing3391 I don't know what it means... It was just some unfounded speculation; I've calculated the tunneling current in Zener diodes (50 years ago) but time wasn't a parameter in those calculations as I recall.

@@TheSandkastenverbot I will answer using logic not physics or math so take it with a grain of salt. If electrons travel across the junction faster than light then the will exist on both sides of the junction at the same time. This situation will create a charge imbalance that can be used to drive a current in a circuit.

I think we must be much more open minded about topics like these. Again, we are apparently debating all kinds of things simultaneously, which leads to all kinds of confusions. What is the speed of the signal? Is it the speed of the "particle"? Is it the speed of the "wave"? Is there agreement now that the "wave" indeed travels faster than the speed of light? What is the speed of a wave? (phase velocity, group velocity, front velocity, peak velocity....!??? lots of answers come to mind!) All these problems and confusions pop up in this debate.

Great! You may be the only human who does.

thoughts about pineaple as pizza topping?

@@LUCTIANITO No gag order on that yet?

If waves wave, do particles part?

It goes well with the anchovies and olives.

How do you explain the sales of Hawaiian pizza at pizzerias?

We have no Bananas today ! 🎶

As long as you don't try eating it.

@@mauricegold9377 Apparently the Swedes sprinkle curry powder on the banana slices. I'm still trying to wrap my head around that logic.

Never... that barier was created by pineapple. Then again you would need both a pen and a trap

No. Pineapple yes, bananas, no.

I seem to remember reading about that a lifetime ago, maybe in New Scientist and forgot about it.

Nimtz's claim that information travelled faster than light was simply wrong. There were several other groups making similar experiments and getting similar results as he. But they (all, or at least the majority of them) were pretty clear about the fact that no violation of the speed limits set by relativity was achieved by these experiments. Nimtz initially was in line with them. Later, he became a bit cranky and insisted that he had sent music at 4.7 times the speed of light and hence beaten relativity. But that was untrue. The front velocity of his tunneling pulses never exceeded the speed of light (and this is the velocity of information transport). He tried to talk his way around that by saying that his pulses were bandwidth limited, i.e., had no front. But the "underground" part of the pulse that has no front, i.e. is always there, even before you push the button to send your information, does not carry any information...

@@krensak As i understand it, Nimtz transmitted music over a small distance and measured the time it needs for this way and then added a tunnel from a few centimeters to this way and the time needed for the signal for the longer way does not exceed as much as aspected. The tunnel they use was normaly to small for the used frequency and the signal drops down extremly in power - but within the tunnel (almost ?) no time was needed for the music to travel through it.

@@sticki3000 Well, that is a bit vague. What is the time it took "the music" to be transmitted, given that the duration of the music is much longer than the 380 ps or so it would take light to travel the 11,4 cm of the waveguide? Even the time it takes for the transmission of a single note would be much longer than 1 ns. Concerning the remainder of the experiment as you describe it, I think the total length of the waveguide without tunnel and with tunnel was the same. That is, in the first case you had a waveguide of constant lateral dimensions that allowed frequencies of about 6 GHz (and higher) to go through, in the second case a piece of this waveguide was replaced by a thinner equal-length waveguide with a lower frequency cutoff of 9 Ghz. The "tunneling" appearing here is not quantum-mechanical, because the experiment can be fully described by the vacuum Maxwell equations (the microwave wave guides are hollow), which are manifestly Lorentz invariant, so you would not expect any violation of special relativity from them. The mathematics of the quantum tunneling effect and this classical tunneling is essentially the same, only the wave equations differ (Schrödinger vs. Maxwell). But the interpretation in terms of electromagnetic waves is much less spectacular than that in terms of particle-like entities, i.e. photons. In the wave picture, the word "tunneling" is misplaced, because it does not invoke the mental image of a tunnel (nor that of a "potential barrier", which rather becomes a "forbidden zone" for wave propatgation, leading to exponential damping of the wave). Anyway, I did not find the original paper about the Mozart symphony. It may be that this was never published in a scientific journal but just given to the press to obtain a lot of publicity. But I found other papers of Nimtz, including some where he describes experiments with microwave cavities. Also, I believe he gave a talk at the research center Jülich while I was a postdoc there (in the early nineties) and I seem to remember some particularities from an after-talk discussion with him. His earlier measurements (or those in his group, probably done by a PhD student) were only in the spectral domain, from which he reconstructed the pulse shape of the electromagnetic wave. In the Mozart-symphony experiment, they also did time domain measurements. Now in the paper(s) that I saw, he cleverly rescales the shape of the pulses in the experiments with and without the tunnel element so the maxima have the same height. Then you see, if you plot the envelope of the pulse as a function of time, that the maximum of the non-tunneling pulse lags behind the maximum of the tunneling pulse and that in general the non-tunneling pulse looks like a shifted picture of the tunneling pulse and delayed. So the tunneling pulse seems faster. Except, if you look at the front, there the two pulses are not shifted versions of each other, rather they seem to end in the same point. Now, if you did plot the pulses not normalized to the same height but with their real size ratio, you would find that the envelope of the smaller pulse (the one with tunnel) lies completely inside that of the larger pulse! Of course, the maximum of the pulse without tunnel still lags behind that of the tunneling pulse (its position on the time axis does not change due to rescaling of the signal), but the front of the tunneling pulse is, as far as it is visible in the plot, *behind* that of the non-tunneling pulse. Now, the point where the front rises from zero to non-zero values and the velocity of which is generally considered the signal velocity cannot be precisely determined in these experiments, because there is always some noise source and because the sensitivity of the detector is not infinite, i.e. you can detect the signal only when it has risen far enough above zero (and out of the noise underground). Theory says that this point moves with the speed of light, and the experimental curves are consistent with that, i.e. if you magnify them and extrapolate to the time abscissa, then they seem to intersect it at the point L/c, where L is the distance covered by the pulse front since its creation. However, the *slope* of the envelope of the tunneling pulse is way smaller than that of the non-tunneling one, and Nimtz suggested in presenting this in the after-talk discussion that they cannot yet measure the front velocity but if they manage to measure lower intensities, the extrapolation of the smaller pulse might in fact lead to a point ahead of that of the larger pulse. This seemed pretty unconvincing to me at the time, especially in view of what the theory says about it (that successfully describes the measured part of the pulse shape). Anyway, so Nimtz did not measure the front velocity, which is regarded as the true signal velocity in the (informed part of the) community. He claims the speed of the maximum to be the velocity at which information travels. I do not know whether he transmitted the Mozart symphony with a long sequence of short pulse (taking advantage of the sampling theorem) or with a long single pulse, in which case the maximum becomes a plateau and the time he measured would in practice rather be the time until the envelope of the pulse has risen to 90% (or a higher percentage) of its final value. Both times are shorter for the tunneling pulse than for the non-tunneling one. But the velocity of the maximum of the pulse (or the 90% point in front of it), which indeed is larger than the speed of light, is not the velocity of some energy (or information, for that matter) being transported. The energy-carrying wavepackets under the maximum before tunneling are not the same as the wave packets under the maximum after tunneling! The maximum is an immaterial point on the pulse that can hop forward, if the pulse shape is modified, without any of the energy packets that remain in the pulse changing their velocity. The effect of tunneling on the envelope is simply to "cut away" those parts of the pulse from the envelope that are outside of the envelope of the smaller pulse (which completely fits inside the larger one...). In principle, that need not have *any* effect on the velocity of the constituents of the pulse that are not cut away. But it shifts the maximum forward... Steinberg and Chiao are other experimenters that did research on superluminal tunneling, and they achieved similar results as Nimtz. However, they criticize his claim that information has been transmitted faster than light as incorrect. Steinberg gives a simple analogy in a popularizing account: consider a train traveling from Chicago to New York, but dropping off train cars at each station along the way, so that the center of the train moves forward at each stop; in this way, the speed of the center of the train exceeds the speed of any of the individual cars. (en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G%C3%BCnter_Nimtz) Would you give the Nobel prize to someone who the majority of the physics community believes to have raised false claims about having found a violation of special relativity?

@@krensak Thank you for this very detailed explanation. Not easy to understand for a non-physist...😉 (and my english is a little poor too...) I found an old TV clip from the original experiment of Prof Nimtz here: ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-XmZKiJ3B5tk.htmlsi=YUQsvrbSRk2QbvYF I did still not understand what could be an "error" in his measurement. I wish, there will be more serious research to find out, if the information (music) was really "transported" faster than the speed of light. We still did not know, what "dark matter" is - perhaps we simply do not know if a "dark medium" exist, where we can transport information without speed limit. Perhaps the hole universe is communicating around us - and we only have no idea to built a "receiver" to hear it...🖖

It's a wave which means it has a cycle. As long as you can measure what part of the cycle it is in you can tell how far or how fast it moved. For example, photon waves of a wavelength roughly 700nm long are called 'red'.

@@hamishfox What causes the speed of light?

First of all; what causes the speed of light?

A clock is just a particle moving to a certain point (and getting backwards but not necessarily) , that point is a cycle, therefore, everytime that the photon gets to a barrier it ticks, therefore having a internal clock. Idk.

Leslie lamport wrote an interesting paper on ordering events in distributed systems that seems germaine here. Like each point in space is a computer synchronizing to only points next to it.

Chicken sausage that includes apple works well for my tastebuds. But I agree with you about orange.

Pineapple goes with pork so any such pizza is fine with pineapple. I prefer lots of japepeno peppers.

I once tried pizza with banana. It didn't work.

I'm quite sure pineapple (has enzymes that helps digest proteins) would be good on pizza, with all that cheesy and meaty content !

@@brothermine2292 Just no sausages covered in chocolate, or mixed with chocolate. But who knows? If you haven't tried it.....?

That's what coffee is for.

Well they don’t. Quantum is weird, so once you get a classical analogy: “it’s like…..”, it doesn’t make sense. It can’t make sense. You have to do the quantum math, which is not hard. It’s linear algebra…like lower level undergrad stuff. All the problem start when you try to interpret the meaning with a classical macroscopic understanding. The fact that that hasn’t been resolved means no one has made sense of it….but when it is dumbed down into non math analogies, it becomes impossible to make sense of it.

Thanks for continuing updates I'd rather trade the crypto market as it's more profitable. I make a good amount of money per week even though I barely trade myself.

A lot of people still make massive profit from the crypto market, all you really need is a relevant information and some ‹professional advice. ‹it's totally inappropriate for investors to hang on while suffering from dip during significant

You trade also?, I

No I don't trade on my own anymore, I always required help and assistance

From my personal financial advisor

I will have to try it.

And the anger of people who hate pineapple on pizza is just extra spice, and I do like my pizza's spicy :-)

Fruit or "Ranch" on pizza? Blasphemy!

blasphemy

While you're at it, could u convince my ex what a b*tch she was being when my dad died?

Hello

Why does God need a fake account?

Why are you so bad with money? All your representatives are begging for cash endlessly. Live within your means, pull yourself up with your bootstraps, layoff the avocado toast and make coffee at home. Seems you should know this already.

You may have a future on RU-vid in front of you.

So pineapple isn't fine but tomato is?? They're both fruit

"Italian constant"

Yes, but we are talking about putting pizza UNDER your pineapple, and that is not forbidden...

@@dylandebruyn356 Knowledge is knowing that tomatoes are fruit. Wisdom is knowing they absolutely don't belong in a fruit-salad.

Thanks for the advice! I'm new to financial planning and wasn't sure where to start. Any tips on finding a reliable financial adviser or resource to guide beginners?

As a beginner, it's essential for you to have a mentor that is verified by finra and SEC to keep you accountable. I'm guided by a widely known financial consultant Stacey Macken

Truly, investing has changed my perspective on how one can succeed in life; working multiple jobs isn't the optimal way to attain financial freedom and unfortunately, we discover this later in life. Currently earn as much as 12 grand weekly and this has improved my financial life

YES! that's exactly her name (Stacey Macken) I watched her interview on CNN News and so many people recommended her trading skills, she's an expert and I'm just starting with her....From Brisbane Australia

This Woman has really change the life of many people from different countries and am a testimony of her trading platform .

Exactly! Moreover, there is only one mathematically rigorous and accepted "textbook" definition of subluminality, namely the one consistent with relativistic causality (everything propagates within its "light cone envelope"). It is then easy to show that no superluminality in quantum tunneling happens. This internal "wave" clock is not relevant to probe relativistic causality, as correctly pointed out in many works e.g. "Subluminality of relativistic quantum tunneling" Phys. Rev. A 107 (2023)

That wall though is composed of huge numbers of atoms or molecules, thus less likely to behave as a quantum object.

The wall in question isn't a physical object; it's an analytical object describing forces

@@collin4555it’s the matrix: there is no wall. Now there could be a hill that you can’t climb, but you get over it anyway.

But what if it is strawberry fields forever

There is only one mathematically rigorous and accepted "textbook" definition of subluminality, the one consistent with relativistic causality (everything propagates within its light cone envelope): it is then a simple theorem to show that no superluminality in quantum tunneling happens. Reference for the rigorous treatment: "Subluminality of relativistic quantum tunneling" Phys. Rev. A 107, 032209 (2023). This internal "wave" clock is not relevant to probe relativistic causality. Einstein would agree with this, because this is exactly his notion of relativistic causality, and it is known to be true for relativistic quantum tunneling.