The relativistic tunneling flight time may be superluminal, but it does not imply superluminal signaling
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Wavepacket tunneling, in the relativistic limit, is studied via solutions to the Dirac equation for a square barrier potential. Specifically, the arrival time distribution (the time-dependent flux) is computed for wavepackets initiated far away from the barrier, and whose momentum is well below the threshold for above-barrier transmission. The resulting distributions exhibit peaks at shorter times than those of photons with the same initial wavepacket transmitting through a vacuum. However, this apparent superluminality in time is accompanied by very low transmission probabilities. We discuss these observations, and related observations by other authors, in the context of published objections to the notion that tunneling can be superluminal in time. We find that many of these objections are not consistent with our observations, and conclude that post-selected (for transmission) distributions of arrival times can be superluminal. However, the low probability of tunneling means a photon will most likely be seen first and therefore the superluminality does not imply superluminal signaling.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".