2020
DOI: 10.1103/physrevresearch.2.033206
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Probability backflow for correlated quantum states

Abstract: In its original formulation, quantum backflow (QB) is an interference effect that manifests itself as a negative probability transfer for free-particle states comprised of plane waves with only positive momenta. Quantum reentry (QR) is another interference effect in which a wave packet expanding from a spatial region of its initial confinement partially returns to the region in the absence of any external forces. Here we show that both QB and QR are special cases of a more general classically forbidden probabi… Show more

Help me understand this report
View preprint versions

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2

Citation Types

0
21
0

Year Published

2021
2021
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

1
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 22 publications
(23 citation statements)
references
References 26 publications
0
21
0
Order By: Relevance
“…From the preceding Bohmian derivation, one also expects that ΠQF would not be a generally valid arrival-time distribution. In particular, it is reasonable only as long as (2.25) holds, which is equivalent to the current positivity (or ‘no backflow’) condition [49,50]: normal∀t>0 and normal∀xQ,1emJfalse(x,tfalse)ds0. Even though (2.26) can be violated in principle, see [7578], stable backflow situations are, as it happens, very difficult to set up experimentally. This is because, on the one hand, the flux density of freely evolving wave functions becomes approximately radial at large distances from the support of the initial wave function ψ 0 [49,50]: Jfalse(x,tfalse)boldxt4|ψ~0(xt)|2, granting (2.26) for just about any surface Q placed in the far-field (as is typical of scattering experiments).…”
Section: Theoretical Viewpointsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…From the preceding Bohmian derivation, one also expects that ΠQF would not be a generally valid arrival-time distribution. In particular, it is reasonable only as long as (2.25) holds, which is equivalent to the current positivity (or ‘no backflow’) condition [49,50]: normal∀t>0 and normal∀xQ,1emJfalse(x,tfalse)ds0. Even though (2.26) can be violated in principle, see [7578], stable backflow situations are, as it happens, very difficult to set up experimentally. This is because, on the one hand, the flux density of freely evolving wave functions becomes approximately radial at large distances from the support of the initial wave function ψ 0 [49,50]: Jfalse(x,tfalse)boldxt4|ψ~0(xt)|2, granting (2.26) for just about any surface Q placed in the far-field (as is typical of scattering experiments).…”
Section: Theoretical Viewpointsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Even though (2.26) can be violated in principle, see [75][76][77][78], stable backflow situations are, as it happens, very difficult to set up experimentally. This is because, on the one hand, the flux density of freely evolving wave functions becomes approximately radial at large distances from the support of the initial wave function ψ 0 [49,50]:…”
Section: Theoretical Viewpointsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The phenomenon was extended into phase space in Ref. [14] and systems suitable for observing QB in an experiment were discussed in Refs. [27,15].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…[4,9,17]. QB is also known to bear close relation to the arrival-time problem [2,3,[18][19][20][21][22][23][24][25] and some nonclassical aspects of the flow of probability in quantum systems [7,[26][27][28][29].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The numerical method is based on the approach originally presented in Ref [1],. and has been further discussed in Section IIIB of Ref [29]. and the appendix of Ref [12]…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%