Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Transmission across
potential wells and
barriers
The physics of transmission and tunneling of waves and particles across dierent media has wide applications. In geometrical optics, certain phenomenon
of light propagation cannot be explained without taking the wave nature of
light [51]. Thus interference, diraction and tunnelling of light through regions which are forbidden in geometrical optics can be understood through
wave nature of light. Another example is the well-known phenomenon of to45
tal internal reflection. When light impinges upon the interface between two
media with refractive indices n1 and n2 , it suers total internal reflection when
( )
i sin1 nn12 , where i is the angle of incidence. According to the geometrical
optics description, there is no penetration of light into the rarer medium. However, it is known that, in reality, the light does propagate into the rarer medium,
even under total internal reflection conditions. This is possible by tunnelling
when the thickness of the rarer medium is comparable to the wavelength of
the light. The penetration of light into forbidden regions is used in a variety of optical devices such as prism couplers, directional couplers, switches,
etc. Similarly, in quantum mechanics the penetration of particle into forbidden
region can be explained by means of the wave nature associated with it.
The general problem of particle tunneling can be classified into two interesting categories [51] both of which involve the propagation of a particle
with energy E through a classically forbidden region of potential energy V(x),
where E < V(x). In the first category, there is a region in space where the
particle can be represented by a free state and its energy is greater than the
background potential energy. As the particle strikes the barrier there will be a
finite probability of tunneling and a finite probability of being reflected back.
In the second category the particle is initially confined to a quantum well (example: tunnelling through two or more barriers with wells in between). The
particle initially confined to a quantum well region is a quasi-bound (QB) or
sharp resonant state. In the quasi-bound state, though the particle is primarily
confined to the quantum well, it has a finite probability of tunnelling out of the
well and escaping. The key dierences between the two cases is that in the
first problem the wave function corresponding to the initial state is essentially
46
barriers [12, 54]. The gap between two adjacent potential barriers provides
a pocket for the formation of sharp resonant states, and these generate sharp
peaks in the transmission coecient. In addition, ordinary potential wells and
barriers can also generate resonances but they will be broader. It is also important to study the resonance generated by purely attractive well. The motivation
of the present chapter is to explore the nature of broader resonances and related
subtle features of the transmission across purely attractive well and the corresponding repulsive barrier to obtain a deeper understanding of transmission
across a potential in one dimension. The study of sharper quasi-bound states
[12] generated by twin symmetric barriers will be described in next chapter.
This chapter (see ref. [11]) is organized as follows: Section 3.1 is about the
formulation of bound states, resonant states and transmission coecient T in
1D. In section 3.2 we investigate the resonance states, its correlation with oscillatory structure of T and the corresponding box potential for 1D rectangular
potential. In section 3.3 we study the transmission across a potential having
a combination of well and barrier and in section 3.4 we analyze T across an
attractive potential for which T does not show any oscillations. In section 3.5
we summarize the main conclusions of our study.
48
equation for a particle of mass m with potential U(x) and total energy E:
d2 (x)
+ (k2 V(x))(x) = 0,
dx2
(3.1)
(3.2)
Er > 0 and r > 0 such that the wave function behaves asymptotically as:
(x)
(x)
ei(kr iki )x
ei(kr iki )x .
x
x
(3.3)
This behavior implies a positive energy state Er with width r and lifetime ~/r
and |(x)| diverges exponentially as eki |x| but decays exponentially in time because the time-dependent part of the solution of the Schrodinger wave equation
is eiEt/~ . Smaller width r corresponds to a long lived resonance state. If the
widths are very narrow, resonant states behave similarly to bound states in the
vicinity of the potential and may be considered as QB state. However, unlike
the bound states the QB or resonance states are not normalizable because of
the exponential divergence stated above indicating the significant presence of
resonance state wave function in the entire domain.
(c) Resonance states and transmission coecient
In one dimensional quantum transmission across a potential, the transmission
coecient can be obtained by solving the Schrodinger wave equation for E > 0
and then by applying the appropriate boundary conditions for the continuity of
(x) and (x) at the boundaries. A smooth potential can be approximated by
a large number of very small step potentials, and the transmission and reflection coecient R can be obtained by using transfer matrix technique. This
method can be used for potentials that are not analytically solvable. Alternatively, one can adopt a numerical integration of the Schrodinger equation using
well known procedures like Runge kutta method.
50
For the study of R and T we seek a solution of (x) satisfying the conditions:
(x)
(x)
Aeikx + Beikx ,
Feikx ,
x
x
(3.4)
0, |x| > a.
51
(3.5)
, |x| > a,
(3.6)
(3.7)
The potential in Eq.(3.6) can be considered to be infinitely repulsive for |x| > a,
we expect that the states for E < 0 have higher energies than the corresponding
square well given by Eq.(3.5). These potentials can generate bound and resonance states. Since the potential V(x) is symmetric in x, the states generated
will have definite parity.
The resonance state positions and widths are evaluated by solving the
Schrodinger equation Eq.(3.1), satisfying the boundary conditions given
by Eq.(3.3). Because we have chosen the potential to be symmetric with
respect to the origin, we expect both even and odd wave functions. The
former behave as cos(x) near the origin and the latter as sin(x). Thus
for even resonant states, the matching of the wave function and its derivative at x = a leads to the condition tan(a) = ik. As a result the even
resonance state energy and widths are obtained from the complex roots
kn of the equation:
kcos(a) isin(a) = 0.
52
(3.8)
The roots kn are just below the real k-axis in the complex k-plane such
that Re(kn ) > |Im(kn )|. This condition signifies a positive energy resonant
state with finite width. The corresponding equation for the energies and
widths of odd states is:
ksin(a) + icos(a) = 0.
(3.9)
(3.10)
( )
B
(k2 2 )
2ika F
= 2i
sin(2a)e
,
A
4k
A
(3.11)
2i(2 k2 )sin(2a)
B
=
,
A
[e2ia ( + k)2 e2ia ( k)2 ]
(3.12)
B
2i(2 k2 )sin(2a)
=
,
F
4k
(3.13)
2
F
(4k)2
,
T = =
A
(4k)2 + 4(2 k2 )2 sin2 (2a)
53
(3.14)
2
B
4(2 k2 )2 sin2 (2a)
R = =
= 1 T,
A
(4k)2 + 4(2 k2 )2 sin2 (2a)
(3.15)
54
55
56
the regular solution of the scattering problem represent the resonant states and
consequently are identified as the pole position of the corresponding partial
wave S -matrix S l [10]. This result demonstrates that resonances have similar
interpretations in one and three dimensions. If let A/F = 0, we obtain the
condition satisfied by the zeros of A/F:
+k
= e2ia ,
k
(3.16)
0, |x| > a .
58
(3.17)
, |x| > a ,
(3.18)
(3.19)
Figure 3.3: Variation of T with E for the repulsive rectangular barrier [Eq.
(3.17)] with V0 = 3 and a = 5.
with 2 = k2 V0 . It is clear that the peaks of the oscillations of T at above
barrier energies correspond to the barrier top resonances. As before, there is a
small dierence between the peak positions of T and the corresponding resonance energies due to the fact that we are dealing with broad states. Note that
the numerically computed T has contributions from background terms in addition to pole terms. When the imaginary part of the pole position of transmission
amplitude is small, the resonance contribution dominates T in the vicinity of
resonance energy, and the peak position of T and the corresponding resonance
position are closer. However, when a resonance is broad, the background term
becomes more significant and there is a shift of the peak position of T with
respect to the corresponding resonance energy. The numerical results shown in
Tables 3.1 and 3.2 demonstrate this eect.
60
To make the comparison between the attractive well and the corresponding
barrier more complete, we examine the variation of the barrier top resonance
position En with n and compare it with the corresponding box potential positive energy eigenvalues Eq.(3.19). We show this in Figure 3.4. The correlation
between the box states and barrier top states is close as in the case for an attractive square well. Figure 3.2 looks dierent because of the single sequencing
of bound and resonant states generated by the well. The positive energy states
generated by Eq.(3.17) and the corresponding peak position of T match very
well. The reason for this common feature can be understood as follows.
The expression for T in Eq.(3.14) holds for an attractive square well with
2 = k2 + V0 . The same expression is valid for the barrier for k2 > V0 with
2 = k2 V0 . We have taken the width 2a of the well and the barrier to be
large (a = 5) to generate a greater number of states. For both the well and
the barrier, the maxima of T are governed by the zeros of sin(2a). Thus for
an attractive well, the peaks of T are at positive energies, signifying that the
resonances occur at En = [(n2 2 /(2a)2 ) V0 ] > 0. Such a close correlation is
not present for the negative energy states, as is clear from Table 3.1. For the
barrier, the peaks of T are at En = [(n2 2 /(2a)2 ) + V0 ] for n=1,2,.... Both sets
of En are eigenvalues of the corresponding box potentials. In contrast, resonant
state energies and widths are generated from the complex poles of T , and their
positions are slightly shifted from the maxima of T because the resonances are
broader. Tables 3.1 and 3.2 summarize these results.
61
Figure 3.4: Comparison of the barrier top resonant state energies of the repulsive rectangular potential [Eq. 3.17] with V0 = 3 and a = 5 with the corresponding states for the box potential [Eq. 3.18]. The abscissa is the sequence
number of the states.
62
x2
]
(V(x) k2 )dx .
(3.20)
x1
Here x1 and x2 > x1 are the turning points, which define the classically forbidden region x1 < x < x2 of the barrier at E = k2 .
This semiclassical approach to tunneling incorporates the potential between
the turning points at a given energy but ignores the potential elsewhere resulting in the expression for T given by Eq.(3.20), which is independent of V(x) in
the domains x < x1 and x > x2 . In the light of our discussion on the transmis63
sion across a well, it is interesting to see the dierence that an adjacent well
makes in tunneling across a barrier. For this purpose we consider the potential:
V(x) =
0, x < a,
V0 , V0 > 0, a < x < a,
V1 , V1 > 0, a < x < b,
(3.21)
0, x > b.
64
Figure 3.5: Plot of T (E) for an attractive square well Eq.[3.5] with V0 = 3,
a = 5 as indicated by W; the repulsive rectangular barrier [Eq.(3.17)] with
V0 = 6 and a = 0.25 is indicated by B, and the combination of attractive square
well and repulsive barrier [Eq.(3.21)] with V0 = 3, V1 = 6, a = 5, and b = 5.5
is indicated by W-B.
65
we have found for the attractive rectangular well and rectangular barrier is applicable even when they are replaced by smoother potentials. However there
can be exceptions. Such an exception is given by the behavior of T for the
modified Poschl-Teller type potential [56]:
V(x) = 2
( 1)
.
cosh2 x
(3.22)
(3.23)
(3.24)
sinh(k/)
.
sin()
(3.25)
T=
where
p=
66
(l + 1 i)
.
(l + 1 + i)
(3.26)
Here = /2k is the Rutherford parameter associated with the Coulomb potential. The repulsive Coulomb potential with < 0 is another example that
does not generate resonant states.
Our results show that there can be attractive wells which can generate resonances and there are examples of other potentials which do not and knowledge of this feature therefore is important for the satisfactory application of
WKB approximation for tunneling. Hence we give some additional information available on this problem. The problem of mathematically proving the
occurrence or non occurrence of resonances for a given potential is non trivial
and remains unresolved. However, some details are known. For example, non
analyticity features in a potential causes multiple zeros in reflection coecient
67
,V0
,
1+x2n
3.5 Summary
Now we summarize below the main conclusions about our study of quantum
transmission and eigenstates generated by potentials like wells and barriers:
By taking an attractive square well and its repulsive counterpart, we have
shown that the oscillations in T as a function of energy corresponds to
the broad resonant state energies obtained by using boundary conditions
satisfied by the resonant state wave function.
We found that the resonant energies and their widths can be obtained in
terms of the complex poles of the transmission amplitude or reflection
amplitude in the lower half of the complex E-plane in the vicinity of
the real axis. This result is similar to the corresponding behavior of S matrix poles in three-dimensional scattering and hence provides a unified
understanding of transmission in one dimension and potential scattering
in three dimensions in terms of the pole structure of the corresponding
amplitudes.
68
For an attractive square well and the rectangular barrier, the positions of
the maxima of T are practically same as the energies of the eigenstates of
the corresponding one-dimensional box potentials. The resonance state
energies are also close to the peak positions of T , this confirms the close
correlation between the oscillatory structure of T at resonance energies.
From the study of transmission across a potential that is a combination
of an attractive well and a repulsive barrier, we found that T exhibits oscillations even at energies below the barrier, in contrast to the WKB type
barrier expression for T , which does not manifest these features. Hence
simple WKB type expressions for T may not be a reasonable approximation if the total potential has physical features such as an attractive well
outside the barrier region.
The oscillations of T across an attractive potential are likely to be found
for most potentials. But these features can have exceptions for example
the attractive modified Poschl-Teller type potential which can generate
bound states but no resonance states. Hence the study of T across this
potential as a function of energy does not show any oscillations.
69