 |
| A quantum tunnelling experiment. Quantum tunnelling allows quantum particles to travel into regions of space, called barriers, that would be forbidden by classical physics. Sharoglazova et al. measured the speed of photons tunnelling into a barrier. The experiment took place in a dye-filled cavity between two mirrors. The bottom mirror was nanostructured to create two ‘waveguides’ that directed the light. In the primary waveguide, photons were generated by shining a laser at fluorescent dye molecules. This waveguide formed a ramp that gave the photons potential energy. The photons travelled down the ramp until they encountered a barrier. When they tunnelled into the barrier, they also tunnelled sideways into the secondary waveguide. The rate at which the photons hopped between the two waveguides was used to measure the speed of the particles in the barrier. |
Blogger Comments:
Relational Reflections on Quantum Tunnelling
This latest experiment may appear to ramp up the “weirdness” of quantum physics — but what if the real issue lies not in the phenomena themselves, but in the metaphors we use to describe them?
Rather than imagining particles skipping through barriers, a relational view reframes the situation more fundamentally:
-
No particle is passing through a wall. What’s happening is a transformation within a field of relational potential, shaped by constraints. The waveguides and mirrors don’t guide a thing; they structure a space of possible transitions.
-
Tunnelling speed isn’t the velocity of a substance but the rate of actualisation — how quickly a new configuration emerges under constraint. In this view, energy is not the fuel of motion but a factor shaping the system’s internal tensions.
-
The so-called “barrier” is not an obstacle being overcome. It’s a zone of reduced affordance — a relational bottleneck that nonetheless permits transformation under the right systemic conditions.
This reframing also sheds light on why the experiment challenges Bohmian mechanics, which assumes particles have definite positions and rest in infinite barriers. In relational terms, that assumption already misses the point: what’s unfolding isn’t a trajectory but a redistribution of coherence — a reorganisation of potential under dynamic constraint.
So perhaps what appears as “quantum weirdness” is better understood as a symptom of ontological mismatch: we’re trying to describe relational phenomena using object-based metaphors. Recasting the scene in terms of fields, constraints, and systemic transformation lets the mystery breathe differently.
In this light, tunnelling isn't a particle doing the impossible. It's the field adjusting itself — meaning isn’t skipping the barrier; it’s flowing around it.
