A normal or not so normal citation from a book?

[mok-kong shen]

I am a layman fond of browsing books in the libraries. Recently I saw the following in a book of physics which I intuitively surmise to be not quite normal (normal in the sense of well-known and undisputed by the experts in the field of science) and, lacking knowledge, would like to know whether it is indeed the case (if not, my apology for the disturbance):

"Two situations where the mechanism remains elusive are the double-slit experiment and tunnelling in solid-state physics. In both situations the apparent paradox may come from an over-simplfied description of the problem in terms of an idealized potential. For example, in the case of the double-slit experiment, an incoming electron or photon may have an electro-magnetic interaction with the electrons of the material of the double-slit and the details of this are not incorporated into the symmetry argument. A polarization of the material of the slit could indeed imply that an electron detects whether there is a second slit or otherwise, because it could lead to different induced charge distributions. In the case of electron tunnelling in solid-state physics, the electron will certainly not see a truly flat potential. These details are not necessary to describe the symmetry, but they can be essential to understanding the mechanism. The mechnism does not have to be universal and may require a case by case discussion."

The above citation is from G. Coddens, From Spinors to quantum mechanics, p.338, London, 2015.

[minkwe]

See discussion in viewtopic.php?f=6&t=51#p1843

[Ben6993]

Hi

I am an amateur too, so you will need to wait for a reply by an expert to get an 'establishment' reply.
There is already a massive amount of material on this website about the double slit experiment and the Bell's Inequality, so I will say what I think about quantum tunneling.

If you hit a right hand electron (spin +0.5) with a left hand photon (spin -1) you can get a higgs family member (weak isospin +0.5) plus a left handed electron (spin -0.5). That is not much use for quantum tunneling as the outgoing left handed electron will be just as bound as the incoming right handed electron and in the same vicinity, but if you vary the handedness it is more useful. Hit a left handed electron (spin -0.5) with a left handed photon (spin -1) you can get a left handed neutrino (spin -0.5) plus a left handed W- (spin -1). [It is interesting how all these particles are left handed.] It is very difficult to bind a neutrino which can easily pass through a binding region. The difficulty is to convert the neutrino back again to an electron before it travels too far. The same interaction path works in reverse: neutrino plus W- interact to give an electron plus a photon. All particles being left handed again. If this path was being followed though it should be obvious because the final outgoing photon should be detectable.