Expanding on an idea posted here earlier.

The Casimir force is hypothesized here to be at least part of the van der Waals force that can bind noble gas atoms like Argon, or molecules, especially symmetric molecules, like CCL4. This suggests that moving van der Waals bound molecules through a Casimir cavity of sufficently small size will reduce the van der Waals binding energy, and in the case of liquids, reduce the boiling point and enthalpy of evaporation.

The binding energy is reflected the enthalpy of vaporization. The problem with noble gases is they have very low boiling points and low Enthalpies of vaporization.

See:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Noble_gas


Table 1 shows some candidate media for Casimir cavity boiling.

          Enthalpy of
Element/  Vaporization
Compound  (kJ/mol) (eV/molecule)

Helium    0.08   8.29x10^-4
Neon      1.74   0.01803
Argon     6.52   0.0676
Krypton   9.05   0.0938
Xenon     12.7   0.1363
Radon     18.1   0.1876
CCl4      32.54  0.3373
CF4       135.7  1.406

Table 1 - Casimir cavity boiling boiling candidates



Carbon tetrachloride, CCL4 and carbon tetraflouride (tetrafluoromethane), CF4, may be good candidates for a Casimir boiler because they are highly symmetric and relatively inert in the expected operating conditions. CF4, with a boiling point of -127.8 C has the same problem as the noble gases, the energy producing device would have to be encapsulated in a cryrogenic envelope. However, it has a stellar 1.4 eV per molecule enthalpy of vaporization. The problem in all cases is knowing just how much of the liquid state binding energy is due to the Casimir force. This is best determined experimentally.

Of the prospects examined, CCl4 is the most readily available, has the best boiling point, 76.72 °C (350 K), and has a good enthalpy of vaporization, 32.54 kJ/mol, or 0.3373 eV/molecule. It has a density of 1.5867 g/cm3, and a molar mass of 153.82 grams. Except for availability, and toxicity, it is good for amateur experiments. An MSDS is here:

http://msds.chem.ox.ac.uk/CA/carbon_tetrachloride.html

It is a probable carcinogen. However, when I was a kid many of us ran around with butterfly nets and small carbon tetrachloride bottles in our hip pockets for doing in butterflies quickly, so its toxicity is limited to at least that degree. It was used by dry cleaners at one time.

An experiment to evaluate CCl4 prospects for a Casimir force boiler would consist of measuring any boiling point depression from imposing a fine mesh barrier between the liquid and gas phases of CCl4. A closed circuit with condenser would be used to recycle the CCl4. A controlled heater and stirrer would be used to maintain the temperature of the liquid phase.

The interesting part is deciding what to use for barriers, i.e. flow- through Casimir cavities. One possibility is sintered fine metal powders. Another is stacked fine foils,like gold leaf, with a dielectric powder or micro-beads used as a plate separator. Plate separation has to be under 10^-7 m to obtain any effect.

Suppose 10 percent of the heat of vaporization is due to the Casimir force for CCl4. That is 3.25 kJ/mol, or (1.5867 g/cm3)(3.25 kJ)/ (153.8 g) = 0.0335 kJ/cm^3 = 33.5 kJ/liter boiled, or 33.5 MJ per 1000 liters boiled.

Looking at this from a practical standpoint, at 1 liter per second boiling rate, that is 33.5 kW output, and at a 1000 liter per second boiling rate 33.5 MW output. It would take a pretty large device to produce 10 kW, enough to run a home, as that would require boiling about 300 ml per second for that output alone. It would make a good home heater, but probably most of the electricity generated would have to be fed right back into the boiler for stand alone operation, and the generator would have to be very efficient. If it turned out that 100 percent of the heat of vaporization is due to the Casimir force, and Cavities small enough to release all that energy were used (an unlikely possibility), then a very good home heater could run by boiling a mere 100 cc per second, or 6 liters a minute.

Best regards,

Horace Heffner
http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/




Reply via email to