RE: [Vo]:DCE for SPP

From: Roarty, Francis X * Perhaps vacuum energy cannot perform measurable work at our typical physical macro velocities relative to C … Well, it is pretty clear from the literature, starting in 2011 and continuing to recent papers - that the DCE the dynamical Casimir

Re: [Vo]:DCE for SPP

...@gmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, February 10, 2016 10:18 PM To: vortex-l <vortex-l@eskimo.com> Subject: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:DCE for SPP I don't believe that the vacuum does work. On Wed, Feb 10, 2016 at 10:15 PM, Eric Walker <eric.wal...@gmail.com<mailto:eric.wal...@gmail.com>> wrote: On

Re: [Vo]:DCE for SPP

In reply to Eric Walker's message of Wed, 10 Feb 2016 21:15:18 -0600: Hi, [snip] >On Wed, Feb 10, 2016 at 8:36 PM, wrote: > >I'm always a bit suspicious of theories that make use of "negative energy". >> > >It's what is needed to do negative work. Is that work, that once

Re: [Vo]:DCE for SPP

On Thu, Feb 11, 2016 at 3:38 PM, wrote: >It's what is needed to do negative work. > > Is that work, that once having been done, requires even more work to fix > up the > result? :) > I was wondering what it was myself. :) It was fun to think about. Now I see why the

RE: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:DCE for SPP

law. Fran -Original Message- From: mix...@bigpond.com [mailto:mix...@bigpond.com] Sent: Thursday, February 11, 2016 4:44 PM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:DCE for SPP In reply to Axil Axil's message of Wed, 10 Feb 2016 21:53:18 -0500: Hi, [snip] >Let us get

Re: [Vo]:DCE for SPP

If the vacuum can be induced to generate more virtual particle production in one location then another location of the vacuum must produce less virtual particle production to keep the average energy production of the vacuum zero. The suppression of virtual particles through this unbalancing

Re: [Vo]:DCE for SPP

In reply to Axil Axil's message of Wed, 10 Feb 2016 21:53:18 -0500: Hi, [snip] >Let us get to the bottom of this fear. Expand... It depends on exactly what is meant by negative energy. If meant in an absolute sense, then I am very doubtful. However if it's just a consequence of only considering

Re: [Vo]:DCE for SPP

In reply to Axil Axil's message of Tue, 9 Feb 2016 20:04:51 -0500: Hi, [snip] >Do you believe the the Penrose mechanism can also add a multiplier effect >to the extraction of energy from the vacuum in the dark mode SPP? > >https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Penrose_process I'm always a bit suspicious

Re: [Vo]:DCE for SPP

Let us get to the bottom of this fear. Expand... On Wed, Feb 10, 2016 at 9:36 PM, wrote: > In reply to Axil Axil's message of Tue, 9 Feb 2016 20:04:51 -0500: > Hi, > [snip] > >Do you believe the the Penrose mechanism can also add a multiplier effect > >to the extraction of

Re: [Vo]:DCE for SPP

On Wed, Feb 10, 2016 at 8:36 PM, wrote: I'm always a bit suspicious of theories that make use of "negative energy". > It's what is needed to do negative work. Eric

Re: [Vo]:DCE for SPP

I don't believe that the vacuum does work. On Wed, Feb 10, 2016 at 10:15 PM, Eric Walker wrote: > On Wed, Feb 10, 2016 at 8:36 PM, wrote: > > I'm always a bit suspicious of theories that make use of "negative energy". >> > > It's what is needed to do

RE: [Vo]:DCE for SPP

What, you don’t believe Casimir’s oxen pull? From: Axil Axil [mailto:janap...@gmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, February 10, 2016 7:18 PM To: vortex-l Subject: Re: [Vo]:DCE for SPP I don't believe that the vacuum does work. On Wed, Feb 10, 2016 at 10:15 PM, Eric Walker <eric.

RE: [Vo]:DCE for SPP

This could be the sleeper paper of the year. Photon multiplication in an incandescent cell - due to DCE/SPP would be a mechanism which changes the whole ball game, if true. As they snidely quip on SNL: Who knew? BTW - this M.O. explains how the Lugano results, as clarified by Bob Higgins to

[Vo]:DCE for SPP

"Dynamical Casimir effect for surface plasmon polaritons" The title says it all, in terms of hitting on two of the significant new catch-phrases which are cropping up in the glow-stick version of LENR, but the paper (from Estonia) is behind a paywall.

RE: [Vo]:DCE for SPP

Here is another paper which reinforces the previous one. (wrt DCE being relevant to understanding one form of LENR - the glow-stick version) "The dynamical Casimir effect generates entanglement" Felicetti, S et al http://meetings.aps.org/Meeting/MAR14/Session/J28.11 "The existence of

RE: [Vo]:DCE for SPP

: [Vo]:DCE for SPP Here is another paper which reinforces the previous one... (wrt DCE being relevant to understanding one form of LENR - the glow-stick version) "The dynamical Casimir effect generates entanglement" Felicetti, S et al http://meetings.aps.org/Meeting/MAR14/Sess

Re: [Vo]:DCE for SPP

In reply to Axil Axil's message of Tue, 9 Feb 2016 12:56:48 -0500: Hi, [snip] >All those references to order of magnitude increases sound like over unity >amplification of incoming photons. The original number is 1E-6, i.e. 1 in a million. Hence even orders of magnitude improvement doesn't even

Re: [Vo]:DCE for SPP

Do you believe the the Penrose mechanism can also add a multiplier effect to the extraction of energy from the vacuum in the dark mode SPP? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Penrose_process On Tue, Feb 9, 2016 at 7:50 PM, wrote: > In reply to Axil Axil's message of Tue, 9 Feb

Re: [Vo]:DCE for SPP

http://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1410/1410.4413.pdf Dynamical Casimir effect for surface plasmon polaritons V. Hizhnyakov, A. Loot, S.Ch. Azizabadi Institute of Physics, University of Tartu, Ravila 14c, 50411 Tartu, Estonia E-mail: h...@fi.tartu.ee Abstract. Emission of photon pairs by an