I had to change to plain text because my ISP rejected sending this
message in rich text, probably due to banned links.
On Aug 8, 2009, at 11:51 AM, Frank Roarty wrote:
On Saturday, August 08, 2009 Horace Heffner wrote
[Snip]
The snip you provide seems irrelevant to the issue at hand. The
space between conductive plates having certain wavelengths excluded
therein is analogous to the space beyond the glass on the side
opposed to the light source also having certain wavelengths
excluded from it. A lower frequency portion of a spectrum is
excluded in both cases. The analogy holds especially well with
regards to the most relevant fact that in neither case is any
frequency or energy "up-converted". Some frequencies from a broad
spectrum are merely excluded in both cases. No frequencies are
changed. Energy is only excluded, not transformed. The term "up-
converted" then merely creates confusion. It draws an unnecessary
cloak of complexity, or possibly just confusion, over something
readily taught and understood in 8th grade science class.
Horace, [Reply]
The propagation of visible light radiation is
attenuated in a filter but is transformed in a Casimir cavity.
.
Repeatedly restating your premise is not rational discussion. ZPF
wavelengths are merely excluded from a Casimir cavity. Again, if you
have any credible reference the ZPF is "up-converted" by a Casimir
cavity then please provide it.
.
The Casimir effect is not a force that interacts with the zero
point field. It is a result of the action of the zero point field
on matter, its isotropic nature, and its cubic energy
distribution. It is also notable that the Casimir force does not
require conductive surfaces to manifest, but that is a side issue,
irrelevant in this case and certainly not an issue that breaks the
analogy at hand. If you have any credible reference that says zero
point field frequency or energy is actually up-converted by or
within Casimir cavities then will you please provide it?
[Reply] The Wikipedia *does define conducting metals* placed within
a few micrometers and there is a link to vacuum expectation value
which may put things in terms You are more familiar with like
Fermion fields.
.
Do you know what "does not require" means? Yes, we all know
conducting metals work. My point above is they are not required to
obtain the Casimir effect.
.
From Wikipedia: In physics, the Casimir effect and the Casimir-
Polder force are physical forces arising from a quantized field.
The typical example
.
Note the phrase "typical example". This has no relevance with
regards to "does not require".
.
is of two uncharged metallic plates in a vacuum, placed a few
micrometers apart, without any external electromagnetic field. In a
classical description, the lack of an external field also means
that there is no field between the plates, and no force would be
measured between them.[1] When this field is instead studied using
quantum electrodynamics, it is seen that the plates do affect the
virtual photons which constitute the field, and generate a net force
[2]—either an attraction or a repulsion depending on the specific
arrangement of the two plates. This force has been measured, and is
a striking example of an effect purely due to second quantization.
[3][4] However, the treatment of boundary conditions in these
calculations has led to some controversy.[5]
Overview
The Casimir effect can be understood by the idea that the presence
of conducting metals and dielectrics alters the vacuum expectation
value of the energy of the second quantized electromagnetic field.
[9] Since the value of this energy depends on the shapes and
positions of the conductors and dielectrics, the Casimir effect
makes itself manifest as a force between such objects.
.
Uhhhhh ... dielectrics are not metals. Have you read the above?
It is talking about conductors and dielectrics, and even dielectrics
with dielectrics, all of which can produce Casimir forces between
each other. This was my point. Was your intent to substantiate my
point?
.
A bit outside the scope of all this is the fact the zero point
field may not exist at all. The Casimir force could just be the
result of van der Walls forces, which are not thought by everyone
to be a result of the zero point field. It is merely a hypothesis.
[Reply] NOW we are talking!
.
Now we are ducking the issue. I don't intend to engage in a
discussion of irrelevant theories based on photon flux and not
virtual photon flux, i.e not based on the zero point field.
.
I had numerous exchanges with Thomas Prevenslik who champions this
sentiment when I first started my quest back in October 08, I
became aware of the controversy surrounding the existence of
Casimir force and vacuum fluctuations into what I simplified as
“push” vs “pull” camps.
I was originally in the push camp associated with the Casimir model
but Thomas convinced me that the electrostatic “pull” could be
induced by up-conversion of IR to VUV in obedience with
conservation of energy. As for up-conversion see ABSTRACT below
from Casimir force – neutral or electrostatic? The controversial
extension I have applied to his “up conversion” was inspired by
Naudts and Bourgoin. I am proposing the “way” nature “up converts”
is relativistic – no attenuation, no transducer, We have confined
the variable and conspired events such that a Lorentz contraction
(or temporal excursion) becomes the path of least resistance to
accomplish conservation of energy.
Since the suppressed IR radiation cannot escape the gap surfaces, the
only way EM energy may be conserved within cavity QED constraints
is for the equivalent amount of suppressed IR
energy to be gained in the gap. But the gap is resonant at VUV
frequencies, and therefore the conservation of EM
energy may be said to induce the frequency up-conversion of IR
radiation to the VUV. Indeed, if Casimir had
included the VUV energy or its IR equivalent in his derivation, he
would have shown there is no force between the
plates. But there is an electrostatic force. For different material
geometry, the VUV radiation causes electron
emission leaving a positive charge on one gap surface while the
other surface gains electrons and charges negative.
Steady heat flow from the environment at ambient temperature
maintains the thermal kT energy of the atoms to
provide a constant source of charge. Permanent adhesion in MEMS
devices is caused by ESD from the high electric
fields developed in the gap. Because of dependence on thermal kT
energy, the Casimir force in the modified theory
does not exist at absolute zero.
HH wrote:
Lastly you again use the phrase "vacuum flux", but you have still
not defined it. Flux of what in or from the vacuum? In fact, what
do you mean by "flux"?
FR wrote:
[Reply] I mean vacuum fluctuations aka virtual particles the same
as those Puthoff proposes wink into and out of existence and which
keep the electron orbital from decaying into the nucleus. I prefer
to call them fluctuations (flux) because I am focused on their wave
nature, If they exist they represent the canvas that nature
stretches performing a Lorentz contraction to keep energy
balanced. Presently they are an unproven mechanism but they still
demonstrate a “force” needed to balance Puthoffs’ atomic model and
regardless if the model is true or not it becomes a place holder,
as such it can be used as a tool. Note the “push” and “pull” camps
both agree that an “exclusion zone” exists between the plates if
permanently braced apart and I was only able to proceed forward
after my communication with Thomas by remaining focused on this
common ground.
Best Regards
Fran
.
.
HH replies:
Here then is a great example of the point I am trying to make. You
are indiscriminately mixing incompatible hypotheses and definitions
without providing the reader a clue as to what you are doing, or any
rationale for doing so. When talking about the ZPF I use the
standard scientific meaning of particle "flux", i.e. the number of
particles passing through a unit of area per unit of time. In the
case of the ZPF the particles are virtual electrons. Given the large
wavelengths relevant to Casimir cavities, there is not enough energy
involved to be talking about vacuum fluctuations in the form of
virtual particle pairs like electron-positron pairs or larger. So,
in this context, "vacuum flux" means "virtual photon flux". This is
in the context of the effects of the zero point field, the context in
which H. Puthoff writes. It makes no sense at all to say you are
working in Puthoff's context and then jump in the next sentence or so
into a foreign context wherein "up conversion" has any meaning and
the Casimir force is attributed to real photons.
Best regards,
Horace Heffner
http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/
