Thanks for the reference, but I meant the sort of drag one experiences when moving through a fluid at a constant velocity. I found this link which gives a qualitative account of their theory of mass http://www.calphysics.org/haisch/sciences.html and they say because the Zero Point Field (ZPF) is Lorentz invariant it does not create a drag at constant velocity. Instead they say acceleration of charged matter through the ZPF creates a kind of counterforce which we interpret as inertia.
All the efforts to explain the origin of inertia as an effect of some other force or energy field look for theoretical justification to question the validity of the law of inertia. However, if we let experience be our guide we don't need theoretical justification to question the law. For example, the law is not respected by the motion of a thrown pebble. The pebble demonstrates a capacity for acceleration. Of course, the modern convention is to imagine the Earth exerting a force because it is assumed a priori that the apple is continuously obeying the law even while it is in free fall. ( General relativity retains the doctrine of the continuity of natural law but "bends" the law in order to account for the acceleration). Instead the Earth can be viewed as providing a stimulus for the apple's acceleration and the law of inertia comes into effect again when the apple hits the ground. Harry On Fri, May 17, 2013 at 5:20 PM, MarkI-ZeroPoint <[email protected]>wrote: > Yes, it’s called inertia…**** > > Bernie Haisch and Alfonso Rueda derived it (F=ma), and published it in > Physical Revue A in 1994.**** > > -mark**** > > ** ** > > *From:* Harry Veeder [mailto:[email protected]] > *Sent:* Friday, May 17, 2013 11:44 AM > *To:* [email protected] > *Subject:* Re: [Vo]:Nickel Aluminum (NiAl)**** > > ** ** > > Assuming the casimir force is the best explanation of the observed force > on the plates, wouldn't the vacuum energy produce a drag on all moving > bodies? **** > > **** > > Harry**** > > ** ** > > On Fri, May 17, 2013 at 1:22 PM, MarkI-ZeroPoint <[email protected]> > wrote:**** > > Ed: > Two things... > > 1. I don't think Fran's explanation adequately explained the Casimir > effect... (sorry Fran). > Theory posits that the vacuum is made up of almost an infinite range of > frequencies (some have proposed a cutoff frequency, probably approaching > the > Plank frequency). Closely spaced, parallel conducting plates will ONLY > exclude vacuum frequencies LARGER than the spacing between the plates. > This > is what creates the unbalanced forces which want to push the plates > together. All vacuum frequencies are pushing on the outside surfaces of > the > plates, but a limited range of frequencies are between the plates, so > forces > pushing plates apart is less than outside forces pushing plates together. > This effect only becomes significant for very small plate separation. > > 2. Empirical evidence for the Casimir effect is now fairly well > established, > and has been tested by several groups, including Steve Lamoreaux from your > old stomping ground of Los Alamos. It has also become a practical issue > now > that nanotechnology has reached the commercialization stage. The following > is from the Wikipedia article: > ------------- > One of the first experimental tests was conducted by Marcus Sparnaay at > Philips in Eindhoven, in 1958, in a delicate and difficult experiment with > parallel plates, obtaining results not in contradiction with the Casimir > theory,[22][23] but with large experimental errors. Some of the > experimental > details as well as some background information on how Casimir, Polder and > Sparnaay arrived at this point[24] are highlighted in a 2007 interview with > Marcus Sparnaay. > > The Casimir effect was measured more accurately in 1997 by Steve K. > Lamoreaux of Los Alamos National Laboratory,[25] and by Umar Mohideen and > Anushree Roy of the University of California at Riverside.[26] In practice, > rather than using two parallel plates, which would require phenomenally > accurate alignment to ensure they were parallel, the experiments use one > plate that is flat and another plate that is a part of a sphere with a > large > radius. > > In 2001, a group (Giacomo Bressi, Gianni Carugno, Roberto Onofrio and > Giuseppe Ruoso) at the University of Padua (Italy) finally succeeded in > measuring the Casimir force between parallel plates using > microresonators.[27] > --------------- > > -Mark**** >
