New Paper - Confirmation - Vacuum of Spacetime is not Empty

Discussion in 'Physics & Math' started by Magneto_1, Jun 9, 2011.

  1. Magneto_1 Super Principia Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    295
    This is very exciting! The Vacuum Energy or Aether is generating photons and particles according to a new paper, which states that one of the most surprising predictions of modern quantum theory is that the vacuum of space is not empty.

    Paper - arXiv.org > quant-ph > arXiv:1105.4714
    : Observation of the Dynamical Casimir Effect in a Superconducting Circuit

    Abstract:

    One of the most surprising predictions of modern quantum theory is that the vacuum of space is not empty. In fact, quantum theory predicts that it teems with virtual particles flitting in and out of existence. While initially a curiosity, it was quickly realized that these vacuum fluctuations had measurable consequences, for instance producing the Lamb shift of atomic spectra and modifying the magnetic moment for the electron. This type of renormalization due to vacuum fluctuations is now central to our understanding of nature. However, these effects provide indirect evidence for the existence of vacuum fluctuations. From early on, it was discussed if it might instead be possible to more directly observe the virtual particles that compose the quantum vacuum. 40 years ago, Moore suggested that a mirror undergoing relativistic motion could convert virtual photons into directly observable real photons. This effect was later named the dynamical Casimir effect (DCE). Using a superconducting circuit, we have observed the DCE for the first time. The circuit consists of a coplanar transmission line with an electrical length that can be changed at a few percent of the speed of light. The length is changed by modulating the inductance of a superconducting quantum interference device (SQUID) at high frequencies (~11 GHz). In addition to observing the creation of real photons, we observe two-mode squeezing of the emitted radiation, which is a signature of the quantum character of the generation process.​


    Paper - Scientific American: Moving Mirrors Make Light from Nothing Researchers claim to have produced sought-after quantum effect


    UTube Video: Dynamic Casmir Effect


    This experiment will provide confirmation that the vacuum of spacetime is not empty!
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. James R Just this guy, you know? Staff Member

    Messages:
    39,397
    As the abstract says, observations such as the Lamb shift already confirm that the vacuum of spacetime is not empty. Indeed, the standard Casimir effect confirms it. So, this paper is not as big a piece of news as you think it is. It is, however, the first observation of the dynamical Casimir effect, which is worthy news in itself.
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. AlphaNumeric Fully ionized Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,702
    More self advertising for a debunked piece of work.

    Besides the paper isn't saying that, as your link use of a link implies the paper is justifying your model, which it isn't. It is justifying the concept that the vacuum is not empty, something which quantum field theory has had since the 30s and is covered extensively in standard textbooks (I can give book and page references if needs be).

    You have no working model of said fluctuations, you cannot predict quantitative behaviour and thus you have absolutely no justification in saying the paper supports your work. The devil is in the details and you have no details.
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. Magneto_1 Super Principia Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    295
    Please stop! You are not "Smart Enough" to be my "Nemesis!"

    If you are able to understand the paper, like JamesR does, the paper is about the "Dynamical Casmir Effect."

    We all know that quantum field theory predicts that virtual particles can spontaneously appear out of the vacuum energy; this is not new! And the classical "Static Casmir Effect" is one way of measuring, and setting up an experiment to measure the spontaneous emission of these virtual particles (photons & matter). However, the hard trick for this experiment is getting the plates separation correct. This is not easy to do.

    So the more experiments that are developed to improve the measuring techniques of the Vacuum Expectation Energy and spontaneous emission of these virtual particles (photons & matter), the more we should celebrate.

    For me these experiments validate that there is an all prevasive Aether and Aetherons that would be the constituents of the Vacuum of Spacetime. Peter Higgs would say that this experiment validates the Higgs field.

    However, what is unique in this paper and experiment is the "Control" that the "Dynamical Casmir Effect" provides. Which means that once this experiment gets sophisticated we will be able to make photons and particles like electrons and positrons on demand! This would occur by dialing in the correct frequency and related motion ratio (v/c).

    And, by the way, this directly supports my working model and predictions. If you read my work, you would know this!! But since you have not. Keep your trap shut!!


    In the future, if "You" have any problem with any portion of my work, then lift out a particular theory and equation to argue! There are a lot of theories and equations to choose from to argue; and I will be happy to defend. This is your burden, not mine!

    But screaming from the back of the room "You are wrong" sounds like an idiot heckler at a ball game, sitting in the stands screaming at the players that have developed the skill and expertise and are actually in the game!!

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
    Last edited: Jun 9, 2011
  8. CptBork Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,460
    No he wouldn't. Even if the Higgs boson doesn't actually exist, this effect would still occur.

    This isn't a scheme for getting free energy. You can have two conducting mirrors attract each other via the Casimir effect, and you can siphon energy out of this attraction, but then you have to put all of that energy back into the system when you want to separate the mirrors again. I think I know of a vastly more efficient way of converting energy into photons: Try using a flashlight.
     
  9. AlphaNumeric Fully ionized Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,702
    I've already debunked your work, there's no need to be your 'nemesis'.

    If you are able to understand the paper, like JamesR does, the paper is about the "Dynamical Casmir Effect."

    No, it wouldn't validate it even if you had quantitative models. It would lend justification to the model but it wouldn't validate it. You can't prove models, you can only not falsify them. The models which last the longest are considered good but they are never proven true. Since there are other models which explain these phenomenona and you have no working model your claims aren't even valid.

    No, he wouldn't. You're once again showing how little of the SM you understand. The Higgs scalar model requires at least a Higgs boson. The effect talked about in the paper is something else, the Casimir effect and things like it do not demand the Higgs boson to be in existence.

    Please provide the quantitative model you have which correctly predicts the observed phenomena. I'm not paying for your book and you're the one making the claims. In previous discussions your 'models' have been either wrong or unable to predict anything, thus not models at all. You claim you have a model, let's see it. You say "lift out a particular theory" but my contention is you don't have one, you don't have a working model which has been experimentally tested and passed. I cannot 'lift' what I do not think exists.

    Judging by your past record you're just making claims you cannot back up.

    And if I had only said "You're wrong!" in previous discussions your comment might be valid. But I didn't, I walked you through the numerous conceptual and mathematical errors you made, which you continue to put forth and which you simply don't understand.

    If you provide your claimed quantitative model then I'll be happy to go through it and highlight any problems/errors I see. But the onus is not on me to trawl through your work, particularly when you charge money for your books. You make the claims of having models, you should provide them. In the past you have completely failed to justify your claims and thus you don't deserve the benefit of the doubt.
     
  10. Motor Daddy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,425
    I don't see what the big hoopla is all about. A true vacuum is void of everything by definition. A true vacuum is simply an empty volume. If there is something in that volume of space then it isn't a vacuum, it is a partial vacuum. Partial vacuum's have matter and light in them, so it is common sense that a partial vacuum isn't empty and real vacuums are empty (I'm not saying a real vacuum actually exists, BTW).
     
  11. Magneto_1 Super Principia Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    295
    Motor Daddy,

    I truly understand your dilemma, and it is the result of centuries of misunderstanding of the vacuum of space or spacetime. So let's get started.

    One of the main misunderstandings is that we now live in the 21st Century, and we understand a lot more; so based on the classical interpretation of the vacuum, we now have to discuss two (2) different types of vacuums.

    The first (1st) type of vacuum, should be named a "Baryonic Vacuum" and the second (2nd) type of vacuum should be named a "Non-Baryonic Vacuum."

    The first (1st) type of vacuum, the "Baryonic Vacuum" is the one that you are the most familiar with. And you are correct here in stating that a real or true "Baryonic Vacuum" will never exist, and is always a "partial vacuum."

    A "Baryonic Vacuum" is a volume of space that is filled with atomic matter such as atoms, electrons, protons, and neutrons.


    Now let's do a "thought experiment or Gedankenexperiment."

    Image we create an experiment where we build a "rectangular box" that can be sealed, and set this box in a room where we can turn on and off the lights in this room. Now returning to our "rectangular box" inside the box we insert a "flashlight" that we can turn on and off, and a "bell" that we can ring on and off.

    The next condition is that we are external observers to the "rectangular box" and its contents, such that while standing in the room and viewing the box as an external observer, if the "flashlight" is turned on we can see the light; and if the "bell" is rung or turned on, we can hear the bell when it rings, while standing outside of the box and in the room.

    The next condition is that we design the electronics of the "rectangular box" so that when the box is sealed, we can install a vacuum pump that will allow us to vacuum pump the "Baryonic Matter: air molecules, electrons, protons, and neutrons" out of the box. The second set of electronics provides us with a set of switches, that allow us to turn on and off the "flashlight", and to turn on and off the "bell" without opening the box.


    Ok, now that our experiment is set up, we are ready to do the experiment.

    The first (1st) - "sealed box" experiment -

    (1) Turn off the light in the room. (2) Turn "off" the vacuum pump. (3) let the "Baryonic Matter: air molecules, electrons, protons, and neutrons" remain in the box. (3) Turn "on" the flashlight; we see the light. (4) Turn "on" the bell, we hear the bell ringing.


    The first (2nd) - "sealed box" experiment -

    (1) Turn off the light in the room. (2) Turn "on" the vacuum pump. (3) remove the "Baryonic Matter: air molecules, electrons, protons, and neutrons" from the box; this is a vacuum state. (3) Turn "on" the flashlight; we see the light. (4) Turn "on" the bell, we "do not" hear the bell ringing.

    In this experiment we have results. Inside the box we have a vacuum sate. Although we suck or remove all of the "Baryonic Matter: air molecules, electrons, protons, and neutrons" from the box; in the real world we can never pump all of the "Baryonic Matter" from the box or vacuum. This is what is known as a "Partial Vacuum. Thus, all "Baryonic Vacuums" are not true or real vacuums but are only "Partial Vacuums"

    Since the air molecules have been pumped out of the box we do not hear the bell because sound waves need "air molecules" to vibrate to produce sound. Since the air molecules have been "removed" or reduced to a very, very rare minimum number, the sound waves can't propagate because there aren't any molecules to vibrate in sufficient number. Remember the bell is still operating properly we just can't hear it because there is nothing to wave!

    However, we can still see the "flash light" shining brightly, but can't hear the bell ringing; Why??

    Here is where our second (2nd) type of vacuum the "Non-Baryonic Vacuum" must be discussed.


    The second (2nd) type of vacuum, the "Non-Baryonic Vacuum" is the one that we are the most unfamiliar with. The "Non-Baryonic Vacuum" is a vacuum that is seething with a form of energy known as the Aether.

    A "Non-Baryonic Vacuum" is a volume of space that is filled with Aether or "Non-Baryonic" matter such as photons, Bosons, Aetherons, Dark-Matter, and Dark Energy. This "Non-Baryonic Vacuum" is host to spontaneous emission of photon-photon pair production and matter-antimatter pair production.

    The paper cited in the Original Post (OP) describes this spontaneous emission of photon-photon pair production in the "Non-Baryonic Vacuum."

    This "Non-Baryonic Vacuum" is also host to electromagnetic fields and is why we can see the shining light of the flashlight, when the "Baryonic Matter" is removed from the sealed rectangular box, in our thought or Gedankenexperiment."

    Finally, this "Non-Baryonic Vacuum" is always a real or true vacuum and is never a partial vacuum. Wherever you have a volume of space you have this "Non-Baryonic Vacuum" energy that cannot be removed from any container. An infinite amount of Matter and energy can be created from this "Non-Baryonic Vacuum"

    I hope this brings enlightenment to your current understanding!

    Best,

    Super Principia Mathematica
     
  12. Motor Daddy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,425

    So neither vacuum that you stated is really a true vacuum, which was my point. A true vacuum is an empty volume, void of everything, to include baryonic and non baryonic matter. A true vacuum would simply be empty space, void of anything.

    So why is "one of the most surprising predictions of modern quantum theory is that the vacuum of space is not empty" so surprising? If it isn't empty it's not a vacuum. Why is it so surprising that space is not empty?
     
  13. Magneto_1 Super Principia Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    295
    This is a misrepresentation of the term "Vacuum." There is no space, place, or volume in the universe that is completly void!



    This is "so surprising" to most, because most think like you! The reality is that there is no space, place or volume in the universe that is completely void!

    Surprise!!

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  14. Motor Daddy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,425
    Did I not make it clear enough?


    All space has a density, whether we can or can't measure it, see it, or detect it.

    Generally, space is made up of regions of density orders, in which the core of that space is the most dense, and the outer border of that region is the least dense.

    So for example, a galaxy has a density order of the core of the galaxy being the most dense and the outer border being the least dense. In that density order, say for example, there are regions of the same, like our solar system, which is the most dense at the core, and least dense at the outer border.
    ...and so it is at every level of the universe.

    You are talking about the least dense areas as "vacuum" but that just isn't the case. Those areas are just really really really really really less dense areas, which are not to be confused with a vacuum, as a vacuum has a zero density.
     
    Last edited: Jun 9, 2011
  15. Magneto_1 Super Principia Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    295
    Motor Daddy, I like your reasoning it is totally classical and pre Einstein, and comical. If we were in the time frame, anytime between the mid 1800s to early 1900s then you would be considered a "True Genius." Once again this is the 21st Century, and things have "truly" changed!!

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!




    You were very clear! You want to define a "True Vacuum" as being empty, and a "Partial Vacuum" as having residual matter and or energy.

    This is only because you are holding on to your personal "classical" definition of the term "Vacuum."

    Once again the term "Vacuum" must be re-interpreted; based on 21st Century Physics.


    Your above rationale is totally correct for the "Baryonic Vacuum." The Baryonic matter is denser at the core of a solar system or galaxy, and less dense in the outer regions.

    This what Newton Gravity models predict.

    However, and at the same time as the above is occurring there is and exist a "Non-Baryonic Vacuum." The Non-Baryonic matter is less dense at the core of a solar system or galaxy and denser in the outer regions.

    This what the Dark Matter models predict.

    Surprise!!

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  16. AlphaNumeric Fully ionized Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,702
    I'm not seeing that model you claimed to have. Having trouble finding it? Or is talking to another relativity nut (which doesn't mean he understands relativity) like MD taking up too much of your attention?
     
  17. Captain Kremmen All aboard, me Hearties! Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    12,738
    What is the importance of the mirror?
    Why a mirror? To a photon, a mirror is no different from any other surface, until it arrives there.

    Just very quickly.
    Can someone tell me why mirrors, which are generally coatings of pure metals,
    deflect photons arriving at the atoms on their surface, back at the inverse angle.
    Or is the reflected light made up of new photons?
     
    Last edited: Jun 10, 2011
  18. funkstar ratsknuf Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,390
    Look at those two: crackpotting away at each other. It's so cute!
     
  19. CptBork Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,460
    Mirrors are excellent conductors, and so the electrons on their surfaces are basically free to move around at will under the influence of external forces. When you shine light on a conductor or introduce an electric or magnetic field by any other means, electric charge tends to accumulate on the surface and drift around, until it's reached a new equilibrium where the fields resulting from the surface charges will cancel the external fields and prevent them from penetrating into the conductor. So in a nutshell, mirrors reflect light precisely because they're excellent conductors- when their surface charges move around to cancel incoming light, the cancellation fields they produce also result in a new beam of light coming back in the reverse direction with respect to the surface.

    Now here's how it applies to photons: in quantum field theory, for every particle in nature there is a corresponding field which exists at every point in the universe, and even in a vacuum, each of these fields has a non-zero energy value. Wherever you have a mirror, you have surface charges moving around which cancel the probabilities for photons to penetrate inside the mirror, thus placing restrictions on the configurations and energies the vacuum field can assume, which in turn leads to a dynamical response, i.e. the Casimir Effect.
     
  20. Captain Kremmen All aboard, me Hearties! Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    12,738
    Are you saying that they are in a sense being reflected before they get there?

    Virtual particles.
    Are they new particles, or particles which have disappeared from somewhere else?
     
    Last edited: Jun 10, 2011
  21. Magneto_1 Super Principia Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    295
    I think that CptBork did an excellent job, answering your original question.

    Where CptBork states:


    So I will only add my two ($0.02) cents for what it is worth, to your follow on question.

    The mirrors are used so that the "Virtual Particles" or "Real Particles" don't tunnel through the surface area of the device, and remain undetected. The mirrors and their mirrored surfaces provide the greatest probability for reflection and thereby detecting the "Virtual Particles" or "Real Particles."

    So they are not being reflected before they get there; they are reflected once they manifest, or are there!

    I would like to add that I am using the terms "Virtual Particles" or "Real Particles" very "loosely" because these are "Particles/Waves"


    I am using the term "Virtual Particles" very "loosely" there is no difference between "Virtual Particles" and "Real Particles."

    The distinction between the "Virtual Particles" and "Real Particles" is the "time stability" of the entities. If the "Particle/Wave" entities come into existence for a short time and disappear then they are termed "Virtual." If the "Particle/Wave" entities come into existence and last for a long enough time to be captured, then they are termed "Real"

    For example, an "Electron" can be captured, is stable, last for a long time, and is considered to be "real".

    The "Anti-Matter-Electron" known as the "Positron" if separated from it's companion and stable partner "Electron" without being annihilated, can also be captured, is stable, last for a long time, and is considered to be "real."

    The "Virtual" particles on the other hand are not able to be captured and have existence for only a very short life time.

    However, is the "Virtual" particles have a greater chance of becoming "Real" particles using the "Static Casimir Effect (SCE)" and the "Dynamical Casimir Effect (DCE)". The "Virtual" particles have the greatest probability of becoming real using the (DCE).

    So what is the difference betwen the "Virtual" and "Real" particles??

    I am glad that you asked. The "Virtual" particles, like "Real" particles are made from the same "stuff/energy" and therfore, must obey the "Law of the Conservation of Energy." It is because of this Conservation Law that "Virtual" particles are "Real" particles only with short lifetimes.

    The various ways in which are "Virtual" particles created is found in a quote from "Wiki"

    There are many observable physical phenomena resulting from interactions involving virtual particles. For bosonic particles which exhibit rest mass when they are free and "real," virtual interactions are characterized by the relatively short range of the force interaction produced by particle exchange. Examples of such short-range interactions are the strong and weak forces, and their associated field bosons. For the gravitational and electromagnetic forces, the zero rest-mass of the associated boson particle permits long-range forces to be mediated by virtual particles. However, in the case of photons, power and information transfer by virtual particles is a relatively short-range phenomenon (existing importantly only within a few wavelengths of the field-disturbance which carries information or transferred power), as for example seen in the characteristically short range of inductive and capacitative effects in the near field zone of coils and antennas.

    Some field interactions which may be seen in terms of virtual particles are:

    • The Coulomb force (static electric force) between electric charges. It is caused by the exchange of virtual photons. In symmetric 3-dimensional space this exchange results in the inverse square law for electric force. Since the photon has no mass, the coulomb potential has an infinite range.

    • The magnetic field between magnetic dipoles. It is caused by the exchange of virtual photons. In symmetric 3-dimensional space this exchange results in the inverse square law for magnetic force. Since the photon has no mass, the magnetic potential has an infinite range.

    • The so-called near field of radio antennas, where the magnetic and electric effects of the changing current in the antenna wire and the charge effects of the wire's capacitive charge are detectable, but both of which effects decay with increasing distance from the antenna much more quickly than do the influence of conventional electromagnetic waves, for which E is always equal to cB, and which are composed of real photons.

    • The strong nuclear force between quarks is the result of interaction of virtual gluons. The residual of this force outside of quark triplets (neutron and proton) holds neutrons and protons together in nuclei, and is due to virtual mesons such as the pi meson and rho meson.

    • The weak nuclear force - it is the result of exchange by virtual W and Z bosons.

    • The spontaneous emission of a photon during the decay of an excited atom or excited nucleus; such a decay is prohibited by ordinary quantum mechanics and requires the quantization of the electromagnetic field for its explanation.

    • The Casimir effect, where the ground state of the quantized electromagnetic field causes attraction between a pair of electrically neutral metal plates.

    • The van der Waals force, which is partly due to the Casimir effect between two atoms,

    • Vacuum polarization, which involves pair production or the decay of the vacuum, which is the spontaneous production of particle-antiparticle pairs (such as electron-positron).

    • Lamb shift of positions of atomic levels.

    • Hawking radiation, where the gravitational field is so strong that it causes the spontaneous production of photon pairs (with black body energy distribution) and even of particle pairs.
     
  22. CptBork Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,460
    I'm saying the mirrors interfere with the vacuum field out of which the photons are created, and that's where the dynamical effect comes from. When a photon strikes a mirror, the charges in the mirror move around to cancel the probability for that photon to be detected inside the mirror, and generate a probability for a reflected photon to be detected in its place, so the mirror doesn't need to "know" in advance that a photon is going to strike it.

    From my understanding, it's not necessary to attribute the Casimir Effect to virtual particles. When you are calculating the probability for some particles to interact in a certain way, whether it be bouncing or annihilating or whatever, the most common trick for doing the calculations is to use a method known as time-dependent perturbation theory, and these calculations can be symbolically represented using what we know as "Feynman diagrams". When you do these calculations using perturbation theory, the math behaves in such a way that it appears as if some particles are popping out of the vacuum, interacting with the incoming particles and then disappearing back into the vacuum before the outgoing particles are detected, and these are what we call virtual particles. For all we know, on the other hand, it could just be a math artifact, and virtual particles don't actually exist- it wouldn't make any difference to our perceptible reality.

    As far as the Casimir Effect is concerned, I would personally summarize it as the result of the vacuum having an intrinsic energy, regardless of whether or not that energy is actually carried to the mirrors via virtual particles popping in and out of the vacuum. The purpose of a virtual particle, if it actually exists, is simply to step out of the vacuum for a brief moment, carry energy and momentum back and forth between some real particles like a mail courier, and then quietly vanish back into the vacuum without being detected.
     
    Last edited: Jun 11, 2011

Share This Page