Casimir effect and dimensional analysis

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the use of dimensional analysis to estimate the force between two plates in the context of the Casimir effect. Participants explore the relationship between the force, the area of the plates, and their separation, while debating the implications of their dimensional analysis approaches.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • One participant proposes a formula for the force as a function of area and separation, suggesting that the force scales as ##F \sim \frac{A}{L}##.
  • Another participant questions the validity of this formula, pointing out that it implies the force is independent of the distance between the plates.
  • There is a discussion about the role of dimensionful constants like ##\hbar## and ##c## in the dimensional analysis, with some participants arguing that these constants should be included in the analysis.
  • One participant expresses confusion about whether the choice of including ##\hbar## and ##c## in the dimensional analysis is arbitrary or justified based on the physics involved.
  • Another participant suggests that dimensional analysis is not an exact science and that educated guesses based on known physics are necessary.
  • There is a debate about the necessity of having three equations corresponding to the three fundamental dimensions (mass, length, time) to solve for the parameters in the analysis.
  • Participants discuss the implications of their dimensional analysis results and the need to revisit assumptions if the results are inconsistent.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the validity of the proposed formulas and the role of dimensional analysis. There is no consensus on the correct approach or the implications of the analysis, indicating ongoing disagreement and exploration of the topic.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight that the dimensional analysis may neglect certain physical quantities and constants that could influence the results. The discussion reflects the complexity of applying dimensional analysis in the context of quantum-field-theoretic effects.

  • #31
Yes, the field should obey the standard set of boundary conditions at a conducting surface (the same ones that you see in an introductory EM course).
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #32
Well, I have the following conditions:

##E_{tan}=0##

##E_{perp}=\sigma##

##B_{tan}=j##

##B_{perp}=0##

How do they relate to the boundary conditions for ##A_{\mu}##?
 
  • #33
That's a good question; I admit that I'm not particularly familiar and haven't actually seen any calculations using the gauge potential itself. Rather, the boundary conditions are just used to quantise the modes (frequencies) present. I mean, well, of course we skipped the entire process of second quantising the electromagnetic field to begin with...so the effect probably enters in that form. But yeah, the usual starting point for deriving the Casimir effect already begins from the second quantised harmonic oscillator form of the Hamiltonian, so those details are swept under the carpet.
 
  • #34
So, you would say that the boundary conditions are not something as trivial as ##A_{\mu}(z=\pm L/2)=0##,

where the area of the plates are in the ##x-y## directions and the plates are located at ##z=\pm L/2##?
 
  • #35
This thread is really a mess.

Let's go back to the beginning. The Coulomb force is given by kq2/r2, so k is a dimensionful constant. Likewise the classical gravitational force is given by km2/r2 and again, k is a dimensionful constant. In this case, you have determined that the Casimir force is really a pressure, and should thereby have a functional form where the force is proportional to area, so you have F = A k/rn.

This form presents no restrictions on n. n could be -1 (like a spring), 2 (like Coulomb's law) or even some other number like 4. You can guess at n (and so far the guesses have been poor) or guess at the dimensionality of k, but these are guesses. Given that all you know is that there is a force, you cannot determine this force's functional dependence on r.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: mheslep

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K