I Is it a fact that vacuum energy exists?

Click For Summary
The existence of vacuum energy and zero-point energy is debated within the physics community, with some asserting it is an established fact supported by observations, while others argue there is insufficient experimental evidence. The Casimir effect is often cited as evidence of vacuum energy, but some claim it can be explained through other forces, such as van der Waals forces. Discussions highlight the distinction between mathematical models and physical reality, with virtual particles being considered necessary in theoretical frameworks but not directly observable. The cosmological constant is frequently associated with vacuum energy, raising questions about its reality if vacuum energy itself is deemed non-existent. Ultimately, the conversation reflects a philosophical divide in interpreting these concepts within physics.
  • #31
anuttarasammyak said:
Say Casimir effect comes from energy differences of "vacuum energy", anyway Casimir effect has something to do with vacuum energy, doesn't it ?
No, because as I said the Casimir effect relates to "energy differences", not to "vacuum energy differences". There is an effective potential energy as a function of the distance ##d## between the plates, leading to an effective force, that's the main point. But taking the Casimir effect as "proof" for the existence of a vacuum energy (as e.g. hinted at in Weinberg's paper just cited) is plainly wrong.

In my opinion the only thing that is safe to say is that the relation between the cosmological constant and potential quantum effects is unclear.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes protonsarecool and anuttarasammyak
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #32
otennert said:
In my opinion the only thing that is safe to say is that the relation between the cosmological constant and potential quantum effects is unclear.
Does that mean that it is unclear to say that the cosmological constant is the same as vacuum energy?
 
  • #33
Suekdccia said:
Does that mean that it is unclear to say that the cosmological constant is the same as vacuum energy?
Well, this is why it is called the "cosmological constant problem", isn't it? Again, I am referring to the Weinberg review from 1989. There are also tons of more recent literature on this.

Actually I think the Wikipedia entry is also a good entry point into this matter: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cosmological_constant_problem
 
Last edited:
  • #34
otennert said:
No, because as I said the Casimir effect relates to "energy differences", not to "vacuum energy differences". There is an effective potential energy as a function of the distance ##d## between the plates, leading to an effective force, that's the main point. But taking the Casimir effect as "proof" for the existence of a vacuum energy (as e.g. hinted at in Weinberg's paper just cited) is plainly wrong.

In my opinion the only thing that is safe to say is that the relation between the cosmological constant and potential quantum effects is unclear.
Thanks. I found a web article to explain it with a key word of "field radiation pressure".
"At a cavity-resonance frequency the radiation pressure inside the cavity is stronger than outside and the mirrors are therefore pushed apart. Out of resonance, in contrast, the radiation pressure inside the cavity is smaller than outside and the mirrors are drawn towards each other." https://physicsworld.com/a/the-casimir-effect-a-force-from-nothing/
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 29 ·
Replies
29
Views
3K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
500
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
Replies
10
Views
3K
Replies
27
Views
3K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
4K
  • · Replies 75 ·
3
Replies
75
Views
11K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
2K