Is it possible to create macroscopic Casimir effect?

Join the discussion
Ask a follow-up here, or get your own question answered by working scientists, mathematicians and engineers — people, not an autocomplete.
Real named experts · corrections over time · the nuance an AI answer skips
6 replies · 3K views
Bawelna
Messages
6
Reaction score
0
Hello.
I read a lot about Casimir Effect. It creates attractive (or repulsive)force between two metal, parallel, electrically neutral, conducting plates. It causes that between plates, it is less electromagnetic field fluctuation wavelength than outside (vacuum). Logic tells me that if vacuum energy is zero-point energy that energy between casimir plates must be NEGATIVE! I also read that casimir effect is measurable if the gap between plates is less than 7-5 nanometers. Is it possible to operate casimir effect on macroscopic scale, say a few centimeters, meter?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Bawelna said:
Logic tells me that if vacuum energy is zero-point energy that energy between casimir plates must be NEGATIVE!
The energy scale is arbitrary if we leave out gravity. It is convenient to set the energy density of the vacuum to zero, but it is not necessary. If you do it, you get negative energy densities between the plates.
Bawelna said:
s it possible to operate casimir effect on macroscopic scale, say a few centimeters, meter?
You have it at any scale, but for a distance of more than a few nanometers it is completely negligible.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: QuantumQuest
Is it possible that the Casimir force on a macroscopic scale was the same as in the microscopic scale? Maybe by controlling electromagnetic field?
 
You try to make categories that do not exist. For parallel plates at distance d and area A, the force is$$F=\frac{\pi^2 \hbar c}{240} \frac{A}{d^4}$$
Plug in A = 1 mm2 and d = 5 nm and you get 2 N - a measurable force. Plug in A = 1 m2 and d = 10 cm, and you get 1.3*10-23 N - completely negligible. It is exactly the same effect described by the same formula, but on larger scales it is negligible.
 
Last edited:
Hey @mfb, shouldn't the distance be to the 4th power, not the area?