Temporary magnetization of Casimir effect plates?

[Martin Sallberg]

Have any experiments on the Casimir effect tried what happens if the plates are temporarily magnetized when they are pulled together by the effect? E.g. measurements of what happens to passing laser beams and the like?

 

[Vanadium 50]

How do you measure the tiny Casimir forces on the plates in the face of the ginormous magnetic forces?

 

[Martin Sallberg]

How do you measure the tiny Casimir forces on the plates in the face of the ginormous maghnetic forces?

It is possible to calculate when the Casimir effect will take place. The point is to test the effects on negative pressure in the presence of a much stronger force working in the same direction as the Casimir effect, to see if it contributes to general physical effects of negative pressure. Have any such experiments been done?

 

[Vanadium 50]

It is not possible to measure the tiny Casimir forces on the plates in the face of the ginormous magnetic forces.

 

[Martin Sallberg]

It is not possible to measure the tiny Casimir forces on the plates in the face of the ginormous magnetic forces.

I am not referring to *measuring* the Casimir effect in itself! I am referring to knowing that the Casimir effect *should* happen, applying a much stronger force working in the same direction, and see if it produces negative pressure effects not seen in magnetism in and by itself. Have such an experiment ever been done?

By the way, it is possible to create an extremely weak magnetic field of approximately the same strength as the Casimir effect.

 

[Vanadium 50]

The answer is "no", for the reasons I stated.

 

[Martin Sallberg]

The answer is "no", for the reasons I stated.

Just because you may not be able to *measure* the Casimir effect in the magnetic field doesn't mean the Casimir effect doesn't exist there. It's like Neptune existed before telescopes were invented. Though in this case, it is still possible to know at what distance between the plates the Casimir effect takes place, and activate the temporary magnetization accordingly. And by the way, inability to measure the Casimir effect itself is not even relevant to the question that I am asking. The question is if experiments have been done to see if temporary magnetization of such plates at such a distance generates overall negative pressure effects not seen if a magnetic field only is used? Such as testing if passing laser beams chnge direction?

 

[sophiecentaur]

Have any experiments on the Casimir effect tried what happens if the plates are temporarily magnetized when they are pulled together by the effect? E.g. measurements of what happens to passing laser beams and the like?

I think you may be trying to combine a QM phenomenon with an essentially classical phenomenon (as you describe it) in the same argument. This sort of disqualifies any results or implications from the thought experiment. That's unsatisfactory, I realize, but it may help to reassure you. (?)

 

[Martin Sallberg]

I think you may be trying to combine a QM phenomenon with an essentially classical phenomenon (as you describe it) in the same argument. This sort of disqualifies any results or implications from the thought experiment. That's unsatisfactory, I realize, but it may help to reassure you. (?)

It is not a simple thought experiment. It is a question of whether or not the experiment have been done IRL. Different models of quantum gravity makes different predictions of when quantum effects can be combined with and equivalent to classic effects. The only way to find out is to do experiments IRL. The question is: have an experiment of this description been done IRL, or not?

 

[sophiecentaur]

I am not referring to *measuring* the Casimir effect in itself!

The question is: have an experiment of this description been done IRL, or not?

These seem to be mutually exclusive. An experiment to detect the effect would involve measuring it, surely? You would need to produce a small enough (measurable) magnetic effect and then measure the difference, with and without the Casimir effect. Measurement each time.
I imagine you would need to measure the magnetic force as the spacing was reduced to Zero and then see whether the results follow the theoretical value, based on (magnetic) theory. You 'd be looking for a sudden blip at very small separations.

 

[Martin Sallberg]

These seem to be mutually exclusive. An experiment to detect the effect would involve measuring it, surely? You would need to produce a small enough (measurable) magnetic effect and then measure the difference, with and without the Casimir effect. Measurement each time.
I imagine you would need to measure the magnetic force as the spacing was reduced to Zero and then see whether the results follow the theoretical value, based on (magnetic) theory. You 'd be looking for a sudden blip at very small separations.

When I wrote "not about measuring the Casimir effect per say", I was referring to the small Casimir effect produced directly by the proximity between the plates, as a reply to it being too small to measure in the presence of a magnetic field. There is no mutual exclusivity between that and measuring spacetime distortions caused by negative pressure in a setup with temporarily magnetized Casimir effect plates. It is not about testing whether or not the small Casimir effect produced by the plates as an isolable factor contribute to the magnetic field at all. It is about testing whether or not the presence of the Casimir effect makes the magnetic field work equivalently with the Casimir effect, contributing to the negative pressure effect on spacetime measurable by laser beam direction change.

 

[sophiecentaur]

To mis-quote from the film Airplane - Stop calling me per say. lol
But I really have no idea about this stuff. Do you have some reference to what you are suggesting? I can't tell if it has legs or if it's just some private hypothesis of yours.

 

[Martin Sallberg]

To mis-quote from the film Airplane - Stop calling me per say. lol
But I really have no idea about this stuff. Do you have some reference to what you are suggesting? I can't tell if it has legs or if it's just some private hypothesis of yours.

I am asking whether or not such an experiment have been done. If I had a reference to such an experiment, I would be reading that and not ask for it on forums. As for your ideas on "having legs", are you ignorant of what Karl Popper said? The falsifiable predictions and testing is what matters. Who came up with a hypothesis and how it was done doesn't.

 

[sophiecentaur]

Popper never said that it's worth while trying to measure the interaction any random pair of quantities. I am asking for some indication that what you are suggesting is worth even considering. If you have no reference to the two effects or a good reason to associate them in the first place then the topic is not worth discussing. Scientific discoveries don't just pop up out of nowhere and you need to establish some 'credentials' for your idea. (e.g. could you expect to get funding on the basis of your idea?)

 

[Martin Sallberg]

Popper never said that it's worth while trying to measure the interaction any random pair of quantities. I am asking for some indication that what you are suggesting is worth even considering. If you have no reference to the two effects or a good reason to associate them in the first place then the topic is not worth discussing. Scientific discoveries don't just pop up out of nowhere and you need to establish some 'credentials' for your idea. (e.g. could you expect to get funding on the basis of your idea?)

In this case, it is a falsifiable hypothesis: that a force that works in the same direction as something caused by the Casimir effect contributes to the negative pressure caused by the Casimir effect, even if the added force in and by itself would not cause such a negative pressure. The hypothesis does make a falsifiable prediction: an increase in the Casimir effect related effects on space-time, measurable by laser beam direction change. And yes, Popper did say that what inspired someone to come up with a hypothesis, or who the person is, does not matter.

If pre-existing theories had to deem a new hypothesis "a good reason" in order for the latter to even be allowed to be empirically tested, there would have been scarcely any progress. A new hypothesis, by definition, makes predictions that previous theories do not make! The equivalency in effects inspired Einstein to hypothetize that acceleration was equivalent to gravity at a deeper level, which by Newtonian mechanics would have been considered a "random pair of qualities".

If an experiment have already been done, it have been done and there's no need to even ask for funding of the initial experiment. All it takes is inexpensive sharing of the experiment results. The question is: have such an experiment already been done, yes or no? Answer!

 

[sophiecentaur]

I repeat that you need to establish some credibility for your idea - if you want more than the straight "no" that you have already had, at the top of the thread. If you want credibility then it is reasonable to expect you to give some background of your existing knowledge and that's what References would do for you. I presume you want a discussion about this and not just a link (which you presumably have not found, or you wouldn't be asking the question here). So far, you have assumed that we all accept your idea and could have no problems with it.
Quoting Einstein's advance on Newton's work doesn't imply anything about this thread. (Even) Einstein supplied evidence and technical arguments and his publications are littered with references to other work. Why should anyone treat your suggestion seriously without some backup? Help us with some detailed information.