
There are currently, 60 guest(s) and 0 member(s) that are online.
You are Anonymous user. You can register for free by clicking here
 
 
Puthoff and Sarfatti on Casimir force and ZPE extraction
Posted on Saturday, September 25, 2004 @ 13:40:07 MST by vlad


Dr. Jack Sarfatti writes: Strange that Puthoff wrote today:
“I'm not trying to scale up the Casimir force effect, never have, never even thought about it. Discussion of the Casimir effect in ZPE discussions are purely pedagogical, not application oriented, and this is clear to everyone else on your list who emails me privately. The devices that have not scaled up are Ken's charge cluster devices, not Casimir devices. My thoughts for ZPE extraction are based on totally different other approaches.
I understand Petersen's work and the implications long before I ever even heard of Petersen. Where in my work have I ever talked about scaling up Casimir effect for engineering energy extraction devices, where?!"
However, in the interview he said:
(Puthoff) For example, Casimir plates in the vacuum can be considered coupled to an open system, and when driven together by vacuum forces, the vacuum has decayed to a lower energy state and heat has been generated by the collision of the plates, pretty standard stuff. For a more detailed discussion of the thermodynamic aspects of zeropoint energy extraction, see D.C. Cole and H.E. Puthoff, "Extracting energy and heat from the vacuum”Phys. Rev. E, vol. 48, p. 1562, 1993."
Rebutted by Ian Peterson who wrote:
"The complexity of the Casimir analysis has led to some untenable assertions. It has been claimed that the parallelmirror configuration provides access to an infinite source of energy [18,***19]. However the maximum energy that can be extracted by allowing the separation of the mirrors to drop to zero cannot exceed the surface energy of their constituent metals, which is typically of the order of 1 J.m2 [20]. There have also been claims that energy can be extracted by cycling a machine 21].
...
16. J Schwinger, L L De Raad, K A Milton Ann. Phys. 115, 1 (1978).
17. S K Lamoreaux Phys. Rev. A 59, R3149R3153 (1999).
18. R Forward Phys. Rev. B 30, 1700 (1984).
***19. D C Cole, H E Puthoff Phys. Rev. E 48, 15621565 (1993).
20. CRC Handbook of Chemistry, Physics, 80th Edn., (Ed D R Lide) (CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL 1999) pp4120, 6144.
21. G J Maclay Phys. Rev. A 61, 052110 (2000).
22. T H Boyer Phys. Rev. A 9, 20782084 (1974).”
Note that Peterson from University of Coventry UK also rebuts Maclay another one of the NASA BPP "usual suspects"! ;)
Then on August 31, 2004, Hal tried to explain Ken Shoulders charge clusters as a Casimir force which contradicts his above remark:
"The devices that have not scaled up are Ken's charge cluster devices, not Casimir devices."
I had written to Hal: Even if that is what you mean, I do not see how anything gets "balanced" here? You have a "classical" electrostatic energy density and a microquantum ZPF virtual photon density. Both are positive. In what sense do they balance?
Hal replied: "Force balance. The ZPE pressure (as in Milonni et al.'s paper "Radiation pressure from the vacuum: Physical interpretation of the Casimir force", Phys. Rev. A, Vol. 38, No. 3, pp. 16211623, 1988) outside the sphere presses inward, and there being no pressure from within the ZPEdepleted sphere   at least from below the Compton freq   pressing outward, so the net ZPE pressure is inward. This is what balances (with stability) the outward Coulomb pressure. This is specifically displayed in http://arxiv.org/abs/physics/0408114 ."
What is wrong here is that virtual photons have negative pressure since w = 1 for them and their energy density is positive. It is wrong to use the positive pressure of real photons here. Real photons have w = +1/3 and Milonni’s paper is wrong for that reason. Note also that I do not claim that the strong direct gravity warping of spacetime by unbalanced zero point energy pressures have anything to do with the Casimir force. They don’t. These are two qualitatively different physical effects. Hal misunderstood what I actually am claiming when he wrongly said that my effect predicts repulsion between the Casimir plates from the virtual photon negative pressure. In fact, I predict nothing of the kind. Under conditions of the Casimir force, the virtual photon pressure should be zero compensated by the vacuum coherence. The Casimir force is then explained as Ian Peterson does as an induced electric dipoledipole electrostatic force. The naïve photon pressure models give the right answer for the wrong reasons. It is an interesting fluke like Ptolemy’s epicycles.
...
Remember, macroquantum vacuum coherence hides random microquantum zero point vacuum energy under the rug. Any random zero point energy that leaks out is exotic vacuum that contributes to the cosmological constant either as dark energy or dark matter depending on the sign of the pressure negative or positive respectively. Dark energy at a distance is a universal repulsive antigravity field. Dark matter at a distance is a universal attractive gravity field. Both fields can be stronger than what is expected from Newton’s constant. That is the effective Planck energy is smaller than 1019Gev. However, as possibly in the case of Ken Shoulders “charge clusters” the effective forces inside an extended exotic vacuum region can change sign! Indeed, that is why the EVO is stable and that is alsowhy the single electron is stable.

 
Don't have an account yet? You can create one. As a registered user you have some advantages like theme manager, comments configuration and post comments with your name.
 
Average Score: 5 Votes: 1
 

No Comments Allowed for Anonymous, please register 

Re: Puthoff and Sarfatti on Casimir force and ZPE extraction (Score: 1) by vlad on Monday, September 27, 2004 @ 22:48:39 MST (User Info  Send a Message) http://www.zpenergy.com  Dr. Jack Sarfatti writes: expanded typocorrected 2nd draft from earlier message:
Casimir Force: The irrelevant explanation of EVOs for the wrong reasons
On Sep 25, 2004, at 12:04 PM, Jack Sarfatti wrote:
Remember, macroquantum vacuum coherence hides random microquantum zero point vacuum energy under the rug. Any random zero point energy that leaks out is exotic vacuum that contributes to the cosmological constant either as dark energy or dark matter depending on the sign of the pressure negative or positive respectively. Dark energy at a distance is a universal repulsive antigravity field. Dark matter at a distance is a universal attractive gravity field. Both fields can be stronger than what is expected from Newton’s constant. That is the effective Planck energy is smaller than 1019Gev. However, as possibly in the case of Ken Shoulders “charge clusters” the effective forces inside an extended exotic vacuum region can change sign! Indeed, that is why the EVO is stable and that is also why the single electron is stable.
Alexander Burinskii in Moscow has rightly raised the issue of the distinction between renormalization and regularization of interacting field Feynman diagrams in special relativistic quantum field perturbation theory expansions in relation to the zero point energy problem. We need to see how all these ideas survive in quantum field theory in a cnumber curved space dynamical background like in Birrell and Davies text book "Quantum Fields in Curved Space". The issue of the reality of quantum gravity foam of Einstein metric field Heisenberg uncertainty fluctuations is problematical in the soft condensed matter physics approach to gravity as a bottomup emergent ODLRO macroquantum phenomenon. That is gravity is a low energy effective cnumber ODLRO macroquantum coherent field theory that in principle is not to be quantized in the usual way the way QED is done. This feature is now being tested in gamma ray astronomy.
Why do Milonni's two naive free virtual photon field models of the Casimir force ~ hcA/d4 as virtual photon effects give, like Ptolemy’s epicycles, closed to the correct empirical answer for the wrong reasons?
In the simple boundary condition model using only free virtual photons Milonni computes
E(d)  E(infinity)
and he gets the cutoffindependent correct answer.
However, what he should compute is
E(d) + E(L  d)
Letting L >> d at the end.
The virtual photon ZPF force is then the negative gradient of this sum. This vanishes in 1 + 1 spacetime.
The cosmological constant problem is that E(d) + E(L  d) is directly observable in general relativity. This is why Hal's "Type II Casimir Force" model is unacceptable because it requires a huge cosmological constant vacuum energy filling all space outside Ken Shoulders EVOs which have zero ZPE inside their charged shells at least below h/mc short wave cutoff. This contradicts general relativity that is the covering theory here. Any result from unstable globally flat quantum field theory that contradicts general relativity must be rejected. That is the basic problem with what Hal Puthoff is suggesting for metric engineering of warp, wormhole and weapon. Puthoff’s PV version of gravity is not consistent with Einstein’s general relativity as shown by his own assistant Michael Ibison. Lest, there be any confusion, I am not suggesting that the direct warping of spacetime by zero point energy density is the explanation of the Casimir force. Indeed, the Casimir force as a direct electrostatic force of mutually induced dipoles in the uncharged conductors is observable only in the absenceof such strong zero point warping of spacetime. I am suggesting that Ken Shoulders EVOs have such strong warping and have nothing to do with the Casimir force at all in the dominating approximation. Therefore, as Ian Peterson says, the Casimir force is not a way to tap the zero point vacuum energy of the virtual photons as the popular literature suggests. The only energy you can recover from the Casimir force is the weak mutually induced dipole electrostatic energies. Using the Casimir force as a pedagogical tool for zero point energy physics is profoundly misleading. 


Brian Greene explains deep error in HaischPuthoffRueda ZPE Origin of Inertia (Score: 1) by vlad on Friday, October 01, 2004 @ 22:46:38 MST (User Info  Send a Message) http://www.zpenergy.com  Dr. Jack Sarfatti writes [for those physics PhDs out there  Vlad]:
"The Higgs Ocean and the Origin of Mass If the Higgs field has a nonzero value  if we are all immersed in an ocean of Higgs field  then shouldn't we feel it or see it or otherwise be aware of it in some way? ... why objects resist acceleration ... The Higgs ocean in which ... we are all immersed interacts with quarks and electrons: it resists their accelerations ... and this drag ... contributes to what you perceive as mass ... And so we do feel the Higgs ocean." pp 260261 of "The Fabric of the Cosmos" by Brian Greene.
Higgs Ocean = Vacuum Coherence.
More precisely
Vacuum Coherence = (Higgs Field)e^i(Goldstone Phase)
Einstein's gravity emerges as ripples in the Goldstone Phase.
Both dark energy and dark matter emerge as ripples in the Higgs Field.
Now in the ordinary nonexotic weightless vacuum that neither gravitates as "dark matter" nor antigravitates as "dark energy", we have the optimal vacuum coherence. That is
Total Observable Random Zero Point Energy Density = (Bare Zero Point Energy Density)[(Quantum of Volume)(Higgs Field)^2  1]
The ordinary nonexotic vacuum in which we measure the mass of the electron has
Total Observable Random Zero Point Energy Density = 0
This means that
(Higgs Field)^2 = (Quantum of Volume)^1
Origin of Inertia is ~ MACRO QUANTUM COHERENT Higgs Field
not to the RANDOM INCOHERENT transverse polarized virtual photons alone as Haisch, Puthoff and Rueda allege. That is the point.
How does the electron get its inertia? In this ordinary vacuum with ZERO RANDOM zero point energy density and zero ZPF pressure for each species of particle separately, hence no Casimir force from ZPF pressure only from VdW induced dipoles, The false vacuum massless charged Dirac spin 1/2 quantum field has the coupling
g(Higgs Field Quantum)(Massless Electron Spinor)*(Massless Electron Spinor)
Then in the pre>post inflationary false > true vacuum phase transition with emergent MACROQUANTUM VACUUM COHERENCE = FORMATION OF THE COHERENT HIGGS OCEAN
m(electron) ~ 10^27 grams ~ g(Higgs Field) a macroquantum coherent true vacuum expectation value.
Now to do this right, we have to replace the rigid window Fourier transforms by multiresolution wavelet transforms.
That is we can no longer use the Dirac transformation functions
[qp] = e^ipg/hbar
So the dark energy we see at large scale need not have a strong effect on the leptoquark rest masses at much smaller scale. That is we have scale power spectrum of the Higgs field to deal with.
We then have to connect m(electron) with a microgeon of Wheeler's "Mass without mass" as a Bohm hidden variable with an effective G* ~ 10^40G on the 10^13 cm scale.
Not only do we automatically get the correct Arrow of Time for the Second Law of Thermodynamics hooked to the expansion of space, but we also explain WHY NO ANTIMATTER. That is, our universe must have a dual universe i.e. two parallel branes in which all the OPEN STRINGS are actually little Wheeler wormholes whose mouths end on the two different branes. A string is equivalent to a wormhole. The closed electric flux tubes are quantized because of the singlevaluedness of the macroquantum vacuum coherence local order parameter and in our universe brane all of the electron wormholes have their flux lines entering the mouths and exiting the mouths on the dual parallel brane next door across a small distance in hyperspace. 



