arXiv Analytics

Sign in

arXiv:quant-ph/0605005AbstractReferencesReviewsResources

Thermal corrections to the Casimir effect

Iver Brevik, Simen A. Ellingsen, Kimball A. Milton

Published 2006-04-29, updated 2006-07-06Version 4

The Casimir effect, reflecting quantum vacuum fluctuations in the electromagnetic field in a region with material boundaries, has been studied both theoretically and experimentally since 1948. The forces between dielectric and metallic surfaces both plane and curved have been measured at the 10 to 1 percent level in a variety of room-temperature experiments, and remarkable agreement with the zero-temperature theory has been achieved. In fitting the data various corrections due to surface roughness, patch potentials, curvature, and temperature have been incorporated. It is the latter that is the subject of the present article. We point out that, in fact, no temperature dependence has yet been detected, and that the experimental situation is still too fluid to permit conclusions about thermal corrections to the Casimir effect. Theoretically, there are subtle issues concerning thermodynamics and electrodynamics which have resulted in disparate predictions concerning the nature of these corrections. However, a general consensus has seemed to emerge that suggests that the temperature correction to the Casimir effect is relatively large, and should be observable in future experiments involving surfaces separated at the few micrometer scale.

Comments: 21 pages, 9 eps figures, uses iopart.cls. Final version to be published in New Journal of Physics, contains Conclusion and clarified remarks
Journal: New J.Phys.8:236,2006
Categories: quant-ph, hep-th
Related articles: Most relevant | Search more
arXiv:quant-ph/0506025 (Published 2005-06-02, updated 2006-04-11)
What is the Temperature Dependence of the Casimir Effect?
arXiv:quant-ph/0410231 (Published 2004-10-27, updated 2005-03-21)
On the Temperature Dependence of the Casimir Effect
arXiv:quant-ph/0503134 (Published 2005-03-15, updated 2006-02-23)
Comment on "On the temperature dependence of the Casimir effect"