Concept

Casimir effect — where it appears

The force between two uncharged conducting plates in vacuum, caused by the plates limiting which field fluctuations fit between them. Between ideal plates at zero temperature it is an attraction growing as the inverse fourth power of the gap, first measured precisely in the 1990s.

Named by 2 essays across one field — each of them below, with the objects they name alongside it.

Also named here as matsubara frequency — the same set of essays touches all of them, so they are one junction rather than several.

The Casimir pressure between warm plates, from vacuum to heat. The attractive pressure between two parallel, perfectly reflecting plates at 300 K against their separation, on logarithmic axes, from the Lifshitz sum over Matsubara frequencies. Dashed: the zero-temperature law π²ħc/240a⁴. Dotted: the classical law ζ(3)kT/4πa³, which contains no Planck constant. At 1 μm the full pressure is 0.0013 Pa, within 0.2 per cent of the vacuum value; at 10 μm it is 3.96·10⁻⁷ Pa, 3.05 times the vacuum value and within 0.002 per cent of the classical law. The two laws cross at 3.28 μm; the thermal length ħc/kT is 7.63 μm. The second solid curve removes one term — the static magnetic fluctuation, which a metal of finite conductivity does not reflect — and sits 15 per cent lower at 1 μm and a factor of two lower far out. The plates are otherwise ideal mirrors: a model, chosen to isolate that one term.

The force that forgets Planck's constant

Two mirrors in a vacuum attract, with a pressure that contains Planck's constant and nothing else about the world but the speed of light. Warm the mirrors and pull them apart, and past a few micrometres at room temperature the Planck constant drops out of the answer. The force is still there and is now larger than the vacuum alone would give, but it has become classical: a count of thermal fluctuations of the static field, with kT of energy each. Half of that classical force comes from one fluctuation — a static magnetic field — and whether a real metal mirror reflects it is a question that has divided the people who measure the force for twenty years.

electromagnetism · Retardation

Two descriptions of gold that agree everywhere but at zero. How strongly gold answers a slowly varying field, (ε(iξ) − 1)ξ²/ωₚ² in the two forms of its permittivity at imaginary frequency ξ, against ξ on a logarithmic axis: the plasma model (dashed), which ignores the electrons' collisions and gives exactly 1, and the Drude model (solid), which includes them at the measured rate ħγ = 35 meV and falls to zero below about γ = 5.3·10¹³ per second. The Lifshitz force samples this curve only at the Matsubara frequencies 2πlkT/ħ (dots, 300 K): the first, 2.47·10¹⁴ per second, lies above γ, and there the two descriptions differ by 18 per cent, at the next by 10, and less beyond. At l = 0, ξ = 0, they part completely: 1 against 0. Everything the two models disagree about is in that one point.

The static field a metal may or may not reflect

The Casimir force between two gold plates at room temperature has been computed two ways for twenty-five years, and the two answers differ by forty per cent at three micrometres. Both use the same measured optical properties of gold. They part company over a single number: whether gold reflects a magnetic field that does not change in time. Common sense and every electrical engineer say it does not, since a static field passes straight through a copper sheet. The most precise force measurements say it does. The disagreement is not about the Casimir effect at all; it is about what a metal's electrons do with a fluctuation slower than their collisions.

electromagnetism · Retardation

Named alongside it

The objects these essays reach for when they reach for this one.

Matsubara frequency Classical limit Drude model Eddy currents Equipartition Fluctuations Lifshitz theory Plasma frequency Reflection coefficient Superconductivity Thermal fluctuations Thermal wavelength

All concepts