-3
$\begingroup$

There is a connection between vacuum energy density and the Casimir effect , see :

https://arxiv.org/abs/quant-ph/0204125

Another reference can be found here:

https://aapt.scitation.org/doi/10.1119/1.16749

The Casimir vacuum between parallel plates has a lower  energy density than the vacuum outside the plates. That's what puts the plates in (attractive ) motion in the original Casimir experiment. 

Based on these references (and many others) in vacuum,  in the absence of any other forces or fields,  it seems that matter tends to follow the gradient of the vacuum energy density  (  for example  from high vacuum energy density  to low vacuum energy density )?

Question. In vacuum,  in the absence of any other forces,  a ship with a large number of Casimir plates at one end , will it tend to move without the need of any fuel (as slow as it may)? This asymmetric "pressure" phenomenon would be caused by the gradient of vacuum energy density.

A picture's worth a thousand words. The design can be seen here:

https://www.academia.edu/40406366/Design_Test

In this design the Casimir plates are parallel to the direction of travel. The ship moves for the same reason the plates are pushed together in the original Casimir experiment,  following the gradient of the vacuum energy density.

If you want to see some feedback from physics:

https://physics.stackexchange.com/q/503796/31339

If this design is not feasible , please explain.  If it is feasible, is anyone interested in testing it (this is not garage work)?

$\endgroup$
17
  • 6
    $\begingroup$ As you will see from the comments over on physics.SE this is still so theoretical it's not really going to be on topic here. $\endgroup$
    – Rory Alsop
    Sep 23 '19 at 4:27
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ It's not yet even at feasibility - the basic premise has more questions than answers. If it is possible to scale it, then it would become much more useful here - I think physics is the correct place. You asked "will it tend to move without fuel" - and literally everything we know says "no" $\endgroup$
    – Rory Alsop
    Sep 23 '19 at 4:52
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Let us continue this discussion in chat. $\endgroup$
    – Rory Alsop
    Sep 23 '19 at 5:28
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ There are hundreds of papers about the Casimir effect available on the net. One relevant paper is mentioned in my question arxiv.org/abs/quant-ph/0204125 As for the design , that's my work, as new as it gets, you are the first to hear about it, and the people from physics.SE. There are no other sources. I just hoped the engineers and scientists active on this site will take this seriously. $\endgroup$ Sep 23 '19 at 6:02
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Thank you @uhoh My question also allows a binary answer (right/wrong , correct/incorrect). It just requires more work than the average question here. $\endgroup$ Sep 23 '19 at 7:32
5
$\begingroup$

The method described proposes a propulsive force based on

following the gradient of the vacuum energy density.

However, I see two problems

  1. There is no evidence given in the question showing that a gradient in vacuum energy exists.
  2. Even if one did exist (some location has a lower vacuum energy than another location) there is no evidence given in the question showing that the energy density between the Casimir plates would not similarly decrease by the same amount, for the same reason.

In order for this to be feasible, you will have to demonstrate that gradients exist in the difference vacuum energy density between the outside and the inside of the plates.

So far I don't see any evidence provided for that difference, so as proposed, I don't see how there would be a propulsive force.

$\endgroup$
15
  • $\begingroup$ physics.stackexchange.com/q/47922/31339 You can also do a search on the net with keywords "energy density Casimir effect". There are quite a lot of papers written by specialists treating this subject. You really need to know something about the subject before you write an answer. @uhoh $\endgroup$ Sep 23 '19 at 13:24
  • $\begingroup$ The results related to the Casimir effect and the existence of the gradient of vacuum energy density, these are established facts. The reference list is too long for a comment, do a search yourself. The only question is whether my design is feasible or not. I already said that in comments. $\endgroup$ Sep 23 '19 at 13:40
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ "do a search yourself" is not how Stack Exchange works. Can you add one or two specific examples of existence of the gradient of vacuum energy density to your question, along with specific examples of the gradient of the inside/outside difference? If your question is based on premises then you need to clearly support those premises yourself. Just say they exist and it's the answer author's responsibility to go look them up for you doesn't work in Stack Exchange. $\endgroup$
    – uhoh
    Sep 23 '19 at 13:52
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @CristianDumitrescu what makes the Stack Exchange ecosystem work so well as a public site is it's rigid adherence to structured questions and answers. It's not a discussion forum, and isn't really a good place to vet new ideas or concepts. That does happen sometimes, but in those cases people carefully support their premises when asking, or respond in a positive way to requests by editing their question and incorporating requested premise support or other modifications within the question itself. $\endgroup$
    – uhoh
    Sep 23 '19 at 15:30
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ I understand this isn't a crank question, that's why I engaged in a series of helpful comments and posted an answer, and retracted my close vote. But in order to get something out of this site, it's necessary to invest some work and try to fit your question into the SE way of doing things. Have another look around here, in Physics SE or elsewhere and see how people formulate their questions and work with commenters to try to fit in to the site's structure. $\endgroup$
    – uhoh
    Sep 23 '19 at 15:32

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.