0 views

Original Title: allocca_2012

Uploaded by monkey1076

- Temperature Co Efficient
- Test Binder
- Geofisica IP
- Us 20140183875
- polymer Nanocomposites and Electrical Conductivity
- SNSPDs-natajaran
- StreamGate
- B.E.mech. Syllabi(1 8)
- #Intro
- AirCraft-311-320
- Civil Engineering 2006 Sem I & II
- K Bradonjic, J D Swain, A Widom and Y N Srivastava- The Casimir Effect in Biology: The Role of Molecular Quantum Electrodynamics in Linear Aggregations of Red Blood Cells
- conductors 1
- APPLIED CHEMISTRY For Civil Engineering
- Hot-Electron Effect in Superconductors and Its Applications for Radiation Sensors
- TRABAJO DE INVESTIGACIÓN FIS III
- Circuits and Other Things
- Electrical Conductivity of Biodiesel
- Content.lib.Utah.edu Utils Getfile Collection Etd3 Id 274 Filename 231
- 1 7 Step Framework

You are on page 1of 7

Annalisa Allocca1 , Giuseppe Bimonte1,2 , Detlef Born3 , Enrico Calloni1,2 , Giampiero

Esposito2 , Uwe Huebner3 , Evgeni Il’ichev3 , Luigi Rosa1,2 , Francesco Tafuri4

1

Dipartimento di Scienze Fisiche, Università Federico II,

Complesso Universitario di Monte S. Angelo, Via Cintia, Edificio 6, 80126 Napoli, Italy

2

INFN, Sezione di Napoli, Complesso Universitario di Monte S. Angelo, Via Cintia, Edificio 6, 80126 Napoli, Italy

3

Institute for Photonic Technology, Postfach 10 02 39 - 07702 Jena, Germany

4

Seconda Università degli Studi di Napoli, Dipartimento di

Ingegneria dell’Informazione, via Roma 29, I-81031 Aversa (Ce), Italy

(Dated: May 14, 2012)

arXiv:1205.2478v1 [hep-th] 11 May 2012

The ALADIN experiment aims at observing how the critical magnetic field of a superconducting

Aluminum film is modified, when it constitutes one of the reflecting surfaces of a Casimir cavity. If

successful, such an observation would reveal the influence of vacuum energy on the superconducting

phase transition. In this paper a rigorous analysis of experimental data is reported, the results are

discussed and compared with theoretical predictions based on Lifshitz theory of dispersion forces,

and the BCS formula for the optical conductivity of superconductors. The main novelty with respect

to a previous data analysis by some of the authors, is the use of a cross-correlation method which

is more rigorous and leads to better estimates.

PACS numbers:

Keywords:

lating the Casimir energy stored in a rigid cavity in a

known way. Such a modulation of the Casimir energy

The Casimir effect [1, 2] provides a striking manifesta-

could be achieved by altering periodically the reflectiv-

tion of vacuum quantum fluctuations of the electromag-

ity of the plates. Recently, a significant modulation of

netic field in bounded geometries, and it represents a rare

the Casimir force between a highly doped semiconduct-

example of a purely quantum phenomenon that can be

ing membrane and a gold plate has been demonstrated

tested at the mesoscopic scale. The Casimir effect has

experimentally [19], by shining periodic laser pulses on

received much attention in the past decades, thanks to a

the membrane which determine a large change in the

wave of new experiments which made it possible to mea-

charge carrier density of the membrane. Despite being

sure the Casimir force with unprecedented precision. For

interesting for Casimir studies, this result is not suitable

a recent review of these experiments and a critical survey

for “weighting” aims: the energy supplied to the system

of the numerous theoretical investigations on the Casimir

to induce the change in carrier density is many orders

effect in materials, we address the reader to the recent

of magnitude larger than the variation of Casimir en-

monograph [3].

ergy. This would make it extremely difficult to observe

Despite the impressive theoretical and experimental the tiny fraction of mass change due to the Casimir con-

advances made in the past twenty years, the Casimir ef- tribution. On the contrary, in our scheme based on the

fect still faces important unsolved questions at the fun- superconducting phase transition, the total change of en-

damental level, in particular the problem of reconciling ergy is of the same order of magnitude as the change in

the vacuum energy density and its interaction with the the Casimir energy and therefore its contribution might

gravitational field, known as the cosmological constant in principle be observed.

problem [4, 5]. No experimental verification that vac-

uum fluctuations gravitate according to the equivalence This is the framework of the ALADIN experiment,

principle has been obtained so far, even though there are whose aim is to observe the variation of the Casimir en-

theoretical expectations that this should be the case [6– ergy stored in a superconducting Casimir cavity, consti-

14]. Relying upon these considerations, some of us stud- tuted by a thin superconducting film separated by a thin

ied the effect of a gravitational field on a rigid Casimir oxide layer from a thick gold substrate, across the super-

cavity, by computing the net force acting on it: interest- conducting phase transition. The scheme of detection is

ingly, it was found that a Casimir apparatus, when sub- based on a measurement of the critical magnetic field that

ject to the weak gravitational field of the Earth, should destroys the superconductivity of the film, whose magni-

experience a tiny push in the upwards direction [15–18]. tude is expected to be influenced by the Casimir energy.

In [15] it was argued that an experimental verification If successful, the experiment would thus reveal the influ-

of this effect is extremely hard, if not impossible, un- ence of vacuum energy on a phase transition. Another

der static conditions, by virtue of the extreme smallness distinctive feature of our setup is that we use rigid cav-

of the expected force. A better possibility would be to ities, that are obtained by deposition techniques, a fea-

2

the dependence of the Casimir energy on the geometrical

shape of the intervening bodies, an issue that remains Hc2 (T )

V = εcond (T ). (2.1)

under scientific debate also at a theoretical level [3]. 8π

The plan of the paper is a follows: in Sec. II we briefly When the film is one of the two plates of a Casimir

describe the experimental setup and the measurement cavity, we have to augment the right-hand side of the

method, Sec. III is devoted to the analysis method based above Equation by the difference ∆F (C) between the

on cross-correlation. Finally, the experimental results are Casimir energies in the normal and in the superconduct-

discussed in Sec. IV. Indeed, a preliminary analysis of the ing phases:

data reported in this paper has already been performed

some time ago, but without the necessary rigor, and we Hc2 (T )

reported on it in [20]. The analysis reported in this pa- V = εcond (T ) + ∆F (C) (T ). (2.2)

8π

per, based on a procedure of cross-correlation, is more

rigorous and the results are now better estimated. In writing this relation, we are tacitly assuming that

the fluctuating electromagnetic field in the Casimir cav-

ity does not alter significantly the properties of the su-

perconductor, and in particular its condensation energy.

II. ALADIN: EXPERIMENTAL SETUP AND

EXPECTED EFFECT This may be considered as a plausible assumption, as

far as ∆F (C) (T ) ≪ εcond (T ). According to Eq. (2.2),

the variation ∆F (C) (T ) of Casimir energy determines a

Before we describe our experimental setup, it is useful change in the magnitude of the critical field Hc , which

to briefly recall the principle at the basis of our experi- for ∆F (C) (T ) ≪ εcond (T ) is estimated to be:

ment, that was described in detail in the works [21, 22].

The starting observation is that according to Lifshitz the- δHc ∆F (C) (T )

ory [3], the Casimir energy is determined by the opti- ≈ . (2.3)

Hc 2 εcond(T )

cal properties of the plates. Since the optical proper-

ties of a superconductor are sharply different from those The key thing to notice is that the condensation energy of

of a normal metal [23], one is led to expect that the a thin superconducting film can easily be orders of mag-

Casimir free energy F (C) stored in a superconducting (C)

nitudes smaller than typical Casimir energies Fn , and

cavity should change across the superconducting tran- therefore one may hope that even tiny fractional changes

(C) (C)

sition. The change ∆F (C) = Fn − Fs of Casimir of Casimir energy ∆F (C) (T ) can determine observable

energy was estimated in [21, 22] (see also [24, 25]), on shifts of the critical field. For example, for a Beryllium

the basis of Lifshitz theory by using the BCS formula film, we estimated [21, 22] that a relative variation of

for the optical conductivity of superconductors, and it F (C) of one part over 108 might lead to a 5 percent vari-

was found to be extremely small. This is not surprising ation of critical magnetic field.

of course, because the superconducting transition alters Detailed numerical computations [22] show that the

the optical properties of a metal only in the microwave magnitude of the effect increases for thin films, because

region, which constitutes a small window in the wide fre- they have a smaller condensation energy, and for small

quency range that contributes to the Casimir energy. The cavity widths d, because the change of Casimir energy

latter typically extends up-to a few times characteristic becomes larger. It is important to remark that the rel-

cavity frequency ωc = c/2d, with d the plate separa- ative shift of critical field was found to be roughly pro-

tion, which for typical submicron separations belongs to portional to the inverse of the transition temperature Tc

the infrared region of the spectrum. The smallness of of the superconducting material. The main reason why

the fractional change of Casimir energy across the super- superconductors with low Tc lead to a larger effect is that

conducting transition makes it impossible to observe the the condensation energy is empirically known to scale as

corresponding change in the Casimir force on the plates, Tc2.6 [27], and this makes the denominator in the r.h.s. of

with present day sensitivities in force measurements. Eq. (2.3) decrease faster than the numerator as Tc de-

The Aladin experiment uses a detection scheme which creases. As a compromise between the possibility to per-

does not involve at all a force measurement, as it aims form preliminary tests, easy change of structures, statis-

at observing how the variation ∆F (C) of Casimir energy tics and signal-to-noise ratio, we chose to work around 1.5

influences the critical magnetic field Hc of a thin super- K, using Al as superconducting material. Besides having

conducting film which is part of a Casimir cavity. To see a low critical temperature, Al is a material that oxides

how this comes about, we recall [26] that the magnitude easily, and this makes it easier to grow oxide layers of

of the parallel critical field Hc for a thick superconducting controllable thicknesses, well attached to the supercon-

slab of volume V can be determined by equating the mag- ducting film, that constitute the dielectric medium of our

netic work V Hc2 /8π required to expel the magnetic field metallic Casimir cavities. The configuration used in the

from the sample, with the so-called condensation energy experiment is a three-layer cavity, made of a thin super-

εcond (T ) of the material, which represents the difference conducting Al film (5 ÷ 10 nm), a thin dielectric layer

of Helmholtz free energies between the normal and the of native oxide (Al2 O3 )(5 ÷ 10 nm), and a thick metallic

3

ering different configurations in order to obtain a larger

signal-to-noise ratio in the expected effect.

In our experiment, we used a cryogenic system based

on the Heliox VL 3 He cryostat, inserted into a dewar

equipped with magnetic screening, which isolates the

samples from external EM fields. Since it is extremely

difficult to keep the cryostat temperature perfectly

constant, we did not try to measure the critical field

Hc of the samples as a function of the temperature.

Rather, we measure how the critical temperature

Tc (H) of the samples changes as a function of the

applied magnetic field H. More precisely, for each value

of the applied field H we measure the relative shift

δt = (Tc (H) − Tc 0 )/Tc 0 in the critical temperature Tc

of the sample, with respect to the critical temperature FIG. 1: Simulation of the expected signal for a bare thin Al

Tc 0 of the same sample in zero field. As we shall explain film of thickness D = 14 nm (lower curve) and for a cavity

below, by using the method of cross-correlations the consisting of a similar Al film, covered by a 6 nm dielectric

shift δt can be measured much more accurately than layer and a 100 nm Au mirror (upper curve).

the individual critical temperatures in the applied and

in the null fields. Our theory predicts (see Figure 1

and comments below) that the curve H(δt) for the bare For the in-cavity film we can divide the expected sig-

film should lie below that for the film in the Casimir nal curve (upper curve in Fig. 1) into three temperature

cavity. Since this is a differential measurement, we need regions. For temperatures far from the transition tem-

a very good sensitivity in temperature, of order a few perature of the film (region not shown in Fig. 1) the

µK in the case of Al. As described in [20], the critical in-cavity curve coincides with the bare film curve, since

temperature is determined by measuring the resistance the vacuum energy contribution becomes negligible com-

of a sample R(T) in a four-wire configuration around pared to the condensation energy. When δt ≈ 3 × 10−5 ,

the phase transition, for different external applied fields. the change of Casimir energy is small but no longer neg-

Several measuremements have been performed and ligible, and a perturbative approach is possible in δH/H:

different samples have been tested, so as to find the best for H ≈ 5 ÷ 6 mT the two curves are expected to differ

experimental conditions for a good signal-to-noise ratio. by an amount δt ≈ 6 × 10−6 . Note that, since the critical

For a good data analysis to be possible, it was important temperature of Al is 1.5 K, this corresponds to a shift in

to make sure that the transition curves did not change temperature of order 10 µK. Finally, for lower tempera-

their profiles in time, or after applying a magnetic field. tures the dependence of δt on H for the in-cavity curve

By employing these criteria, the best samples have been is expected to differ from the bare film case, because the

selected. Data reported in the following were obtained Casimir energy contribution is of the same order of mag-

from the samples showing the sharper transition and nitude as the condensation energy. In this region we are

the highest homogeneity among transition curves. For not able to perform any perturbative calculation, and

a detailed description of sample preparation, cryogenic there is no theoretical prediction for the curve’s trend

apparatus and measurement scheme, see [20]. (dashed line in Fig. 1).

magnetic field H is plotted against the shift δt = 1 − t of III. ANALYSIS METHOD BASED ON

the reduced critical temperature t = Tc (H)/Tc 0 (with Tc 0 CROSS-CORRELATION

zero-field transition temperature). We recall [26] that for

a (bare) thin superconducting film, with a thickness D

much less than the penetration length λ, incomplete field As was explained in the previous Section, for each value

of the applied magnetic field H we need to determine ac-

expulsion leads to higher values of the parallel critical

field H, as compared to bulk samples. For 1 − t ≪ 1 curately the fractional shift δt of the critical temperature

of the sample, relative to its critical temperature Tc 0 in

(as in our case), the thin-film critical magnetic field H

follows the simple law [26] zero field. As described in Ref. [20], the major source

of noise in our measurements is the electronic noise at

the read-out amplifier. This noise has a “fast” compo-

√ λ(0) √

H = H0 24 1−t, (2.4) nent (with time scale of one second) that determines a

D statistical error of a few µK, and a slow thermal drift

where λ(0) is the penetration depth and H0 is the bulk (linear in time, about 50 µK per hour) that produces a

critical field, both determined for zero temperature. shift proportional to the time elapsed between two mea-

surements. To correct for the thermal drift we arranged

4

3.86 of this translation, independently of any model for the

shape of the curves. The idea is very simple, and consists

3.85

in looking for the translation that maximizes the overlap

between any two R(T ) curves. Let us see how this works

out in detail. In reality, each R(T ) curve consists of a

3.84

3 1 large number of data points more or less scattered in the

R(T) [Ω]

3.83

consider only data points that belong to the transition

region, having a width of a few mK, around the critical

3.82

temperature. Typically, this region contains a few thou-

1 → R(T, H = 0; t1) sand points for each curve. At this point, we cover the

3.81

2 → R(T, H ; t1+t

2 )

2

T − R plane by a rectangular grid whose axis are parallel

3 → R(T, H = 0; t2) to the T and R coordinate axis, and whose steps are sT

3.8 and sR respectively. The points pi,j of the grid in the

R (T, H = 0; t1+t

2 )

2

3.79 where {aT , aR } are the coordinates of the grid’s origin.

1.5243 1.5243 1.5244 1.5244 1.5245 1.5245

T [K] We let Hi,j be the number of data points that occupy

the grid cell whose left-down corner coincides with the

FIG. 2: Example of the measurement sequence. All measure- point p(i, j) of the grid. Clearly, the number of points

ments are performed at equal time intervals. Before and after occupying the non-empty cells depends on the size of the

each measurement with the applied field, a measurement in cells, i.e. on the steps sT and sR . We shall discuss below

the absence of field is performed. From the two measurements the criterion we used to choose these steps. In practice

in absence of field, it is possible to reconstruct the zero-field for the chosen size of the steps, the occupied cells turn

curve that would be measured simultaneously to the tran-

out to include about five or six data points. Consider

sition curve in the presence of the magnetic field. ∆Tc is

the distance in temperature between the R(T) curve in the now any two transition curves R(a) (T ) and R(b) (T ) (not

(a) (b)

presence of the magnetic field (continuous line), and the re- necessarily distinct), and let Hi,j and Hi,j be the re-

constructed R(T) curve in zero field (dashed-dotted line). spective histograms. For any translation of R(b) (T ) by

n steps along the T -axis, we define the cross-correlation

C (a,b) [n], to be the quantity:

our measurements in series of triplets, as is shown in Fig.

2. Each triplet consists of three measurements of the

curve R(T ) that are equally spaced in time, the first and (a) (b)

X

C (a,b) [n] = Hi,j Hi−n,j . (3.1)

the last one of which (left-most and right-most dashed i,j

curves in Fig. 2) are performed in zero-field, while the

intermediate one (continuous line in Fig. 2) is done with

the field applied. Since the slow thermal drift is linear

The quantity C (a) [n] ≡ C (a,a) [n] shall be denoted in what

in time, and since the two zero-field measurements are

follows as the self-correlation of the curve R(a) (T ). Intu-

performed at equal time intervals before and after the

itively, C (a,b) [n] measures how well R(a) (T ) and R(b) (T )

applied field measurement, it is possible to “reconstruct”

overlap, after we translate R(b) (T ) by an amount n × sT

out of them the position that the zero-field curve R(T )

along the T -axis.

would have occupied in the R − T plane (dotted-dashed

line in Fig. 2), had it been measured at the same time as In Figs. 3 and 4 we plot the normalized self-correlation

the applied field curve. The relative shift δt in the crit- C[n] of one of our R(T ) curves, for two different steps sT .

ical temperatures is then determined by comparing the In Fig. 5 we plot the self-correlations and the crossed

measured curve R(T ) in the applied field, with the recon- correlations of two of our curves, one measured in zero

structed curve in zero field. Having explained the general field and the other in a non-zero field. We verified that

scheme of the measurements, let us see how the method all correlations have a Gaussian shape around the central

of cross-correlations permits to accurately determine δt. peak. More importantly, we see from Fig. 5 that the

The key feature of the R(T ) curves that allows to use maximum of the cross-correlation between the zero-field

the cross-correlation method to accurately determine the curve and the non-zero-field curve is of the same order

shifts δt is that, for each sample, their shape is prac- of magnitude as the maximum of the self-correlations of

tically independent of both the intensity of the applied the two curves. From this circumstance we infer that

magnetic field, and the time at which the measurements the two curves actually have equal shapes and that they

are performed. In other words, the curves R(T ) that are can be made to overlap by a translation ∆T along the

taken at different times, or in different fields, appear to temperature axis. From the cross-correlation plot, one

differ from each other just by some horizontal transla- can estimate ∆T = nmax × sT , where nmax is the shift

tion ∆ along the temperature axis. The cross-correlation for which the cross-correlation reaches its maximum.

5

lattice step on the abscissa equal to 15µK.

sT .

the plateau region was chosen, which is still large enough

to ensure that the typical number of points in the occu-

pied cells of the grid is five or six.

The error on the temperature shifts ∆T between any

two curves R(T ) was estimated by using the familiar

FIG. 4: Self-correlation of the R(T ) curve with lattice step

jackknife method. We divided the transition region of

equal to 5µK.

the T − R plane into n stripes parallel to the T -axis,

and of equal widths along the R-axis, and we covered

A. Grid sizing and error estimates

each of these stripes with grids of equal steps sT and

sR . The data points falling in each of the n stripes

were then analyzed by the cross-correlation method, pro-

To choose the best size of the grid cells, we investi- (n)

viding n independent estimates ∆Tk , k = 1, . . . , n of

gated the behavior of the self-correlation on a trial curve

the temperature shifts. For each number of subdivi-

for several different choices of the steps sT along the tem-

sions n, we then determined the corresponding average

perature axis. We pointed out earlier that the distribu- Pn ∆Tk(n) (n)

tion of bins around the autocorrelation peak is Gaussian shift ∆T (n) = k=1 n , and the variance σ∆T =

Pn

r

shaped. We found that the width σ of the Gaussian de- (n)

(∆T k −∆T (n) )2

creases with the grid step until it stabilizes, as shown in

k=1

n−1 . To find the optimal number of

stripes, the above process was repeated for n∈ {1, 40}.

(n)

In Fig. 7 we plot the behavior of σ∆T versus n. As we

(n)

see, σ∆T reaches a plateau for n ≈ 10 − 15, and on this

basis we adopted n = 15 for our final assessment of the

errors.

Having determined the optimal grid size and number

of stripes, we could then determine the best estimates for

the differences ∆Tc = Tc (H) − Tc 0 between the critical

temperatures in the presence of the magnetic field and

in null field, with the relative errors. For each triplet of

measurements as described in Sec. III (see Fig. 2), we

estimated

∆T(1,3)

∆Tc = ∆T(1,2) − , (3.2)

2

FIG. 5: Self-correlation of two R(T ) curves, green and blue, where the superscripts 1 and 3 refer to the curves in zero

and cross-correlation among the two. field, and the superscript 2 to the curve in the presence

6

(n)

FIG. 7: The error σ∆T versus the number n of subdivisions.

The error reaches a plateau for n ≈ 10-15.

s 2 FIG. 8: Bare film data: the points follow the expected

2 1 parabolic behavior.

σ∆Tc = σ∆T + σ∆T(1,3) − cov(∆T(1,2) ,∆T(1,3) )

(1,2)

2

(3.3)

where σ∆T1,2 and σ∆T1,3 are the standard deviations ob- bare-film parabolic behavior. Unfortunately, the error

tained as explained previously with n = 15. bars are of the same order of magnitude of the expected

small deviations, and therefore a better sensitivity would

be needed to ascertain the effect in this region. For lower

IV. EXPERIMENTAL RESULTS

magnetic fields, the condensation energy and the vari-

ation of Casimir energy become of the same order, the

The first thing that we checked is that the data for the perturbation expansion is no longer possible, and devi-

bare film actually follow the theoretical law Eq. (2.4). ations are possibly larger. Interestingly, in this energy

According to that relation, the shifts δT should have a region, the data of the in-cavity film are no longer com-

parabolic dependence on the applied magnetic field H. patible with a parabolic behavior, as is the case for the

This expectation is fully verified by our data, as can be bare film. This suggests the hypothesis that in-cavity

seen from Fig. 8, where the data are plotted together data display an anomalous trend with respect to bare

with a parabolic fit (continuous line). film data. Note that the preliminary analysis reported in

The data for the in-cavity film are shown in Fig. 9 [20], even if less rigorous, is compatible with the present

(note the different scales for H and δT in comparison results. However, it is not possible to draw final conclu-

with Fig. 8) together with a parabolic fit on higher mag- sions from this observation, since error bars are too large

netic field data. It is apparent that low-field in-cavity and a theoretical model for low condensation energy is

data show deviations from the parabolic behavior, unlike missing.

the bare-film data. To sum up, in-cavity data show a behavior which is

The different behavior of in-cavity data compared to qualitatively different from the bare film case, and com-

bare-film data can be better appreciated from Fig. 10, patible with the predictions of Refs. [21, 22]. Even if we

where they are both plotted. It should be noted that in cannot draw definite conclusions from the present anal-

Fig. 10 the shifts δT /Tc are reported as a function of ysis, its results encourage us in continuing this research,

the absolute value of the magnetic field, the shifts being and exploring different configurations to enhance the ef-

independent of the sign of H. The two curves in Fig. fect.

10 are the same as in Fig. 1. We observe again that

the bare-film data lie nicely on the expected theoretical

parabolic curve. More detailed comments are in order for

the in-cavity data in Fig. 10. Let us consider first the re- Acknowledgments

gion corresponding to H ≈ 5 ÷ 6 mT: as discussed in Sec.

II, for these larger fields the Casimir energy variation is We would like to thank Professor F. Gatti and the

sufficiently small compared to the condensation energy to INFN Genova group for collaboration in making the sam-

justify our perturbative calculations. In this region one ples of Tungsten and Iridium which will be used to realize

expects a small deviation of the in-cavity data from the the upgrade of the experiment. G. Esposito is grateful to

7

for hospitality and support.

cavity film data (squares), bare film data (diamonds). The

lower curve shows the theoretical prediction for bare film data,

the upper one that for in-cavity film data. The point-dashed

line indicates the region where a definite theoretical prediction

is not possible.

magnetic field data: for low magnetic field, corresponding

to the dashed part of the curve, the data do not follow the

parabolic behavior.

[1] H.B.G. Casimir, Proc. K. Ned. Akad. Wet. Rev. 51, 793 [14] K. A. Milton, Lect. Notes Phys. 834, 39 (2011).

(1948). [15] E. Calloni, L. Di Fiore, G. Esposito, L. Milano, and L.

[2] V. A. Parsegian, Van der Waals Forces (Cambridge Uni- Rosa, Phys. Lett. A 297, 328 (2002).

versity Press, Cambridge, England, 2005). [16] E. Calloni, L. Di Fiore, G. Esposito, L. Milano, and L.

[3] M. Bordag, G. L. Klimchitskaya, U. Mohideen, and V. M. Rosa. Int. J. Mod. Phys. A 17, 804 (2002).

Mostepanenko, Advances in the Casimir Effect (Oxford [17] G. Bimonte, E. Calloni, G. Esposito, and L. Rosa, Phys.

University Press, Oxford, 2009). Rev. D 74, 085011 (2006).

[4] S. Weinberg, Rev. Mod. Phys. 61, 1 (1989). [18] G. Bimonte, E. Calloni, G. Esposito, and L. Rosa, Phys.

[5] R. P. Feynman and A. R. Hibbs, Quantum Mechanics and Rev. D 76, 025008 (2007).

Path Integrals (McGraw–Hill, New York, 1965), pp.244- [19] F. Chen, G. L. Klimchitskaya, V. M. Mostepanenko, and

246. U. Mohideen, Opt. Express 15, 4823 (2007); Phys. Rev.

[6] L. S. Brown and G. J. Maclay, Phys. Rev. 184, 1272 B76, 035338 (2007).

(1969). [20] G. Bimonte, D. Born, E. Calloni, G. Esposito, U. Hueb-

[7] D. W. Sciama, in: S. Saunders, H. R. Brown (Eds.), The ner, E. Il’ichev, L. Rosa, F. Tafuri, and R. Vaglio, J.

Philosophy of Vacuum, Clarendon, Oxford, p. 137. Phys. A 41, 164023 (2008).

[8] S. A. Fulling, K. A. Milton, P. Parashar, A. Romeo, K. [21] G. Bimonte, E. Calloni, G. Esposito, L. Milano, and L.

V. Shajesh, and J. Wagner, Phys. Rev. D 76, 025004 Rosa, Phys. Rev. Lett. 94, 180402 (2005).

(2007). [22] G. Bimonte, E. Calloni, G. Esposito, and L. Rosa, Nucl.

[9] K. A. Milton, P. Parashar, K. V. Shajesh, and J. Wagner, Phys. B 726, 441 (2005).

J. Phys. A 40, 10935 (2007). [23] R. E. Glover III and M. Tinkham, Phys. Rev. 108, 243

[10] K. A. Milton, S. A. Fulling, P. Parashar, A. Romeo, K. (1957).

V. Shajesh, and J. A. Wagner, J. Phys. A 41, 164052 [24] G. Bimonte, Phys. Rev. A 78, 062101 (2008).

(2008). [25] G. Bimonte, H. Haakh, C. Henkel, and F. Intravaia, J.

[11] K. V. Shajesh, K. A. Milton, P. Parashar, and J. A. Wag- Phys. A 43, 145304 (2010).

ner, J. Phys. A 41, 164058 (2008). [26] M. Tinkham, Introduction to Superconductivity

[12] R. Estrada, S. A. Fulling, Z. Liu, L. Kaplan, K. Kirsten, (McGraw–Hill, New York, 1975).

and K. A. Milton, J. Phys. A 41, 164055 (2008). [27] H. W. Lewis, Phys. Rev. 101, 939 (1956).

[13] K. A. Milton, P. Parashar, J. Wagner, K. V. Shajesh, A.

Romeo, and S. Fulling, arXiv:0810.0081 [hep-th].

- Temperature Co EfficientUploaded bykiran392
- Test BinderUploaded bySaad Bin Sharf
- Geofisica IPUploaded byWillian
- Us 20140183875Uploaded byVictor Von Doom
- polymer Nanocomposites and Electrical ConductivityUploaded byBeatriz Ferreira
- SNSPDs-natajaranUploaded bycreateusername411
- StreamGateUploaded byDalibor Petkovic
- B.E.mech. Syllabi(1 8)Uploaded byRaajeshkrishna
- #IntroUploaded byinfusion1967
- AirCraft-311-320Uploaded bymaitham100
- Civil Engineering 2006 Sem I & IIUploaded byArjun Kr
- K Bradonjic, J D Swain, A Widom and Y N Srivastava- The Casimir Effect in Biology: The Role of Molecular Quantum Electrodynamics in Linear Aggregations of Red Blood CellsUploaded byldkgfd
- conductors 1Uploaded byUmaima Reheeman
- APPLIED CHEMISTRY For Civil EngineeringUploaded byvenkat chunduru
- Hot-Electron Effect in Superconductors and Its Applications for Radiation SensorsUploaded bymarkrichardmurad
- TRABAJO DE INVESTIGACIÓN FIS IIIUploaded byJoshua Williams
- Circuits and Other ThingsUploaded byRobert Hemsley
- Electrical Conductivity of BiodieselUploaded byAnto Poernomo
- Content.lib.Utah.edu Utils Getfile Collection Etd3 Id 274 Filename 231Uploaded bytsar_philip2010
- 1 7 Step FrameworkUploaded byvelkus2013
- An Experimental Study of Developing and Fully Developed Flows in a Wavy Channel by PIVUploaded byleonravi
- AUTOMATED IMAGE MOSAICING SYSTEM WITH ANALYSIS OVER VARIOUS IMAGE NOISEUploaded byAnonymous lVQ83F8mC
- Basic Electronics Theory and PracticeUploaded bysukmawatisari
- JMMCE20060100005_64506348.pdfUploaded byAkmal Nizar
- Kwok K. Ng(auth.)-Complete Guide to Semiconductor Devices, Second Edition-Wiley-IEEE Press (2002).pdfUploaded byAndres Galeano
- Properties of Aluminium - Aluminium DesignUploaded byRahul Mahajan
- Christensen_PRB_90_241414_2014Uploaded by周浩銘
- peperiksaan cubaan sem2Uploaded byBestah Teo
- Biomechanics and Motor Control of Human MovementUploaded bySocratis Komaris
- tmpDEB9.tmpUploaded byFrontiers

- 0656.Particle Interaction in HydrocyclonesUploaded byJhon Ayala
- Quality Control of Herbal CosmeticsUploaded byGeoffrey V Arthur
- Biomass Pyrolysis Process (Brownsort 2009)Uploaded byiboukis
- Uniform plane waveUploaded byPuneeth Siddappa
- 0620_w09_qp_31Uploaded bykoolro
- REACTIVE ABSORPTION OF H2S by SO2Uploaded bymc_temp
- Temperature Measurements in BoreholesUploaded byEkmal Adi Mahardika
- Marli PalUploaded byfree_share
- Bansal.test.solidstate.pdfUploaded byTarun Gupta
- NaphthaUploaded byShagun Bhardwaj
- Transport Properties of Fluids Their Correlation Prediction and EstimationUploaded byvamsi_m
- e Learning 4Uploaded byDidit Gencar Laksana
- Norma Para Catodos! b115.23282Uploaded byFelipe Cid Sanhueza
- Total Suspended SolidUploaded byFaizYosh
- 9702_s11_qp_21Uploaded byAhmad Syahmi Irfan
- PoteniometryUploaded bymalyaa
- 27-1147-01Uploaded byketchito
- Transit Individu PBS Sains F2Uploaded bymiss int
- Kyocera Substrates) Electronic Fine CeramicsUploaded bymanolo_super
- Thermal Stabilizers for PVC a ReviewUploaded byDarshan Shah
- Termotehnica Automotive EngeneeringUploaded bySchiopu George
- GEASUploaded byMiko Gorospe
- diffequa4Uploaded byCharlie
- Immobilization of Protease EnzymeUploaded bySnape the Prince
- (Ch-ressoc) CUploaded byopurata
- Aqa Phy1h Qp Jan12Uploaded byyohvn
- Anti ViralUploaded bythamizh555
- A Numerical Investigation of Gas Flow Effects on High-Pressure Gas Atomization Due to Melt Tip Geometry VariationUploaded byMolly0630
- IQ4I Research & Consultancy published a new report on “Spectrometry Global Market – Forecast To 2022”Uploaded byVinay
- Jfsfjsljfs;lUploaded byFatema Khatun