Atoms 07 00051

atoms
Article
Extraction of Zero-Point Energy from the Vacuum:
Assessment of Stochastic Electrodynamics-Based
Approach as Compared to Other Methods
Garret Moddel * and Olga Dmitriyeva
Department of Electrical, Computer, and Energy Engineering, University of Colorado, Boulder, CO 80309-0425,
USA; m2olga@gmail.com
* Correspondence: moddel@colorado.edu; Tel.: +1-303-492-1889

Received: 16 February 2019; Accepted: 17 May 2019; Published: 23 May 2019
Abstract: In research articles and patents several methods have been proposed for the extraction
of zero-point energy from the vacuum. None of the proposals have been reliably demonstrated,
yet they remain largely unchallenged. In this paper the underlying thermodynamics principles of
equilibrium, detailed balance, and conservation laws are presented for zero-point energy extraction.
The proposed methods are separated into three classes: nonlinear processing of the zero-point field,
mechanical extraction using Casimir cavities, and the pumping of atoms through Casimir cavities.
The first two approaches are shown to violate thermodynamics principles, and therefore appear not
to be feasible, no matter how innovative their execution. The third approach, based upon stochastic
electrodynamics, does not appear to violate these principles, but may face other obstacles. Initial
experimental results are tantalizing but, given the lower than expected power output, inconclusive.
Keywords: zero-point energy; quantum vacuum; vacuum energy; detailed balance; casimir cavity;
stochastic electrodynamics
1. Introduction
We present results from a set of experiments in which we attempted to extract quantum vacuum
energy from a gas flow system based upon stochastic electrodynamics principles. To put this method
in context we first outline other methods that have been proposed for harvesting this energy. The
methods are divided into three classes, and the underlying principle of operation for each is assessed
in terms of which would violate fundamental thermodynamics principles.
Physical effects resulting from zero-point energy (ZPE) are well established ([1], Chapter 3). This
has led to several proposals and reviews discussing the extraction of ZPE to use as a power source [2–9].
The ZPE extraction methods usually involve ZPE in the form of electromagnetic zero-point fields
(ZPFs). The energy density of these ZPE vacuum fluctuations is ([1], p. 11):
8πν2
!
hν hν
ρ(hν) = 3 + , (1)
c exp(hν/kT ) − 1 2
where ν is the frequency, and k is Boltzmann’s constant. The first term in the large brackets describes
Planck radiation from a black body at temperature T. At room temperature, at frequencies above 7
THz, the energy density is dominated by the second, temperature-independent term, which is due to
zero-point energy. For high frequencies this energy density is large, but just how large depends upon
the frequency at which the spectrum cuts off, a matter that is not yet resolved.
Atoms 2019, 7, 51; doi:10.3390/atoms7020051 www.mdpi.com/journal/atoms

Atoms 2019, 7, 51 2 of 18
Two physical manifestations of the ZPF that will be discussed in this paper are zero-point noise
fluctuations and the force between Casimir cavity plates. The available noise power in a resistance R
per unit bandwidth is [10]
∆V 2 hν hν
= + , (2)
4R exp(hν/kT ) − 1 2
The first term on the right-hand side is the thermal noise, which is approximated at low frequencies
by the familiar Johnson noise formula. The second term, usually called quantum noise, is due to
zero-point fluctuations. This physical manifestation of the ZPF dominates the noise at low temperatures
and high frequencies.
A second physical manifestation is evident with a Casimir cavity, which consists of two
closely-spaced, parallel reflecting plates [11]. Because the tangential electric field is reduced (to
zero for a perfect conductor) at the boundaries, limits are placed on the ZPF modes between the plates,
and those modes having wavelengths longer than twice the gap spacing are suppressed to a degree
determined by the plate reflectivity. This suppression is not imposed on the ZPF on the exterior side of
the plats. The radiation pressure exerted on the exterior side of the plates is larger than on the interior,
with the result that the plates are pushed together. The resulting attractive force between the plates is
([1], p. 58):
π2 }c
F(d) = , (3)
240d4
where d is the gap spacing. For this force to be measurable with the currently available experimental
techniques, d must be less than 1 µm.
The benefits of tapping ZPE from the vacuum would be tremendous. Assuming even a conservative
cutoff frequency in Equation (1), if just a small fraction of this energy were available for extraction,
the vacuum could supply sufficient power to meet all of our needs for the foreseeable future. Cole
and Puthoff [12] have shown that extracting energy from the vacuum would not, in principle, violate
the second law of thermodynamics, but that is not equivalent to stating that extraction is feasible,
nor do they attempt to describe how it could be accomplished. There is no verifiable evidence that
any proposed method works [13], and there has been a continuing debate as to whether ZPE is
fundamentally extractable [14].
In this article, we assess different methods that have been proposed to extract usable ZPE. We do
not examine proposed methods to use ZPE forces as a means to enhance or catalyze the extraction of
energy from other sources, such as chemical [15] or nuclear energy. We separate the different vacuum
energy extraction approaches into three classes: nonlinear extraction, mechanical extraction, and
pumping of gas. We analyze each to see if the underlying principles of operation are consistent with
known equilibrium thermodynamics principles, and then draw conclusions about the feasibility of the
ZPE extraction. Finally, we describe a method based on a stochastic electrodynamics picture of ZPE
and present initial experimental results using the approach.
2. Analysis
2.1. Nonlinear Processing of the Zero-Point Field
2.1.1. Rectification of Zero-Point Fluctuations in a Diode

Several suggested approaches to extracting energy from the vacuum involve nonlinear processing
of the ZPF. One particular nonlinear process is electrical rectification, in which an alternating (AC)
waveform is transformed into a direct (DC) one.
Valone [9] describes the electrical noise in resistors and diodes that results from zero-point
fluctuations. He discusses the use of diodes to extract power from these ambient fluctuations, and
compares this to diodes used for thermal energy conversion. For example, in thermophotovoltaics
radiation from a heated emitter is converted to electricity. In Valone’s case, however, the source is under
Atoms 2019, 7, 51 3 of 18
ambient conditions. In support of Valone’s approach, a straightforward analysis of diode rectification

Atoms 2019, 7, x FOR PEER REVIEW 3 of 18
in the presence of thermal noise does appear to produce a rectified output from that noise unless
aunless
compensating currentcurrent
a compensating is added to thetosystem
is added [16]. [16].
the system Valone is particularly
Valone interested
is particularly interested in the useuse
in the of
zero-bias
of zero-biasdiodes forfor
diodes zero-point
zero-point energy
energy harvesting,
harvesting,sosoasastotorectify
rectifythe theambient
ambientfluctuations
fluctuations without
without
having to supply power in providingproviding aa voltage
voltage bias
bias to
to the
the diodes.
diodes.
This nonlinear extraction
extraction represents
represents aa sort
sort of
of Maxwell’s
Maxwell’s demon
demon [17]. [17]. In 1871 Maxwell developed
a thought experiment in which a tiny demon operates a trapdoor to separate gas in equilibrium into
two compartments, one holding more energetic molecules and the other holding holding less
less energetic
energetic ones.
ones.
Once separated, the resulting temperature difference could be used used to to do
do work.
work. This is a sort of
nonlinear processing, in which the system, consisting of the demon and the compartments, operates
differently on a molecule
molecule depending upon its thermal energy. energy. In the nearly fifteen decades since its
creation,
creation, innovative
innovativevariations
variationsonon thethe
original demon
original demonhavehave
beenbeen
proposed and then
proposed andfound
then to be invalid.
found to be
Despite the best efforts of Maxwell’s demon and his scrutineers [18,19] there
invalid. Despite the best efforts of Maxwell’s demon and his scrutineers [18,19] there still is no still is no corroborated
experimental
corroborated evidence for the
experimental demon’s
evidence forviability [20], and
the demon’s for the[20],
viability current
and analyses I will assume
for the current analysesthat he
I will
cannot assist us in extracting energy from a system in equilibrium.
assume that he cannot assist us in extracting energy from a system in equilibrium.
In the absence of such aa demon, demon, thermal
thermal noise fluctuations
fluctuations cannot be extracted without the
expenditure
expenditure of additional energy,
energy, because
because such
such fluctuations
fluctuations areare inin aa state of thermal equilibrium with
their surroundings [21]. These thermal fluctuations are described by the first term on the right-hand
side of Equation (2). In equilibrium, the second law of thermodynamics applies and no system can
extract power continuously.
continuously. All processes in such aa system system areare thermodynamically
thermodynamically reversible.reversible. A
detailed balance description of the kinetics of such a situation was developed by Einstein to explain
the relationship between the emission and absorption spectra of atoms [22], and discussed as a
manifestation of equilibrium by Bridgman Bridgman [23]. [23].
If the
the equilibrium
equilibriumisisaltered,
altered,forforexample
example bybythethe
addition of aof
addition non-equilibrium
a non-equilibrium radiation field,field,
radiation then
the
thendetailed balance
the detailed is replaced
balance by a less
is replaced byrestrictive steady state
a less restrictive steady condition and it becomes
state condition possible
and it becomes
to extracttopower.
possible The difference
extract power. between
The difference detailed
between balance
detailed and steady
balance state state
and steady is illustrated withwith
is illustrated the
three-state system
the three-state shown
system in Figure
shown 1. Each
in Figure arrow
1. Each represents
arrow a unit
represents of energy
a unit flux. flux.
of energy In the Insteady-state
the steady-
case
stateshown in Figure
case shown 1a, the total
in Figure 1a, thefluxtotal
into flux
any state equals
into any theequals
state total flux theout of it.
total fluxUnder
out of equilibrium,
it. Under
however,
equilibrium,a more restrictive
however, detailed
a more balancedetailed
restrictive must be observed,
balance must in which the flux between
be observed, in which anythepair of
flux
states
betweenmustanybepair
balanced.
of statesThis
mustis depicted
be balanced.in Figure
This is1b.
depicted in Figure 1b.
Illustrationof
Figure 1. Illustration ofdetailed
detailedbalance.
balance.InInthis
thisthree-state
three-state system
system each
each arrow
arrow represents
represents one
one unit
unit of
of energy flux. The system in (a) is in steady state, such that the total flux into each state
energy flux. The system in (a) is in steady state, such that the total flux into each state equals the total equals the
total fluxof
flux out outit;ofInit;system
In system
(b) (b)
notnot
only only does
does thethe steady-state
steady-state conditionapply,
condition apply,butbutthe
the more
more restrictive
detailed
detailed balance
balance alsoalso applies,
applies, in
in which
which thethe flux
flux between
between each
each pair
pair of
of states
states is
is balanced.
balanced.
This
This concept
concept ofof detailed
detailed balance
balance can
can be
be applied
applied to to the extraction of
the extraction thermal noise
of thermal noise from
from aa resistor
resistor
at ambient (equilibrium) temperature. To optimally transfer power from a source,
at ambient (equilibrium) temperature. To optimally transfer power from a source, in this casein this case the noisy
the
resistor, to a load the load resistance should be adjusted to match that of the source. In
noisy resistor, to a load the load resistance should be adjusted to match that of the source. In that that case, the
load
case, generates an equal noise
the load generates power
an equal to power
noise that of to
thethat
source,
of theand an equal
source, and power is power
an equal transferred from the
is transferred
from the load to the source as was transferred from the source to the load. Because of this detailed
balance, no net power can be extracted from a noisy resistor.
To analyze the case of extracting energy from thermal noise fluctuations in a diode, consider the
energy band diagram for a diode shown in Figure 2, where transitions among three different states
Atoms 2019, 7, 51 4 of 18
load to the source as was transferred from the source to the load. Because of this detailed balance, no
net power can be extracted from a noisy resistor.
AtomsTo
2019, 7, x FORthe
analyze PEER REVIEW
case 4 of 18
of extracting energy from thermal noise fluctuations in a diode, consider
the energy band diagram for a diode shown in Figure 2, where transitions among three different
are shown. For simplicity, five other pairs of transitions are not shown and are assumed to have
states are shown. For simplicity, five other pairs of transitions are not shown and are assumed to
negligible rates. (Not shown are (i) direct transitions between the p-type region valence band and the
have negligible rates. (Not shown are (i) direct transitions between the p-type region valence band
n-type region conduction band; (ii) transport of valence-band charge carriers (holes) through the
and the n-type region conduction band; (ii) transport of valence-band charge carriers (holes) through
junction region; (iii) generation and recombination in the n-type region; (iv) direct transitions
the junction region; (iii) generation and recombination in the n-type region; (iv) direct transitions
between the n-type region valence band and the p-type region conduction band; and (v) generation
between the n-type region valence band and the p-type region conduction band; and (v) generation
and recombination in the junction region. A completely parallel set of processes could be added for
and recombination in the junction region. A completely parallel set of processes could be added for
these transitions, and would not change the physical principles involved, or the conclusions drawn.)
these transitions, and would not change the physical principles involved, or the conclusions drawn.)
Figure 2. Diode energy band diagram. Shown are electron transitions between the conduction and
Figure 2.
valence Diode
bands in energy band
the p-type diagram.
region, Shown aretoelectron
corresponding transitions
generation between
rate g, and the conduction
recombination and
rate r. Also
valenceare
shown bands in thetransitions
electron p-type region, corresponding
between n-type andtop-type
generation rate g, and
conduction bandrecombination rate r. Also
states, corresponding to
shown arerate
excitation electron transitions
e, and drift ratebetween n-type and
d. This diagram p-type
is used inconduction band states,
the text to illustrate corresponding
photovoltaic to
carrier
excitation rate
collection, e, and drift
rectification rate d. fluctuations,
of thermal This diagram is also
and usedrectification
in the text of
to zero-point
illustrate photovoltaic carrier
energy fluctuations
collection,
as proposed rectification
by Valone of[9].thermal fluctuations, and also rectification of zero-point energy fluctuations
as proposed by Valone [9].
First consider the case of photovoltaic power generation. If the diode operates as a solar cell, light
absorbed
First in the p-type
consider region
the case of generates
photovoltaic electron-hole pairs, promoting
power generation. If the diode electrons
operates to the
as aconduction
solar cell,
band
light at a rate g that
absorbed depends
in the p-type upon the light
region intensity
generates and other factors.
electron-hole pairs, The photogenerated
promoting electrons electrons
to the
diffuse to the junction region, where the built-in electric field
conduction band at a rate g that depends upon the light intensity and other factors. Thecauses them to drift across the junction to
the
photogenerated at rate d. diffuse
n-type regionelectrons The recombination
to the junction r, and the
rate,region, where excitation rate, e,electric
the built-in are alsofield
shown.
causes Because
them
gto>> r and
drift d >>the
across e under
junction solar
to illumination,
the n-type region i.e., the system
at rate is far
d. The from equilibrium,
recombination rate, r,there
andisthe
a net flow of
excitation
electrons
rate, e, aretoalso
the shown.
n-type region,
Becausewhere g >> rthey
and are
d >>collected
e under to provide
solar power. i.e., the system is far from
illumination,
The diode
equilibrium, would
there is a netoperate
flow ofinelectrons
much the to same
the n-typeway region,
for rectifying
where they thermal fluctuations
are collected under
to provide
equilibrium,
power. except that now g would represent the thermal generation rate. In this case, however, the
generation rate and drift rate across the junction would be much
The diode would operate in much the same way for rectifying thermal fluctuations under smaller than under solar illumination.
Under thermal
equilibrium, equilibrium
except that now andg in the absence
would represent of athe
Maxwell’s
thermaldemongenerationto influence
rate. Inone thisofcase,
the processes,
however,
athedetailed balance is strictly observed, such that g = r and d = e.
generation rate and drift rate across the junction would be much smaller than under solar The second law of thermodynamics
does not allowUnder
illumination. for power generation.
thermal equilibrium and in the absence of a Maxwell’s demon to influence one
of theValone’s
processes, proposal [9] makes
a detailed balance useisofstrictly
power observed,
generationsuch in a that
diode g from
= r and ZPEd =fluctuations
e. The second described
law of
by the second term on the right-hand
thermodynamics does not allow for power generation. side of Equation (2). Whether this is feasible becomes a question
of whether
Valone’s theproposal
zero-point [9]energy
makesinuse a diode is in generation
of power a state of true in aequilibrium
diode fromwith ZPEits surroundings.
fluctuations It has
described
been generally accepted that the “’vacuum’ should be considered to be
by the second term on the right-hand side of Equation (2). Whether this is feasible becomes a question a state of thermal equilibrium
at
of the temperature
whether of T = 0”energy
the zero-point [12]. Recently,
in a diodeusingis inthe principle
a state of true of equilibrium
maximal entropy, with itsDannon has shown
surroundings. It
explicitly
has been that zero-point
generally energy
accepted thatdoes,
the in fact, represent
“’vacuum’ should a state of thermodynamic
be considered to be a equilibrium
state of thermal [24].
equilibrium at the temperature of T = 0” [12]. Recently, using the principle of maximal entropy,
Dannon has shown explicitly that zero-point energy does, in fact, represent a state of thermodynamic
equilibrium [24]. Therefore, it is clear that the detailed balance argument presented above for the case
of thermal fluctuations also applies to ambient zero-point energy fluctuations, and a diode cannot
rectify these fluctuations to obtain power.
Atoms 2019, 7, 51 5 of 18
Therefore, it is clear that the detailed balance argument presented above for the case of thermal
fluctuations also applies to ambient zero-point energy fluctuations, and a diode cannot rectify these
fluctuations
Atoms 2019, 7, xto obtain
FOR PEER power.
REVIEW 5 of 18
2.1.2. Harvesting of Vacuum Fluctuations Using a Down-Converter

Down-Converter and
and Antenna-Coupled
Antenna-Coupled Rectifier
Rectifier
somewhatdifferent
A somewhat differentapproach
approach to to
thethe nonlinear
nonlinear processing
processing of theofZPFthe forZPF for extracting
extracting usable usable
power
power would be to use an antenna, diode and battery. The radiation
would be to use an antenna, diode and battery. The radiation is received by the antenna, rectified by is received by the antenna,
rectified
the diode,byand thethediode, and the
resulting DCresulting DC power
power charges chargesIn
the battery. the battery.
the microwave In theengineering
microwave domain,
engineeringthis
domain, this rectifying antenna is known as a rectenna [25]. Because
3
rectifying antenna is known as a rectenna [25]. Because of its ν dependence, shown in Equation (1), of its ν 3 dependence, shown in
Equation
the (1), the
ZPF power ZPF power
density density at
at microwave microwaveisfrequencies
frequencies is too low
too low to provide to provide
practical practical
power. power.
Therefore, to
Therefore,
obtain to obtain
practical levelspractical
of power, levels of power,
a rectenna must a rectenna
operate atmust
higheroperate at higher
frequencies, frequencies,
such as those ofsuch as
visible
thoseorofeven
light visible lightThere
higher. or even higher.that
are diodes There are at
operate diodes that frequencies.
petahertz operate at petahertz
One example frequencies. One
is a graphene
example isdiode
geometric a graphene
[26] but geometric diode [26]
the rectification butefficiency
power the rectification
of opticalpower efficiency
rectennas of optical
at such rectennas
high frequencies
at generally
is such highlow frequencies
[27]. Theisfirst
generally
question lowabout
[27]. The
ZPFfirst question is
rectification about
howZPF it canrectification is how it The
be made practical. can
be made practical. The second, and more important question here, is
second, and more important question here, is whether this is feasible from fundamental considerations. whether this is feasible from
Ifundamental
address these considerations.
in turn. I address these in turn.
A method to extract
A method to extract ZPE is ZPE is proposed
proposed in in aa 1996
1996 patent
patent by by Mead
Mead and and Nachamkin
Nachamkin [4], [4], which
which
describes an invention to produce lower beat frequency from high-frequency
describes an invention to produce lower beat frequency from high-frequency ZPF to make it more ZPF to make it more
practical to
practical to rectify.
rectify. TheThe invention
invention includes
includes resonant
resonant microscopic
microscopic spheres
spheres that that intercept
intercept ambient
ambient ZPF ZPF
and build its intensity at their resonant frequency. The high-intensity oscillation
and build its intensity at their resonant frequency. The high-intensity oscillation induces interactions induces interactions
between two
between spheres of
two spheres of different
different sizesize such
such that
that aa lower
lower beat-frequency
beat-frequency radiation radiation is is emitted
emitted fromfrom
them. This
them. This lower
lower beat-frequency
beat-frequency radiation
radiation is is said
said to
to be
be then
then absorbed
absorbed by by an antenna and
an antenna and rectified
rectified toto
provide DC electrical power. (Note that the beat frequency is not frequency
provide DC electrical power. (Note that the beat frequency is not frequency down-conversion, which down-conversion, which
requires aa nonlinear
requires nonlinear mixer.
mixer. The The down-conversion
down-conversion occurs occurs only
only after
after the
the signals
signals encounter
encounter the the diode,
diode,
and so the antenna cannot actually pick up the short-wavelength ZPF,
and so the antenna cannot actually pick up the short-wavelength ZPF, and the diode cannot rectify the and the diode cannot rectify
the high-frequency
high-frequency ZPF.) ZPF.)
The The invention
invention is depicted
is depicted in Figure
in Figure 3. 3.
Figure
Figure 3. Mead and
3. Mead and Nachamkin’s
Nachamkin’s invention
invention [4]
[4] for
for producing
producing aa beat
beat frequency
frequency from
from zero-point
zero-point field
field
radiation,
radiation, and collecting, and rectifying it. The non-identical microscopic resonant spheres interact
and collecting, and rectifying it. The non-identical microscopic resonant spheres interact
with
with ambient
ambient zero-point
zero-point fields
fields to
to produce
produce radiation
radiation atat aa beat
beat frequency.
frequency. This
This radiation
radiation is
is absorbed
absorbed in
in
the loop antenna and rectified in the circuit.
the loop antenna and rectified in the circuit.
Mead and Nachamkin’s approach can be broken down into three steps:
Mead and Nachamkin’s approach can be broken down into three steps:
(a) Producing lower beat frequency radiation from the ambient ZPF;
(a) Producing lower beat frequency radiation from the ambient ZPF;
(b) Collecting the beat-frequency radiation at the diode by the antenna;
(b) Collecting the beat-frequency radiation at the diode by the antenna;
(c) Rectification of the concentrated radiation by the diode.
Step (a) is a process akin to that performed by the diode described in the previous section, except
that in the current case the ZPF produces an intermediate beat frequency whereas in the previous
case the ZPF fluctuations in a diode were down-converted to DC. Therefore, this step operating with
Atoms 2019, 7, 51 6 of 18
(c) Rectification of the concentrated radiation by the diode.
Step (a) is a process akin to that performed by the diode described in the previous section, except
that in the current case the ZPF produces an intermediate beat frequency whereas in the previous
case the ZPF fluctuations in a diode were down-converted to DC. Therefore, this step operating with
incoming radiation under equilibrium must observe a detailed balance of rates. Regarding steps (b)
and (c), under equilibrium a source, antenna and load are in detailed balance, such that the power
received by the antenna from the source and transferred to a load is equal to the power transmitted
back to the source [28].
If steps (a) and (b) could provide a greater-than-equilibrium concentration of power to the diode,
then the diode in step (c) would no longer be operating under equilibrium. When driven far from
equilibrium the harvesting efficiency would be limited to the Carnot efficiency in a quantum heat
engine, unless the extra energy somehow created some coherence [29]. However, as argued above, the
concentration of power at the diode cannot occur under equilibrium. In summary, when applied to the
harvesting of vacuum fluctuations each of the three steps in the ZPF down-converter system is subject
to a detailed balance of rates, and therefore, the system cannot provide power.
2.1.3. Nonlinear Processing of Background Fields in Nature

If nonlinear processing of ZPFs were sufficient to extract energy, one would expect to see the
consequences throughout nature. Naturally occurring nonlinear inorganic and organic materials
would down-convert the ZPF, for example, to the infrared. The result would be constant warmth
emanating from these nonlinear materials. Such down-conversion may exist, but through detailed
balance there must be an equal flux of energy from the infrared to higher-frequency background ZPF.
For ZPFs to provide usable power, an additional element must be added beyond those providing
nonlinear processing of ambient fields.
2.2. Mechanical Extraction Using Casimir Cavities

The attractive force between two closely spaced conducting, i.e., reflecting, plates of a Casimr
cavity was predicted by Casimir in 1948 [11], and is given by Equation (3). This attractive force was
later shown to apply also to closely spaced dielectric plates [30], and becomes repulsive under certain
conditions [31]. The potential energy associated with the Casimir force is considered next as a source
of extractable energy [5,6].
The simplest way to extract energy from Casimir cavities would be to release the closely spaced
plates so that they could accelerate together. In this way, the potential energy of the plate separation
would be converted to kinetic energy. When the plates hit each other, their kinetic energy would be
turned into heat. The Casimir cavity potential would be extracted, albeit into high-entropy thermal
energy. If this energy conversion could be carried out as a cyclic process, electrical power obtained
from this heat would be subject to the limitations of the Carnot efficiency:
Th − Tc
ηmax = (4)
Th
where Th is the temperature of hot source and Tc is the temperature of the cold sink.
2.2.1. Energy Exchange between Casimir Plates and an Electrical Power Supply
In 1984, Forward described a different concept [2] for extracting energy from the mechanical
motion of Casimir plates, one that maintains the low entropy of the Casimir cavity’s potential energy
through the extraction process. A coiled Casimir plate is shown in Figure 4. The attractive Casimir
force between spaced-apart coils of the Casimir plates is nearly balanced by the injection of electric
charge from an external power supply causing the plates to repel each other. As the plates move
together due to the attractive Casimir force, they do work on the repulsive charge, resulting in a charge
Atoms 2019, 7, 51 7 of 18
flow and transfer of energy to the power supply. In this way, the coming together of the Casimir
plates provides usable energy, and maintains the low entropy of the original attractive potential energy.
Forward made no attempt to show how this would provide continuous power, since once the plates
came2019,
Atoms together allPEER
7, x FOR the available
REVIEW potential energy would be used up. 7 of 18
Figure 4. Slinky-like coiled Casimir cavity, as conceptualized by Forward [2]. He used this device
Figure 4.
concept to Slinky-like
demonstratecoiled Casimir
how one mightcavity, as the
convert conceptualized by Forward
vacuum fluctuation [2]. energy
potential He used thisCasimir
from device
Figure
concept 4.toSlinky-like
demonstrate coiled
how Casimir
one mightcavity, as conceptualized
convert the vacuum by Forward
fluctuation [2]. He
potential usedfrom
energy thisCasimir
device
attraction to electrical energy. As the plates approach each other the repulsion of positive like-charges
concept to demonstrate
attraction how one might convert the vacuum fluctuation potential
ofenergy from Casimir
results in atocurrent
electrical
thatenergy.
chargesAsupthe
anplates approach
external powereach other
supply. the repulsion positive like-charges
attraction
results in atocurrent
electrical energy.
that chargesAsup
theanplates approach
external powereach other the repulsion of positive like-charges
supply.
results in a current that charges up an external power
2.2.2. Cyclic Power Extraction from Casimir Cavity Oscillations supply.
2.2.2. Cyclic Power Extraction from Casimir Cavity Oscillations
2.2.2.In Forward’s
Cyclic
In Powerconcept,
Forward’s Extraction
concept, described in
in the
from Casimir
described previous
theCavity
previous section,
section, energy
Oscillations energy is is extracted
extracted from from thethe Casimir
Casimir
force until
forceInuntil the
the plates
plates have
have come
come together,
together, but
but continuous
continuous power
power extraction
extraction would
would require
require aa cyclic
cyclic
Forward’s concept, described in the previous section, energy is extracted from the Casimir
process.
process. In a
In theseries
a series of publications,
of have
publications, Pinto proposed
Pinto proposed an engine
an engine for the
for the extraction
extraction of mechanical
of mechanical energy
force until plates come together, but continuous power extraction would require aenergycyclic
from
from Casimir
Casimir cavities
cavities [6].
[6]. His
His concept
concept makes
makes use
use of
of switchable
switchable Casimir
Casimir cavity
cavity mirrors.
mirrors. AA schematic
schematic
process. In a series of publications, Pinto proposed an engine for the extraction of mechanical energy
depiction
depiction of
of the
the process
process is
is shown
shown in
in Figure
Figure 5.
5. In
In step
step (a)
(a)the
theCasimir
Casimir cavity
cavity plates are
are allowed
platesmirrors. allowed to
to move
move
from Casimir cavities [6]. His concept makes use of switchable Casimir cavity A schematic
together in response
together inofresponse to their
to their attraction,
attraction, and
and5.the the reduction in potential energy is extracted (for
depiction the process is shown in Figure Inreduction
step (a) the inCasimir
potentialcavity
energy is extracted
plates are allowed(for example,
to move
example, by
by the Forward the Forward
method). method). In step
In stepattraction,
(b) one of and (b) one
the plates of the plates
is altered to is altered to change its reflectivity.
together in response to their the reduction in change
potential its reflectivity. Because of(for
energy is extracted the
Because of
altered state,the altered
the Forwardstate, the
attractivemethod). attractive
Casimir force Casimir
is reduced force is
or the reduced
reversed or reversed and the plates can then
example, by the In step (b) one of platesand the plates
is altered can then
to change itsbe separated
reflectivity.
be separated
using less usingthan
energy lesswas
energy than was
extracted when extracted
they camewhen they came
together, as together,
depicted in as depicted
step (c). Afterin step
they (c).
are
Because of the altered state, the attractive Casimir force is reduced or reversed and the plates can then
After they are separated, the plates are restored to their original state, and the cycle is repeated.
be separated using less energy than was extracted when they came together, as depicted in step (c).a
separated, the plates are restored to their original state, and the cycle is repeated. Puthoff analyzed
Puthoff
systemtheyanalyzed
of switchable a system
Casimir of switchable Casimir cavity mirrors and calculated the potential power
After are separated, thecavity
platesmirrors and calculated
are restored to their the potential
original power
state, and that
the could
cycle be produced
is repeated.
that could be
by Casimir produced
plates by Casimir plates asfrequency
a functionand of vibration frequency and mass [32].
Puthoff analyzed aassystem
a function of vibration
of switchable Casimir cavity mass [32].
mirrors and calculated the potential power
that could be produced by Casimir plates as a function of vibration frequency and mass [32].
(a) (b ) (c)
(a) (b ) (c)
Figure 5. Casimir cavity engine for the cyclic extraction of vacuum energy, similar to system proposed
Figure 5. Casimir cavity engine for the cyclic extraction of vacuum energy, similar to system proposed
by Pinto [6]. In step (a) the Casimir plates move together in response to Casimir attraction, producing
by Pinto [6]. In step (a) the Casimir plates move together in response to Casimir attraction, producing
energy5.
Figure that is extracted;
Casimir In step for
cavity engine (b) the
the cyclic
lowerextraction
plate is altered to reduce
of vacuum its reflectivity
energy, and hence
similar to system reduce
proposed
energy that is extracted; In step (b) the lower plate is altered to reduce its reflectivity and hence reduce
thePinto
by Casimir attraction;
[6]. In In step
step (a) the (c) the
Casimir plates
plates aretogether
move pulled apart, using less
in response energyattraction,
to Casimir than that which was
producing
the Casimir attraction; In step (c) the plates are pulled apart, using less energy than that which was
obtained in step (a), and then the cycle is repeated.
energy that is extracted; In step (b) the lower plate is altered to reduce its reflectivity and hence reduce
obtained in step (a), and then the cycle is repeated.
the Casimir attraction; In step (c) the plates are pulled apart, using less energy than that which was
obtained in step (a),cannot
Pinto’s approach and then the cycle
work if theisCasimir
repeated.force is conservative. If so, no matter what process
were to be used in separating the plates, it would require at least as much energy as had been
Pinto’s approach cannot work if the Casimir force is conservative. If so, no matter what process
extracted by their coming together. For example, in step (b) shown in Figure 5, electrical charge might
were to be used in separating the plates, it would require at least as much energy as had been
be drained from at least one of the plates to modify its reflective property. This would reduce the
Atoms 2019, 7, 51 8 of 18
Pinto’s approach cannot work if the Casimir force is conservative. If so, no matter what process
were to be used in separating the plates, it would require at least as much energy as had been extracted
by their coming together. For example, in step (b) shown in Figure 5, electrical charge might be drained
from at least one of the plates to modify its reflective property. This would reduce the Casimir attraction
and allow the plates to be pulled apart with minimal force, after which charge would be injected
back into the plates to reestablish the Casimir attraction. For a conservative force, the minimum
energy required for this draining and injecting back of the electrical charge is the energy that could be
obtained from the attractive force of the plates moving together. Alternatively, exposing a plate to
hydrogen may be used to change its reflectivity [33] and hence the attraction between plates. If the
force is conservative then the hydrogenation/de-hydrogenation cycle would require at least as much
energy as could be extracted from the Casimir-plate attraction, and the system cycle could not produce
power. A similar situation to that of the Casimir force exists with standard electric forces, which clearly
are conservative. The electric attraction induced by opposite charge on two capacitor plates cannot
produce cyclic power.
In one analysis, a Carnot-like cycle was used to show that the Casimir force did not appear to be
conservative [6], so that it would be possible to extract cyclic power. However, from an analysis of each
of the steps in the cycle, Scandurra found that the Casimir force is conservative after all, consistent
with the general consensus, and that the method cannot produce power in a continuous cycle [34]. In a
recent publication, Pinto has supported this conclusion and its implications [35].
Generalizing from the conservative nature of the Casimir force, it appears that any attempt to obtain
net power in a cyclic fashion from changing the spacing of Casimir cavity plates cannot work. In a different
sort of mechanical extraction, it may be possible to use vacuum fluctuations as nanoscale hammers to heat
surfaces [36], or even to account for the expansion of the Universe via parametric resonance [37].
2.3. Pumping Atoms through Casimir Cavities
2.3.1. Zero-Point Energy Ground State and Casimir Cavities

There is a fundamental difference between the equilibrium state for heat and for ZPE. It is well
understood that one cannot make use of thermal fluctuations under equilibrium conditions. To use the
heat, there must be a temperature difference to promote a heat flow to obtain work, as reflected in the
Carnot efficiency of Equation (4). We cannot maintain a permanent temperature difference between a
hot source and a cold sink in thermal contact with each other, without expending energy, of course.
Similarly, without differences in some characteristic of ZPE in one region as compared to another, it
is difficult to understand what could drive a flow of ZPE to allow its extraction. If the ZPE represented
the universal ground state, we could not make use of ZPE differences to do work. But the entropy and
energy of ZPE are geometry dependent [38], and are a function of the boundary conditions [39]. In this
way ZPE fluctuations differ fundamentally from thermal fluctuations. Inside a Casimir cavity the ZPF
density is different than outside, a difference that is established as a result of the different boundary
conditions inside and out. A particular state of thermal or chemical equilibrium can be characterized by a
temperature or chemical potential, respectively. For an ideal Casimir cavity having perfectly reflecting
surfaces it is possible to define a characteristic temperature that describes the state of equilibrium for
zero-point energy and which depends only on cavity spacing [33]. In a real system, however, no such
parameter exists because the state is determined by boundary conditions in addition to cavity spacing [40],
such as the cavity reflectivity as a function of wavelength, spacing uniformity, and general shape.
The next approach to extracting power from vacuum fluctuations makes use of the step in
the ZPE ground state at the entrance to Casimir cavities. According to stochastic electrodynamics
(SED), the energy of classical electron orbits in atoms is determined by a balance of emission and
absorption of vacuum energy [41,42]. By this view of the atom, electrons emit a continuous stream of
Larmor radiation as a result of the acceleration they experience in their orbits. As the electrons release
energy their orbits would spin down were it not for absorption of vacuum energy from the ZPF. This
Atoms 2019, 7, 51 9 of 18
balancing of emission and absorption has been modeled and shown to yield the correct Bohr radius in
hydrogen [43–45]. Accordingly, based on unpublished suggestions by B. Haisch and H.E. Puthoff, the
orbital energies of atoms inside Casimir cavities should be shifted if the cavity spacing blocks the ZPF
required to support a particular atomic orbital. However, under particular simplifying assumptions
this shift is not predicted [46]. This reduction of orbital energy inside Casimir cavities is not associated
withAtoms 2019, 7, x FOR
a reduced PEER REVIEW
temperature, as the entire system is in thermal equilibrium. Unlike with the Lamb 9 of shift,
18
theZPF
orbital energy is not just modified by the ZPF but is directly supported by it, and so the reduction
required to support a particular atomic orbital. However, under particular simplifying
in energy
assumptionsinsidethisa Casimir
shift is notcavity is expected
predicted to be
[46]. This much larger
reduction thanenergy
of orbital the change
inside in the Lamb
Casimir shift
cavities is as
predicted by cavity quantum electrodynamics [47].
not associated with a reduced temperature, as the entire system is in thermal equilibrium. Unlike
withWethedoLambnot attempt
shift, the to assess
orbital whether
energy is notSED is valid,by
just modified which
the ZPF is well
but isbeyond the scope by
directly supported of it,
this
investigation, but rather
and so the reduction insimply
energy make
inside use of the cavity
a Casimir implications of SED
is expected to betheory
muchto develop
larger thanof process
the changefor
potential ZPE harvesting.
in the Lamb Currently,
shift as predicted only quantum
by cavity a semi-classical analysis using
electrodynamics [47]. SED has been used to predict
this shift We of do
ground state orbital
not attempt energies.
to assess Although
whether SED ismuch valid,ofwhich
SED theory
is wellhas been applied
beyond the scope successfully
of this
in producing
investigation, results that are
but rather consistent
simply make with
use ofstandard quantumofmechanics
the implications SED theory[40,42,44],
to developparticularly
of process for with
thepotential
inclusion ZPE of harvesting.
spin in theCurrently,
SED analysis only[48],
a semi-classical
there haveanalysis
not been using
anySED has been
reports used
to date intowhich
predict this
this shift of ground state orbital energies. Although much of SED theory
orbital energy shift has been replicated using quantum electrodynamics. An exploratory experiment tohas been applied successfully
testinforproducing
a shift inresults that are consistent
the molecular ground state withofstandard quantumthrough
H2 gas flowing mechanics a 1 [40,42,44],
µm Casimir particularly
cavity was
with out,
carried the inclusion
but without of spin in the SED
a definitive analysis
result [49].[48], there have not been any reports to date in which
this orbital energy shift has been replicated using quantum electrodynamics. An exploratory
experiment
2.3.2. to test for
The Extraction a shift in the molecular ground state of H2 gas flowing through a 1 µm Casimir
Process
cavity was carried out, but without a definitive result [49].
In a 2008 patent [8], Haisch and Moddel describe a method to extract power from vacuum
fluctuations
2.3.2. The that makesProcess
Extraction use of this ground state reduction inside Casimir cavities. The process of atoms
flowing into and out from Casimir cavities is depicted in Figure 6. In the upper part of the loop, gas is
pumpedInfirst a 2008 patent
through [8], Haisch
a region and Moddel
surrounded describe absorber,
by a radiation a methodand to extract power afrom
then through vacuum
Casimir cavity.
fluctuations that makes use of this ground state reduction inside Casimir cavities. The process of
As the atoms enter the Casimir cavity, their orbitals spin down and release electromagnetic radiation,
atoms flowing into and out from Casimir cavities is depicted in Figure 6. In the upper part of the
depicted by the outward pointing arrows, that is extracted by the absorber. On exiting the cavity at
loop, gas is pumped first through a region surrounded by a radiation absorber, and then through a
the top left, the ambient ZPF re-energizes the orbitals, depicted by the small inward pointing arrows.
Casimir cavity. As the atoms enter the Casimir cavity, their orbitals spin down and release
The gas then flows through a pump and is re-circulated through the system. The system functions
electromagnetic radiation, depicted by the outward pointing arrows, that is extracted by the absorber.
likeOn a heat pump,
exiting pumping
the cavity at theenergy from
top left, an external
the ambient ZPFsource to a local
re-energizes the absorber. The amount
orbitals, depicted by theofsmall
power
produced in a small toaster-sized system producing roughly 10 22 transitions into and out from Casimir
inward pointing arrows. The gas then flows through a pump and is re-circulated through the system.
cavities per second
The system waslike
functions estimated to be pumping
a heat pump, approximatelyenergy1fromkW. anThe powersource
external required to ato pump
local the gas
absorber.
through the cavities was estimated to be well below 1 W [8].
The amount of power produced in a small toaster-sized system producing roughly 10 transitions 22
intoInitial studies
and out fromon energycavities
Casimir emission perfrom
secondthiswas
system have to
estimated been carried out [50].
be approximately We first
1 kW. examine
The power
therequired
results and then the
to pump discuss the thermodynamics
gas through the cavities was issues that are
estimated to berelated to the 1process.
well below W [8].
Figure 6. System
Figure 6. Systemtoto
pump
pumpenergy
energy continuously
continuouslyfrom
fromthe
thevacuum,
vacuum,asasproposed
proposedby byHaisch
HaischandandModdel
Moddel[8].
As[8].
gasAsenters
gas the Casimir
enters cavity the
the Casimir electron
cavity orbitalsorbitals
the electron of the gas atoms
of the gas spin
atomsdown
spin in energy,
down emitting
in energy,
emittingradiation,
Larmour Larmourshown
radiation, shown
as small as small
arrows arrows
pointing pointing The
outwards. outwards.
radiantThe radiant
energy energy and
is absorbed is
absorbedWhen
extracted. and extracted.
the atomsWhen theCasimir
exit the atoms exit the the
cavity, Casimir cavity,
atomic the atomic
orbitals orbitalsto
are recharged are recharged
their to
initial level
by their initial level
the ambient by the ambient
zero-point zero-point
field, shown by thefield, shown
inward by thesmall
pointing inward pointing
arrows. Thesmall
figurearrows. The
is reprinted
figure is reprinted
from Ref. [49]. from Ref. [49].
Initial studies on energy emission from this system have been carried out [50]. We first examine
the results and then discuss the thermodynamics issues that are related to the process.
2.3.3. Experimental Test of Radiant Emission Due to Gas Flow

Atoms 2019, 7, 51 10 of 18
2.3.3. Experimental
AtomsFor
2019,a7,working
Test
gas
x FOR PEER
ofofRadiant
REVIEW xenon, aEmission
Casimir Duecavitytospacing
Gas Flow of approximately 0.1 µm is required 10 of to
18
suppress the frequency for the outer orbital [8]. In an initial set of experiments
For a working gas of xenon, a Casimir cavity spacing of approximately 0.1 µm is required to cavities were formed
usingFor
suppress
a working optical
spaced-apart
thethefrequency
gas of xenon,
for flats,
the outer
a Casimir
but because[8].
orbital
cavity
of the
In
spacing spacing
narrow
an
of approximately
initialset
setof
0.1 µm
required, even
ofexperiments
experiments theisthick
cavities
required
were
to
optical
formed
suppress
flatsspaced-apart frequency
bowed too much for the
to flats,
provideouter orbital
sufficiently [8]. In an
uniform initial
spacing. More reliable cavities
cavities were formed
wereoptical
formed
using
using spaced-apart optical
optical butbut
flats, because
becauseof of
the narrow
the narrow spacing
spacing required,
required,even
eventhethe
thick
thick opticalflats
from Whatman polycarbonate Nuclepore flexible membranes with pore sizes of 0.1, 0.2, and 0.4 µm.
bowed
flats too
bowed much to provide
too much sufficiently
to cavities
providegold uniform
sufficiently spacing.
uniformevaporatedMore
spacing. More reliable cavities
reliable were formed from
To form metallic Casimir was thermally at two anglescavities
onto thewereporeformed
walls.
Whatman polycarbonate Nuclepore flexible membranes withwith
pore sizes of 0.1, 0.2, and 0.4 µm.
µm.To
The coverage was confirmed by scanning electron microscope (SEM) inspection, as shown in0.4
from Whatman polycarbonate Nuclepore flexible membranes pore sizes of 0.1, 0.2, and Figure
form
To metallic Casimir
form metallic cavities
Casimir goldgold
cavities was was
thermally
thermallyevaporated
evaporated at two angles
at two onto
angles thethe
onto pore walls.
pore walls. The
7.
coverage was confirmed
The coverage by scanning
was confirmed electron
by scanning microscope
electron (SEM)
microscope inspection,
(SEM) as shown
inspection, as shown in Figure
in Figure7.
7.
(a) (b)
Figure 7. SEM images of coated (a)Nanopore polycarbonate membrane shown (b) at two magnifications. In
(a) the white line corresponds to a length of 2 µm, and in (b) to 0.1 µm. The figure is reprinted from
Figure
Figure
Ref. 7. 7.
SEM
[49]. SEM images
images ofofcoated
coatedNanopore
Nanoporepolycarbonate
polycarbonatemembrane
membraneshownshownatattwo
twomagnifications.
magnifications. In
In (a)
the(a) the white
white line corresponds
line corresponds to a length
to a length of and
of 2 µm, 2 µm,
inand in 0.1
(b) to (b)µm.
to 0.1 µm.
The The is
figure figure is reprinted
reprinted from
from Ref. [49].
Ref. [49].
Coated and uncoated membranes having a diameter of 25.4 mm were mounted into a holder
and Coated
placedand uncoated
in an evacuated membranes having
stainless-steel a diameter
chamber. Gas of 25.4 mm
flowed intowere mounted
the top into a holder
of the membrane at aand
placed Coated
pressure and
in anofevacuateduncoated
1 to 10 Torr, membranes
stainless-steel
and was pumped having
chamber. out a
Gas diameter
flowed
below, withof
into25.4 mm were
thepumping
the top of the mounted
membrane
modulated into
at at a holder
0.5a pressure
Hz to
1and placed
of facilitate
to 10 Torr, in andetection
and
lock-in evacuated
was pumped ofstainless-steel
out below,
emission fromchamber.
with
thethe Gas Above
pumping
device. flowed intodevice
modulated
the the at
top0.5
a ofHzthetomembrane
facilitate
pyroelectric at a
lock-in
detector
pressureofof
detection
measuring 1 to 10 from
emission
emission Torr, and
in thethe was pumped
device.
wavelength Above out
rangethe below,
device
of 0.6 with
to 5 aµm theplaced
pumping
pyroelectric
was modulated
detector
outside measuring at 0.5
the chamber Hz to in
emission
facing
facilitate
thethe lock-in
wavelength
device through detection
range an of 0.6 of emission from
to 5 µm was placed
infrared-transparent the
ZrSe device.
outside
window. Above the
the chamber device
Additionalfacing a pyroelectric
the device
experimental detector
through
details are an
measuringinemission
infrared-transparent
described in the
ZrSe
Ref. [49]. wavelength
window. range of
Additional 0.6 to 5 µm was
experimental placed
details outside theinchamber
are described Ref. [49]. facing
theFour
device
Four through
different
different gases an(He,
gases infrared-transparent
(He, Ar,N
Ar, N22,, and Xe) wereZrSe
were usedwindow.
used tototest Additional
testboth
bothcoated
coated experimental
andanduncoated
uncoated details
membranes. are
membranes.
described
Emitted in Ref. [49].
radiationfromfromfilters
filterswith
withaa0.2 0.2 µm
µm pore
pore size is shown
Emitted radiation shown in inFigure
Figure8.8.
Four different gases (He, Ar, N2, and Xe) were used to test both coated and uncoated membranes.
Emitted radiation 7 from filters with a 0.2 µm pore size is shown in Figure 8.
membrane
7
6
He
units)units)
membrane
6
5
He
(arbitrary
Uncoated
5
(arbitrary
Ar
Uncoated
Ar
Power
4
membrane
N2 Xe
Power
membrane
3
Radiated
2
N2 Xe
Gold-coated
Radiated
2
1
Gold-coated
1
0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35
0
Gas Flow Rate (sccm)
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35
Figure 8. 8.Measured
Figure Measuredradiation
radiationemitted
emitted using N22,,Flow
Gas
using N Ar,Xe
Ar, XeRate
andHe
and He gassesflowing
(sccm)
gasses flowing through
through uncoated
uncoated andand
gold coated polycarbonate filters having 0.2 µm pore size [49].
Figure 8. Measured radiation emitted using N2, Ar, Xe and He gasses flowing through uncoated and
Atoms 2019, 7,
Atoms 2019, 7, 51
x FOR PEER REVIEW 11 of
11 of 18
18
Emission of radiation from all the membranes was clearly measured, with lower output from
Emission of radiation
radiation from all the membranes was clearly
clearly measured, with lower output
output from
the gold-coatedofmembranes
Emission from
thanall thethe
from membranes
uncoated was measured,
polycarbonate. with
To assess howlower
the radiationfrom
was
the
the gold-coated
gold-coated membranes
membranes than
than from
from the
the uncoated
uncoated polycarbonate.
polycarbonate. To
To assess
assess how
how the
the radiation
radiation was
was
produced a series of tests was carried out.
produced
produced aa series
series of
of tests
tests was
was carried
carried out.
out.
2.3.4. Test of Frictional Heating as a Source for the Observed Radiation
2.3.4.
2.3.4. Test
Test of
of Frictional
Frictional Heating
Heating as as aa Source
Source for
for the
the Observed
Observed Radiation
Radiation
We compared the radiated power from the filters with different pore diameters. In Figure 9 we
We
We compared
compared the theradiated
radiatedpower
powerfrom fromthe
thefilters
filterswith
with different
differentpore diameters.
pore diameters.In Figure 9 we9
In Figure
show the signal measured for helium gas flowing through 0.1, 0.2, and 0.4 µm pore diameter
show the signal measured for helium gas flowing through 0.1, 0.2, and
we show the signal measured for helium gas flowing through 0.1, 0.2, and 0.4 µm pore diameter 0.4 µm pore diameter
membranes. The highest signal was registered from the 0.1 µm filter. One possible explanation for
membranes.
membranes. The highest signal
The highest signalwas
wasregistered
registeredfrom
from thethe
0.10.1
µmµm filter.
filter. OneOne possible
possible explanation
explanation for
for why
why that diameter produced the largest signal is that the smaller sizes suppress ZPFs having
why that diameter produced the largest signal is that the smaller sizes suppress
that diameter produced the largest signal is that the smaller sizes suppress ZPFs having frequencies ZPFs having
frequencies that more closely match the atomic outer orbital frequencies, and hence, give rise to
frequencies that more
that more closely matchclosely match
the atomic the orbital
outer atomicfrequencies,
outer orbital andfrequencies,
hence, giveand
rise hence, give
to greater rise to
radiation
greater radiation from the ZPE. Alternatively, the smaller diameters produce a higher pressure drop
greater
from theradiation from the ZPE.
ZPE. Alternatively, the Alternatively,
smaller diametersthe smaller
producediameters producedrop
a higher pressure a higher pressure
and could givedrop
rise
and could give rise to more frictional heating, as discussed below.
and could give rise to more frictional
to more frictional heating, as discussed below.heating, as discussed below.
Power(arbitrary
RadiatedPower
Radiated units)
(arbitraryunits)

Figure 9.
Figure 9. Effect
Effect ofof diameter
of diameter onon radiated
radiated power,
power, as
as measured
measured for
for He
He gas
gas flowing
flowing through
through uncoated
uncoated
Figure 9. Effect diameter on radiated power, as measured for He gas flowing through uncoated
polycarbonate filters
polycarbonate filters of
of 0.1
0.1 (blue
(blue diamonds),
diamonds), 0.2
0.2 (red
(red squares),
squares), and
and 0.4
0.4 µm
µm (greed
(greed triangles)
triangles) pore
pore
polycarbonate filters of 0.1 (blue diamonds), 0.2 (red squares), and 0.4 µm (greed triangles) pore
diameter sizes.
diameter sizes.
diameter sizes.
To test
To test for
for frictional
frictional heating,
heating, we
we examined
examined whether
whether the membrane might work as a passive passive
To test for frictional heating, we examined whether the membrane might work as a passive
element dissipating
element dissipating heat
heat as
as a result
result of the pressure
pressure drop of gas flowing through
through it. Results for different
different
element dissipating heat as a result of the pressure drop of gas flowing through it. Results for different
through 0.2
gases flowing through 0.2 µm
µm uncoated
uncoated membrane
membrane areareshown
shownin inFigure
Figure10.
10.
gases flowing through 0.2 µm uncoated membrane are shown in Figure 10.
Xe
Xe
(Torr)
Drop(Torr)
Ar
Ar
PressureDrop
N2
N
Pressure
He
He

Figure 10.
Figure Pressure drop
10. Pressure drop verses
verses gas
gas flow
flow through
through 0.2 µm uncoated
0.2 µm uncoated filter
filter for
for different
different gases.
gases.
Figure 10. Pressure drop verses gas flow through 0.2 µm uncoated filter for different gases.
These results are in excellent agreement with the studies done by Roy and Raju on the gas flow
These results are in excellent agreement with the studies done by Roy and Raju on the gas flow
through microchannels [51]. The pressure drop depends linearly on gas flow and the slope is different
Atoms 2019, 7, 51 12 of 18
AtomsThese
2019, 7, results are REVIEW
x FOR PEER in excellentagreement with the studies done by Roy and Raju on the gas 12 flow
of 18
for
for different gases with
different gases with xenon
xenon being
being the
the most
most resistive
resistive and
and helium
helium being
being the
the least.
least. If these frictional
If these frictional
losses
losses are
are what
what produce
produce heating
heating and
and the
the measured
measured radiation,
radiation, the
the power
power should
should depend
depend quadratically
quadratically
on
on the
the gas
gas flow.
flow. This
This would
would amplify
amplify the
the differences
differences seen
seen for
for the
the different
different gases,
gases, with
with xenon
xenon producing
producing
the largest heating and helium the smallest, as shown in Figure
the largest heating and helium the smallest, as shown in Figure 11. 11.
80
70
Calculated Power (Torr x sccm)

sses model 60 Xe
50
Ar
40
30
N2
20
10
He
0
0 2 4 6 8 10
Figure 11. Calculated power from frictional loss based upon pressure drop for each of the gases.
Figure 11. Calculated power from frictional loss based upon pressure drop for each of the gases.
This trend in radiated power is the opposite of what was observed in the data of Figure 8, calling
This trend in radiated power is the opposite of what was observed in the data of Figure 8, calling
the frictional heating model into question. On the other hand, helium is more thermally conductive
the frictional heating model into question. On the other hand, helium is more thermally conductive
than xenon, and so if the signal measured in Figure 8 somehow involves thermal conduction—despite
than xenon, and so if the signal measured in Figure 8 somehow involves thermal conduction—despite
the fact that it is radiation and not conduction that is being measured—the greater thermal conductivity
the fact that it is radiation and not conduction that is being measured—the greater thermal
of helium may give rise to gas trend that was observed.
conductivity of helium may give rise to gas trend that was observed.
Another issue with the frictional heating model is that the measured power, shown in Figure 9,
Another issue with the frictional heating model is that the measured power, shown in Figure 9,
depends linearly rather than quadratically on the flow. This observation does not necessarily rule
depends linearly rather than quadratically on the flow. This observation does not necessarily rule out
out frictional losses as a source for the measured radiation. The reason is that the system has more
frictional losses as a source for the measured radiation. The reason is that the system has more
elements taking part in the process, with gas in the chamber transferring its energy to the walls. This
elements taking part in the process, with gas in the chamber transferring its energy to the walls. This
might affect the power dependence on the flow and cause it to appear linear. The frictional heating
might affect the power dependence on the flow and cause it to appear linear. The frictional heating
does not appear to be the source for the measured signal both because the gas order is wrong and
does not appear to be the source for the measured signal both because the gas order is wrong and
because the dependence on pressure is wrong. Still, it cannot be ruled out entirely.
because the dependence on pressure is wrong. Still, it cannot be ruled out entirely.
2.3.5. Test of the Joule-Thomson Effect as a Source for the Observed Radiation
2.3.5. Test of the Joule-Thomson Effect as a Source for the Observed Radiation
Another possible mechanism for the emission could be the Joule–Thomson effect [52]. To test
Another possiblethe
for this, we replaced mechanism
membrane forwith
the emission
a 12.5 µmcould beMylar
thick the Joule–Thomson
film having a effect
single[52].
holeTo3 test
mmfor in
this, we replaced the membrane with a 12.5 µm thick Mylar film having a single
diameter, far too large to give rise to any measurable ZPF effect. The results are shown in Figure 12.hole 3 mm in
diameter,
The phase far too large
measured bytothe
give rise to
lock-in any measurable
amplifier was 180◦ ZPF effect.
off from theThe results
phase are shown
measured in theinexperiment
Figure 12.
The phase
with measured
the nanopore by the lock-in
membrane, amplifier
indicating was 180°
cooling. off from
For xenon, the phase
argon, measured
and nitrogen theinJoule–Thompson
the experiment
with the nanopore membrane, indicating cooling. For xenon, argon, and
coefficient is expected to produce cooling from expansion under the measurement conditions. nitrogen the Joule–
We
Thompson coefficient is expected to produce cooling from expansion under the
could clearly distinguish the heating we observed from flowing the gases through the Casimir cavities measurement
conditions. We couldJoule–Thompson
from this measured clearly distinguish the heating
effect. weitobserved
This rules from flowing
out as a source for the the gases through
observed radiation.the
Casimir cavities from this measured Joule–Thompson effect. This rules it out as a source for the
observed radiation.
Atoms 2019, 7, 51 13 of 18
2.5
Radiated Power (arbitrary units)

2
Xe
1.5
1
Ar
N2
0.5
0
He negligible
0 5 10 15
Figure 12. Test of Joule–Thomson effect. Emitted radiation was measured for N2 , Ar, Xe and He gasses
Figure 12. Test of Joule–Thomson effect. Emitted radiation was measured for N2, Ar, Xe and He gasses
flowing through a Mylar film having a 3 mm diameter hole. The phase of the lock-in signal indicated a
flowing through a Mylar film having a 3 mm diameter hole. The phase of the lock-in signal indicated
cooling effect.
a cooling effect.
2.3.6. Turbulence as a Potential Source for the Observed Radiation
2.3.6. Turbulence as a Potential Source for the Observed Radiation
Turbulence is another possible heat source if the Reynolds number is sufficiently high, which
would Turbulence
indicate that is another
the flow possible heat source
is not dominated if the Reynolds
by viscosity number
[53]. In our is sufficiently
experiment the rate high, which
at which the
would
gas indicate
flowed throughthat the
the nanopore
flow is not dominated
cavities by viscosity
was below 2 cm/s,[53].
which In results
our experiment the rate
in a Reynolds at which
number that
thefar
is gas flowed
below whatthrough
wouldthe nanoporetocavities
be required was belowat2 the
cause turbulence cm/s, which
exit. results in the
Furthermore, a Reynolds number
viscosities of the
that isused
gases far below
in thewhat would be
experiment required
have valuesto cause
that are turbulence
very close toat each
the exit.
otherFurthermore,
(Xe: 0.021 cP, the viscosities
Ar: 0.021 cP,
of2the
N gasescP,used
: 0.0166 He: in the experiment
0.0186 have valuessomehow
cP). Even if turbulence that are very close toradiation
did produce each other (Xe:the
from 0.021 cP, Ar:
membrane
0.021 cP, N : 0.0166 cP, He: 0.0186 cP). Even if turbulence somehow
it could not explain the differences in signal levels for the different gases.
2 did produce radiation from the
membrane it could not explain the differences in signal levels for the different gases.
2.3.7. Absorption/Adsorption as a Potential Source for the Observed Radiation
2.3.7.When
Absorption/Adsorption
a gas is brought into ascontact
a Potential
withSource
a solidfor the Observed
surface Radiation
its molecules are either absorbed into the
solidWhen
or adsorbed
a gas ison the surface,
brought both processes
into contact being
with a solid exothermic.
surface We tested
its molecules whether
are either this could
absorbed be
into the
a source
solid for the observed
or adsorbed radiation.
on the surface, bothAdsorption is proportional
processes being to We
exothermic. the tested
surfacewhether
area. We thisused
couldthree
be
different pore size membranes, 0.1 µm, 0.2 µm and 0.4 µm, having surface areas of 9.4 cm 2 , 18 cm2 and
a source for the observed radiation. Adsorption is proportional to the surface area. We used three
12.6 cm2 , pore
different respectively. Signal from
size membranes, 0.1 these
µm, 0.2different
µm and filters measured
0.4 µm, havingfor a pressure
surface ~5 torr
areas of 9.4 cm2,did not2
18 cm
vary withcm
and 12.6 surface area. Therefore,
2, respectively. the absorption/adsorption
Signal from model may
these different filters measured forbea ruled outof
pressure as~5 a possible
torr did
explanation for the observed radiation.
not vary with surface area. Therefore, the absorption/adsorption model may be ruled out as a possible
explanation for the observed radiation.
2.3.8. Expected Radiation Power
2.3.8.We
Expected Radiation
can calculate Power radiated power assuming that each atom releases 10% of its ground
the expected
state We
orbital
can energy
calculateeachthetime it enters
expected a Casimir
radiated powercavity, whichthat
assuming wouldeachresult
atominreleases
roughly10% 1 eVofper
its
transition [8]. For the flows we used that would result in the production of milliwatts
ground state orbital energy each time it enters a Casimir cavity, which would result in roughly 1 eV of power. The
measured
per transitionpower[8]. was below
For the 1 µW
flows wefor
usedallthat
the gases
wouldand samples.
result Assuming that
in the production roughly 20%
of milliwatts of the
of power.
emitted power power
The measured was received by the1 detector
was below µW for allfacing the membrane,
the gases and samples. the measured
Assumingpower is three 20%
that roughly ordersof
of magnitude smaller than expected. There could be multiple reasons for this
the emitted power was received by the detector facing the membrane, the measured power is three discrepancy. An obvious
one
ordershasoftomagnitude
do with the pore than
smaller shape, shown in
expected. Figure
There 7. be
could It is far from
multiple uniform,
reasons so that
for this only a small
discrepancy. An
fraction
obvious one has to do with the pore shape, shown in Figure 7. It is far from uniform, so that only isa
of the gas atoms or molecules encountered Casimir cavities of the required dimensions. It
difficult to assess
small fraction how
of the gasmuch
atomsof or
a power deficit
molecules can be attributed
encountered Casimirtocavities
this, butofitthe
is clearly
required large. Another
dimensions.
unknown hastotoassess
It is difficult do with howthemuch
direction
of aof the radiation.
power If there
deficit can is radiation
be attributed frombut
to this, theitgas
is transitions,
clearly large. it
may be directed to the walls of the Casimir cavity, causing them to heat up.
Another unknown has to do with the direction of the radiation. If there is radiation from the gasIn that case the radiation
transitions, it may be directed to the walls of the Casimir cavity, causing them to heat up. In that case
the radiation may be a secondary effect, with much of the power being lost to the environment by
convection and conduction, and some radiation being outside the wavelength range of our detector.
Atoms 2019, 7, 51 14 of 18
may be a secondary effect, with much of the power being lost to the environment by convection and
conduction, and some radiation being outside the wavelength range of our detector.
If the power that was radiated does not come from ZPE, then it must come from the power
supplied by pumping the gas through the cavities. Based on theory and experiments of gases flowing
through nanopores [50] and consistent with the data and calculations of Figures 10 and 11, the power
required to pump gas through the Casimir cavities is more than three orders of magnitude lower than
the expected power that could be harvested [8]. Therefore, from a simple gas flow perspective the
harvested power does not come from the gas pump.
The SED model adds an additional factor. One might argue that because the ground state energy
of the gas atoms in the Casimir cavity is lower than that outside, they would have to surmount a
potential hill to exit the cavity. The power to do that would have to come from the pumping. By that
argument the power emitted when the gas entered the cavity would all be supplied by the pump,
and no ZPE would be harvested. There is a flaw in that argument, however. The power would not
have to be supplied by the pump because it is supplied by the ambient ZPF that the atoms encounter
when they exit the cavity—that is the whole point of the system. Furthermore, we do not know of a
mechanism that could translate the spherically symmetric energy radiation from the molecules into a
back-pressure. Still, we cannot totally rule out this potential hill argument.
In addition to these possible loss mechanisms, there are other unknowns because there are not yet
a precise theory and simulations that would enable us to predict what the desired dimensions should
be. Given the ambiguities it is not yet possible to know whether the measured power is consistent with
ZPE being the source.
2.3.9. Deviations from Expected Results

The results deviated from what was expected in several ways.
1. The measured power is much lower than predicted, as described in the previous section. Some if
not all this deviation can be attributed to inconsistent sizes and shapes of the nanopores.
2. Another unexpected result is that the uncoated polycarbonate membranes produced much more
radiation than the gold-coated devices. It is expected that the metal-walled Casimir cavities are
more effective than the dielectric-walled cavities in suppressing interior modes, although the
latter does produce the Casimir effect [29] that are only slightly smaller [54]. A likely reason that
more radiation was observed from the polycarbonate is that the emitted power heated the cavity
walls and the emissivity of the polycarbonate walls and membrane is much greater than that of
the gold.
3. We expected to see the greatest emission from the xenon atoms. Their outer orbital frequency
corresponds to a wavelength (0.1 µm) that is suppressed in the 0.2 µm cavities (suppressed
wavelength is 12 the cavity spacing). That suppressed wavelength is farthest from the wavelength
corresponding to the helium orbital (0.05 µm). The opposite was observed. We do not know
the reason for this, but it may have to do with more total energy being available from the
helium atoms.
2.3.10. Violations of the Second Law of Thermodynamics

Putting aside the fact that radiation was observed, we consider whether there are fundamental
constraints on the process. The first question is whether it conflicts with the conservative nature of the
Casimir force. It does not because although Casimir plates are used, they do not move as part of the
process. Therefore, this process differs from the mechanical process described in Section 2.2.2, which
does make use of cyclic Casimir plate motion in an attempt to extract power from Casimir attraction.
Next comes the question as to whether there is a detailed balance that would render the process
invalid. If the gas were stationary, then we would expect a detailed balance of radiation to exist
between the atoms and their environment at the entrance and exit to the cavity. However, the gas is
Atoms 2019, 7, 51 15 of 18
flowing and in such a dynamic situation could circumvent the requirement for detailed balance. A key
issue here are the time scales involved. If the gas enters the Casimir cavity on a time scale that is much
slower than the equilibration time, then the entire process occurs in quasi-equilibrium and detailed
balance applies. In such a case, there would be no excess energy to shed, e.g., to the absorber shown in
Figure 6, because the orbitals would remain in equilibrium with the vacuum ZPF at each instant of
the process.
In summary, although the process does not overtly violate the second law, it is not clear whether
equilibrium considerations render it incapable of providing harvestable energy.
2.3.11. Future Work to Investigate Gas Flow through Casimir Cavities

A study based on the same concept of harvesting energy from ground state reduction was carried
out by Henriques [55]. To avoid the detailed balance described above and to improve the chances for
observing orbital energy shifts he optically excited the atoms as they entered the Casimir cavity. He
was not able to detect any emitted radiation, but the reason might have been due to poor sensitivity in
the detector.
Our results are tantalizing but unfortunately inconclusive. The investigation could be improved
in several ways. One is to obtain nanopores having a more consistent size and shape so that they
provide uniform cavities of the desired dimensions. This would allow for a better assessment of how
much power can be emitted, and whether the emitted power exceeds the pumping power. Another
would be to image the radiation to determine the location of its source, and to measure its spectral
dependence to determine whether it is thermal and if so at what temperature.
3. Conclusions
The tremendous energy density in the zero-point field (ZPF) makes it tempting to attempt tapping
it for power. Furthermore, the fact that these vacuum fluctuations may be distinguished from thermal
fluctuations and are not under the usual thermal equilibrium make it tempting to try to skirt second
law of thermodynamics constraints. However, the ZPF is in a state of true equilibrium, and the
constraints that apply to equilibrium systems apply to it. In particular, any attempt to use nonlinear
processes, such as with a diode, cannot harvest energy from a system in equilibrium. Detailed balance
arguments apply.
The force exhibited between opposing plates of a Casimir cavity have led to attempts to make use
of the potential energy to obtain power. This cannot succeed because the Casimir force is conservative.
In any attempt to obtain power by cycling Casimir cavity spacing the energy gained in one part of the
cycle must be paid back in another.
Thermal fluctuations, usually thought of as an expression of Planck’s law, and ZPE vacuum
fluctuations, usually associated with the ground state of a quantum system, are most often treated if
they were separate forms of energy. However, the zero-point energy (ZPE) density given in Equation (1)
may be re-expressed in the form [56]:
4πhν3 hν
ρ(hν) = 3
coth (5)
c 2kT
The fact that these two seemingly separate concepts can be merged into a single formalism
suggests that thermal and ZPE fluctuations are connected fundamentally. More rigorously, Planck’s
law can be seen as a consequence of ZPE [57], and is “inherited” from it [58]. In more than a century of
theory and experimentation we have not been able to extract usable energy from thermal fluctuations,
and it might seem that we are destined to find ourselves in a similar situation with attempts to extract
usable energy from ZPE.
There is, however, a distinction that can be drawn between the two cases, which has to do with
the nature of the ZPE equilibrium state. The equilibrium ZPE energy density is a function of the
local geometry. Two thermal reservoirs at different temperatures that are in contact with each other
Atoms 2019, 7, 51 16 of 18
cannot be in equilibrium; heat will flow from one to the other. Two ZPE reservoirs having different
energy densities that are in contact with each other can, however, be in equilibrium. For example, a
Casimir cavity can be in direct contact (open at its edges) with the free space surrounding it such that
the ZPE density inside and outside the cavity are different without any net flow of energy between
the two regions. Furthermore, extracting ZPE from the vacuum does not violate the second law of
thermodynamics [12].
Our apparent lack of clear success in extracting energy from the vacuum thus far leads to two
possible conclusions. Either fundamental constraints beyond what have been discussed here and the
nature of ZPE preclude extraction, or it is feasible and we just need to find a suitable technology.
Author Contributions: G.M. developed the analysis of the various zero-point energy harvesting methods. O.D.
and G.M. conceived of and designed the experiment, and O.D. carried them out. G.M. wrote the paper.
Funding: This work was funded by HUB Lab, Coolescence, and DARPA under SPAWAR Grant
No. N66001-06-1-2026.
Acknowledgments: Many thanks to B. Haisch and M.A. Mohamed for stimulating discussions about vacuum
energy, R. Cantwell and M. McConnell for help with the experiments, and to S. Grover, B. Haisch, B.L. Katzman
and J. Maclay for comments on the manuscript.
Conflicts of Interest: G.M. owns stock in a company founded to develop the gas-flow energy harvesting technology,
Jovion Corporation, but plays no active role in the company. Besides that, the authors declare no conflict of interest.
The funding sponsors had no role in the design of the study; in the collection, analyses, or interpretation of data;
in the writing of the manuscript, and in the decision to publish the results.
References
1. Milonni, P.W. The Quantum Vacuum; Academic Press: Boston, MA, USA, 1994.
2. Forward, R.L. Extracting electrical energy from the vacuum by cohesion of charged foliated conductors.
Phys. Rev. B 1984, 30, 1700–1702. [CrossRef]
3. Booth, I.J. Energy extraction from the quantum electrodynamic fluctuations of the vacuum state. Specul. Sci.
Technol. 1987, 10, 201–204.
4. Mead, F.B., Jr.; Nachamkin, J. System for Converting Electromagnetic Radiation Energy to Electrical Energy.
U.S. Patent No. 5,590,031, 31 December 1996.
5. Widom, A.; Sassaroli, E.; Srivastava, Y.N.; Swain, J. The Casimir effect and thermodynamic instability. arXiv
1998, arXiv:quant-ph/9803013v1.
6. Pinto, F. Method for Energy Extraction-II. U.S. Patent No. 6,920,032, 19 July 2005.
7. Davis, E.; Teofilo, V.L.; Puthoff, H.E.; Nickisch, L.J.; Rueda, A.; Cole, D.C. Review of experimental concepts
for studying the quantum vacuum field. Am. Inst. Phys. Conf. Proc. 2006, 813, 1390–1401.
8. Haisch, B.; Moddel, G. Quantum Vacuum Energy Extraction. U.S. Patent No. 7,379,286, 27 May 2008.
9. Valone, T.F. Proposed Use of Zero Bias Diode Arrays as Thermal Electric Noise Rectifiers and Non-Thermal
Energy Harvesters. Proc Space, Propulsion and Energy Sciences International Forum, Workshop on Future
Energy Sources. Am. Inst. Phys. Conf. Proc. 2009, 1103, 501–512.
10. Bell, D.A. Electrical Noise: Fundamentals and Physical Mechanism; Van Nostrand: London, UK, 1960; p. 60.
11. Casimir, H.B.G. On the attraction between two perfectly conducting plates. Proc. Kon. Ned. Akad Wet. 1948,
51, 793–795.
12. Cole, D.C.; Puthoff, H.E. Extracting energy and heat from the vacuum. Phys. Rev. E 1993, 48, 1562–1565.
[CrossRef]
13. Little, S.R. Null Tests of Breakthrough Energy Claims, 42nd AIAA/ASME/SAE/ASEE; Joint Propulsion Conference
& Exhibit: Sacramento, CA, USA, 2006; pp. 1–6.
14. Abbott, D.A.; Davis, B.R.; Phillips, N.J.; Eshraghian, K. Quantum Vacuum Fluctuations, Zero Point Energy
and the Question of Observable Noise. Unsolved Problems of Noise in Physics, Biology, Electronic Technology and
Information Technology; Doering, C.R., Kiss, L.B., Shlesinger, M.F., Eds.; World Scientific: Singapore, 1997;
pp. 131–138.
15. Sheehan, D.P. Casimir chemistry. J. Chem. Phys. 2009, 131, 104706. [CrossRef]
16. Joshi, S.; (University of Colorado, Boulder, CO, USA). Internal research, 2016.
Atoms 2019, 7, 51 17 of 18
17. Lef, H.S.; Rex, A.F. Maxwell’s Demon 2: Entropy, Classical and Quantum Information, Computing; IOP: London,
UK, 2003.
18. Capek, V.; Sheehan, D.P. Challenges to the Second Law of Thermodynamics; Springer: Berlin, Germany, 2005.
19. D’abramo, G. The peculiar status of the second law of thermodynamics and the quest for its violation. Stud.
Hist. Philos. Sci. Part B Stud. Hist. Philos. Mod. Phys. 2012, 43, 226–235.
20. Sheehan, D.P.; Mallin, D.J.; Garamella, J.T.; Sheehan, W.F. This could prove to be a violation of the Second
Law: Experimental test of a thermodynamic paradox. Found. Phys. 2014, 44, 235–247. [CrossRef]
21. McFee, R. Self-rectification in diodes and the second law of thermodynamics. Am. J. Phys. 1971, 39, 814–829.
[CrossRef]
22. Coutre, L.; Zitoun, R. Statistical Thermodynamics and Properties of Matter; Geissler, E., Translator; Overseas
Publishers: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2000; p. 229.
23. Bridgman, P.W. Note on the principle of detailed balancing. Phys. Rev. 1928, 31, 101–102. [CrossRef]
24. Dannon, H.V. Zero-point energy: Thermodynamic equilibrium and Planck radiation law. Gauge Inst. J. 2005,
1, 1–8.
25. Brown, W.C. Microwave to DC Converter. U.S. Patent No. 3,434,678, 25 March 1969.
26. Zhu, Z.; Joshi, S.; Grover, S.; Moddel, G. Graphene geometric diodes for terahertz rectennas. J. Phys. D Appl.
Phys. 2013, 46, 185101. [CrossRef]
27. Garret, M.; Grover, S. (Eds.) Rectenna Solar Cells; Springer: New York, NY, USA, 2013.
28. Burgess, R.E. Noise in receiving aerial systems. Proc. Phys. Soc. 1941, 53, 293–304. [CrossRef]
29. Scully, M.O.; Zubairy, M.S.; Agarwal, G.S.; Walther, H. Extracting work from a single heat bath via vanishing
quantum coherence. Science 2003, 299, 862–864. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
30. Lifshitz, E.M. The theory of molecular attractive forces between solids. In Perspectives in Theoretical Physics;
Pergamon: Oxford, UK, 1956; Volume 2, pp. 73–83.
31. Munday, J.N.; Capasso, F.; Parsegian, A. Measured long-range repulsive Casimir–Lifshitz forces. Nature
2009, 457, 170–173. [CrossRef]
32. Puthoff, H.E. Vacuum Energy Extraction by Conductivity Switching of Casimir Force; Technical Memo Inst. for
Advanced Studies: Austin, TX, USA, 1985.
33. de Man, S.; Iannuzzi, D. On the use of hydrogen switchable mirrors in Casimir force experiments. New J.
Phys. 2006, 8, 235–249. [CrossRef]
34. Scandurra, M. Thermodynamic properties of the quantum vacuum. arXiv 2001, arXiv:Hep-th/0104127v3.
35. Pinto, F. Engines powered by the forces between atoms. Am. Sci. 2014, 102, 280. [CrossRef]
36. Sheehan, D.; Nogami, S.H. Hammering with the Quantum Vacuum. Micro Nanosyst. 2011, 3, 348–353.
[CrossRef]
37. Wang, Q.; Zhu, Z.; Unruh, W.G. How the huge energy of quantum vacuum gravitates to drive the slow
accelerating expansion of the Universe. Phys. Rev. D 2017, 95, 103504. [CrossRef]
38. Revzen, M.; Opher, R.; Opher, M.; Mann, A. Casimir’s entropy. J. Phys. A Math. Gen. 1997, 30, 7783–7789.
[CrossRef]
39. Puthoff, H.E. The energetic vacuum: Implications for energy research. Spect. Sci. Technol. 1990, 13, 47–257.
40. Bezerra, V.B.; Klimchitskaya, G.L.; Mostepanenko, V.M. Correlation of energy and free energy for the thermal
Casimir force between real metals. Phys. Rev. A 2002, 66, 062112. [CrossRef]
41. Boyer, T.H. Random electrodynamics: The theory of classical electrodynamics with classical electromagnetic
zero-point radiation. Phys. Rev. D 1975, 11, 790–808. [CrossRef]
42. Puthoff, H.E. Quantum ground states as equilibrium particle–vacuum interaction states. Quantum Stud.
Math. Found. 2016, 3, 5–10. [CrossRef]
43. Cole, D.C.; Zou, Y. Quantum mechanical ground state of hydrogen obtained from classical electrodynamics.
Phys. Lett. A 2003, 317, 14–20. [CrossRef]
44. Boyer, T.H. Comments on Cole and Zou’s Calculation of the Hydrogen Ground State in Classical Physics.
Found. Phys. Lett. 2003, 16, 613–617. [CrossRef]
45. Nieuwenhuizen, T.M. On the stability of classical orbits of the hydrogen ground state in Stochastic
Electrodynamics. Entropy 2016, 18, 135. [CrossRef]
46. Cetto, A.M.; de la Peña, L. Environmental effects on spontaneous emission and lamb shift, according to
stochastic electrodynamics. Phys. Scr. 1988, T21, 27–32. [CrossRef]
Atoms 2019, 7, 51 18 of 18
47. Walther, H.; Varcoe, B.T.H.; Englert, B.-G.; Becker, T. Cavity quantum electrodynamics. Rep. Prog. Phys. 2006,
69, 1325–1382. [CrossRef]
48. Cavalleri, G.; Barbero, F.; Bertazzi, G.; Cesaroni, E.; Tonni, E.; Bosi, L.; Spavieri, G.; Gillies, G.T. A quantitative
assessment of stochastic electrodynamics with spin (SEDS): Physical principles and novel applications. Front
Phys China 2010, 5, 107–122. [CrossRef]
49. Puthoff, H.E.; Little, S.R.; Ibison, M. Engineering the zero-point field and polarizable vacuum for interstellar
flight. J. Br. Interplanet. Soc. 2002, 55, 137–144.
50. Dmitriyeva, O.; Moddel, G. Test of zero-point energy emission from gases flowing through Casimir cavities.
Phys. Procedia 2012, 38, 8–17. [CrossRef]
51. Roy, S.; Raju, R.; Chuang, H.F.; Cruden, B.A.; Meyyappan, M. Modeling gas flow through microchannels and
nanopores. J. Appl. Phys. 2003, 93, 4870–4879. [CrossRef]
52. Reif, F. Fundamentals of Statistical and Thermal Physics; Waveland Press: Long Grove, IL, USA, 2009; p. 178.
53. Kolmogorov, A.N. The local structure of turbulence in incompressible viscous fluid for very large Reynolds
numbers. Proc. Roy. Soc. Lond. Math. Phys. Sci. 1991, 434, 9–13. [CrossRef]
54. Iannuzzi, D.; Lisanti, M.; Capasso, F. Effect of hydrogen-switchable mirrors on the Casimir force. Proc. Natl.
Acad. Sci. USA 2004, 101, 4019–4023. [CrossRef]
55. Henriques, C.A.D.O. Study of Atomic Energy Shifts Induced by Casimir Cavities. Master’s Thesis, University
of Coimbra, Coimbra, Portugal, 2014.
56. Koch, R.H.; Van Harlingen, D.J.; Clarke, J. Measurements in quantum noise in resistively shunted Josephson
junctions. Phys. Rev. B 1982, 26, 74–87. [CrossRef]
57. De la Peña, L.; Valdés-Hernández, A.; Cetto, A.M. Statistical consequences of the zero-point energy of the
harmonic oscillator. Am. J. Phys. 2008, 76, 947–955. [CrossRef]
58. Boyer, T.H. Conjectured derivation of the Planck radiation spectrum from Casimir energies. J. Phys. A Math.
Gen. 2003, 36, 7425–7440. [CrossRef]
© 2019 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access
article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution
(CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).

Atoms 07 00051

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Atoms 07 00051

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

atoms

Atoms 2019, 7, 51; doi:10.3390/atoms7020051 www.mdpi.com/journal/atoms

2.1. Nonlinear Processing of the Zero-Point Field

2.1.1. Rectification of Zero-Point Fluctuations in a Diode

ambient conditions. In support of Valone’s approach, a straightforward analysis of diode rectification

2.1.2. Harvesting of Vacuum Fluctuations Using a Down-Converter

(c) Rectification of the concentrated radiation by the diode.

2.1.3. Nonlinear Processing of Background Fields in Nature

2.2. Mechanical Extraction Using Casimir Cavities

2.3. Pumping Atoms through Casimir Cavities

2.3.1. Zero-Point Energy Ground State and Casimir Cavities

2.3.3. Experimental Test of Radiant Emission Due to Gas Flow

Atoms 2019, 7, x FOR PEER REVIEW 10 of 18

Gas Flow Rate (sccm)

Gas Flow Rate (sccm)

Calculated Power (Torr x sccm)

Radiated Power (arbitrary units)

2.3.9. Deviations from Expected Results

2.3.10. Violations of the Second Law of Thermodynamics

2.3.11. Future Work to Investigate Gas Flow through Casimir Cavities

You might also like