Next Article in Journal
Intrinsic Conductance of Ferroelectric Charged Domain Walls
Previous Article in Journal / Special Issue
The Casimir Effect in Finite-Temperature and Gravitational Scenarios
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Editorial

Advances and Prospects in Casimir Physics

by
Galina L. Klimchitskaya
1,2 and
Vladimir M. Mostepanenko
1,2,3,*
1
Central Astronomical Observatory, Pulkovo of the Russian Academy of Sciences, 196140 Saint Petersburg, Russia
2
Peter the Great Saint Petersburg Polytechnic University, 195251 Saint Petersburg, Russia
3
Kazan Federal University, 420008 Kazan, Russia
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Physics 2024, 6(3), 1072-1082; https://doi.org/10.3390/physics6030066
Submission received: 10 July 2024 / Accepted: 16 August 2024 / Published: 22 August 2024
(This article belongs to the Special Issue 75 Years of the Casimir Effect: Advances and Prospects)

Abstract

:
In the present introductory to the Special Issue “75 Years of the Casimir Effect: Advances and Prospects”, we summarize the state of the art in this field of physics, briefly describe the topics of the contributing papers, formulate several unresolved problems, and outline possible pathways towards their resolution. Special attention is given to experiments on measuring the Casimir force, to the known problem of the dissipation of conduction electrons when one compares experiment with theory, and to the Casimir effect in novel materials and non-traditional situations. We conclude that in the future, this multidisciplinary quantum effect will continue to play a crucial role in both fundamental physics and its applications.

1. Introduction

The Casimir effect [1] was discovered 75 years ago, and now is an appropriate time to summarize its role in different physical phenomena, the results thus far obtained, and the unsolved problems, as well as to outline possible pathways towards their resolution.
At first sight, the Casimir prediction of the attractive force acting between two parallel, uncharged ideal metal planes kept at zero temperature could be considered to have a rather modest physical significance. The reason is that this force takes noticeable values only at extremely short separations between the plates, and both the ideal metal and the zero temperature are idealizations which are literally unrealizable in physical experiments.
The importance of the Casimir discovery greatly exceeded these expectations. The Casimir force is determined by the vacuum fluctuations of the electromagnetic and other quantum fields. These fluctuations are inherent to all physical phenomena in which Casimir forces may play some role. A few years after its discovery, the Casimir effect was generalized for the case of ideal metal planes kept at non-zero temperatures [2,3,4] and, within the framework of the Lifshitz theory [5,6,7], for two thick plates made of any material. It was shown that the Casimir force is a generalization of the van der Waals force [8] for separations where relativistic effects come into play, and to any temperature. The forces in question also act between atoms, molecules, and material surfaces, and in this case they are called Casimir–Polder forces [9].
There are a great number of applications of the Casimir force caused by the zero-point and thermal fluctuations of the electromagnetic field in condensed matter physics and atomic physics. In condensed matter physics, the Casimir force acts between any closely spaced surfaces made of metallic, dielectric, and semiconductor materials (see, e.g., Refs. [10,11,12,13,14,15,16,17,18,19,20,21,22,23,24,25,26,27,28,29,30,31], reviews [32,33], and monographs [34,35]). In atomic physics, the Casimir–Polder force has been calculated in many systems [36,37,38,39,40,41,42,43,44,45,46,47]. It plays a primary role in the phenomena of quantum reflection [48,49,50,51,52,53,54,55] and Bose–Einstein condensation [56,57,58,59,60,61] (see also the monograph [62,63]).
Many measurements of the Casimir force have been performed by means of an atomic force microscope, where the sharp tip was replaced with a relatively large sphere (see Refs. [32,34,64,65,66,67,68,69,70,71,72,73,74,75,76,77,78]), and by means of a micromechanical torsional oscillator [32,34,79,80,81,82,83,84,85]. Based on these measurement results, the Casimir force was applied for the creation of various next-generation micro- and nanoelectromechanical devices [86,87,88,89,90,91,92,93,94,95,96,97,98,99]. The Casimir–Polder force has been measured in experiments on quantum reflection [49,50,51,52] and Bose–Einstein condensation [56,57,60,61].
The Casimir effect for other than electromagnetic (scalar, spinor, gluon, etc.) fields has found prospective applications in elementary particle physics, for instance, in the bag model of hadrons (see Refs. [100,101,102,103,104,105,106] and the monograph [107]). It has been demonstrated that the Casimir effect is also of high importance in topologically non-trivial cosmological models, where the identification conditions play the same role as the materials boundaries, changing the spectrum of the vacuum fluctuations and leading to non-zero Casimir energy density [108,109,110,111,112,113]. A similar effect was found in multi-dimensional physics, where the extra spatial dimensions are compactified at some energy scale [114,115,116].
All of the above permits us to conclude that the Casimir force, regarded initially as an interesting but toy and somewhat exotic example, has developed over time into a broad research area, which is often called Casimir physics.

2. The Topics Highlighted in This Special Issue

This Special Issue, entitled “75 Years of the Casimir Effect: Advances and Prospects”, presents several scientific directions within the wide research area of Casimir-related phenomena. After the creation of the Lifshtz theory, which allows for the calculation of the Casimir force in plane-parallel configurations only, it was generalized for the case of arbitrary-shaped bodies [117,118,119,120,121,122,123,124,125,126] and, specifically, for the experimentally important configuration of a sphere above a plate [127,128,129,130,131,132,133,134,135]. In this Special Issue, this line of research is represented by Ref. [136], which is devoted to the application of the scattering approach for calculating the Casimir–Polder interaction with magnetodielectric bodies, by Ref. [137], which reviews an application of the method of derivative expansion in Casimir physics, by Ref. [138], which considers the Casimir forces with periodic structures, and by Ref. [139], calculating the Casimir–Polder force for a conducting cone.
Special attention in this Special Issue is devoted to recent progress in measuring the Casimir force. Reference [140] reviews the last experiments performed by means of an atomic force microscope. This includes measuring the normal Casimir force between the smooth surfaces of both non-magnetic and magnetic metals, normal and lateral Casimir forces between the corrugated surfaces, and the thermal Casimir force in graphene systems. The comparison of the experimental results with theory for graphene systems required the development of a novel approach to describing the response of graphene to the electromagnetic field because the previously used semi-phenomenological approaches, based on the Kubo formula, the two-dimensional Drude model, and density–density correlation functions [141,142,143,144], turned out to be insufficient. The new approach, which was found to be in agreement with the measurement data, uses the polarization tensor of graphene with non-zero values of the energy gap and the chemical potential found within the framework of thermal quantum field theory in (2 + 1) dimensions [145,146,147,148].
Two other experimental papers are devoted to the dynamical sensitivity of three-layer microelectromechanical systems exploiting the Casimir force to the optical properties of the intervening liquid layer [149] and to the planned experiment on measuring the Casimir pressure between two parallel plates spaced at micrometer separations [150]. Realization of the last experiment will allow to strengthen the constraints on the Yukawa-type corrections to the Newton law of gravitation and on the hypothetical constituents of dark matter and dark energy, such as axions, chameleons, symmetrons, and environment-dependent dilatons [151,152,153,154,155], which are often constrained from measuring the Casimir force [156,157,158,159,160,161,162]. One more experimentally oriented paper considers the possibility of compensating the electrostatic interaction between dielectric and metallic test bodies [163]. This investigation is directed towards solving the problem of surface patches, which complicates measurements of the Casimir force [164,165].
The major problem of Casimir physics, which has remained unresolved over the last 25 years, is the question of how to describe the free charge carriers correctly when calculating the Casimir force. It has been shown Refs. [32,34,72,74,75,80,81,85] that for metallic test bodies the Casimir force, calculated by means of the Lifshitz theory using the dissipative Drude model at low frequencies, is excluded by the measurement data. If the dissipationless plasma model is used in the calculations, the theoretical results agree with all precise experiments on measuring the Casimir force [32,34,72,74,75,80,81,85]. For the dielectric test bodies, theory comes into agreement with the measurement data only if the role of free charge carriers, which are present in all real dielectrics at any non-zero temperature, is omitted in the computations [32,34,65,69,70,166].
According to the results of Ref. [167] published in this Special Issue, the roots of the problem are not in accounting for or disregarding the dissipation properties of the conduction electrons in calculations of the Casimir force, but in the necessity of accounting for these properties correctly. It is shown that an account of the relaxation properties of conduction electrons at low frequencies by means of the Drude model in the region of propagating waves with any polarization and transverse magnetic evanescent waves does not lead to contradictions with the measurement data. The contradiction between the calculated and measured Casimir forces arises only when the Drude model is used to describe the response of metals to the low-frequency evanescent waves with transverse electric polarization.
It is common knowledge that the Drude model has numerous experimental confirmations in the region of propagating waves. It has also been confirmed by special experiments in the area of transverse magnetic evanescent waves [168]. As to the area of transverse electric evanescent waves, the Drude model lacks any reliable experimental confirmation. On this basis, it was concluded [167] that the experiments on measuring the Casimir force invalidate the Drude model in the area of transverse electric evanescent waves. An alternative experiment in the field of classical electrodynamics was proposed, which can independently confirm this important conclusion [169,170]. Reference [171] of this Special Issue suggests another experimental means of distinguishing between the Drude and plasma models, which is based on measuring the Lorentz force originating from thermal fluctuations.
It is interesting that for the Casimir force between two graphene sheets considered in Ref. [172] of this Special Issue, theory is in good agreement with the measurement data. The reason for this is that the electromagnetic response of graphene is described on the rigorous basis of quantum electrodynamics at non-zero temperature do not using any phenomenological approach like the Drude model. This is reached by employing the polarization tensor of graphene with any energy gap and the chemical potential found in the framework of thermal quantum field theory [145,146,147,148].
Several papers belonging to this Special Issue are devoted to the investigation of the Casimir effect in various specific configurations. Thus, in Ref. [173] the Casimir energy in (2 + 1)-dimensional field theories is considered which is interesting in connection with its application to novel two-dimensional materials, such as graphene, silicene, stanene, phosphorene, and others [174,175,176,177]. The Casimir forces in conformal field theories with defects and boundaries are discussed in Ref. [178]. The normal Casimir force for the planes with isotropic conductivity in the state of lateral motion is found in Ref. [179]. In Ref. [180], the Casimir–Lifshitz force of friction, which arises due to the relative motion of interacting bodies, and resulting heating are considered in the framework of fluctuational electrodynamics. Finally, it is explained in Ref. [181] how the Casimir force can be used to stabilize the levitation of a graphene sheet lifted by the repulsive force arising in an inhomogeneous magnetic field.
In a few papers included in this Special Issue, the Casimir effect is considered in rather non-standard situations and using some alternative approaches. For instance, in Ref. [182] the Casimir effect in axion electrodynamics is investigated where, due to the presence of an additional pseudoscalar quantity, the relationship between the vectors of the electric field, magnetic induction, electric displacement, and the magnetic field becomes more complicated than in the standard electrodynamics of continuous media. This subject is closely related to new materials called topological insulators, which are of great practical interest.
An interesting approach to the Casimir effect based on semi-classical electrodynamics is discussed in Ref. [183] in this Special Issue. This paper includes a preface discussing different concepts of intermolecular forces in the early history of physics. It is shown how the semi-classical approach results in the familiar Lifshits formula for Casimir free energy. One more study [184] is devoted to a derivation of the Casimir pressure between two Chern–Simons boundary layers deposited on dielectric substrates. For this purpose, gauge-invariant formalism was developed using the electric and magnetic Green functions. Two more papers are devoted to the dynamical Casimir effect. One of them [185] considers an analogy between the dynamical Casimir effect, black holes, and the radiation temperature of an accelerated electron. The other one [186] investigates an asymmetric force acting on a moving mirror modeled by the potential, which is equal to the difference between the delta function and its derivative in two-dimensional space–time. We also list one more paper published in this Special Issue which is devoted to the one-loop correction to the mass of an electron in a homogeneous magnetic field [187]. This issue has been considered by several authors but with somewhat differing results. Keeping in mind that the radiative corrections are similar in their physical nature to the Casimir effect, it is necessary to resolve all existing discrepancies.
As was discussed in Section 1, the Casimir effect arises not only in configurations with material boundaries but also in spaces with non-trivial topology. Because of this, it plays a significant role in gravitation and cosmology and in multi-dimensional theories of elementary particle physics. Four papers in this Special Issue represent this scientific direction in the field of Casimir physics. It is known that anti-de Sitter space–time plays a significant role in cosmology. Generally speaking, the braneworld model contains the fields propagating in the bulk or localized on the branes. The boundary conditions on the branes induce Casimir-type contributions to the expectation values of physical observables. In Ref. [188], the vacuum expectation of the surface stress–energy tensor for a scalar field is calculated in the configuration of two parallel branes orthogonal to the boundary of anti-de Sitter space–time.
Other objects of importance to cosmology are the so-called cosmic strings, i.e., the topological defects which could have been created in the early Universe during cosmological phase transitions. The Casimir interaction between two cosmic strings arising due to vacuum fluctuations of the scalar field with minimal coupling is considered in Ref. [189] in the cases both small and large separation distances, taking into account the transverse size of a string.
Finally, the Casimir effect for two parallel plates in a weak gravitational field and the wormholes determined by the Casimir energy densities of the Yang–Mills field are discussed in Ref. [190]. The same paper studies the Casimir energy density in Euclidean space–time with a non-trivial topology, equivalent to imposing the so-called helix identification conditions.

3. Future Prospects

As has been demonstrated above, the Casimir effect is a wide research area, with implications for practically all branches of modern physics. It is actively investigated both theoretically and experimentally by many research groups working in many countries. Over the last few years, a number of new breakthrough results have been obtained. Below, we outline the most crucial problems in this research area to be solved in the future.
Although for metallic test bodies at separations below several micrometers, the Casimir force was already measured with high precision, at larger separations, and for the test bodies made of semiconductor and dielectric materials, new breakthrough experimental results are expected in near future. Progress in precise force measurements can be stimulated using the traditional and novel techniques (see Refs. [140,150] published in this Special Issue) and by compensating for the spurious electric forces [163,164,165]. The obtained results are considered to be used for the creation of next-generation micro- and nanoelectromechanical devices driven by the Casimir force (see Ref. [149] of this Special Issue, elaborating this scientific direction).
One can expect that the problem of disagreement between experiment and theory, taking into account the dissipation of conduction electrons by means of the Drude model (this problem is often called the Casimir puzzle [32,34,75]), will be solved soon. In this Special Issue, the problem has already been narrowed down to the inapplicability of the Drude model in the region of transverse electric evanescent waves [167]. It has been shown [191,192,193] that if to modify the Drude model in this area phenomenologically by adding a spatially non-local contribution, the theoretical predictions come to an agreement with the measurement data. It remains to put the phenomenology on a solid fundamental basis as has already been made for the electromagnetic response of graphene [77,78,145,146,147,148].
In near future, Casimir physics is going also to find new applications in modern theoretical approaches beyond the Standard Model, e.g., in the brane models, multi-dimensional physics with compacted extra dimensions, the theory of topological defects, etc. It is to be used for obtaining stronger constraints on the Yukawa-type corrections to Newtonian gravity and the hypothetical particle constituents of dark matter and dark energy.
We hope that the papers published in this Special Issue, “75 Years of the Casimir Effect: Advances and Prospects”, will be helpful by stimulating further developments in this prospective field of physics.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, G.L.K. and V.M.M.; investigation, G.L.K. and V.M.M.; writing—original draft, V.M.M.; writing—review and editing, G.L.K. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

The work of G.L.K. and V.M.M. was partially funded by the Ministry of Science and Higher Education of Russian Federation as part of the World-Class Research Center program: Advanced Digital Technologies (contract No. 075-15-2022-311 dated 20 April 2022). The research of V.M.M. was also partially carried out in accordance with the Strategic Academic Leadership Program “Priority 2030” of the Kazan Federal University.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

References

  1. Casimir, H.B.G. On the attraction between two perfectly conducting plates. Proc. Kon. Ned. Akad. Wetensch. B 1948, 51, 793–795. Available online: https://dwc.knaw.nl/DL/publications/PU00018547.pdf (accessed on 11 August 2024).
  2. Fierz, M. Zur Anziehung leitender Ebenen im Vakuum. Helv. Phys. Acta 1960, 33, 855–858. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Mehra, J. Temperature correction to Casimir effect. Physica 1967, 37, 145–152. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Brown, L.S.; Maclay, G.J. Vacuum stress between conducting plates—An image solution. Phys. Rev. 1969, 184, 1272–1279. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Lifshitz, E.M. The theory of molecular attractive forces between solids. Zh. Eksp. Teor. Fiz. 1955, 29, 94–110. (In Russian); Sov. Phys. JETP 1956, 2, 73–83. Available online: http://jetp.ras.ru/cgi-bin/e/index/e/2/1/p73?a=list (accessed on 11 August 2024).
  6. Dzyaloshinskii, I.E.; Lifshitz, E.M.; Pitaevskii, L.P. The general theory of van der Waals’ forces. Usp. Fiz. Nauk 1961, 73, 381–422. (In Russian); Sov. Phys. Uspekhi 1961, 4, 153–176 [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Lifshitz, E.M.; Pitaevskii, L.P. Statistical Physics, Part 2; Pergamon: Oxford, UK, 1980; Available online: https://haidinh89.files.wordpress.com/2015/08/landau-l-d-lifshitz-e-m-course-of-theoretical-physics-vol-09-statistical-physics-part-2-3455.pdf (accessed on 11 August 2024).
  8. Parsegian, V.A. Van der Waals Forces: A Handbook for Biologists, Chemists, Engineers, and Physicists; Cambridge University Press: New York, NY, USA, 2005. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Casimir, H.B.G.; Polder, D. The influence of retardation on the London–van der Waals forces. Phys. Rev. 1948, 73, 360–372. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Hargreaves, C.M. Corrections to retarded dispersion force between metal bodies. Proc. Kon. Ned. Akad. Wetensch. B 1965, 68, 231–236. [Google Scholar]
  11. Boyer, T.H. Quantum electromagnetic zero-point energy of a conducting spherical shell and Casimir model for a charged particle. Phys. Rev. 1968, 174, 1764–1776. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Richmond, P.; Ninham, B.W. A note on the extension of the Lifshitz theory of van der Waals forces to magnetic media. J. Phys. C 1971, 4, 1988–1993. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Boyer, T.H. Van der Waals forces and zero-point energy for dielectric and permeable materials. Phys. Rev. A 1974, 9, 2078–2084. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Boström, M.; Sernelius, B.E. Comment on “Calculation of the Casimir force between imperfectly conducting plates”. Phys. Rev. A 2000, 61, 046101. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Boström, M.; Sernelius, B.E. Thermal effects on the Casimir force in the 0.1–5 μm range. Phys. Rev. Lett. 2000, 84, 4757–4760. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  16. Lambrecht, A.; Reynaud, S. Casimir force between metallic mirrors. Eur. Phys. J. D 2000, 8, 309–318. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Genet, C.; Lambrecht, A.; Maia Neto, P.; Reynaud, S. The Casimir force between rough metallic plates. EPL (Europhys. Lett.) 2003, 62, 484–490. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Boström, M.; Sernelius, B.E. Entropy of the Casimir effect between real metal plates. Phys. A 2004, 339, 53–59. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Torgerson, J.R.; Lamoreaux, S.K. Low-frequency character of the Casimir force between metallic films. Phys. Rev. E 2004, 70, 047102. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  20. Bimonte, G.; Calloni, E.; Esposito, G.; Milano, L.; Rosa, L. Towards measuring variations of Casimir energy by a superconducting cavity. Phys. Rev. Lett. 2005, 94, 180402. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Bimonte, G.; Calloni, E.; Esposito, G.; Rosa, L. Variations of Casimir energy from a superconducting transition. Nucl. Phys. B 2005, 726, 441–463. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Bimonte, G. Comment on “Low-frequency character of the Casimir force between metallic films”. Phys. Rev. E 2006, 73, 048101. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Bimonte, G. A theory of electromagnetic fluctuations for metallic surfaces and van der Waals interactions between metallic bodies. Phys. Rev. Lett. 2006, 96, 160401. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Bimonte, G. Bohr-van Leeuwen theorem and the thermal Casimir effect for conductors. Phys. Rev. A 2009, 79, 042107. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Levin, M.; McCauley, A.P.; Rodrigues, A.W.; Reid, M.T.H.; Johnson, S.G. Casimir repulsion between metallic objects in vacuum. Phys. Rev. Lett. 2010, 105, 090403. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  26. Bimonte, G. Making precise predictions of the Casimir force between metallic plates via a weighted Kramers-Kronig transform. Phys. Rev. A 2011, 83, 042109. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Schwinger, J.; DeRaad, L.L.; Milton, K.A. Casimir effect in dielectrics. Ann. Phys. 1978, 115, 1–23. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Inui, N. Temperature dependence of the Casimir force between silicon slabs. J. Phys. Soc. Jpn. 2003, 72, 2198–2202. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Canaguier-Durand, A.; Gérardin, A.; Guérout, R.; Maia Neto, P.A.; Nesvizhevsky, V.V.; Voronin, A.Y.; Lambrecht, A.; Reynaud, S. Casimir interaction between a dielectric nanosphere and a metallic plane. Phys. Rev. A 2011, 83, 032508. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Rosa, F.S.S.; Dalvit, D.A.R.; Milonni, P.W. Electrodynamic energy, absorption, and Casimir forces. II. Inhomogeneous dielectric media. Phys. Rev. A 2011, 84, 053813. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Inui, N. Temperature dependence of the Casimir force between a superconductor and a magnetodielectric. Phys. Rev. A 2012, 86, 022520. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Klimchitskaya, G.L.; Mohideen, U.; Mostepanenko, V.M. The Casimir force between real materials: Experiment and theory. Rev. Mod. Phys. 2009, 81, 1827–1885. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Woods, L.M.; Dalvit, D.A.R.; Tkatchenko, A.; Rodriguez-Lopez, P.; Rodriguez, A.W.; Podgornik, R. Materials perspective on Casimir and van der Waals interactions. Rev. Mod. Phys. 2016, 88, 045003. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Bordag, M.; Klimchitskaya, G.L.; Mohideen, U.; Mostepanenko, V.M. Advances in the Casimir Effect; Oxford University Press: Oxford, UK, 2015. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Sernelius, B.E. Fundamentals of van der Waals and Casimir Interactions; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2018. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Zhou, F.; Spruch, L. Van-der-Waals and retardation (Casimir) interactions of an electron or an atom with multilayered walls. Phys. Rev. A 1995, 52, 297–310. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  37. Caride, A.O.; Klimchitskaya, G.L.; Mostepanenko, V.M.; Zanette, S.I. Dependences of the van der Waals atom-wall interaction on atomic and material properties. Phys. Rev. A 2005, 71, 042901. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Babb, J.F. Long-range atom–surface interactions for cold atoms. J. Phys. Conf. Ser. 2005, 19, 1. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Safari, H.; Welsch, D.-G.; Buhmann, S.Y.; Scheel, S. van der Waals potentials of paramagnetic atoms. Phys. Rev. A 2008, 78, 062901. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Haakh, H.; Intravaia, F.; Henkel, C.; Spagnolo, S.; Passante, R.; Power, B.; Sols, F. Temperature dependence of the magnetic Casimir–Polder interaction. Phys. Rev. A 2009, 80, 062905. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Ellingsen, S.; Buhmann, S.Y.; Scheel, S. Temperature-independent Casimir–Polder forces despite large thermal photon numbers. Phys. Rev. Lett. 2010, 104, 223003. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Passante, R.; Rizzuto, L.; Spagnolo, S.; Tanaka, S.; Petrosky, T.Y. Harmonic oscillator model for the atom-surface Casimir–Polder interaction energy. Phys. Rev. A 2012, 85, 062109. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Sun, W. Interaction forces between a spherical nanoparticle and a flat surface. Phys. Chem. Chem. Phys. 2014, 16, 5846–5854. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Khusnutdinov, N.; Kashapov, R.; Woods, L.M. Casimir–Polder effect for a stack of conductive planes. Phys. Rev. A 2016, 94, 012513. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Fuchs, S.; Crosse, J.A.; Buhmann, S.Y. Casimir–Polder shift and decay rate in the presence of nonreciprocal media. Phys. Rev. A 2017, 95, 023805. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Milton, K.A.; Li, Y.; Kalauni, P.; Parashar, P.; Guérout, P.; Ingold, G.-L.; Lambrecht, A.; Reynaud, S. Negative entropies in Casimir and Casimir–Polder interactions. Fortschr. Phys./Prog. Phys. 2017, 65, 1600047. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Fuchs, S.; Bennett, R.; Krems, R.V.; Buhmann, S.Y. Nonadditivity of optical and Casimir–Polder potentials. Phys. Rev. Lett. 2018, 121, 083603. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  48. Berkhout, J.J.; Luiten, O.J.; Setija, I.D.; Hijmans, T.W.; Mizusaki, T.; Walraven, J.T.M. Quantum reflection: Focusing of hydrogen atoms with a concave mirror. Phys. Rev. Lett. 1989, 63, 1689–1693. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Yu, I.A.; Doyle, M.J.; Sandberg, J.C.; Cesar, C.L.; Kleppner, D.; Greytak, T.J. Evidence for universal quantum reflection of hydrogen from liquid 4He. Phys. Rev. Lett. 1993, 71, 1589–1593. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  50. Shimizu, F. Specular reflection of very slow metastable neon atoms from a solid surface. Phys. Rev. Lett. 2001, 86, 987–991. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  51. Friedrich, H.; Jacoby, G.; Meister, C.J. Quantum reflection by Casimir-van der Waals potential tails. Phys. Rev. A 2002, 65, 032902. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Druzhinina, V.; DeKieviet, M. Experimental observation of quantum reflection far from threshold. Phys. Rev. Lett. 2003, 91, 193202. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Oberst, H.; Tashiro, Y.; Shimizu, K.; Shimizu, F. Quantum reflection of He* on silicon. Phys. Rev. A 2005, 71, 052901. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Madroñero, J.; Friedrich, H. Influence of realistic atom wall potentials in quantum reflection traps. Phys. Rev. A 2007, 75, 022902. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Bezerra, V.B.; Klimchitskaya, G.L.; Mostepanenko, V.M.; Romero, C. Lifshitz theory of atom-wall interaction with applications to quantum reflection. Phys. Rev. A 2008, 78, 042901. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Harber, D.M.; McGuirk, J.M.; Obrecht, J.M.; Cornell, E.A. Thermally induced losses in ultra-cold atoms magnetically trapped near room-temperature surfaces. J. Low Temp. Phys. 2003, 133, 229–238. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Leanhardt, A.E.; Shin, Y.; Chikkatur, A.P.; Kielpinski, D.; Ketterle, W.; Pritchard, D.E. Bose–Einstein condensates near a microfabricated surface. Phys. Rev. Lett. 2003, 90, 100404. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Antezza, M.; Pitaevskii, L.P.; Stringari, S. Effect of the Casimir–Polder force on the collective oscillations of a trapped Bose–Einstein condensate. Phys. Rev. A 2004, 70, 053619. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Lin, Y.-J.; Teper, I. Chin, C.; Vuletić, V. Impact of the Casimir–Polder potential and Johnson noise on Bose–Einstein condensate stability near surfaces. Phys. Rev. Lett. 2004, 92, 050404. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  60. Harber, D.M.; Obrecht, J.M.; McGuirk, J.M.; Cornell, E.A. Measurement of the Casimir–Polder force through center-of-mass oscillations of a Bose–Einstein condensate. Phys. Rev. A 2005, 72, 033610. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Obrecht, J.M.; Wild, R.J.; Antezza, M.; Pitaevskii, L.P.; Stringari, S.; Cornell, E.A. Measurement of the temperature dependence of the Casimir–Polder force. Phys. Rev. Lett. 2007, 98, 063201. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Buhmann, S.Y. Dispersion Forces I: Macroscopic Quantum Electrodynamics and Ground-State Casimir, Casimir–Polder and van der Waals Forces; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2012. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  63. Buhmann, S.Y. Dispersion Forces II: Many-Body Effects, Excited Atoms, Finite Temperature and Quantum Friction; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2012. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  64. Mohideen, U.; Roy, A. Precision measurement of the Casimir force from 0.1 to 0.9 μm. Phys. Rev. Lett. 1998, 81, 4549–4552. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  65. Chen, F.; Klimchitskaya, G.L.; Mostepanenko, V.M.; Mohideen, U. Control of the Casimir force by the modification of dielectric properties with light. Phys. Rev. B 2007, 76, 035338. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  66. de Man, S.; Heeck, K.; Wijngaarden, R.J.; Iannuzzi, D. Halving the Casimir force with Conductive Oxides. Phys. Rev. Lett. 2009, 103, 040402. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  67. de Man, S.; Heeck, K.; Iannuzzi, D. Halving the Casimir force with conductive oxides: Experimental details. Phys. Rev. A 2010, 82, 062512. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  68. Torricelli, G.; van Zwol, P.J.; Shpak, O.; Binns, C.; Palasantzas, G.; Kooi, B.J.; Svetovoy, V.B.; Wuttig, M. Switching Casimir force with phase-change materials. Phys. Rev. A 2010, 82, 010101. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  69. Chang, C.-C.; Banishev, A.A.; Klimchitskaya, G.L.; Mostepanenko, V.M.; Mohideen, U. Reduction of the Casimir force from indium tin oxide film by UV treatment. Phys. Rev. Lett. 2011, 107, 090403. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  70. Banishev, A.A.; Chang, C.-C.; Castillo-Garza, R.; Klimchitskaya, G.L.; Mostepanenko, V.M.; Mohideen, U. Modifying the Casimir force between indium tin oxide film and Au sphere. Phys. Rev. B 2012, 85, 045436. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  71. Laurent, J.; Sellier, H.; Mosset, A.; Huant, S.; Chevrier, J. Casimir force measurements in Au-Au and Au-Si cavities at low temperature. Phys. Rev. B 2012, 85, 035426. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  72. Banishev, A.A.; Klimchitskaya, G.L.; Mostepanenko, V.M.; Mohideen, U. Demonstration of the Casimir force between ferromagnetic surfaces of a Ni-coated sphere and a Ni-coated plate. Phys. Rev. Lett. 2013, 110, 137401. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  73. Sedighi, M.; Svetovoy, V.B.; Palasantzas, G. Casimir force measurements from silicon carbide surfaces. Phys. Rev. B 2016, 93, 085434. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  74. Liu, M.; Xu, J.; Klimchitskaya, G.L.; Mostepanenko, V.M.; Mohideen, U. Examining the Casimir puzzle with an upgraded AFM-based technique and advanced surface cleaning. Phys. Rev. B 2019, 100, 081406. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  75. Liu, M.; Xu, J.; Klimchitskaya, G.L.; Mostepanenko, V.M.; Mohideen, U. Precision measurements of the gradient of the Casimir force between ultraclean metallic surfaces at larger separations. Phys. Rev. A 2019, 100, 052511. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  76. Svetovoy, V.B.; Postnikov, A.V.; Uvarov, I.V.; Stepanov, F.I.; Palasantzas, G. Measuring the dispersion forces near the van der Waals–Casimir transition. Phys. Rev. Appl. 2020, 13, 064057. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  77. Liu, M.; Zhang, Y.; Klimchitskaya, G.L.; Mostepanenko, V.M.; Mohideen, U. Demonstration of unusual thermal effect in the Casimir force from graphene. Phys. Rev. Lett. 2021, 126, 206802. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  78. Liu, M.; Zhang, Y.; Klimchitskaya, G.L.; Mostepanenko, V.M.; Mohideen, U. Experimental and theoretical investigation of the thermal effect in the Casimir interaction from graphene. Phys. Rev. B 2021, 104, 085436. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  79. Decca, R.S.; López, D.; Fischbach, E.; Krause, D.E. Measurement of the Casimir force between dissimilar metals. Phys. Rev. Lett. 2003, 91, 050402. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  80. Decca, R.S.; López, D.; Fischbach, E.; Klimchitskaya, G.L.; Krause, D.E.; Mostepanenko, V.M. Precise comparison of theory and new experiment for the Casimir force leads to stronger constraints on thermal quantum effects and long-range interactions. Ann. Phys. 2005, 318, 37–80. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  81. Decca, R.S.; López, D.; Fischbach, E.; Klimchitskaya, G.L.; Krause, D.E.; Mostepanenko, V.M. Tests of new physics from precise measurements of the Casimir pressure between two gold-coated plates. Phys. Rev. D 2007, 75, 077101. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  82. Decca, R.S.; López, D.; Osquiguil, E. New results for the Casimir interaction: Sample characterization and low temperature measurements. Int. J. Mod. Phys. A 2010, 25, 2223–2230. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  83. Bao, Y.; Guérout, R.; Lussange, J.; Lambrecht, A.; Cirelli, R.A.; Klemens, F.; Mansfield, W.M.; Pai, C.S.; Chan, H.B. Casimir force on a surface with shallow nanoscale corrugations: Geometry and finite conductivity effects. Phys. Rev. Lett. 2010, 105, 250402. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  84. Intravaia, F.; Koev, S.; Jung, I.W.; Talin, A.A.; Davids, P.S.; Decca, R.S.; Aksyuk, V.A.; Dalvit, D.A.R.; López, D. Strong Casimir force reduction through metallic surface nanostructuring. Nat. Commun. 2013, 4, 2515. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  85. Bimonte, G.; López, D.; Decca, R.S. Isoelectronic determination of the thermal Casimir force. Phys. Rev. B 2016, 93, 184434. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  86. Buks, E.; Roukes, M.L. Stiction, adhesion, and the Casimir effect in micromechanical systems. Phys. Rev. B 2001, 63, 033402. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  87. Buks, E.; Roukes, M.L. Metastability and the Casimir effect in micromechanical systems. EPL (Europhys. Lett). 2001, 54, 220–226. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  88. Chan, H.B.; Aksyuk, V.A.; Kleiman, R.N.; Bishop, D.J.; Capasso, F. Quantum mechanical actuation of microelectromechanical system by the Casimir effect. Science 2001, 291, 1941–1944. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  89. Chan, H.B.; Aksyuk, V.A.; Kleiman, R.N.; Bishop, D.J.; Capasso, F. Nonlinear micromechanical Casimir oscillator. Phys. Rev. Lett. 2001, 87, 211801. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  90. Barcenas, J.; Reyes, L.; Esquivel-Sirvent, R. Scaling of micro- and nanodevices actuated by the Casimir force. Appl. Phys. Lett. 2005, 87, 263106. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  91. Palasantzas, G. Contact angle influence on the pull-in voltage of microswitches in the presence of capillary and quantum vacuum effects. J. Appl. Phys. 2007, 101, 053512. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  92. Palasantzas, G. Pull-in voltage of microswitch rough plates in the presence of electromagnetic and acoustic Casimir forces. J. Appl. Phys. 2007, 101, 063548. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  93. Esquivel-Sirvent, R.; Pérez-Pascual, R. Geometry and charge carrier induced stability in Casimir actuated nanodevices. Eur. Phys. J. B 2013, 86, 467. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  94. Broer, W.; Palasantzas, G.; Knoester, G.; Svetovoy, V.B. Significance of the Casimir force and surface roughness for actuation dynamics of MEMS. Phys. Rev. B 2013, 87, 125413. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  95. Sedighi, M.; Broer, W.; Palasantzas, G.; Kooi, B.J. Sensitivity of micromechanical actuation on amorphous to crystalline phase transformations under the influence of Casimir forces. Phys. Rev. B 2013, 88, 165423. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  96. Zou, J.; Marcet, Z.; Rodriguez, A.W.; Reid, M.T.H.; McCauley, A.P.; Kravchenko, I.I.; Lu, T.; Bao, Y.; Johnson, S.G.; Chan, H.B. Casimir forces on a silicon micromechanical chip. Nat. Commun. 2013, 4, 1845. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  97. Broer, W.; Waalkens, H.; Svetovoy, V.B.; Knoester, J.; Palasantzas, G. Nonlinear actuation dynamics of driven Casimir oscillators with rough surfaces. Phys. Rev. Appl. 2013, 4, 054016. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  98. Liu, X.-F.; Li, Y.; Jing, H. Casimir switch: Steering optical transparancy with vacuum forces. Sci. Rep. 2016, 6, 27102. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  99. Inui, N. Optical switching of a graphene mechanical switch using the Casimir effect. J. Appl. Phys. 2017, 122, 104501. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  100. Milton, K.A. Fermionic Casimir stress on a spherical bag. Ann. Phys. 1983, 150, 432–438. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  101. Baacke, J.; Igarashi, Y. Casimir energy of confined massive quarks. Phys. Rev. D 1983, 27, 460–463. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  102. Bordag, M.; Elizalde, E.; Kirsten, K.; Leseduarte, S. Casimir energies for massive scalar fields in a spherical geometry. Phys. Rev. D 1997, 56, 4896–4904. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  103. Elizalde, E.; Santos, F.C.; Tort, A.C. The Casimir energy of a massive fermionic field confined in a (d + 1)-dimensional slab-bag. Int. J. Mod. Phys. A 2003, 18, 1761–1772. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  104. Cruz, M.B.; Bezerra de Mello, E.R.; Petrov, A.Y. Fermionic Casimir effect in a field theory model with Lorentz symmetry violation. Phys. Rev. D 2019, 99, 085012. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  105. Mandlecha, Y.V.; Gavai, R.V. Lattice fermionic Casimir effect in a slab bag and universality. Phys. Lett. B 2022, 835, 137558. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  106. Rohim, A.; Romadani, A.; Adam, A.S. Casimir effect of Lorentz-violating charged Dirac field in background magnetic field. Prog. Theor. Exp. Phys. 2024, 2024, 033B01. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  107. Milton, K.A. The Casimir Effect: Physical Manifestations of Zero-Point Energy; World Scientific: Singapore, 2001. [Google Scholar]
  108. Ford, L.H. Quantum vacuum energy in a closed universe. Phys. Rev. D 1976, 14, 3304–3313. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  109. Dowker, J.S.; Critchley, R. Covariant Casimir calculations. J. Phys. A Math. Gen. 1976, 9, 535–540. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  110. Isham, C.J. Twisted quantum fields in a curved space-time. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. A Math. Phys. Sci. 1978, 362, 383–404. [Google Scholar]
  111. DeWitt, B.S.; Hart, C.F.; Isham, C.J. Topology and quantum field theory. Phys. A 1979, 96, 197–211. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  112. Ford, L.H. Vacuum polarization in a non-simply connected spacetime. Phys. Rev. D 1980, 21, 933–948. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  113. Helliwell, T.M.; Konkowski, D.A. Vacuum fluctuations outside cosmic strings. Phys. Rev. D 1986, 34, 1918–1920. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  114. Candelas, P.; Weinberg, S. Calculation of gauge couplings and compact circumferences from self-consistent dimensional reduction. Nucl. Phys. B 1984, 237, 397–441. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  115. Chodos, A.; Myers, E. Gravitational contribution to the Casimir energy in Kaluza-Klein theories. Ann. Phys. 1984, 156, 412–441. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  116. Birmingham, D.; Kantowski, R.; Milton, K.A. Scalar and spinor Casimir energies in even-dimensional Kaluza–Klein spaces of the form M4 × SN1 × SN2 × ⋯. Phys. Rev. D 1988, 38, 1809–1822. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  117. Emig, T.; Jaffe, R.L.; Kardar, M.; Scardicchio, A. Casimir interaction between a plate and a cylinder. Phys. Rev. Lett. 2006, 96, 080403. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  118. Emig, T.; Graham, N.; Jaffe, R.L.; Kardar, M. Casimir forces between arbitrary compact objects. Phys. Rev. Lett. 2007, 99, 170403. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  119. Kenneth, O.; Klich, I. Casimir forces in a T-operator approach. Phys. Rev. B 2008, 78, 014103. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  120. Emig, T.; Graham, N.; Jaffe, R.L.; Kardar, M. Casimir forces between compact objects: The scalar case. Phys. Rev. D 2008, 77, 025005. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  121. Rahi, S.J.; Emig, T.; Graham, N.; Jaffe, R.L.; Kardar, M. Scattering theory approach to electromagnetic Casimir forces. Phys. Rev. D 2009, 80, 085021. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  122. Fosco, C.D.; Lombardo, F.C.; Mazzitelli, F.D. Proximity force approximation for the Casimir energy as a derivative expansion. Phys. Rev. D 2011, 84, 105031. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  123. Bimonte, G.; Emig, T.; Jaffe, R.L.; Kardar, M. Casimir forces beyond the proximity force approximation. EPL (Europhys. Lett.) 2012, 97, 50001. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  124. Bimonte, G.; Emig, T.; Kardar, M. Material dependence of Casimir force: Gradient expansion beyond proximity. Appl. Phys. Lett. 2012, 100, 074110. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  125. Graham, N. Electromagnetic Casimir forces in elliptic cylinder geometries. Phys. Rev. D 2013, 87, 105004. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  126. Spreng, B.; Hartmann, M.; Henning, V.; Maia Neto, P.A.; Ingold, G.-L. Proximity force approximation and specular reflection: Application of the WKB limit of Mie scattering to the Casimir effect. Phys. Rev. A 2018, 97, 062504. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  127. Bulgac, A.; Magierski, P.; Wirzba, A. Scalar Casimir effect between Dirichlet spheres or a plate and a sphere. Phys. Rev. D 2006, 73, 025007. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  128. Bordag, M. Casimir effect for a sphere and a cylinder in front of a plane and corrections to the proximity force theorem. Phys. Rev. D 2006, 73, 125018. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  129. Maia Neto, P.A.; Lambrecht, A.; Reynaud, S. Casimir energy between a plane and a sphere in electromagnetic vacuum. Phys. Rev. A 2008, 78, 012115. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  130. Canaguier-Durand, A.; Maia Neto, P.A.; Cavero-Pelaez, I.; Lambrecht, A.; Reynaud, S. Casimir interaction between plane and spherical metallic surfaces. Phys. Rev. Lett. 2009, 102, 230404. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  131. Bordag, M.; Pirozhenko, I. Casimir entropy for a ball in front of a plane. Phys. Rev. D 2010, 82, 125016. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  132. Teo, L.P. Material dependence of Casimir interaction between a sphere and a plate: First analytic correction beyond proximity force approximation. Phys. Rev. D 2013, 88, 045019. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  133. Bimonte, G. Going beyond PFA: A precise formula for the sphere-plate Casimir force. EPL (Europhys. Lett.) 2017, 118, 20002. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  134. Hartmann, M.; Ingold, G.-L.; Maia Neto, P.A. Plasma versus Drude modeling of the Casimir force: Beyond the proximity force approximation. Phys. Rev. Lett. 2017, 119, 043901. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  135. Hartmann, M.; Ingold, G.-L.; Maia Neto, P.A. Advancing numerics for the Casimir effect to experimentally relevant asect ratios. Phys. Scr. 2018, 93, 114003. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  136. Bimonte, G.; Emig, T. Surface scattering expansion of the Casimir–Polder interaction for magneto-dielectric bodies: Convergence properties for insulators, conductors, and semiconductors. Physics 2024, 6, 194–205. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  137. Fosco, C.D.; Lombardo, F.C.; Mazzitelli, F.D. Casimir Physics beyond the Proximity Force Approximation: The Derivative Expansion. Physics 2024, 6, 290–316. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  138. Castillo-López, S.G.; Esquivel-Sirvent, R.; Pirruccio, G.; Villarreal, C. Casimir forces with periodic structures: Abrikosov flux lattices. Physics 2024, 6, 394–406. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  139. Graham, N. Electromagnetic Casimir–Polder interaction for a conducting cone. Physics 2023, 5, 1003–1012. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  140. Dhital, M.; Mohideen, U. A Brief review of some recent precision Casimir force measurements. Physics 2024, 6, 891–904. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  141. Hult, E.; Hyldgaard, P.; Rossmeisl, J.; Lundqvist, B.I. Density-functional calculation of van der Waals forces for free-electron-like surfaces. Phys. Rev. B 2001, 64, 195414. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  142. Drosdoff, D.; Woods, L.M. Casimir forces and graphene sheets. Phys. Rev. B 2010, 82, 155459. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  143. Sernelius, B.E. Retarded interactions in graphene systems. Phys. Rev. B 2012, 85, 195427. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  144. Zhu, T.; Antezza, M.; Wang, J.-S. Dynamical polarizability of graphene with spatial dispersion. Phys. Rev. B 2021, 103, 125421. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  145. Bordag, M.; Fialkovsky, I.V.; Gitman, D.M.; Vassilevich, D.V. Casimir interaction between a perfect conductor and graphene described by the Dirac model. Phys. Rev. B 2009, 80, 245406. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  146. Fialkovsky, I.V.; Marachevsky, V.N.; Vassilevich, D.V. Finite-temperature Casimir effect for graphene. Phys. Rev. B 2011, 84, 035446. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  147. Bordag, M.; Klimchitskaya, G.L.; Mostepanenko, V.M.; Petrov, V.M. Quantum field theoretical description for the reflectivity of graphene. Phys. Rev. D 2015, 91, 045037. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  148. Bordag, M.; Fialkovskiy, I.; Vassilevich, D. Enhanced Casimir effect for doped graphene. Phys. Rev. B 2016, 93, 075414. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  149. Tajik, F.; Palasantzas, G. Dynamical sensitivity of three-layer micro electromechanical systems to the optical properties of the intervening liquid layer. Physics 2023, 5, 1081–1093. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  150. Haghmoradi, H.; Fischer, H.; Bertolini, A.; Galić, I.; Intravaia, F.; Pitschmann, M.; Schimpl, R.; Sedmik, R.I.P. Force metrology with plane parallel plates: Final design review and outlook. Physics 2024, 6, 690–741. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  151. Khoury, J.; Weltman, A. Chameleon fields: Awaiting surprises for tests of gravity in space. Phys. Rev. Lett. 2004, 93, 171104. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  152. Olive, K.A.; Pospelov, M. Environmental dependence of masses and coupling constants. Phys. Rev. D 2008, 77, 043524. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  153. Hinterbichler, K.; Khoury, J. Screening long-range forces through local symmetry restoration. Phys. Rev. Lett. 2010, 104, 231301. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  154. Hinterbichler, K.; Khoury, J.; Levy, A.; Matas, A. Symmetron cosmology. Phys. Rev. D 2011, 84, 103521. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  155. Brax, P.; Fischer, H.; Käding, C.; Pitschmann, M. The environment dependent dilaton in the laboratory and the solar system. Eur. Phys. J. C 2022, 82, 934. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  156. Decca, R.S.; López, D.; Chan, H.B.; Fischbach, E.; Krause, D.E.; Jamell, C.R. Constraining new forces in the Casimir regime using the isoelectronic technique. Phys. Rev. Lett. 2005, 94, 240401. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  157. Antoniadis, I.; Baessler, S.; Bücher, M.; Fedorov, V.V.; Hoedl, S.; Lambrecht, A.; Nesvizhevsky, V.V.; Pignol, G.; Protasov, K.V.; Reynaud, S.; et al. Short-range fundamental forces. Comptes Rendus Phys. 2011, 12, 755–778. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  158. Klimchitskaya, G.L.; Mostepanenko, V.M. Improved constraints on the coupling constants of axion-like particles to nucleons from recent Casimir-less experiment. Eur. Phys. J. C 2015, 75, 164. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  159. Chen, Y.-J.; Tham, W.K.; Krause, D.E.; López, D.; Fischbach, E.; Decca, R.S. Stronger limits on hypothetical Yukawa interactions in the 30–8000 nm range. Phys. Rev. Lett. 2016, 116, 221102. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  160. Klimchitskaya, G.L.; Mostepanenko, V.M. Constraints on axionlike particles and non-Newtonian gravity from measuring the difference of Casimir forces. Phys. Rev. D 2017, 95, 123013. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  161. Klimchitskaya, G.L. Recent breakthrough and outlook in constraining the non-Newtonian gravity and axion-like particles from Casimir physics. Eur. Phys. J. C 2017, 77, 315. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  162. Klimchitskaya, G.L.; Kuusk, P.; Mostepanenko, V.M. Constraints on non-Newtonian gravity and axionlike particles from measuring the Casimir force in nanometer separation range. Phys. Rev. D 2020, 101, 056013. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  163. Svetovoy, V.B. Casimir forces between a dielectric and metal: Compensation of the electrostatic interaction. Physics 2023, 5, 814–822. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  164. Speake, C.C.; Trenkel, C. Forces between conducting surfaces due to spatial variations of surface potential. Phys. Rev. Lett. 2003, 90, 160403. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  165. Behunin, R.O.; Dalvit, D.A.R.; Decca, R.S.; Genet, C.; Jung, I.W.; Lambrecht, A.; Liscio, A.; López, D.; Reynaud, S.; Schnoering, G.; et al. Kelvin probe force microscopy of metallic surfaces used in Casimir force measurements. Phys. Rev. A 2014, 90, 062115. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  166. Klimchitskaya, G.L.; Mostepanenko, V.M. Conductivity of dielectric and thermal atom-wall interaction. J. Phys. A Math. Theor. 2008, 41, 312002. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  167. Klimchitskaya, G.L.; Mostepanenko, V.M. Casimir effect invalidates the Drude model for transverse electric evanescent waves. Physics 2023, 5, 952–967. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  168. Törmä, P.; Barnes, W.L. Strong coupling between surface plasmon polaritons and emitters: A review. Rep. Prog. Phys. 2015, 78, 013901. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  169. Klimchitskaya, G.L.; Mostepanenko, V.M.; Svetovoy, V.B. Probing the response of metals to low-frequency s-polarized evanescent fields. EPL (Europhys. Lett.) 2022, 139, 66001. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  170. Klimchitskaya, G.L.; Mostepanenko, V.M.; Svetovoy, V.B. Experimentum crucis for electromagnetic eesponse of metals to evanescent waves and the Casimir puzzle. Universe 2022, 8, 574. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  171. Henkel, C. Rectified Lorentz force from thermal current fluctuations. Physics 2024, 6, 568–578. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  172. Klimchitskaya, G.L.; Mostepanenko, V.M. The Casimir force between two graphene sheets: 2D Fresnel reflection coefficients, contributions of different polarizations, and the role of evanescent waves. Physics 2023, 5, 1013–1030. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  173. Asorey, M.; Iuliano, C.; Ezquerro, F. Casimir energy in (2 + 1)-dimensional field theories. Physics 2024, 6, 613–628. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  174. Geim, A.K.; Novoselov, K.S. The rise of graphene. Nat. Mater. 2007, 6, 183–191. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  175. Lalmi, B.; Oughaddou, H.; Enriquez, H.; Kara, A.; Vizzini, S.B.; Ealet, B.N.; Aufray, B. Epitaxial growth of a silicene sheet. Appl. Phys. Lett. 2010, 97, 223109. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  176. Garcia, J.C.; de Lima, D.B.; Assali, L.V.C.; Justo, J.F. Group IV graphene- and graphane-like nanosheets. J. Phys. Chem. C 2011, 115, 13242. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  177. Carvalho, A.; Wang, M.; Zhu, X.; Rodin, A.S.; Su, H.; Castro Neto, A.H. Phosphorene: From theory to applications. Nat. Rev. Mater. 2016, 1, 16061. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  178. Brax, P.; Fichet, S. Casimir forces in CFT with defects and boundaries. Physics 2024, 6, 544–667. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  179. Khusnutdinov, N.; Emelianova, N. The normal Casimir force for lateral moving planes with isotropic conductivities. Physics 2024, 6, 148–163. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  180. Dedkov, G.V. Casimir–Lifshitz frictional heating in a system of parallel metallic plates. Physics 2024, 6, 13–30. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  181. Inui, N. Stabilizing diamagnetic levitation of a graphene flake through the Casimir effect. Physics 2023, 5, 923–935. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  182. Brevik, I.; Pal, S.; Li, Y.; Gholamhosseinian, A.; Boström, M. Axion electrodynamics and the Casimir effect. Physics 2024, 6, 407–421. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  183. Boström, M.; Gholamhosseinian, A.; Pal, S.; Li, Y.; Brevik, I. Semi-classical electrodynamics and the Casimir effect. Physics 2024, 6, 456–467. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  184. Marachevsky, V.N.; Sidelnikov, A.A. Casimir interaction of Chern–Simons layers on substrates via vacuum stress tensor. Physics 2024, 6, 496–514. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  185. Ievlev, I.; Good, M.R.R. Larmor temperature, Casimir dynamics, and Planck’s law. Physics 2023, 5, 797–813. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  186. Gorban, M.J.; Julius, W.D.; Brown, P.M.; Matulevich, J.A.; Radhakrishnan, R.; Cleaver, G.B. First and second-order forces in the asymmetric dynamical Casimir effect for a single δ-δ mirror. Physics 2024, 6, 760–779. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  187. Bordag, M.; Pirozhenko, I.G. Mass and magnetic moment of the electron and the stability of QED—A critical review. Physics 2024, 6, 237–250. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  188. Saharian, A. Surface Casimir densities on branes orthogonal to the boundary of anti-de Sitter spacetime. Physics 2023, 5, 1145–1162. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  189. Grats, Y.V.; Spirin, P. Vacuum interaction of topological strings at short distances. Physics 2023, 5, 1163–1180. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  190. Bezerra, V.B.; Mota, H.F.S.; Lima, A.P.C.M.; Alencar, G.; Muniz, C.R. Casimir effect in finite temperature and gravitational scenarios. Physics 2024, 6, 1046–1071. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  191. Klimchitskaya, G.L.; Mostepanenko, V.M. An alternative response to the off-shell quantum fluctuations: A step forward in resolution of the Casimir puzzle. Eur. Phys. J. C 2020, 80, 900. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  192. Klimchitskaya, G.L.; Mostepanenko, V.M. Casimir effect for magnetic media: Spatially nonlocal response to the off-shell quantum fluctuations. Phys. Rev. D 2021, 104, 085001. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  193. Klimchitskaya, G.L.; Mostepanenko, V.M. Theory-experiment comparison for the Casimir force between metallic test bodies: A spatially nonlocal dielectric response. Phys. Rev. A 2022, 105, 012805. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Klimchitskaya, G.L.; Mostepanenko, V.M. Advances and Prospects in Casimir Physics. Physics 2024, 6, 1072-1082. https://doi.org/10.3390/physics6030066

AMA Style

Klimchitskaya GL, Mostepanenko VM. Advances and Prospects in Casimir Physics. Physics. 2024; 6(3):1072-1082. https://doi.org/10.3390/physics6030066

Chicago/Turabian Style

Klimchitskaya, Galina L., and Vladimir M. Mostepanenko. 2024. "Advances and Prospects in Casimir Physics" Physics 6, no. 3: 1072-1082. https://doi.org/10.3390/physics6030066

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop