April 10, 1990
This paper was written and courteously shared by Dr. H. E.
Puthoff of the Institute for Advanced Studies, Austin, Texas
78746.
See full paper at:
http://www.ldolphin.org/zpe.html
Quantum Fluctuations of Empty Space : A New Rosetta Stone
of Physics?
In a recent article in the popular press (The Economist, January
7, 1989, pp. 71-74) it was noted how many of this century's
new technologies depend on the Alice-in-Wonderland physics
of quantum mechanics, with all of its seeming absurdities.
For starters, one begins with the observation that classical
physics tells us that atoms, which can be likened to a
miniature solar system with electron planets orbiting a nuclear
sun, should not exist.
The circling electrons should radiate away their energy like
microscopic radio antennas and spiral into the nucleus. But
atoms do exist, and multitudinous other phenomena which
don't obey the rules do occur.
To resolve this cognitive dissonance physicists introduced
quantum mechanics, which is essentially a set of mathematical
rules to describe what in fact does happen. But when we
re-ask the question, "why didn't the electron radiate away its
energy?" the answer is, basically, "well, in quantum theory it
doesn't."
It's at this point that not only the layman but some physicists
can begin to feel that someone's not playing fair. I say only
some physicists because the majority of working physicists are
content simply to use quantum rules that work, that describe
(if only statistically) what will happen in a given experiment
under certain conditions.
These are the so-called "logical positivists" who, in a
philosophical sense, are like the news reporter whose only
interest is the bottom line.
There are nevertheless individuals here and there who still
want to know why the electron didn't radiate, why Einstein's
equations are in this form and not another, where does the
ubiquitous zero- point energy that fills even empty space come
from, why quantum theory, and perhaps the biggest question
of all, how did the universe get started anyway?
Page 1 Surprisingly enough, there may be answers to these
seemingly unanswerable meta-level questions. Perhaps even
more surprising, they seem to be emerging, as a recent book
title put it, from "Something called Nothing" (1), or to put it
more correctly, from empty space, the vacuum, the void.
To comprehend the significance of this statement, we will have
to take a detour into the phenomenon of fluctuations with
which quantum theory abounds, including the fluctuations of
empy space itself.
Before the advent of quantum theory, physics taught that any
simple oscillator such as a pendulum, when excited, would
eventually come to rest if not continuously energized by some
outside force such as a spring. This is because of friction
losses in the system.
After it was recognized that quantum theory was a more
accurate representation of nature, one of the findings of
quantum theory was that such an oscillator would in fact not
come to total rest but rather would continue to "jiggle"
randomly about its resting point with a small amount of energy
always present, the so-called "zero-point energy."
Although it may not be observable to the eye on your
grandfather clock because it is so minute, it is nonetheless
very real, and in many physical systems has important
consequences.
One example is the presence of a certain amount of "noise" in
a microwave receiver that can never be gotten rid of, no matter
how perfect the technology. This is an example which shows
that not only physical devices such as pendulums have this
property of incessant fluctuation, but also fields, such as
electromagnetic fields (radio waves, microwaves, light, X-rays,
etc.).
As it turns out, even though the zero-point energy in any
particular mode of an electromagnetic field is minute, there are
so many possible modes of propagation (frequencies,
directions) in open space, the zero-point energy summed up
over all possible modes is quite enormous; in fact, greater
than, for example, nuclear energy densities. And this in all of
so-called "empty" space around us. Let us concentrate on the
effects of such electromagnetic zero-point fluctuations.
With such large values, it might seem that the effects of
electromagnetic zero-point energy should be quite obvious, but
this is not the case because of its extremely uniform density.
Just as a vase standing in a room is not likely to fall over
spontaneously, so a vase bombarded uniformly on all sides by
millions of ping pong balls would not do likewise because of
the balanced conditions of the uniform bombardment.
The only evidence of such a barrage might be minute jiggling
of the vase, and similar mechanisms are thought to be
involved in the quantum jiggle of zero-point motion.
However, there are certain conditions in which the uniformity
of the background electromagnetic zero-point energy is slightly
disturbed and leads to physical effects.
One is the slight perturbation of the lines seen from
transitions between atomic states known as the Lamb Shift
(2), named after its discoverer, Willis Lamb.
Another, also named for its discoverer, is the Casimir Effect, a
unique attractive quantum force between closely-spaced metal
plates.
An elegant analysis by Milonni et. al. at Los Angeles National
Laboratory (3) shows the Casimir force to be due to radiation
pressure from the background electromagnetic zero-point
energy which has become unbalanced due to the presence of
the plates, and which results in the plates being pushed
together.
From this it would seem that it might be possible to extract
electrical energy from the vacuum, and indeed the possibility
of doing so (at least in principle) has been shown in a paper of
that same name by Robert Forward (4) at Hughes Research
Laboratories in Malibu, California.
What does this have to do with our basic questions? Let's
start with the question as top why the electron in a simple
hydrogen atom doesn't radiate as it circles the proton in its
stable ground state atomic orbit.
This issue has been re-addressed in a recent paper by the
author, this time taking into account what has been learned
over the years about the effects of zero-point energy. (5)
There it is shown that the electron can be seen as continually
radiating away its energy as predicted by classical theory, but
simultaneously absorbing a compensating amount of energy
from the ever-present sea of zero-point energy in which the
atomm is immersed, and an assumed equilibrium between
these two processes leads to the correct values for the
parameters known to define the ground-state orbit.
Thus the ground-state orbit is set by a dynamic equilibrium in
which collapse of the state is prevented by the presence of the
zero-point energy. The significance of this observation is that
the very stability of matter itself appears to depend on the
presence of the underlying sea of electromagnetic zero-point
energy.
With regard to the gravitational attraction that is described so
well by Einstein's theory, its fundamental nature is still not
well understood. Whether addressed simply in terms of
Newton's Law, or with the full rigor of general relativity,
gravitational theory is basically descriptive in nature, without
revealing the underlying dynamics for that description.
As a result, attempts to unify gravity with the other forces
(electromagnetic, strong and weak nuclear forces) or to
develop a quantum theory of gravity have foundered again and
again on difficulties that can be traced back to a lack of
understanding at a fundamental level.
To rectify these difficulties, theorists by and large have
resorted to ever-increasing levels of mathematical
sophistication and abstraction, as in the recent development of
supergravity and superstring theories.
Taking a completely different tack when addressing these
difficulties in the sixties, the well-known Russian physicist
Andrei Sakharov put forward the somewhat radical hypothesis
that gravitation might not be a fundamental interaction at all,
but rather a secondary or residual effect associated with other
(non- gravitational) fields. (6)
Specifically, Sakharov suggested that gravity might be an
induced effect brought about by changes in the zero-point
energy of the vacuum, due to the presence of matter.
If correct, gravity would then be understood as a variation on
the Casimir theme, in which background zero-point-energy
pressures were again responsible.
Although Sakharov did not develop the concept much further,
he did outline certain criteria such a theory would have to
meet such as predicting the value of the gravitational constant
G in terms of zero-point-energy parameters.
The approach to gravity outlined by Sakharov has recently been
addressed in detail, and with positive reults, again by the
author. (7)
The gravitational interaction is shown to begin with the fact
that a particle situated in the sea of electromagnetic
zero-point fluctuations develops a "jitter" motion, or
ZITTERBEWEGUNG as it is called.
When there are two or more particles they are each influenced
not only by the fluctuating background field, but also by the
fields generated by the other particles, all similarly undergoing
ZITTERBEWEGUNG motion, and the inter-particle coupling due
to these fields results in the attractive gravitational force.
Gravity can thus be understood as a kind of long-range Casimir
force. Because of its electromagnetic unerpinning, gravitational
theory in this form constitutes what is known in the literature
as an "already-unified" theory.
The major benefit of the new approach is that it provides a
basis for understanding various characteristics of the
gravitational interaction hitherto unexplained.
These include the relative weakness of the gravitational force
under ordinary circumstances (shown to be due to the fact that
the coupling constant G depends inversely on the large value
of the high-frequency cutoff of the zero-point-fluctuation
spectrum); the existence of positive but not negative mass
(traceable to a positive-only kinetic-energy basis for the mass
parameter); and the fact that gravity cannot be shielded (a
consequence of the fact that quantum zero-point-fluctuation
"noise" in general cannot be shielded, a factor which in other
contexts sets a lower limit on the detectability of
electromagnetic signals).
As to where the ubiquitous electromagnetic zero-point energy
comes from, historically there have been two schools of
thought: existence by fiat as part of the boundary conditions
of the universe, or generation by the (quantum-fluctuation)
motion of charged particles that constitute matter.
A straightforward calculation of the latter possibility has
recently been carried out by the author. (8)
It was assumed that zero-point fields drive particle motion,
and that the sum of particle motions throughout the universe
in turn generate the zero-point fields, in the form of a
self-regenerating cosmological feedback cycle not unlike a cat
chasing its own tail.
This self-constistent approach yielded the known zero-point
field distribution, thus indicating a dynamic-generation process
for the zero-point fields.
Now as to the question of why quantum theory. Although
knowledge of zero-point fields emerged from quantum physics
as that subject matured, Professor Timothy Boyer at City
College in New York took a contrary view.
He bagan asking in the late sixties what would happen if we
took classical physics as it was and introduced a background of
random, classical fluctuating fields of the zero-point spectral
distribution type. Could such an all-classical model reproduce
quantum theory in its entirety, and might this possibility have
been overlooked by the founders of quantum theory who were
not aware of the existence of such a fluctuating background
field?
(First, it is clear from the previously-mentioned cosmological
calculation that such a field distribution would reproduce itself
on a continuing dynamic basis.)
Boyer began by tackling the problems that led to the
introduction of quantum theory in the first place, such as the
blackbody radiation curve and the photoelectric effect. One by
one the known quantum results were reproduced by this
upstart neoclassical approach, now generally referred to as
Stochastic Electrodynamics (SED) (9), as contrasted to
quantum electrodynamics (QED).
Indeed, Milonni at Los Alamos noted in a review of the Boyer
work that had physicists in 1900 thought of taking this route,
they would probably have been more comfortable with this
classical approach than with Planck's hypothesis of the
quantum, and one can only speculate as to the direction that
physics would have taken then.
The list of topics successfully analyzed within the SED
formulation (i.e., yielding precise quantitative agreement with
QED treatments) has now been extended to include the
harmonic oscillator, Casimir and Van der Waals forces and the
thermal effects of acceleration through the vacuum, to name a
few.
Out of this work emerged the reasons for such phenomena as
the uncertainty principle, the incessant fluctuation of particle
motion, the existence of Van der Waals forces even at zero
temperature, and so forth, all shown to be due to the influence
of the unceasing activity of the random background fields.
There are also some notable failures in SED, such as
transparent derivation of something as simple as Schrodinger's
equation, which turns out as yet to be an intractable problem.
Therefore, it is unlikely that quantum theory as we have come
to know it and love it will be entirely replaced by a refurbished
classical theory in the near future.
Nonetheless, the successes to date of the SED approach, by
its highlighting of the role of background
zero-point-fluctuations, means that when the final chapter is
written on quantum theory, field fluctuations in empty space
will be accorded an honored position.
And now to the preeminent question of all, where did the
Universe come from? Or, in modern terminology, what started
the Big Bang? Could quantum fluctuations of empty space have
something to do with this also?
Well, Prof. Edward Tryon of Hunter College of the City
University of New York thought so when he proposed in 1973
that our Universe may have originated as a fluctuation of the
vacuum on a large scale, as "simply one of those things which
happen from time to time." (10)
This idea was later refined and updated within the context of
inflationary cosmology by Alexander Vilenkin of Tufts
University, who proposed that the universe is created by
quantum tunneling from literally nothing into the something
we call our universe. (11)
Although highly speculative, these types of models indicate
once again that physicists find themselves turning again and
again to the Void (and the fluctuations thereof) for their
answers.
Those with a practical bent of mind may be left with yet one
more unanswered question. Can this emerging Rosetta Stone
of physics be used to translate such lofty insights into
mundane application?
Could the engineer of the future specialize in "vacuum
engineering?" Could the energy crisis be solved by harnessing
the energies of the zero-point sea?
After all, since the basic zero-point energy form is highly
random in nature, and tending towards self-cancellation, if a
way could be found to bring order out of chaos, the, because of
the highly energetic nature of the vacuum fluctuations,
relatively large effects could in principle be produced.
Given our relative ignorance at this point, we must fall back on
a quote given by Podolny (12) when contemplating this same
issue.
"It would be just as presumptuous to deny the feasibility of
useful application as it would be irresponsible to guarantee
such application."
Only the future can reveal the ultimate use to which Mankind
will put this remaining Fire of the Gods, the quantum
fluctuations of empty space.
See full paper at:
http://www.ldolphin.org/zpe.html
REFERENCES
1. R. Podolny, "Something Called Nothing" (Mir Publ., Moscow,
1986)
2. W. E. Lamb, Jr., and R. C. Retherford, "Fine Structure of the
Hydrogen Atom by a Microwave Method," Phys. Rev. 72, 241
(1947)
3. P. W. Milonni, R. J. Cook and M. E. Goggin, "Radiation
Pressure from the Vacuum : Physical Interpretation of the
Casimir Force," Phys. Rev. A 38, 1621 (1988)
4. R. L. Forward, "Extracting Electrical Energy from the Vacuum
by Cohesion of Charged Foliated Conductors," Phys. Rev. B 30,
1700 (1984)
5. H. E. Puthoff, "Ground State of Hydrogen as a Zero-Point
Fluctuation-Determined State," Phys. Rev. D 35, 3266 (1987)
See also science news article, "Why Atoms Don't Collapse," in
New Scientist, p. 26 (9 July 1987)
6. A. D. Sakharov, "Vacuum Quantum Fluctuations in Curved
Space and the Theory of Gravitation, Dokl. Akad. Nauk. SSSR
(Sov. Phys. - Dokl. 12, 1040 (1968). See also discussion in C.
W. Misner, K. S. Thorne and J. A. Wheeler, Gravitation
(Freeman, San Francisco, 1973), p. 426
7. H. E. Puthoff, "Gravity as a Zero-Point Fluctuation Force,"
Phys. Rev. A 39, 2333 (1989)
8. H. E. Puthoff, "Source of Vacuum Electromagnetic Zero-Point
Energy," subm. to Phys. Rev. A, (March 1989)
9. See review of SED by T. H. Boyer, "A Brief Survey of
Stochastic Electrodynamics," in Foundations of Radiation
Theory and Quantum Electrodynamics, edited by A. O. Barut
(Plenum, New York, 1980) See also the very readable account
"The Classical Vacuum," in Scientific American, p. 70 (August
1985)
10. E. P. Tryon, "Is the Universe a Vacuum Fluctuation?"
Nature 246, 396 (1973)
11. A. Vilenkin, "Creation of Universes from Nothing," Phys.
Lett. 117B, 25 (1982)
12. R. Podolny, Ref. 1, p. 211
We of Vangard Sciences wish to express our thanks to Dr.
Puthoff for allowing us to list his excellent paper on Zero Point
Energy on the KeelyNet. If you have questions or comments,
you may address them to KeelyNet or directly to Dr. Puthoff at
the address on the title page.