http://arxiv.org/pdf/1202.0478v1.pdf
*OBSERVATION OF REDUCTION IN CASIMIR FORCE WITHOUT CHANGE OF DIELECTRIC PERMITTIVITY* FYI for the zero point energy folks. This interesting paper describes an experiment that shows that the Casimir force can be minipulated as follows: Additional information is provided on the effect of the significant (up to 35%) reduction in the magnitude of the Casimir force between an Au-coated sphere and an indium tin oxide film which was observed after UV treatment of the latter. A striking feature of this effect is that the reduction is not accompanied with a corresponding variation of the dielectric permittivity, as confirmed by direct ellipsometry measurements. The measurement data are compared with computations using the Lifshitz theory. It is shown that the data for the untreated sample are in a very good agreement with theory taking into account the free charge carriers in the indium tin oxide. The data for the UV-treated sample exclude the theoretical results obtained with account of free charge carriers. These data are found to be in a very good agreement with theory disregarding the free charge carriers in an indium tin oxide film. A possible theoretical explanation of our observations as a result of phase transition of indium tin oxide from metallic to dielectric state is discussed in comparison with other related experiments. On Mon, Feb 6, 2012 at 2:38 PM, Roarty, Francis X <[email protected] > wrote: > Agreed, and if there happens to be a zero point component of this > technology as I suspect then there will be a reversible linkage to virtual > particles that could lead to a reactionless drive.**** > > Fran**** > > ** ** > > *From:* Randy Wuller [mailto:[email protected]] > *Sent:* Monday, February 06, 2012 1:36 PM > *To:* [email protected] > *Subject:* EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:Feb 1st 2012 National Research Council News > Release & Report: NASA's 16 top technical challenges for the next 5 years* > *** > > ** ** > > I must say, when I see the words "simply NO way" used to describe the > capabilities of a process we don't understand, my annoyance meter starts to > twitch. (Which is why I found it necessary to respond) I really wish > these kind of comments weren't so common in our society with regard to the > future. Don't get me wrong, Mr. Lynn may be exactly correct, but making > those predictions with the knowledge we have now seems premature. **** > > **** > > Ransom**** > > ----- Original Message ----- **** > > *From:* Robert Lynn <[email protected]> **** > > *To:* [email protected] **** > > *Sent:* Monday, February 06, 2012 12:08 PM**** > > *Subject:* Re: [Vo]:Feb 1st 2012 National Research Council News Release & > Report: NASA's 16 top technical challenges for the next 5 years**** > > ** ** > > There is simply no way that LENR will be useful for getting stuff to orbit > - unless it is used as a method for making cheaper chemical rocket fuels, > and even then rocket fuel costs are only a few % of a launch. **** > > - LENR power density is far too low (a 3500kg SSME delivers 9GW of power, > ie 2.5MW/kg)**** > > - The temperature (<700°C) is too low to heat hydrogen sufficiently to > give a competitive specific impulse to match the density and performance of > other chemical fuels. With LENR/LH2 at 1000°C you might get to 6000m/s > exhaust velocity but LOX/LH2 can do 4700m/s and is a far more dense and > cheap fuel combination than using all expensive LH2 (a tremendously bulky > and expensive fuel requiring enormous well insulated tanks).**** > > ** ** > > However LENR will be tremendously useful for moving stuff around slowly in > orbit and interplanetary space using various types of high Isp plasma > drives.**** > > ** ** > > On 5 February 2012 21:06, Chemical Engineer <[email protected]> wrote:*** > * > > * > http://ns1.nianet.org/workshops/pdfs/Olds%20LaRC%20Workshop%20Presentation%20Final.pdf > ***** > > ** ** > > *Page 14 shows an LENR thermal propulsion prototype from 2009 - 18 GW!**** > * > > LENR Rocket**** > > Fully Reusable SSTO Vehicle powered by Low Energy Nuclear Reactions > (LENR) Propulsion**** > > Reactor Power**** > > Payload**** > > LOX-Augmented Nuclear Thermal Rocket**** > > (H2) with LENR Reactor**** > > 18 GW**** > > 20,000 lbs to LEO**** > > ** ** > > On Sat, Feb 4, 2012 at 9:04 AM, Chemical Engineer <[email protected]> > wrote:**** > > I will interpret "Nuclear Thermal Propulsion" to including LENR... 5 years > would not be too bad for something not on the near horizon 1 year ago. > Hopefully we can have a residential HVAC/Generator before that or at least > something to heat our coffee.**** > > ** ** > > http://www8.nationalacademies.org/onpinews/newsitem.aspx?RecordID=13354 ** > ** > > ** ** > > -- radiation mitigation for human spaceflight; > -- guidance, navigation, and control; > -- optical systems; > -- long-duration crew health; > -- solar power generation; > -- high-contrast imaging and spectroscopy technologies; > -- environmental control and life support systems; > -- electric propulsion; > -- detectors and focal planes; > -- instruments and sensors; > -- fission power generation; > -- lightweight and multifunctional materials and structures; > -- nuclear thermal propulsion; > -- entry, descent, and landing thermal protection systems; > -- active thermal control of cryogenic systems; and **** > > ** ** > > ** ** > >
