4.5 Article

Optical-Cavity-Induced Current

期刊

SYMMETRY-BASEL
卷 13, 期 3, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/sym13030517

关键词

MIM diode; metal– insulator– metal diode; photoinjection; internal photoemission; vacuum fluctuations; Casimir effect; zero-point fluctuations; geometrical asymmetry

资金

  1. TheDenver Foundation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The formation of a submicron optical cavity on one side of a metal-insulator-metal tunneling device induces an electrical current between the metal layers with no applied voltage. Various tests were conducted to eliminate experimental artifacts as possible causes for the observed electrical output. The fast transport and scattering times of hot charge carriers in these devices are consistent with a model involving energy increments from zero-point fluctuations.
The formation of a submicron optical cavity on one side of a metal-insulator-metal (MIM) tunneling device induces a measurable electrical current between the two metal layers with no applied voltage. Reducing the cavity thickness increases the measured current. Eight types of tests were carried out to determine whether the output could be due to experimental artifacts. All gave negative results, supporting the conclusion that the observed electrical output is genuinely produced by the device. We interpret the results as being due to the suppression of vacuum optical modes by the optical cavity on one side of the MIM device, which upsets a balance in the injection of electrons excited by zero-point fluctuations. This interpretation is in accord with observed changes in the electrical output as other device parameters are varied. A feature of the MIM devices is their femtosecond-fast transport and scattering times for hot charge carriers. The fast capture in these devices is consistent with a model in which an energy increment E may be accessed from zero-point fluctuations for a time increment t, following a increment E increment t uncertainty-principle-like relation governing the process.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据