4.5 Review

Casimir effect: The classical limit

期刊

ANNALS OF PHYSICS
卷 288, 期 1, 页码 103-136

出版社

ACADEMIC PRESS INC ELSEVIER SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1006/aphy.2000.6118

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

We analyze the high temperature (or classical) limit of the Casimir effect. A useful quantity which arises naturally in our discussion is the relative Casimir energy which we define for a configuration of disjoint conducting boundaries of arbitrary shapes, as the difference of Casimir energies between the given configuration and a configuration with the same boundaries infinitely far apart. Using path integration techniques, we show that the relative Casimir energy vanishes exponentially fast in temperature. This is consistent with a simple physical argument based on Kirchhoff's law. As a result the relative Casimir entropy which we define in an obviously analogous manner, tends, in the classical limit, to a finite asymptotic value which depends only on the geometry of the boundaries. Thus the Casimir force between disjoint pieces of the boundary, in the classical limit, is entropy driven and is governed by a dimensionless number characterizing the geometry of the cavity. Contributions to the Casimir thermodynamical quantities due to each individual connected component of the boundary exhibit logarithmic deviations in temperature from the behavior just described. These logarithmic deviations seem to arise due to our difficulty to separate the Casimir energy (and the other thermodynamical quantities) from the electromagnetic self-energy of each of the connected components of the boundary in a well defined manner. Our approach to the Casimir effect is not to impose sharp boundary conditions on the fluctuating field, but rather take into consideration its interaction with the plasma of charge carriers in the boundary, with the plasma frequency playing the role of a physical UV cutoff. This also allows us to analyze deviations from a perfect conductor behavior. (C) 2001 Academic Press.

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