Quantum Fluctuations of Empty Space: A New Rosetta Stone in Physics?

Full text

Quantum Fluctuations of Empty Space:
A New Rosetta Stone in Physics?
by
Dr. H. E. Puthoff
Institute for Advanced Studies,
4030 W. Braker Lane, Suite 300
Austin, Texas 78759
1990
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?
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 Alamos
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 to 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 atom 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 results, 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 underpinning,
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-consistent 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 began 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.
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,"
New Scientist, p. 26 (9 July 1987)
6. A. D. Sakharov, “Vacuum 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); Phys. Rev. A 47, 3454
(1993)
8. H. E. Puthoff, "On the Source of Vacuum Electromagnetic
Zero-Point Energy," Phys. Rev. A 40, 4857 (1989); Phys.
Rev. 44, 3382, 3385 (1991)
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," 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