  # stephaneww

Senior Members

503

1

## Everything posted by stephaneww

1. hello I would like to know the complete formula to have a precise value of the value of the acceleration of the expansion of the universe (m/s^2) at the Hubble radius in the Lambda-CDM model please ...if possible with an arXiv source, which would be a luxury thanks in advance
2. to be synthetic : S = lPl2 is a surface (= plate for the Casimir effect) 1/S = 1/lPl2 in QFT or 1/S = Λ in cosmology are energies according to their side in the equality of the Casimir effect, their physical meaning is different. I do not see anything more convincing
3. of course there are no plates in cosmology just as Λ was initially used to make the universe static to finally account for the acceleration of the expansion of the universe, 1/S = Λ changes the physical meaning of physical plates. The fact remains that dF / dS keeps the physical meaning of an energy density (or of a pressure if you prefer)
4. once again : in one side S is the surface of the plates, in the other side dF/dS is an energy density in Casimir effect egality
5. Let's see: with : SPl = lPl2 Planck surface 1/SPl = 1/lPl2 = zero point energy of the QFT FPl/SPl = energy density of zero point energy of the QFT the physical meaning is not in doubt here so why would putting 1/S =Λ not make physical sense ?
6. Hello In fact the solution is probably very simple : We just have to pass the surface S on the other side of the equality of casimir effect with : 1/dS = Λ and dF = FPl = c4/G, Planck force We have thus by the same trick as the change of side of the equality for the cosmological constant in the EINSTIEN equation to obtain the energy density of the cosmological constant. We don't need physical plates in the cosmos anymore
7. There was a bit of irony in my question: I don't see how one can invoke 2 plates to talk about the Casimir effect in cosmology. So it must be something else. Λ and lPl-2 are energies expressed in m-2. You don't need to know complex QM terms, nor QM to understand this.
8. ok this is beyond what I know and understand uh, does he use two plates or a space geometry in this approach?
9. ok question : do they need 2 plates for this calculational approach ? I
10. it's not a problem. it is indeed an excessive shortcut on my part. i haven't found any sources in my proposition, cosmologycal constant and zero-point energy of quantum fields are linked to obtain the Casimir effect
11. here : https://royalsocietypublishing.org/doi/10.1098/rsta.2019.0229 you can read the whole article, I didn't take the time to translate it al either it was badly said or it is a problem of automatic translation I refer you to the whole article quoted above here too but I haven't access : https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/The-vacuum-energy%3A-Casimir-effect-and-the-constant-Elizalde/e0d922a743ae3c2c5ef7cb61cfb391f1fab7fcb3
12. it is simply the interaction of the cosmological constant at the quantum scale (lPl-2). It does not "become" the cosmological constant. The cosmological constant is already in the equality. It is the identification of (1) to (2) that allows to say that we are in the framework of the Casimir effect https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Effet_Casimir#Expression_de_la_force_par_unité_de_surface traduction : Moreover, it is more than likely that the effect also depends on the distance L between the plates. "Probable" does not prohibit another way of presenting L-4 edit : moreover I would be curious to know what L4 represents in nature
13. oops yes indeed it is a pressure or J/m3 i.e. an energy density the units of (1) and (2) of the first post indicate it and are correct they
14. the separation distance is not important in my identification of the equalities: 1/L^4 becomes the cosmological constant multiplied by the QFT quantum vacuum energy (lPl^2) to obtain the Casimir effect
15. tradution : It is further assumed that the plates are perfect conductors of infinite electrical conductivity, and that they are not charged. if I understand correctly the vacuum is conductive we have to combine the cosmological constant with the QFT quantum vacuum energy (=lPl-2) to obtain the Casimir effect ... and dF/dS is an energy, not a force
16. I identify the cosmological and quantum vacuum energy with the Casimir effect to confirm that the cosmological constant of general relativity is the cosmological vacuum energy. https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Effet_Casimir#Expression_de_la_force_par_unité_de_surface The Casimir effect having been proved experimentally as effect of the vacuum energy
17. Hi I think it's okay. That's why I didn't post it in Speculations first. Thanks for your opinions casimir eng(1).pdf
18. .not to another day but later and remplace s-2 et m2 in Joules kg m2 s-2 by Λs-2 and Λm-2 correction :
19. no, precisely I take into account the dimensions: originally I have an equality which in a form is in Joules and in a second form it gives a numerical value close to the value of Λ in m-2. I justify this difference because of a difference in degrees of freedom. edit : I tried to explain the process clearly but I can't. I'll put it off for another day. I never use this : for me ρvac = Λ FPl /8 pi and ρvac from QFT = lPl2 FPl (FPl =c4/G) it is not in the standard physics. it comes from my model derived from the ΛCDM model and which approaches it under a new angle. but I find the essential of the results of the standard model. (mass at the Hubble radius and critical energy density of the universe in a certain way). other points are still speculative including this one
20. Uh m-2 is the dimension of the cosmological constant. for lPl-2 of the QFT I have only one reference in French : https://www.unige.ch/communication/communiques/2019/cosmologie-une-solution-a-la-pire-prediction-en-physique/ This equality comes from a speculation published in French on my blog. I can't put in latex a clean way to reach the equality that I have a problem with here.
21. lPl-2 is the vacuum energy from QFT in m-2 on the right I have 1(kg s-2) or 1(N/m) inverse of a surface tension. Is my problem insolvent or do you see a solution please?
22. precisions for the above diagram : - time = 1/H , It can exist before tPl. - the distances of the 3D flat space increase with time. l = c t and t = l / c -each of the 3 axes of the 3D flat space merges with the time axis and vice versa let's try to go forward with the correspondence of the critical density of my model with the one of the standard cosmological model :
23. Well no, this scheme is not consistent either. Let's see if the next one gives satisfaction or permit to progress:
24. hello swansont thank you for your relevant criticism this formula is indeed incorrect RH = (1+2+3+...+tH) lp the sigma summation : RH = (1 tp/tp+2 tp/tp+3 tp/tp+...+tH/tp) lp if I am not mistaken, corresponds to the diagram
×