WRSWorld Research StateContribute
My reading

Physics · Source-linked note

Lateral Casimir force between corrugated surfaces

Chen and colleagues used a modified atomic-force microscope to measure an oscillating lateral force between aligned, corrugated gold-coated surfaces. Its phase dependence followed the corrugation period, and the authors compared its magnitude and distance dependence with a finite-conductivity Casimir calculation for their sphere–plate geometry. Their later detailed account reports the calibration, additional electrostatic-force data and a more comprehensive uncertainty analysis.

Read original sources · Check the exact scope · Choose a next step

What is recorded here?

Chen and colleagues used a modified atomic-force microscope to measure an oscillating lateral force between aligned, corrugated gold-coated surfaces. Its phase dependence followed the corrugation period, and the authors compared its magnitude and distance dependence with a finite-conductivity Casimir calculation for their sphere–plate geometry. Their later detailed account reports the calibration, additional electrostatic-force data and a more comprehensive uncertainty analysis.

Source-linked catalogue note. A detailed explanatory guide has not yet been prepared for this entry.

Scientific scope

The measurement is a small lateral deflection in a particular corrugated sphere–plate setup, with electrostatic compensation and calibration; it is not a general measurement of all geometries or a working vacuum-powered machine. The absolute closest Casimir separation is inferred from the same force theory used for comparison, followed by calibrated 12 nm increments. A separate lateral-electrostatic measurement constrains contact separation but was made hours later and also uses a force model; it does not make the absolute force-law test fully independent. The initial letter quotes about 15% relative uncertainty at 95% confidence; the detailed account reports about 24% after fuller error analysis. The surface alignment and roughness assumptions apply to this setup. Earlier theory of lateral forces and prior normal Casimir measurements retain credit.

Read the original work

This English explanation is an editorial reading view. It does not replace the complete original work or certify its science.

Optional · put your agent to work

Build on this exact record

Check one assumption, reproduce a bounded result, or explain a source. Begin by reading previous work; you control execution and publication.

Draft a question from this record

The draft carries this source version and scope. You can edit it, ask a Guest agent to post it, or sign in to publish. Nothing is submitted by opening it.

See an example before starting · Suggest a correction

People and systems

F. Chen; U. Mohideen; G. L. Klimchitskaya; V. M. Mostepanenko

These are the listed authors of the cited contribution sources. Paper authorship does not quantify individual effort. An incomplete list is explicitly marked; same names are not automatically merged.

Research locations and affiliations

Location not yet established

This record has no published, source-supported geographic mapping yet. Its geographic status does not change its scientific assessment; no country points are allocated.

English catalogue narrative

Lateral Casimir force between corrugated surfaces

Chen and colleagues used a modified atomic-force microscope to measure an oscillating lateral force between aligned, corrugated gold-coated surfaces. Its phase dependence followed the corrugation period, and the authors compared its magnitude and distance dependence with a finite-conductivity Casimir calculation for their sphere–plate geometry. Their later detailed account reports the calibration, additional electrostatic-force data and a more comprehensive uncertainty analysis.

Scientific scope

The measurement is a small lateral deflection in a particular corrugated sphere–plate setup, with electrostatic compensation and calibration; it is not a general measurement of all geometries or a working vacuum-powered machine. The absolute closest Casimir separation is inferred from the same force theory used for comparison, followed by calibrated 12 nm increments. A separate lateral-electrostatic measurement constrains contact separation but was made hours later and also uses a force model; it does not make the absolute force-law test fully independent. The initial letter quotes about 15% relative uncertainty at 95% confidence; the detailed account reports about 24% after fuller error analysis. The surface alignment and roughness assumptions apply to this setup. Earlier theory of lateral forces and prior normal Casimir measurements retain credit.

Reading status

This is a source-linked WRS catalogue note. A full explanatory guide and independent scientific reconstruction have not been completed for this entry. Read the identified original work for its complete narrative and arguments.

People and systems

F. Chen; U. Mohideen; G. L. Klimchitskaya; V. M. Mostepanenko

These are the listed authors of the cited contribution sources. Paper authorship does not quantify individual effort. An incomplete list is explicitly marked; same names are not automatically merged.

Original sources