Measurement of the Casimir force between dissimilar metals.

@article{Decca2003MeasurementOT,
  title={Measurement of the Casimir force between dissimilar metals.},
  author={Ricardo S. Decca and Daniel L{\'o}pez and Ephraim Fischbach and Dennis E. Krause},
  journal={Physical review letters},
  year={2003},
  volume={91 5},
  pages={
          050402
        }
}
The first precise measurement of the Casimir force between dissimilar metals is reported. The attractive force, between a Cu layer evaporated on a microelectromechanical torsional oscillator and an Au layer deposited on an Al2O3 sphere, was measured dynamically with a noise level of 6 fN/sqrt[Hz]. Measurements were performed for separations in the 0.2-2 micro m range. The results agree to better than 1% in the 0.2-0.5 micro m range with a theoretical model that takes into account the finite… 
Measurement of the Casimir Force between 0.2 and 8 μm: Experimental Procedures and Comparison with Theory
We present results on the determination of the differential Casimir force between an Au-coated sapphire sphere and the top and bottom of Au-coated deep silicon trenches performed by means of the
Casimir force between a metal and a semimetal
We present here measurements of the Casimir force gradient in the 60–300 nm range using a commercial Atomic Force Microscope operating in Ultra High Vacuum (UHV). The measurements were carried out in
Casimir force between liquid metals
We present a theoretical calculation of the Casimir force between liquid metals at room temperature using as case studies mercury (Hg) and eutectic indium gallium (EInGa). The surface tension of the
Measurement of the Casimir force between a spherical gold tip and Si(111)-(7 × 7) surfaces
We have performed the measurement of Casimir force between a spherical Au tip and an atomically flat Si(111)-(7 × 7) surface at tip–sample distances ranging from 15 to 50 nm in an ultrahigh vacuum of
Experimental investigation of the Casimir force beyond the proximity-force approximation.
TLDR
An experimental search for corrections to the proximity-force approximation (PFA) is conducted by measuring the Casimir force and force gradient between a gold-coated plate and five gold- coated spheres with different radii using a microelectromechanical torsion oscillator.
Precise Determination of the Casimir Force and First Realization of a “Casimir Less” Experiment
We present improved Casimir effect measurements. The attractive force between a metallized sphere and the coated plate of a Si microelectromechanical oscillator is measured with unparalleled
Halving the Casimir force with conductive oxides.
TLDR
It is shown that, in the presence of a conductive oxide, the Casimir force can be the dominant interaction even in air, and that the use of conductive oxides allows one to reduce theCasimir force up to a factor of 2 when compared to noble metals.
New Results for the Casimir Interaction:. Sample Characterization and Low Temperature Measurements
We describe our latest results in the separation dependence of the Casimir interaction in the sphere-plane geometry for two Au-coated surfaces. All results are obtained by measuring the change in the
DEMONSTRATING THE STRONG GEOMETRY DEPENDENCE OF THE CASIMIR FORCE ON A SURFACE WITH DEEP, NANOSCALE CORRUGATIONS
We measure the Casimir force gradient between silicon surfaces with nanoscale, rectangular corrugations and a gold sphere attached to a micromechanical torsional oscillator. By comparing the force
The Casimir effect in microstructured geometries
In 1948, Hendrik Casimir predicted that a generalized version of van der Waals forces would arise between two metal plates due to quantum fluctuations of the electromagnetic field. These forces
...
...

References

SHOWING 1-2 OF 2 REFERENCES
The Casimir Effect and Its Applications
The Casimir effect is analyzed. This effect consists of a polarization of the vacuum of quantized fields which arises as a result of a change in the spectrum of vacuum oscillations when the
Microsystem Design
p. 445 There is a minor numerical error in going from Eq. 16.39 to Eq. 16.40. The factor of 2 in the 1/f term was omitted, so the correct numerator for the second term in Eq. 16.40 is 1.44 x 10 -7 .