2. Acknowledgements Experiment C.C. Chang A.B. Banishev R. Castillo Theoretical Comparison V.M. Mostepanenko G.L. Klimchitskaya Research Funded by: DARPA, National Science Foundation & US Department of Energy

4. Average Casimir Force from 30 scans Harris et al., Phys Rev. A, 62, 052109 (2000) Why Need Another One? Understand the role of free carrier relaxation Decca et al., Euro Phys J. C 51, 963 (2007) Sushkov et al. Nat Phys 7, 230 (2011) Chan et al., Science, 291, 1941 (2001) Jourdan et al., Europhys. Lett, 85,31001 (2009)

5. Lifshitz Formula R z R>>z 2 1 At l=0,  Matsubara Freqs. Reflection Coeffs:

6. Puzzles in Application of Lifshitz Formula For two metals and for large z (or high T),  =0 term dominates For ideal metals put   ∞ first and l,  0 next (Schwinger Prescription) Milton, DeRaad and Schwinger, Ann. Phys. (1978) Recover ideal metal Casimir Result

7. For Real Metals if use Drude and  is the relaxation parameter  For  =0,, only half the contribution even at z≈100 mm, where it should approach ideal behavior  Get large thermal correction for short separation distances z~100 nm  Biggest problem: Entropy S≠0 as T  0 (Third Law violation) for perfect lattice where  (T=0)=0 If there are impurities  (T=0) ≠0, Entropy S=0 as T  0 Bostrom & Serenelius, PRL (2000); Physica (2004) Geyer, Klimchitskaya & Mostepanenko, PR A (2003) Hoye, Brevik, Aarseth & Milton PRE (2003); (2005) Svetovoy & Lokhanin, IJMP (2003) Paris Group, Florence Group, Oklahoma group

8. Decca et al., Euro Phys J. C 51, 963 (2007) Sushkov et al. Nat Phys 7, 230 (2011) Experimental Results Plasma Model Drude Model

9. Requirements for high precision Casimir force measurement

10. New Experimental Methodology Dynamic AFM Measure Frequency Shift instead of Cantilever Deflection

11. Dynamic AFM Method Used Cantilever small oscillations in a force field For small cantilever oscillations, we can take Taylor expansion of F int at the mean equilibrium position

12. Band-pass filter DC+AC Low-pass Filter FM technique Phase detector (PhaseLockedLoop) Separation “d” PID control in Q point ∆fDrive Piezo1 Piezo2 Interferometer 2 (Short coherence length) interferometer 1 Vacuum High voltage power supply linear voltage applied on Piezo-tube repeatedly d ∆V Interference signal AC DC 10 -8 Torr

13. Determination of Au Sphere- Plate Potential Difference Electrostatic Force Formula: STEPS 1.Repeat Experiment for 12 Voltages applied to Au plate – not sequentially 2.Correct separation for plate or sphere drift 3.Use Parabolic dependence of force gradient on Voltage, to draw parabolas at every separation 4. Vertex of Parabola, which denotes zero electrostatic force gives the residual potential

14. If Experiment Repeated for Same Applied Voltage to the Plate, Change in Signal is due to Drift Correcting for Drift in Sphere-Plate Separation During Experiment- Method separation (nm) Sphere-Plate Separation Change in time of one Repitition Frequency Shift

15. 15 points 10 curves at V 0 0 200 sec 100 sec separation (nm) Separation (nm) time (sec) Drift =0.002 nm/sec If Experiment Repeated for Same Applied Voltage to the Plate, Change in Signal is due to Drift Correcting for Drift in Sphere-Plate Separation During Experiment- Data

16. Determination of Au Sphere- Plate Potential Difference Electrostatic Force Formula: STEPS 1.Repeat Experiment for 12 Voltages applied to Au plate – not sequentially 2.Correct separation for plate or sphere drift 3.Use Parabolic dependence of force gradient on Voltage, to draw parabolas at every separation 4. Vertex of Parabola, which denotes zero electrostatic force gives the residual potential Overbeek et.al 1971

17. Stability Checks Residual Potential V o =-0.0275  0.003 V Residual Potential Independent of Sphere-Plate Separation No Anamalous Electrostatic Behavior

18. Determination of Absolute Sphere-Plate Separation & Spring Constant =196.1  0. 4 nm =0.01206  0.00005 N/m Fit Parabola Curvature To Electrostatic Theory

19. Raw Experimental Data: Electrostatic+ Casimir Force

20. Complete Dataset – 12 applied Voltages to the Plate Subtract Electrostatic Force Gradient from Frequency Shift Mean

21. Repeat Experiment Total of 4 x 12=48 experiments Dataset 1 Dataset 2 Dataset 3 Dataset 4

22. Error Bars with Sphere-Plate Separation

23. Sphere and Plate Roughness RMS 2.3 nm nm % 00.129 0.5030.129 1.0060.129 1.5090.258 2.0122.323 2.5154.129 3.0188.387 3.5218.387 4.02411.226 4.52711.871 5.039.032 5.5339.419 6.0369.806 6.5395.161 7.0426.194 7.5455.161 8.0492.323 8.5522.71 9.0551.806 9.5581.161 10.0610.258 nm % 00.296 0.5321.481 1.0632.222 1.5954.444 2.1275.926 2.6587.556 3.198.444 3.7229.333 4.25411.259 4.7859.778 5.3179.63 5.8497.556 6.384.296 6.9124.444 7.4443.556 7.9752.963 8.5073.259 9.0392.074 9.5710.741 10.1020.593 10.6340.148 Plate Sphere Percent v i of the surface area covered by roughness with heights h i Sphere Plate RMS 2.1 nm Roughness Effects much less than 1%

24. Lifshitz Theory Comparison Proximity force approximation (PFA) z R a If Generalized plasma-like permittivity : fitting by tabulated optical data Drude-like permittivity pp = 8.9 eV  = 0.035 eV

25. Comparison with Theory

26. Arbitrarily Shift Data by 3 nm to Fit Drude Model At Smallest Separation If separation shifted by 3 nm, then also do not fit the Drude model

27. Comparison with Theory AGREEMENT ONLY WITH PLASMA MODEL! Even though Drude Model Describes the metal best. Decca et al., Euro Phys J. C 51, 963 (2007)

28. Understanding the Patch Effect by Electrostatic Simulation

29. Electrostatic simulation with COMSOL software package Plate size = 32×32  m; Patch size = 0.6×0.6  m; V plate =0.018 mV, V sphere =0, V patches =random in [-90;90] mV,  ~0.7 mV. We solved the Poisson equation for conductive plate (variable potential V plate ) with dielectric patches on the surface (random potential distribution in [-90;90] mV ) and conductive sphere on the distance z from the plate Area filled by patches has been chosen according to condition: Surface area > A eff =2  Rd (for z=0.1  m plate size should be higher then 8  m) F total ( V plate ) between the sphere and plate = 0 V plate = V 0 A eff =2  Rd Patches -- 0r0r  V =0  r – relative permittivity

30. Electrostatic simulation with COMSOL software package In the pictures: Sphere radius R = 100  m; Plate size = 32×32  m; Patch size = 0.3×0.3  m to 0.9×0.9  m; V patches =random in [-90;90] mV,  ~0.7 mV. We solved the Poisson equation for conductive plate (variable potential V plate ) with dielectric patches on the surface (random potential distribution in [-90;90] mV ) and conductive sphere on the distance d from the plate Plate Patches A eff =2  Rd Sphere Apply voltages to the plate and find voltage when electrostatic force goes to zero This compensating voltage (V o ) is found for different separations. -- 0r0r  V =0  r – relative permittivity

31. Simulation Results of Compensating Voltage Distance Independent As in Observed in Experiment –Well Compensated

32. Conclusions 1.Measured Casimir Force Gradient Between Au Sphere & Plate using a Dynamic AFM. 2.No anamalous Behavior of Sphere-Plate Residual Potential 3.Independent determination of Absolute Sphere-Plate separation distance 4.The Force Gradient is in Agreement with the Plasma Model for Sphere- Plate Separations below 500 nm. 5.Verified unique curvature of the Plasma Model.

33. Simulation Results Different distance between the patches

34. Simulation Results Different sizes of the patches

35. Acknowledgements Experiment C.C. Chang A.Banishev R. Castillo Theoretical Analysis V.M. Mostepanenko G.L. Klimchitskaya Research Funded by: DARPA, National Science Foundation & US Department of Energy

37. Thermal Correction Procedure 2) Measurement of each curve starts after 100 sec (50 sec for curve measurement when piezo extend and 50 sec when piezo retract). The each point of the curves should be corrected due to the thermal drift. To calculate the drift we measure the last 10 curves at the same compensate V 0 voltage and calculate the drift at 15 points, then calculate average drift value. 15 points 10 curves at V 0 0 200 sec 100 sec separation (nm) Separation (nm) time (sec) Drift =0.002 nm/sec

38. Experimental Forces where, Electrostatic Force Formula:

39. Cantilever small oscillations in a force field For small oscillation, we can take Taylor expansion of F int at point Z 0 corresponding to the equilibrium position

40. Proximity force approximation (PFA) z R a If and plate area

41. 1) At long distances (2.1 µm) all forces should be negligible. The signal at large separation distances of 1.8-2.1 µm was fit to a straight line. This straight line was subtracted from the measured signal measured at all sphere plate separations to correct for the effects of mechanical drift. 0 Thermal Correction Procedure 0 separation (nm)

42. The Roughness Sphere Plate RMS 2.3 nm nm % 00.129 0.5030.129 1.0060.129 1.5090.258 2.0122.323 2.5154.129 3.0188.387 3.5218.387 4.02411.226 4.52711.871 5.039.032 5.5339.419 6.0369.806 6.5395.161 7.0426.194 7.5455.161 8.0492.323 8.5522.71 9.0551.806 9.5581.161 10.0610.258 nm % 00.296 0.5321.481 1.0632.222 1.5954.444 2.1275.926 2.6587.556 3.198.444 3.7229.333 4.25411.259 4.7859.778 5.3179.63 5.8497.556 6.384.296 6.9124.444 7.4443.556 7.9752.963 8.5073.259 9.0392.074 9.5710.741 10.1020.593 10.6340.148 Plate Sphere Percent v i of the surface area covered by roughness with heights h i Sphere Plate RMS 2.1 nm

43. Determination of Au Sphere- Plate Potential Difference Electrostatic Force Formula: STEPS 1.Repeat Experiment for 12 Voltages applied to Au plate – not sequentially 2.Correct separation for plate or sphere drift 3.Use Parabolic dependence of force gradient on Voltage, to draw parabolas at every separation 4. Vertex of Parabola, which denotes zero electrostatic force gives the residual potential