AAWSAP DIRD, Concepts for Extracting Energy from the Quantum Vacuum, April 2010

Text

This text came with the file. It may have mistakes. When the text and the image disagree, the image is right.

UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFIEIAk WS&i OPtkY
which both matter and vacuum mode structure have been returned to their original
states, the vacuum modes must of necessity contain at a minimum the same, "hard­
wired," energetic content as before the cycle. Therefore, assuming local detailed­
balance energy conservation, continuous conversion of vacuum ZPE to other forms via
a Type II machine is, from the QED viewpoint, forbidden in principle since the vacuum
as described by the QED formalism is non-degradable. (Globally, vacuum energy is not
conserved during cosmological expansion, with work being done by the negative
vacuum pressure to maintain positive constant vacuum energy density and therefore
increasing the vacuum energy (Reference 65) This outcome of second-quantized QED
theory permits of but two interpretations with regard to continuous vacuum energy
conversion: 1) QED theory, despite criticisms that can be leveled against it, is correct in
its description of vacuum fluctuation dynamics, and even though vacuum ZPE exists, it
cannot be continuously converted to other forms, or 2) the axiomatic inconvertibility is
an artifact of an over-idealized mathematical structure, and therefore the possibility of
conversion remains an open question. 11 What is not in question, however, is that QED,
as an axiomatic, quantum formalism based on the concept of an immutable, non­
degradable vacuum, does not support the concept of continuous vacuum energy
conversion.
ALTERNATIVES TO QED
As noted in Section V, despite its successes the second-quantized QED formalism with
its infinite vacuum degrees of freedom and associated infinite energy density has been
the subject of criticism and, as a result, alternatives have been proposed and
investigated in the literature. The alternatives run the gamut from neoclassical theories
in which matter is quantized but the fields are not (for example, the voluminous work of
E. T. Jaynes), through classical theories where both matter and fields are treated
classically, with vacuum fluctuations fields taken to be real but of a classical nature (for
example, SED), to formalisms which eliminate the concept of vacuum fields altogether
(for example, direct-action approaches investigated by A. 0 . Barut and others; see the
references cited below). Each of these will be examined briefly with regard to the
possibility of useful "vacuum energy conversion."
Neoclassical Theories of QED Vacuum Fluctuation Effects
A major proponent of the neoclassical approach has been E. T. Jaynes, who has
questioned whether the quantized vacuum field is physically real or merely an artifice of
the second-quantized QED formalism. Based on the fact that the QED formalism
permits expression of effects in terms of quantized "self" or "source" fields as an
alternative to expression in terms of quantized vacuum fluctuation fields, Jaynes
advanced the hypothesis that QED effects can be attributed to the self-fields of
quantized matter without considering independent quantization of the vacuum fields,
expressions in terms of the latter just being a placeholder for the former. Pointedly,
with regard to QED being "the jewel of physics because of its extremely accurate
predictions," Jaynes' position is that "those accurate experimental confirmations of QED
come from the local source fields, which are coherent with the local state of matter,"
and that "the quantized free field only tags along (Reference 66)." Jaynes nonetheless
arrived at a conclusion that one might call Jaynes' Axiom, namely, "This complete
11 A number of publications by E. T. Jaynes, A. 0 . Barut and their collaborators are based on the premise that
second quantization is an unnecessary artifact of an over-idealized formalism.
26
UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICI0L: 11ili QIU.,¥