EXOTIC LAB🪐 Gravity Lab · Lanturn

The Casimir negative-energy meter MEASURED

Two uncharged mirrors very close together block the vacuum's longer wavelengths between them. The space between the plates then holds less energy than empty space: a real, measured negative energy density. It's the only laboratory source of negative energy we have, and it's tiny.

energy density u = -π²ħc / (720 a⁴)
as mass density (u / c²)
pressure P = -π²ħc / (240 a⁴)
energy per area -π²ħc / (720 a³)
total negative energy (your plates)
total mass-equivalent

Measured, not just predicted

The line is the ideal-plate pressure |P| against the gap; the shaded bands show the ranges real experiments covered. Lamoreaux 1997 used a torsion pendulum with a sphere and plate over 0.6–6 µm (about 5% claimed, later revised for an electrostatic background) [3]. Mohideen & Roy 1998 used an atomic-force microscope over 0.1–0.9 µm (about 1% at the closest gap) [4]. Bressi et al. 2002 measured true parallel plates over 0.5–3 µm (about 15%) [5]. Real metals and temperature lower the force below the ideal line at the smallest and largest gaps.

Quantum inequality: how much negative energy, for how long THEORY

Physics doesn't allow unlimited negative energy. For a free quantum field, Ford and Roman showed that the energy density, averaged over a sampling time t₀, can't fall below ρ̄ ≥ -3ħ / (32 π² c³ t₀⁴) (massless scalar, 4D, Lorentzian sampling) [6]. The longer the pulse, the weaker it has to be: negative energy has to be "paid back" quickly.

deepest allowed average ρ̄
that, as mass density
Casimir gap with the same u

Casimir energy is static and boundary-made, so it isn't limited the same way. That's why warp-drive physicists look to it, and why its ~10⁻²¹ kg/m³ scale (at 1 µm) is the honest starting point for the next tab.

What would a warp drive really cost?

Each line is a published answer, with its status. Bars compare each requirement with the best negative energy we can picture making: a 100 m × 100 m Casimir plate pair at a 10 nm gap (one hectare, a stadium-sized array).

designneedsstatus

The gap, in powers of ten

Conclusion: the search has moved from "find negative energy" (we can make about 10⁻¹⁷ kg-equivalent of it, and every negative-energy design needs 19 to 79 more powers of ten) to "build a positive-energy shell". That needs no exotic matter, but it is slower than light and weighs planets: the Fuchs et al. 2024 shell is 2.4 Jupiter masses for a 10–20 m bubble. No known path builds either today. This page shows the math; it is not a device.

The dark matter meter

1 · The galaxy spins too fast MEASURED

Stars from 5 to 25 kpc orbit at 229 km/s near the Sun, and the speed falls only 1.7 km/s per kpc farther out [7]. Visible matter alone predicts the speed should fall much faster: a disk of 6.8×10¹⁰ M☉ (a = 3 kpc, b = 0.28 kpc) plus a 4.5×10⁹ M☉ bulge [8]. Adding an NFW dark halo (8×10¹¹ M☉, concentration 15.3, scale radius 16 kpc, the MWPotential2014 setup [8]) closes most of the gap. Slide the halo to zero and watch the prediction fall away from the stars.

2 · 3D: switch the dark matter off SIMULATION

3,000 stars start at the speeds we really measure. With the halo on, gravity holds them in orbit. Switch it off: only the visible mass pulls, and the outer stars, moving too fast for it, drift outward and escape. That runaway, which real galaxies don't show, is why astronomers infer dark matter. One frame = 2 million years.

3 · Dark matter in your room INFERRED

density
dark matter in your room
particles per litre (if WIMPs)
passing through you each second

Near the Sun, analyses find ρ ≈ 0.3–0.5 GeV/cm³ (global models) to 0.4–0.6 GeV/cm³ (local studies) [9]. The flux uses ~230 km/s and a 0.6 m² body. Status: nobody has directly detected a dark matter particle. The LZ experiment (4.2 tonne-years) saw no excess and excludes WIMP–nucleon cross sections down to 2.2×10⁻⁴⁸ cm² at 40 GeV [10]. Dark matter is weighed by its gravity; it hasn't been seen.

Findings COMPUTED

Computed by the Lanturn Gravity Lab from the formulas on this page and stored on a sha256 hash chain. Your browser re-checks every link below.

checking chain…

    Sources

    1. H. B. G. Casimir, Proc. KNAW 51, 793 (1948): the parallel-plate result used here (ideal mirrors, T = 0).
    2. CODATA 2018 constants (ħ, c); 1 GeV/c² = 1.78266×10⁻²⁷ kg.
    3. S. K. Lamoreaux, "Demonstration of the Casimir Force in the 0.6 to 6 µm Range", PRL 78, 5 (1997); erratum PRL 81, 5475 (1998); systematic correction PRA 82, 024102 (2010).
    4. U. Mohideen & A. Roy, "Precision Measurement of the Casimir Force from 0.1 to 0.9 µm", PRL 81, 4549 (1998), arXiv:physics/9805038.
    5. G. Bressi, G. Carugno, R. Onofrio, G. Ruoso, "Measurement of the Casimir force between parallel metallic surfaces", PRL 88, 041804 (2002), arXiv:quant-ph/0203002.
    6. L. H. Ford & T. A. Roman, "Restrictions on negative energy density in flat spacetime", PRD 55, 2082 (1997), arXiv:gr-qc/9607003 (bound in natural units; ħ, c restored here).
    7. A.-C. Eilers, D. W. Hogg, H.-W. Rix, M. K. Ness, "The Circular Velocity Curve of the Milky Way from 5 to 25 kpc", ApJ 871, 120 (2019), arXiv:1810.09466.
    8. J. Bovy, "galpy" ApJS 216, 29 (2015): MWPotential2014 disk and NFW halo; bulge shown as a Hernquist sphere (4.5×10⁹ M☉, 0.442 kpc) as in arXiv:1804.04995.
    9. P. F. de Salas & A. Widmark, "Dark matter local density determination", Rep. Prog. Phys. 84, 104901 (2021), arXiv:2012.11477.
    10. LZ Collaboration, "Dark Matter Search Results from 4.2 Tonne-Years of Exposure of the LUX-ZEPLIN (LZ) Experiment", PRL 135, 011802 (2025), arXiv:2410.17036.
    11. M. Alcubierre, "The warp drive: hyper-fast travel within general relativity", CQG 11, L73 (1994), arXiv:gr-qc/0009013.
    12. M. J. Pfenning & L. H. Ford, "The unphysical nature of 'Warp Drive'", CQG 14, 1743 (1997), arXiv:gr-qc/9702026: E ≲ -6.2×10⁶² v kg for a 100 m bubble, "roughly ten orders of magnitude greater than the total mass of the entire visible universe".
    13. C. Van Den Broeck, "A 'warp drive' with more reasonable total energy requirements", CQG 16, 3973 (1999), arXiv:gr-qc/9905084 (final version: a few solar masses).
    14. H. White, 2012 100 Year Starship Symposium / NASA Eagleworks: a ~725 kg estimate for an oscillating, toroidal design (conference claim; not independently validated).
    15. E. W. Lentz, "Breaking the warp barrier: hyper-fast solitons in Einstein–Maxwell-plasma theory", CQG 38(7) (2021), arXiv:2006.07125; positive-energy claim disputed (e.g. Olum's theorem, Fell–Heisenberg revision).
    16. A. Bobrick & G. Martire, "Introducing physical warp drives", CQG 38, 105009 (2021), arXiv:2102.06824.
    17. J. Fuchs et al., "Constant velocity physical warp drive solution", CQG 41, 095013 (2024), arXiv:2405.02709: shell R₁ = 10 m, R₂ = 20 m, M = 4.49×10²⁷ kg (2.365 Jupiter masses), subluminal.