Upload
others
View
2
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
arX
iv:q
uant
-ph/
0608
118v
2 1
2 Ju
n 20
07
Dispersion for es in ma ros opi quantum
ele trodynami s
Stefan Yoshi Buhmann
∗,1, Dirk-Gunnar Wels h
1
Theoretis h-Physikalis hes Institut, Friedri h-S hiller-Universität Jena,
Max-Wien-Platz 1, 07743 Jena, Germany
Abstra t
The des ription of dispersion for es within the framework of ma ros opi quantum
ele trodynami s in linear, dispersing and absorbing media ombines the benets of
approa hes based on normal-mode te hniques of standard quantum ele trodynami s
and methods based on linear-response theory in a natural way. It renders generally
valid expressions for both the for es between bodies and the for es on atoms in the
presen e of bodies while showing very learly the intimate relation between the dif-
ferent types of dispersion for es. By onsidering examples, the inuen e of various
fa tors like form, size, ele tri and magneti properties, or intervening media on the
for es is addressed. Sin e the approa h based on ma ros opi quantum ele trody-
nami s does not only apply to equilibrium systems, it an be used to investigate
dynami al ee ts su h as the temporal evolution of for es on arbitrarily ex ited
atoms.
Key words: dispersion for e, ma ros opi quantum ele trodynami s, Casimir
ee t, van der Waals for e, atomsurfa e intera tion, intermole ular potential,
atomi polarizability, magneto-ele tri medium, multilayer stru ture, spontaneous
de ay, weak atomeld oupling, strong atomeld oupling, Rabi os illations
PACS: 12.20.-m, 42.50.Ct, 34.50.Dy, 42.50.Nn
Contents
1 Introdu tion 2
1.1 Dispersion for es 3
1.2 Experimental observations 4
∗Corresponding author.
Email address: s.buhmanntpi.uni-jena.de (Stefan Yoshi Buhmann).
URL: www.tpi.uni-jena.de/tpi/qophysi s/qo.html (Dirk-Gunnar Wels h).
1This work was supported by the Deuts he Fors hungsgemeins haft.
1.3 Appli ations 8
1.4 Theoreti al approa hes 9
2 Elements of QED in linearly responding media 19
2.1 The medium-assisted ele tromagneti eld 19
2.2 Atomeld intera tion 25
3 For es on bodies 32
3.1 Casimir stress in planar stru tures 36
3.2 Ma ro- and mi ro-obje ts 39
4 For es on atoms 45
4.1 Ground-state atoms 45
4.2 Ex ited atoms 61
5 Con luding remarks 75
A knowledgements 77
A Overview over s enarios 78
B Green tensors 80
Referen es 81
1 Introdu tion
Dispersion for es originate from the ele tromagneti intera tion between ele -
tri ally neutral obje ts whi h do not arry permanent ele tri and magneti
moments. They have been of in reasing interest be ause of their important
impa t on many areas of s ien e. In parti ular, the extremely miniaturized
omponents in nanote hnology an be strongly ae ted by dispersion for es.
Re ent progress in experimental te hniques has led to a urate measurements
of dispersion for es whi h have onrmed some of the theoreti al predi tions
while posing new questions at the same time.
2
1.1 Dispersion for es
The predi tion of dispersion for es is one of the most prominent a hievements
of quantum ele trodynami s (QED) where they an be regarded as being a
onsequen e of quantum ground-state u tuations. In order to understand how
quantum u tuations lead to dispersion for es, it may be helpful to rst re all
the orresponding lassi al situation. A ording to lassi al ele trodynami s,
ele tri ally neutral, unpolarized material obje ts will not intera t with ea h
other, even if they are polarizable. An intera tion an only o ur if (i) at least
one of the obje ts is polarized or (ii) an ele tromagneti eld is applied to at
least one of the obje ts. In the former ase the obje t's polarization will give
rise to an ele tromagneti eld whi h an indu e a polarization of the other
polarizable obje t(s); in the latter ase the applied eld indu es a polarization
of the obje t whi h in turn gives rise to an ele tromagneti eld a ting on the
other obje t(s). Both ases result in polarized obje ts intera ting with ea h
other via an ele tromagneti eld, the intera tion and the resulting attra tive
for es between them being a onsequen e of the departure from the lassi al
ground stateunpolarized obje ts and vanishing ele tromagneti eld.
In QED, the state that most losely orresponds to the lassi al ground state
is given by the material obje ts being in their (unpolarized) quantum ground
states and the ele tromagneti eld being in its va uum state, su h that both
the ele tromagneti eld and the polarization of all obje ts vanish on the
quantum average. At rst glan e, one ould hen e expe t the absen e of any
intera tion between the obje ts. However, the Heisenberg un ertainty prin iple
ne essarily implies the existen e of ground state u tuations, i.e., both (i) u -
tuating polarizations of the obje ts and (ii) a u tuating ele tromagneti eld
will always be present. These u tuations give rise to an intera tion between
the obje tsa purely quantum ee t whi h is manifested in the dispersion
for es a ting on them. At nite temperatures, additional thermal u tuations
ome into play.
Thus, dispersion for esalso known as Casimir or van der Waals for es
2are
ever-present long-range for es between atoms and/or ma ros opi bodies, i.e.,
they exist even if the intera ting obje ts are ele tri ally neutral and do not
arry ele tri or magneti moments. Naturally, dispersion for es have many
important onsequen es. On a mi ros opi level, they inuen e, e.g., the prop-
erties of weakly bound mole ules [1,2. A prominent ma ros opi signature of
dispersion for es is the well-known orre tion to the equation of state of an
ideal gas, leading to the more general van der Waals equation.
3But disper-
2Often, the term Casimir for e is used to denote dispersion for es on a ma ros opi
level whereas dispersion for es on a mi ros opi level are referred to as van der Waals
for es.
3In fa t, it was in this ontext that the existen e of dispersion for es was rst
3
sion for es also inuen e the ma ros opi properties of liquids and solids su h
as the anomalies of water [4, the magneti , thermal and opti al properties of
solid oxygen [5 or the melting behavior of weakly bound rystals [6.
The inuen e of dispersion for es be omes even more pronoun ed in the pres-
en e of interfa es between dierent phases and/or media. Atomsurfa e dis-
persion intera tions drive the adsorption of inert gas atoms to solid surfa es
[79, inuen e the wetting properties of liquids on su h surfa es [8,10,11 and
lead to the phenomenon of apillarity [12. The mutual dispersion attra tions
of olloidal parti les suspended in a liquid [13 inuen e the stability of su h
suspensions [14,15; unless su iently balan ed by repulsive for es, they lead
to a lustering of the parti les, ommonly known as o ulation [16,17.
The above mentioned relevan e of dispersion for es to material s ien es and
physi al hemistry being rather obvious, it is perhaps more surprising to note
that they also play a role in astrophysi s and biology. Thus, dispersion for es
initiate the preplanetary dust aggregation leading to the formation of planets
around a star [18. Furthermore, they are needed for an understanding of the
intera tion of mole ules with ell membranes [19,20 and of ell adhesion driven
by mutual ell-membrane intera tions [19,21. Re ently, dispersion for es have
been found to be responsible for the remarkable abilities of some ge ko [22
and spider spe ies [23 to limb smooth, dry surfa es.
1.2 Experimental observations
A for e between two ma ros opi bodies an most easily be measured in a
quasi-stati way where the bodies are brought lose together and the for e to
be measured is ompensated by a for e of known magnitude. In the rst use of
this idea for measuring dispersion for es, the ompensating for e was provided
by a Hookean spring and the distan e of the bodies was measured by means of
opti al interferometry [24. In this way, for es between two diele tri [2428
and metal plates [2932 were investigated. Di ulties in aligning the plates
were over ome by using alternative setups of a plate intera ting with a spher-
i al lens [28,3335, two intera ting spheres [36, and rossed ylinders [36,37.
Magneti for es generated by ele tri urrents were also used to ompensate
dispersion for es where via feedba k, the for e values ould be inferred from
urrent measurements [3841. The typi al out ome of all these experiments
was the observation of attra tive for es whi h follow 1/z4 and 1/z3 power
laws for the plateplate and platesphere
4geometries, respe tively, with z
denoting the obje tobje t separation (see Ref. [42 for a review). However,
owing to the rather low a ura ythe main limitations being the presen e
of ele trostati for es due to residual harges, the roughness of the samples,
predi ted, for a histori al review, see Ref. [3.
4Note that the platesphere separation was mu h smaller than the sphere radius.
4
the la k of a urate position ontrol and the low resolution of the a tual for e
measurementsthe early results remained ontroversial. This is best illus-
trated by the fa t that diering power laws [24,25 and even signs [29 were
found.
Substantial progress was made by using a torsion-balan e s heme [43 where
very smooth bodies, piezoele tri devi es for position ontrol, and apa itive
for e dete tion, were used to measure the for e between a metal sphere and
plate with high a ura y, thereby onrming an attra tive for e proportional
to 1/z3. This experiment has been followed by a number of experiments whi h
have proted by re ent developments in nanote hnology (for an overview, see
Refs. [44,45). By atta hing a mi rosphere to the antilever of an atomi for e
mi ros ope (playing the role of the spring) and monitoring the dispersion-for e
indu ed bending of the antilever via dee tion of an opti al beam, the for e
between the sphere and a nearby surfa e was measured to obtain very a u-
rate results for various metals [4650 and/or diele tri s [51,52, in luding the
inuen e of nite ondu tivity [46,47,49 as well as surfa e roughness [48,50.
It was further demonstrated that one-dimensional periodi surfa e orruga-
tions an lead to a sinusoidally varying tangential for e in addition to the
attra tive normal Casimir for e [50,53,54. A similar experimental setup was
used to measure the for e between two diele tri ylinders [55 and spheres
[56. Dispersion for es have also been measured by means of a mi roma hined
torsion-balan e s heme where a small plate suspended by two thin rods ro-
tates in response to the Casimir for e exerted by a nearby mi rosphere and
this tilting is monitored by apa itive measurements. The s heme was used
to study the for e between dissimilar metals [57,58 and to demonstrate its
dependen e on the thi kness of the intera ting obje ts [59,60. Changing the
obje ts' ree tivity in the visible region by means of hydrogen deposition was
found to have no observable inuen e on the for e [60,61, indi ating that it
should depend on the frequen y-dependent body properties in some integral
form.
Dispersion for es an also be measured in a dynami al setup, based on the idea
that any intera tion will ae t the relative motion of two obje ts. In the rst
experimental realization of this idea, a spheri al lens was mounted on a loud
speaker and periodi ally driven, thereby indu ingby means of the Casimir
for ea similar motion of a nearby plate mounted on a mi rophone [62,63.
Dete tion of the amplitude of the indu ed os illations led to a urate for e
measurements. This idea has been applied in modern experiments to infer the
Casimir for e from the periodi motion of an obje t su h as a mi rosphere os-
illating at the tip of an atomi for e mi ros ope antilever while intera ting
with a surfa e [64,65 or an os illating mi roma hined torsion balan e inter-
a ting with a rigidly mounted sphere [57,58,66,67. Dynami al measurements
of this kind an also provide high-pre ision results for atombody dispersion
intera tions, whi h was demonstrated by observing the hange of the os il-
5
latory motion of a single ex ited ion trapped in a standing ele tromagneti
wave [68 and of old gases of (ground-state) atoms onned in a magneti
trap [69 or an opti al latti e [70, indu ed by their dispersion intera tion
with a nearby surfa e. In the latter experiment, a temperature dependen e of
dispersion for es was observed.
Controlled dynami al measurements of dispersion for es on atoms have only
be ome feasible re ently due to the availability of e ient te hniques to ool
and trap single atoms. In the early experiments, s attering te hniques were
employed whi h are of ourse mu h simpler to implement. Atomatom inter-
a tions have been observed by s attering a beam of ground-state atoms with
known narrow velo ity prole o a se ond beam of atoms with thermal velo -
ity distribution [7173 or a stationary target gas [7477 where an attra tive
1/z7 for e, was found. S attering te hniques have also been employed to probe
the intera tions of atoms with anisotropi mole ules [7880 and even the in-
tera tion of ex ited atoms with ground-state atoms [81 where in the latter
ase a strong enhan ement of the for e, was observed. Eviden e of atombody
for es was rst found by observing the dee tion of a beam of ground-state
atoms or mole ules passing near the surfa e of a metal or diele tri ylinder,
the results suggesting an attra tive 1/z4 for e [8285. 5 In a similar s heme,
the dee tion of atoms passing between two metal plates was monitored by
observing the atom ux losses due to the sti king of atoms to the plates. In
doing so, a strong enhan ement of the for e on ex ited atoms was observed
[86. It was further found [87,88 that the distan e dependen e of the ground-
state for e hanges from a 1/z4 power law for small atomsurfa e separations
(non-retarded regime) to the more rapidly de reasing 1/z5 power law as soon
as the separations ex eed the relevant transition wavelengths of the atoms and
the bodies (retarded regime
6).
It has turned out that introdu ing a ontrollable ompensating for e is also
useful in the ontext of atom-s attering experiments; this is the entral idea of
the evanes ent-wave mirror: A laser beam is in ident on the surfa e of a diele -
tri from the inside at a su iently shallow angle, su h that total ree tion
leads to an exponentially de aying ele tri eld at its exterior. An atom pla ed
in the vi inity of the body will intera t with this evanes ent eld, leading to
an opti al potential. If the laser frequen y is larger than the relevant atomi
transition frequen y (blue detuning), then this potential is repulsive; thus re-
ating the required ompensating for e whi h an be ontrolled by varying the
laser frequen y and intensity. In this way, dispersion for es on ground-state
atoms an be measured by monitoring the ree tion of the atoms in ident on
5In the experiments, the minimum atomsurfa e separation was so small that to a
good approximation, the ylinder surfa es an be regarded as planar.
6Note that the above mentioned measurements of Casimir for es between ma ro-
s opi bodies typi ally operate in the retarded regime.
6
evanes ent-wave mirrors [8991. Alternatively, ompensating for es an be
provided by the magneti elds reated by magneti lms, the strength being
ontrolled by varying the lm thi kness [92.
Ee ts due to the wave nature of the atomi motion be ome relevant for small
values of the ( enter-of-mass) momentum su h that the atomi de Broglie
wavelength be omes su iently large. In this ase quantum ree tion of an
atom from the potential asso iated with the atombody for e may o ur [93.
Quantum ree tion of ground-state [9497 and ex ited atoms [98,99 in ident
on the surfa e of diele tri bodies was observed in various experiments where a
detailed measurement of the atomsurfa e dispersion potential, was a hieved
by re ording the ree tivities at dierent normal velo ities. Another prominent
wave phenomenon that an be exploited for the measurement of atombody
potentials is the dira tion of an atomi wave in ident on a transmission
grating forming a periodi array of parallel slits. When passing the slits (whi h
may be regarded as small planar avities), the atomi matter wave a quires
a phase shift due to the dispersion potential whi h ae ts the interferen e
pattern forming behind the slits. By omparing the experimental observations
with theoreti al simulations, the intera tion of ground-state [100103 as well
as ex ited atoms [104106 with diele tri s in the non-retarded regime has
been measured.
Spe tros opi measurements provide a powerful indire t method for studying
atombody dispersion intera tions. Here, the fa t is exploited that the dis-
persion potential of an atom an be identied with the position-dependent
shift of the respe tive atomi energy level [107. The resulting shifts of the
atomi transition frequen ies an be observed by spe tros opi means. As the
shifts are usually mu h more noti eable for ex ited levels, this approa h yields
good estimates of the dispersion potentials of atoms in ex ited energy eigen-
states. This was demonstrated in experiments measuring dispersion potentials
of atoms inside planar [108110 and spheri al metal avities [111,112, near a
diele tri half spa e [113,114, and of an ion near a metal plate [115. In this
ontext, sele tive ree tion spe tros opy of atomi gases has proven to be a
parti ularly powerful method [116. It is based on the fa t that the ree tion of
a laser beam in ident on a gas ell is modied due to the laser-indu ed polar-
ization of the gas atoms whi h in turn is strongly inuen ed by the dispersion
intera tion of the atoms with the walls of the ell. By omparing measured
ree tivity spe tra with theoreti ally omputed ones, very a urate informa-
tion on the non-retarded dispersion intera tion of atoms with diele tri plates
[117122 was obtained, in luding the potentials of atoms in very short-lived
ex ited energy eigenstates whi h are di ult to study by s attering methods.
Note that the dispersion intera tion with metal plates is mu h more di ult
to observe via sele tive ree tion spe tros opy [123. As a major a hievement,
the method has shown that the dispersion for es on ex ited atoms an be
repulsive [124,125.
7
1.3 Appli ations
Taking advantage of the substantially improved sensitivity of dispersion-for e
measurements, omparison of the experimental results with theoreti al pre-
di tions an nowadays even be used to pla e onstraints on other short-s ale
intera tions of fundamental interest, su h as non-standard gravitational for es
[44,58,69,126129. In addition, dispersion for es have be ome of in reasing im-
portan e in applied s ien e su h as nanote hnology and related elds. While
providing a powerful tool for surfa e ontrol, e.g., in near-eld s anning mi-
ros opy [130,131, they an also be a disturbing fa tor whose inuen e will
be ome more and more pronoun ed with pro eeding miniaturization. In par-
ti ular, they an lead to an undesired and permanent sti king of (small) ob-
je ts to surfa es [132134. A similarly disturbing ee t is observed when atom
traps are operated near surfa es where dispersion for es an diminish the depth
of magneto-opti al traps, thereby imposing limits upon the near-surfa e op-
eration of su h traps [135,136. Traps based on evanes ent waves [137141
ne essarily operate in the near-surfa e regime so that dispersion for es au-
tomati ally ome into play. The inuen e of dispersion for es also needs to
be taken into a ount when onstru ting evanes ent-wave based elements for
atom guiding [142146.
Dispersion for es are indispensable in atom opti s [147 where mirrors and
beam splitters for atomi matter waves, have been onstru ted based on the
dispersion intera tions of atoms with at surfa es and transmission gratings,
respe tively. Transmission gratings an be used to realize Ma hZehnder-type
interferometers for atoms [102. Flat quantum ree tive mirrors provide a fo-
ussing me hanism when dispersion and gravitational for es are ombined with
in an appropriate way [148. In addition, by lo ally enhan ing the ree tivity
of the mirrors via a Fresnel ree tion stru ture [149, ree tion holograms for
atomi matter waves an be realized [150. The e ien y of atomi mirrors an
also be enhan ed by using evanes ent-wave mirrors whi h an even operate
quantum-state sele tively [151. As re ently reported, the quantum ree tion
of ultra old gases at diele tri surfa es gives rise to interesting phenomena,
su h as the ex itation of solitons and vortex stru tures [152.
Further impa t on the appli ation of dispersion for es has been made by the
re ent proposal [153 and subsequent fabri ation [154 of materials with tai-
lored magneto-ele tri properties, also known as metamaterials.
7Metamate-
rials displaying simultaneous negative permittivity and permeability in some
frequen y range, allow for the existen e of traveling ele tromagneti waves
whose ele tri -eld, magneti -eld and wave ve tor, form a left-handed triad
[160
8, leading to a number of unusual ee ts. It is yet an open question
7For the urrent state-of-art of metamaterial fabri ation, see, e.g., Refs. [155159.
8For this reason materials with these properties are ommonly referred to as left-
8
whether left-handed properties an lead to interesting phenomena in the on-
text of dispersion for es and to what extent metamaterials an be exploited
to tailor the shape and sign of these for es. An interesting behavior of disper-
sion for es may also o ur in onjun tion with soft-magneti alloys, su h as
permalloy or Mumetal [161,162. After heating and rapid ooling (a pro ess
alled annealing), these materials are in a state of extremely high permeability;
values of more than 5× 104 have been reported for Mumetal [163.
1.4 Theoreti al approa hes
As already mentioned, dispersion for es arise from quantum zero-point u tu-
ations, namely the u tuating harge and urrent distributions of the intera t-
ing obje ts and the va uum u tuations of the (transverse) ele tromagneti
eld. If the separation of the obje ts is smaller than the wavelengths of the
relevant eld u tuations, then the latter an be disregarded, allowing for a
simplied treatment of dispersion for es. In this non-retarded regime, disper-
sion for es are dominated by the Coulomb intera tion of u tuating harge
distributions. In parti ular, the Coulomb intera tion between two atoms may
within a leading-order multipole expansion be regarded as the intera tion of
two ele tri dipoles d and d′,
V =d·d′ − 3dzd
′z
4πε0z3. (1)
This approa h was rst used by London in onjun tion with leading-order
perturbation theory to derive the potential energy of two isotropi ground-
state atoms to be
U(z) = −Cz6, C =
1
24π2ε20
∑
kk′
∣∣∣〈0|d|k〉∣∣∣2 ∣∣∣〈0′|d′|k′〉
∣∣∣2
Ek + Ek′ − (E0 + E0′)(2)
with |k(′)〉 and Ek(′) denoting the eigenstates and -energies of the unperturbed
atoms [164. The London potential implies an attra tive for e proportional to
1/z7. The idea of deriving dispersion for es from dipoledipole intera tions by
means of perturbation theory was later applied to three- [165171, four- [172
and N-atom intera tion potentials [173176. Lennard-Jones showed [177 that
the intera tion of an atom with a perfe tly ondu ting plate an be treated on
an equal footing, by using the image- harge method. Considering the dipole
dipole intera tion of the atom with its own image in the plate (instead of a
handed materials.
9
se ond atom) within rst-order perturbation theory, he found a potential
U(z) = −〈0|d2|0〉
48πε0z3, (3)
implying an attra tive 1/z4 for e. The inuen e of u tuating magneti dipoles
[178180, ele tri quadrupoles [181 and higher multipoles [182,183 as well as
permanent ele tri [164,168,184,185 and magneti dipoles [184 on the atom
atom intera tion has also been dis ussed. In this way, it was found that the
for e between a magnetizable and a polarizable atom is repulsive and propor-
tional to 1/z5, in ontrast to the attra tive 1/z7 for e between two polarizable
atoms. Furthermore, studying the intera tion of atoms prepared in ex ited
energy eigenstates showed that the ontributions to the for e whi h arise from
real, resonant transitions an be attra tive or repulsive [168,179,184 (for fur-
ther reading regarding the atomatom intera tion, refer to Refs. [186188).
Similar extensions have been a omplished regarding the intera tion of atoms
with (planar) bodies. Quadrupole [189 and higher-order multipole atomi mo-
ments [190192 were in luded in the intera tion of ground-state atoms with
perfe tly ondu ting plates and extensions of the image- harge method to the
intera tion of ground-state [193,194 and atoms in ex ited energy eigenstates
[195 with planar diele tri bodies were given.
The method an be further improved by des ribing the atom and the body on
an equal footing in terms of their harge densities and expressing the resulting
intera tion potential in terms of ele trostati linear response fun tions
9of the
two systems. This was rst demonstrated for a ground-state atom intera ting
with a realisti ele tri
10half spa e exhibiting non-lo al properties [199. The
approa h was demonstrated to lead to a nite value of the intera tion potential
in the limit z → 0 [190,200203.
11For su iently large values of z, the
potential for an atom in front of a half spa e an be given by an asymptoti
power series in 1/z [199,206209
U(z) = − ~
16π2ε0z3
∫ ∞
0dξ α(iξ)
ε(iξ)− 1
ε(iξ) + 1+O(1/z4) (4)
[α(ω), dipole polarizability of the atom; ε(ω), lo al permittivity of the half
spa e where the leading-order term orresponds to an attra tive 1/z4 for e
9In ontrast to the quantities appearing in earlier attempts to treat ondu tors in
a more realisti way [196198, the two response fun tions are dire tly a essible to
measurements.
10The term ele tri is used where no expli it distin tion is made between metals
( ondu tors) and diele tri s (insulators). Likewise, the notion magneto-ele tri is
used to refer to metals or diele tri s possessing non-trivial magneti properties.
11For the dispersion intera tion between two diele tri half spa es, this is shown in
Refs. [204,205.
10
and oin ides with the perfe t ondu tor result (3) in the limit of innite per-
mittivity. Next-order orre tions are due to the atomi quadrupole polarizabil-
ity on the one hand [203 and the leading-order non-lo al diele tri response
on the other hand [199. The response-fun tion approa h has been used to
study the intera tion of various ground-state obje ts with half spa es of dif-
ferent kinds, su h as the for es on an ion [210 and a permanently polarized
atom [211,212 in front of a metal half spa e, an anisotropi mole ule in front
of an ele tri half spa e [213 as well as the intera tion of two atoms in front
of a metal [214,215 and an ele tri half spa e [216. Extensions in lude the
intera tion of an atom in an ex ited energy eigenstate with an ele tri [217
and a birefringent diele tri half spa e [218; non-perturbative ee ts [219;
ee ts due to a onstant external magneti eld [220; and the intera tion
of single ground-state atoms/mole ules with bodies of various shapes where
perfe tly ondu ting [221, non-lo al metalli [222,223 and ele tri spheres
[221, non-lo al metalli [224,225 and ele tri ylinders [226, perfe tly on-
du ting planar [227 and non-lo al metalli spheri al avities [228,229, have
been onsidered.
The intera tion of two ma ros opi bodies B and B′was rst treated by
pairwise summation over the mi ros opi London potentials (2) between the
atoms onstituting the bodies [230,231,
U(z) = −∑
r∈B
∑
r′∈B′
C
|r− r′|6 , (5)
yielding an attra tive 1/z3 for e between two diele tri half spa es [230,232.
Though appli able to bodies of various shapes ( f. also Refs. [200,233), the
method ould only yield approximate results due to the restri tion to two-
atom intera tions. By modeling the body atoms by harmoni os illators, the
intera tion energy of the bodies ould be shown to be a sum of all possible
many-atom intera tion potentials [230,232,234. Appli ations to the intera -
tion of two half spa es [175 and two spheres [235 were studied. Mi ros opi
al ulations of the dispersion intera tion between bodies were soon realized to
be very umbersome, in parti ular for more involved geometries. In an alter-
native approa h based on ma ros opi ele trostati s, the intera tion energy
an be derived from the eigenmodes of the ele trostati Coulomb potential
whi h are subje t to the boundary onditions imposed by the surfa es of dis-
ontinuity [236,237 (for an overview, f. Ref. [45). The method was used
to al ulate Casimir for es between ele tri spheres [237; ele tri spheri al
avities [238; metal half spa es exhibiting non-lo al properties [208; rough
ele tri half spa es [239,240; and ele trolyti half spa es separated by a di-
ele tri [241.
Even though ele trostati methods have been developed into a sophisti ated
theory overing various aspe ts of dispersion for es, they an only render ap-
proximate results valid in the non-retarded limit where the obje t separa-
tions are su iently small so that the inuen e of the transverse ele tromag-
11
neti eld an be disregarded. This was rst demonstrated by Casimir and
Polder [107,242. Using a normal-mode expansion of the quantized ele tro-
magneti eld inside a planar avity bounded by perfe tly ondu ting plates,
they showed that the for e between the plates an be derived from the total
zero-point energy of the modes
E =∑
k
12~ωk. (6)
The di ulty that this energy is divergent was over ome by subtra ting the re-
spe tive diverging energy orresponding to innite plate separation, the nite
result implying a for e per unit area
F =π2~c
240
1
z4. (7)
In a similar way, they obtained the for e on an atom near one of su h plates
and the for e between two atoms in free spa e from the ground-state energy
of the respe tive system in leading-order perturbation theory. They re overed
the results of the non-retarded limit, Eqs. (2) and (3), and found that in the
retarded limit the atomatom and atomplate potentials are given by
U(z) = −23~cα(0)α′(0)
64π3ε20z7
(8)
and
U(z) = − 3~cα(0)
32π2ε0z4, (9)
respe tively, whi h orrespond to attra tive 1/z8 and 1/z5 for es that de reasemore rapidly than the ones in the non-retarded limit. Casimir and Polder had
thus developed a unied theory to des ribe dispersion intera tions over a large
range of distan es.
Normal-mode te hniques have sin e been widely used to study dispersion
intera tions. The two-atom intera tion has been onrmed in various ways
[243257, inter alia by basing the al ulations on the multipolar- oupling
s heme [243,245,254 in pla e of the minimal- oupling s heme originally used
by Casimir and Polder, and relativisti orre tions have been onsidered [258.
Extensions in lude the intera tion of three [247,255,259262 or more atoms
[263,264, the inuen e of higher-order multipole moments [265 and perma-
nent dipole moments [266 on the two-atom for e, the intera tion between
anisotropi ally polarizable atoms [267 and that between a polarizable and a
magnetizable atom [268274 (for an overview, f. Ref. [275). In parti ular,
it was found that in the retarded limit the for e between a polarizable and
a magnetizable atom is repulsive as in the non-retarded limit, but follows
the same 1/z8 power law as that between two polarizable atoms. Further-
more, the intera tion of atoms in ex ited energy eigenstates [276282 and
the inuen e of external onditions su h as nite temperature [273,283286,
12
applied ele tromagneti elds [285, or additional bodies [267,287289 on the
atomatom intera tion have been studied. In parti ular, when the interatomi
separation ex eeds the thermal wavelength, the for e de reases more slowly
(∼ 1/z7) than in the zero-temperature limit. Similarly, the CasimirPolder re-
sult for the atomplate intera tion has been onrmed [247250,252,269,290,
atoms that arry permanent ele tri dipole moments [291 or are magnetizable
[292 have been onsidered and the inuen e of nite temperature [284,293
as well as for e u tuations [294 has been studied. In lose analogy to the
atomatom intera tion, it was found that the intera tion between a magne-
tizable atom and a perfe tly ondu ting plate is repulsive and that the for e
de reases more slowly (∼ 1/z4) than in the zero-temperature limit as soon as
the atomplate separation ex eeds the thermal wavelength. In ontrast to the
atomatom intera tion, the atomplate potential for an atom in an ex ited
energy eigenstate was found to show an os illatory behavior in the retarded
limit [251,287,295,296, thereby making the ee t of the transverse ele tro-
magneti eld more expli it. In addition, atoms intera ting with bodies of
dierent shapes and materials have been onsidered, su h as: Perfe tly on-
du ting planar [291,297301 and paraboli avities [302,303; metal [304, ele -
tri [305308 and magneto-ele tri half spa es [309; ele tri planar [310,311
and spheri al avities [312.
Needless to say that the pioneering work of Casimir and Polder on disper-
sion for es has also stimulated further studies of the problem of bodybody
intera tions (for reviews see Refs. [44,313). Apart from onrming and in-
terpreting the original results [314316, normal-mode te hniques have been
employed to in lude ee ts that arise from nite temperatures [317, surfa e
roughness [318320, the presen e of a diele tri medium between the plates
[321 and even virtual ele tron-positron pairs [322,323 (where the latter were
found to be negligibly small). As in the ase of atombody intera tions, vari-
ous other geometries and materials have been onsidered su h as: Two ele tri
[324327, diele tri [328, lo ally [329331 and non-lo ally responding metal
plates [332; two plates that are polarizable and magnetizable [333339; the
fa es of a perfe tly ondu ting re tangular avity [340,341; two ele tri multi-
layer sta ks [342; a perfe tly ondu ting plate and ylinder [343; two ele tri
spheres [344; a perfe tly ondu ting plate and a small ele tri sphere [345;
a sphere and a surrounding spheri al avity [346. The results qualitatively
resemble the ndings for the atomatom and atombody intera tions. In par-
ti ular, retardation was found to lead to a stronger asymptoti de rease of
the for es whi h is softened due to thermal ee ts as soon as the separations
ex eed the thermal wavelengths; and the for e between a polarizable obje t
and a magnetizable one was found to be repulsive. Perhaps a more surpris-
ing result is the fa t that two birefringent plates may exert a non-vanishing
dispersion torque on ea h other [347,348. Moreover, the problem of Casimir
energies of single bodies
12has been addressed, motivated by a onje ture
12The Casimir energy of a single body an be dened as the geometry-dependent
13
made by Casimir [349, a ording to whi h an attra tive Casimir energy of an
ele tron (modeled as a small perfe tly ondu ting sphere) should be able to
ounterbalan e the repulsive self-energy of the ele tron harge and thus ex-
plain its stability.
13However, the energy of a perfe tly ondu ting sphere was
found to be repulsive [350,351, with similar ndings for a weakly diele tri
sphere [352355. On the ontrary, the Casimir energy of a weakly diele tri
ylinder was found to be attra tive, in agreement with expe tations [353,356.
The physi al signi an e of Casimir energies of single obje ts is yet un lear;
in parti ular it was shown by pairwise summation over mi ros opi dispersion
energies that dispersion energies of ma ros opi obje ts are in fa t dominated
by the always attra tive volume and surfa e energies and may hen e never be
observed [357. In standard al ulations of Casimir energies, these volume and
surfa e energies are either not onsidered from the very beginning or dis arded
during regularization pro edures [355.
Normal-mode te hniques have proved to be a powerful tool for studying disper-
sion for es ( f. also Refs. [3,358). Nevertheless, some prin ipal limitations of
the approa h have be ome apparent re ently, in parti ular in view of the new
hallenges in onne tion with re ent improvements on the experimental side.
So, normal-mode al ulations an be ome extremely umbersome when ap-
plied to obje t geometries relevant to pra ti e or when a realisti des ription of
the ele tromagneti properties of the intera ting obje ts is required. The lim-
itations are also illustrated by the ontroversy regarding the low-temperature
behavior of dispersion for es on bodies (for a re ent a ount of the debate, see
Ref. [359 and referen es therein). The answer to this question requires detailed
knowledge of the ompli ated interplay of positional, thermal and spe tral fa -
tors. To see this, one has to bear in mind that, in general, a large range of
frequen ies ontributes to the for es where the relative inuen e of dierent
frequen y intervals is determined by the obje tobje t separation, tempera-
ture and the frequen y dependen e of the obje t properties. As a onsequen e,
approximations su h as long-/short-range, high-/low-temperature or perfe t-
ree tivity limits be ome intrinsi ally intertwined. A typi al material property
relevant to dispersion for es is the permittivity whi h is a omplex fun tion of
frequen y, with the real and the imaginary part being responsible for disper-
sion and absorption, respe tively. In parti ular, absorption whi h introdu es
additional noise into a system, inhibits the appli ation of normal-mode expan-
sion on a ma ros opi level. This point was rst taken into a ount by Lifshitz
in his al ulation of the dispersion for e between two ele tri half spa es at
nite temperature [360,361 where he derived the for e from the average of the
stress tensor of the u tuating ele tromagneti eld at the surfa es of the half
spa es, with the sour e of the eld being the u tuating noise urrent within
part of the total ele tromagneti energy where the notion geometry-dependent part
is subje t to ambiguities, f. the dis ussion below. For further reading on the Casimir
energy of a single body, f. Ref. [313.
13For a further a dis ussion of this idea, f. Ref. [3.
14
the diele tri matter. The required average was obtained by noting that the
urrent u tuations are linked to the imaginary part of the permittivity via
the u tuationdissipation theorem. In this way, Lifshitz ould express the
for e per unit area in terms of the permittivities ε(ω), ε′(ω) of the two half
spa es where in parti ular, in the non-retarded (zero-temperature) limit the
for e per unit area, was obtained to be
F =~
8π2z3
∫ ∞
0dξ
ε(iξ)− 1
ε(iξ) + 1
ε′(iξ)− 1
ε′(iξ) + 1. (10)
The Lifshitz theory has been applied and extended by a number of authors
(for an overview, see Refs. [44,313), who studied the inuen e of dierent
frequen y ranges [362365, ee ts of nite temperatures [366369 and sur-
fa e roughness [370, and other planar stru tures su h as ele trolyti half
spa es separated by a diele tri [371, magneto-ele tri half spa es [372, metal
plates of nite thi kness [373, metal half spa es exhibiting non-lo al proper-
ties [368,374 and ele tri multilayer systems [375 (for further reading, f.,
e.g., Ref. [233). A typi al approximation for treating small deviations from
planar stru tures (like a sphere that is su iently lose by a plate [330) is
the proximity for e approximation where it is assumed that the intera tion of
two obje ts with gently urved surfa es an be obtained by simply integrating
the (Lifshitz) for e per unit area along the surfa es [376.
14While the debate
regarding the temperature dependen e of the for e between realisti metal
half spa es still seems unsettled, general onsensus is rea hed that in lusion
or negle t of material absorption (i.e., use of a Drude-type or a plasma-type
permittivity) leads to the disagreeing results [359. It is worth noting that
the for es in a planar stru ture an be reexpressed in terms of (frequen y-
dependent) ree tion oe ients dire tly a essible from experiments. This
formulation of the theory has been applied to metal [378380 and ele tri
half spa es [381, metal half spa es with non-lo al properties [382, ele tri
multilayer sta ks [383,384 and, in some approximation, to rough perfe tly
ondu ting [385,386 and metal half spa es [387,388 where the surfa e rough-
ness an give rise to a tangential for e omponent [389 and a torque [390.
Lifshitz's idea of expressing dispersion for es in terms of response fun tions
is of ourse not restri ted to planar systems, but an be extended to arbi-
trary geometries. This an be a hieved by expressing the results obtained by
normal-mode expansion in terms of the Green tensor of the ( lassi al) ele -
tromagneti eld [391393. Alternatively, the Green tensor whi h ontains
all the ne essary information on the shape and the relevant ele tromagneti
properties of the obje ts, an be introdu ed by applying path-integral te h-
niques [394,395 or employing the u tuationdissipation theorem [396. The
14Re ently, validity limits for the proximity for e approximation in the ase of per-
fe tly ondu ting obje ts have been dis ussed on the basis of numeri al al ulations
[377.
15
theory has been used to study the for es between two perfe tly ondu ting
plates [391,397,398, a perfe tly ondu ting plate and a perfe tly permeable
plate [393, two diele tri half spa es [328,399, two ele tri plates [396 and, in
some approximation, two perfe tly ondu ting spheres [393,397, a perfe tly
ondu ting sphere and a perfe tly ondu ting plate [397,398; the for e on a
re tangular piston [400; and the for e and the torque between weakly diele -
tri obje ts of arbitrary shapes [392. In parti ular, it was shown that the
for e between two mirror-symmetri ele tri obje ts is always attra tive [401.
Casimir energies of a perfe tly ondu ting sphere [391, a diele tri sphere
[395, a magneto-diele tri sphere [402 and a perfe tly ondu ting ylinder
[403 have also been studied in this way.
The on ept of linear-response theory has also been widely used to study
dispersion for es on atoms. In parti ular, it an be shown that the (position-
dependent part of the) intera tion energy between a ground-state atom and the
(body-assisted) ele tromagneti va uum in leading-order perturbation theory
an be expressed in terms of the linear response fun tions of the two systems,
U(r) =~µ0
2π
∫ ∞
0dξ ξ2α(iξ) TrG (1)(r, r, iξ), (11)
i.e., the atomi polarizability α(ω) on the one hand and the s attering Green
tensor G
(1)(r, r, ω) of the ele tromagneti eld on the other, thus rendering
a general expression for the for e on an atom in the presen e of arbitrary
bodies [404407
15(for an alternative, semi lassi al approa h based on nd-
ing the eigenenergies of the lassi al ele tromagneti eld intera ting with a
harmoni -os illator atom, see Ref. [200). The method whi h an easily be ex-
tended to thermal elds [408410, also applies to the dispersion intera tion of
two ground-state atoms in free spa e [404,408 or in the presen e of bodies [216
( f. also Refs. [200,411). However, it annot dire tly be applied to atoms in
ex ited energy eigenstates where it is ne essary to again start from the leading-
order intera tion energy and only express the eld ontribution in terms of the
respe tive response fun tion [412,413. Linear response theory has been used
to study the dispersion intera tion of a single ground-state atom with a multi-
tude of bodies su h as: Perfe tly ondu ting plates [404,405,407,408; diele tri
[414, ele tri [405,407,409,415 and magneto-ele tri half spa es [416; metal
half spa es exhibiting non-lo al properties [406,417 and/or surfa e roughness
[406,418 or being overed by a thin overlayer [419; perfe tly ondu ting [420
and diele tri spheres [395,414,421,422; diele tri ylinders [414,423425; per-
fe tly ondu ting and ele tri planar avities [426; diele tri spheri al [427,
ylindri al [424 and perfe tly ondu ting wedge-shaped avities [395,422.
Moreover, the for e on an atom in an ex ited energy eigenstate in front of
15Note that the method is the natural extension of the approa h based on the
ele trostati response fun tion whi h is now repla ed by the response fun tion for
the omplete ele tromagneti eld in luding its transverse part.
16
a perfe tly ondu ting [412,413, diele tri [413 and birefringent diele tri
half spa e [428 has been onsidered; and the intera tion of two ground-state
atoms embedded in a non-lo ally responding ele trolyte [429, pla ed near a
perfe tly ondu ting [430 and a ele tri half spa e [415,431 or inside a per-
fe tly ondu ting [411,430 and diele tri planar avity [432 has been studied.
Finally, relations between mi ros opi and ma ros opi dispersion for es have
been established whose validity is no longer restri ted to the non-retarded
limit. Modeling ma ros opi bodies as olle tions of harmoni -os illator atoms
intera ting with the ele tromagneti eld and al ulating the total energy
of the intera ting system, both the the for e on a single ground-state atom
in the presen e of a diele tri half spa e and the for e between two diele -
tri half spa es were derived from mi ros opi atomatom intera tions [433
where the former result was later extended beyond the harmoni -os illator
model [434. A harmoni -os illator model of atoms with the atoms being ou-
pled to a heat bath, was used to derive the for e between absorbing diele tri
half spa es, onrming the result of Lifshitz theory [435. The mi ros opi -
model al ulations show that only in the limit of weakly polarizable bodies,
i.e., small values of the sus eptibilities, a pairwise sum over two-atom for es
is su ient to obtain the total for e, stressing on e more the importan e of
many-atom intera tions in the ontext of body-assisted dispersion for es. Pair-
wise summation of two-atom intera tions an be used to obtain an approx-
imate des ription of the intera tion between intri ately shaped obje ts, e.g.,
bodies with rough surfa es [436,
16or of atombody/bodybody intera tions
involving ex ited atoms and/or bodies [281,282,439. Conversely, from well-
known formulas for the bodybody intera tion, formulas for the atombody
intera tion [360,361,394,395,440446 as well as the atomatom intera tion
[286,360,361,443,446,447 an be obtained in the limit of the respe tive sus-
eptibilities being asymptoti ally small.
As we have seen, various on epts have been developed to des ribe disper-
sion for esan overview over the dierent s enarios whi h have been studied
theoreti ally, is given in App. A in tabular form. These on epts, to some
extent, are based on dierent basi assumptions and hen e impose dierent
limitations upon the appli ability. The QED on epts based on normal-mode
expansion of the quantized ele tromagneti eld typi ally suer from the fa t
that when ma ros opi bodies ome into play, these bodies should be regarded
as non-absorbing and hen e also non-dispersing. To over ome this di ulty,
arguments from other theories, su h as the u tuationdissipation theorem
of statisti al physi s, must be borrowed. On the ontrary, the on epts based
on linear response theory abandon an expli it eld quantization and employ
16For bodies with small deviations from the planar geometry, the result of pairwise
summation an be improved by introdu ing a orre tion fa tor obtained from Lifshitz
theory [437,438.
17
the u tuationdissipation theorem from the beginning. However, the appli-
ability of methods that make use of the u tuationdissipation theorem by
some means or other is limited to equilibrium systems a disadvantage when
dynami al aspe ts of ex ited atoms are to be onsidered. All on epts have in
ommon that ma ros opi bodies are typi ally des ribed in terms of ma ro-
s opi ele trodynami s, i.e., boundary onditions at surfa es of dis ontinuity
and/or onstitutive relations.
In this arti le we show that by following the formalism of ma ros opi QED in
media (as developed, e.g., in Refs. [448450) from the very beginning, one an
obtain a unied approa h to dispersion for es whi h does not only ombine
the benets of normal-mode QED and linear-response theory in a natural way,
but also a entuates the ommon origin of and intimate relations between the
dierent types of for es and extends the range of appli ation. In parti ular, the
approa h an be used to study dispersion for es for a wide lass of dierent
s enarios, in luding many of those listed in the above overview whi h have
originally been studied by means of a variety of dierent methods.
The further ontents of the arti le are organized as follows. In Se . 2, the
main features of the quantization of the ele tromagneti eld in linear, dis-
persing and absorbing media and the intera tion of the medium-assisted eld
with atoms is outlined, with spe ial emphasis on magneto-ele tri media de-
s ribed in terms of spatially varying permittivities and permeabilities whi h
are omplex fun tions of frequen y. On this basis, in Se . 3, very general for-
mulas for the for e on a ma ros opi body due to its intera tion with other
ma ros opi bodies are presented whi h are valid for arbitrarily shaped bod-
ies as all the relevant properties of the bodies are fully expressed in terms
of the Green tensor of the asso iated ma ros opi Maxwell equations. Both
Casimir stress and Casimir for e are introdu ed, and a very general relation
to many-atom van der Waals for es is established. In parti ular, it is shown
that both the for e on a single ground-state atom intera ting with a body and
the for e between two ground-state atoms, an be obtained as limiting ases
of the general formulas. In Se . 4, for es on individual atoms intera ting with
the body-assisted ele tromagneti eld are studied in more detail, with spe ial
emphasis on expli itly solving the orresponding quantum-me hani al inter-
a tion problem. It is demonstrated how the for e on one or two ground-state
atoms in the presen e of magneto-ele tri bodies an be al ulated by leading-
order perturbation theory, the results agreeing with those obtained in Se . 3.
A number of examples is studied where it is shown that dispersion for es are
often given by simple asymptoti power laws in the retarded and non-retarded
limits. The for e on a single atom initially prepared in an arbitrary ex ited
quantum state is al ulated by solving the atomeld dynami s, leading to
expli itly time-dependent results. Some on luding are given in Se . 5.
18
2 Elements of QED in linearly responding media
It is well known that the properties of the ele tromagneti eld in media an
signi antly dier from those observed in free spa e, and hen e, the intera tion
of the eld with atoms an strongly be inuen ed by the presen e of media.
In lassi al ele trodynami s, linear media are ommonly des ribed in terms of
phenomenologi ally introdu ed ma ros opi ele tri and magneti sus eptibil-
ities (or permittivities and permeabilities, respe tively) available from mea-
surable data. This on ept whi h an be transferred to quantum ele trody-
nami s, has the benet of being universally valid be ause it uses only very
general physi al properties, without the need for spe i mi ros opi matter
models and involved ab initio al ulations.
2.1 The medium-assisted ele tromagneti eld
The medium-assisted ele tromagneti eld in the absen e of free harges or
urrents obeys the ma ros opi Maxwell equations whi h in the Fourier do-
main read
∇·B(r, ω) = 0, (12)
∇×E(r, ω)− iωB(r, ω) = 0, (13)
ε0∇·E(r, ω) = ρin(r, ω), (14)
κ0∇×B(r, ω) + iωε0E(r, ω) = jin(r, ω) (15)
(κ0 = µ−10 ) where the internal harge and urrent densities of the magneto-
ele tri media ρin(r, ω) and j
in(r, ω) are the sour es for the ele tri eld E(r, ω)
and the indu tion eld B(r, ω). Note that the pi ture-independent Fourier
omponents O(r, ω) of an operator eld O(r) are dened a ording to
O(r) =∫ ∞
0dω O(r, ω) + H.c. (16)
so that O(r, ω, t) = e−iω(t−t′)O(r, ω, t′) in the Heisenberg pi ture. Sin e the
internal harge and urrent densities are subje t to the ontinuity equation
−iωρin(r, ω) +∇· j
in(r, ω) = 0, (17)
they may be related to polarization and magnetization elds P(r, ω) and
M(r, ω) as follows:
ρin(r, ω) =−∇·P(r, ω), (18)
jin(r, ω) =− iωP(r, ω) +∇×M(r, ω). (19)
19
Upon introdu ing the displa ement eld
D(r, ω) = ε0E(r, ω) + P(r, ω) (20)
and the magneti eld
H(r, ω) = κ0B(r, ω)− M(r, ω), (21)
the inhomogeneous Maxwell equations (14) and (15) an hen e be written in
the familiar equivalent form
∇·D(r, ω) = 0, (22)
∇×H(r, ω) + iωD(r, ω) = 0 (23)
where the sour e terms asso iated with the internal harge and urrent den-
sities are now ontained in the displa ement and magneti elds.
In parti ular in the ase of linearly and lo ally responding magneto-ele tri
media, Eqs. (20) and (21) take the form
P(r, ω) = ε0[ε(r, ω)− 1]E(r, ω) + PN(r, ω), (24)
M(r, ω) = κ0[1− κ(r, ω)]B(r, ω) + MN(r, ω) (25)
[κ(r, ω) = µ−1(r, ω) with ε(r, ω) and µ(r, ω) being the (relative) ele tri per-
mittivity and magneti permeability of the media, respe tively. Causality im-
plies that ε(r, ω) and µ(r, ω) whi h vary with spa e in general, are omplex-
valued fun tions of frequen y with the KramersKronig relations being satis-
ed [451.
17A ording to the u tuationdissipation theorem, PN(r, ω) and
MN(r, ω) are the (linear) noise polarization and magnetization, respe tively,
asso iated with the (linear) absorption des ribed by the imaginary parts of
ε(r, ω) [Im ε(r, ω)> 0 and µ(r, ω) [Imµ(r, ω)> 0. For simpli ity, in Eqs. (24)
and (25) the material is assumed to be isotropi .
18
Substituting Eqs. (20), (21), (24) and (25) into Eq. (23) and making use
of Eq. (13), one an verify that the ele tri eld obeys the inhomogeneous
17Note that both metals and diele tri s an be des ribed in terms of their permit-
tivity with the main dieren e being that the permittivity of a diele tri is analyti
in the whole upper half of the omplex frequen y plane whereas that of a metal is
ommonly assumed to exhibit a simple pole at ω=0 [451.
18The theory an be extended to arbitrary media, by starting from the general linear
response relation between the urrent density and the ele tri eld. Formulas in this
arti le whi h do not expli itly refer to material properties (but solely via the Green
tensor) are valid for arbitrary linear media [452.
20
Helmholtz equation
[∇×κ(r, ω)∇×− ω
2
c2ε(r, ω)
]E(r, ω) = iωµ0jN(r, ω) (26)
where the sour e term is determined by the noise urrent density
jN(r, ω) = −iωPN(r, ω) +∇×MN(r, ω). (27)
Note that noise urrent density and noise harge density
ρN(r, ω) = −∇·PN(r, ω) (28)
fulll the ontinuity equation
−iωρN(r, ω) +∇· j
N(r, ω) = 0 (29)
[re all Eqs. (17)(19). The solution to Eq. (26) an be given in the form
E(r, ω) = iωµ0
∫d3r′G (r, r′, ω)· j
N(r′, ω) (30)
whi h, a ording to Eq. (13), implies that
B(r, ω) = µ0
∫d3r′ ∇×G(r, r′, ω)· j
N(r′, ω). (31)
Here, G(r, r′, ω) is the ( lassi al) Green tensor whi h is dened by the equation
[∇×κ(r, ω)∇×− ω
2
c2ε(r, ω)
]G(r, r′, ω) = δ(r− r′)I (32)
(I : unit tensor) together with the boundary ondition
G(r, r′, ω)→ 0 for |r− r′| → ∞. (33)
It should be pointed out that the Green tensor is uniquely dened by Eqs. (32)
and (33) provided that the stri t inequalities Im ε(r, ω)>0 and Imµ(r, ω)> 0hold. Note that it is an analyti fun tion of ω in the upper omplex half plane
and and has the following useful properties (A
T
ij =Aji):
G
∗(r, r′, ω) = G(r, r′,−ω∗), (34)
G(r, r′, ω) = G
T(r′, r, ω), (35)
∫d3s
−Im κ(s, ω)
[∇s×G(s, r, ω)
]T ·[∇s×G ∗(s, r′, ω)
]
+ω2
c2Im ε(s, ω)G(r, s, ω)·G∗(s, r′, ω)
= ImG (r, r′, ω). (36)
21
Noise polarization and magnetization and hen e noise urrent density, an be
related to dynami al variables fλ(r, ω) and f†λ(r, ω) (λ∈e,m) of the system
whi h onsists of the ele tromagneti eld and the magneto-ele tri matter, in-
luding the dissipative system responsible for absorption, as follows [448,449:
PN(r, ω) = i
√~ε0π
Im ε(r, ω) fe(r, ω), (37)
MN(r, ω) =
√
−~κ0π
Imκ(r, ω) fm(r, ω) =
√√√√ ~
πµ0
Imµ(r, ω)
|µ(r, ω)|2 fm(r, ω) (38)
with the fλ(r, ω) and f†λ(r, ω) being attributed to the olle tive Bosoni ex i-
tations of the system,
[fλi(r, ω), f
†λ′i′(r
′, ω′)]= δλλ′δii′δ(r− r′)δ(ω − ω′), (39)
[fλi(r, ω), fλ′i′(r
′, ω′)]= 0. (40)
By substituting Eqs. (37) and (38) into Eq. (30), on re alling Eq. (27), we may
express the medium-assisted ele tri eld in terms of the dynami al variables
fλ(r, ω) and f†λ(r, ω) to obtain
E(r, ω) =∑
λ=e,m
∫d3r′Gλ(r, r
′, ω)· fλ(r′, ω) (41)
where
G e(r, r′, ω) = i
ω2
c2
√~
πε0Im ε(r′, ω) G(r, r′, ω), (42)
Gm(r, r′, ω) = i
ω
c
√
− ~
πε0Imκ(r′, ω) [∇′×G (r′, r, ω)]
T, (43)
so that, a ording to Eq. (16),
E(r) =∫ ∞
0dω E(r, ω) + H.c.
=∑
λ=e,m
∫d3r′
∫ ∞
0dωGλ(r, r
′, ω)· fλ(r′, ω) + H.c.. (44)
Note that the relation (36) an be written in the more ompa t form
∑
λ=e,m
∫d3sGλ(r, s, ω)·G∗T
λ (r′, s, ω) =~µ0
πω2ImG(r, r′, ω). (45)
By starting from Eq. (41) and making use of the Maxwell equations in the
Fourier domain, Eqs. (13) and (23) together with Eqs. (20), (21), (24), (25),
(37) and (38), the other ele tromagneti -eld quantities su h as B(r), D(r)
22
and H(r), an be expressed in terms of the dynami al variables fλ(r, ω) andf†λ(r, ω) in a straightforward way. In parti ular, one derives
B(r, ω) =1
iω
∑
λ=e,m
∫d3r′ ∇×Gλ(r, r
′, ω)· fλ(r′, ω), (46)
and hen e,
B(r) =∫ ∞
0dω B(r, ω) + H.c.
=∑
λ=e,m
∫d3r′
∫ ∞
0
dω
iω∇×Gλ(r, r
′, ω)· fλ(r′, ω) + H.c. (47)
In view of the treatment of the intera tion of the medium-assisted ele tro-
magneti eld with atoms, it may be expedient to express the ele tri and
indu tion elds in terms of potentials,
E(r) = −∇ϕ(r)− ˙A(r), (48)
B(r) = ∇×A(r). (49)
In Coulomb gauge, ∇ ·A(r) = 0, the rst and se ond terms on the r.h.s. of
Eq. (48) are equal to the longitudinal (‖) and transverse (⊥) parts of the
ele tri eld, respe tively. From Eq. (44) it then follows that ∇ϕ(r) and A(r) an be expressed in terms of the dynami al variables fλ(r, ω) and f
†λ(r, ω) as
∇ϕ(r) = −E‖(r) = −∑
λ=e,m
∫d3r′
∫ ∞
0dω ‖
Gλ(r, r′, ω)· fλ(r′, ω) + H.c., (50)
A(r) =∑
λ=e,m
∫d3r′
∫ ∞
0
dω
iω⊥Gλ(r, r
′, ω)· fλ(r′, ω) + H.c. (51)
Note that the longitudinal (transverse) part of a ve tor eld is given by
F‖(⊥)(r) =∫
d3r′ δ‖(⊥)(r− r′)·F(r′) (52)
where
δ‖(r) = −∇∇
(1
4πr
), δ⊥(r) = δ(r)I − δ‖(r) (53)
(and for a tensor eld a ordingly).
The ommutation relations for the ele tromagneti elds an be dedu ed from
the ommutation relations for the dynami al variables fλ(r, ω) and f†λ(r, ω) as
given by Eqs. (39) and (40). In parti ular, it an be shown [448,449 that the
ele tri and indu tion elds obey the well-known (equal-time) ommutation
23
relations
[Ei(r), Bi′(r
′)]= −i~ε−1
0 ǫii′k∂kδ(r− r′), (54)
[Ei(r), Ei′(r
′)]= 0 =
[Bi(r), Bi′(r
′)]. (55)
Introdu ing the anoni al momentum eld asso iated with the (transverse)
ve tor potential,
Π(r) = −ε0E⊥(r), (56)
one an also prove that the (equal-time) ommutation relations
[Ai(r), Πi′(r
′)]= i~δ⊥ii′(r− r′), (57)
[Ai(r), Ai′(r
′)]= 0 =
[Πi(r), Πi′(r
′)]
(58)
are fullled.
It is an almost trivial onsequen e of the quantization s heme that upon hoos-
ing the Hamiltonian of the ombined system to be
Hmf =∑
λ=e,m
∫d3r
∫ ∞
0dω ~ω f
†λ(r, ω)· fλ(r, ω), (59)
the Heisenberg equation of motion
˙O =
i
~
[Hmf , O
](60)
generates the orre t Maxwell equations in the time domain,
∇×E(r) + ˙B(r) = 0, (61)
∇×H(r)− ˙D(r) = 0. (62)
Note that the Maxwell equations ∇·B(r)=0 and ∇·D(r)=0 are fullled by
onstru tion.
The Hilbert spa e an be spanned by Fo k states obtained in the usual way
by repeated appli ation of the reation operators f†λ(r, ω) on the ground state
|0〉 whi h is dened by
fλ(r, ω)|0〉 = 0 ∀ λ, r, ω. (63)
Note that the ground state refers to the ombined system of the ele tromag-
neti eld and the medium. In parti ular, from Eq. (41) together with the
ommutation relations (39) and (40) one derives, on using the integral rela-
tion (45),
〈0|Ei(r, ω)E†
i′(r′, ω′)|0〉 = π−1
~µ0ω2ImG ii′(r, r
′, ω)δ(ω − ω′), (64)
24
whi h reveals that the ground-state u tuations of the ele tri eld are deter-
mined by the imaginary part of the Green tensorin full agreement with the
u tuationdissipation theorem.
It should be stressed that Im ε(r, ω) > 0 and Imµ(r, ω) > 0 are assumed to
hold everywhere. Even in almost empty regions or regions where absorption
is very small and an be negle ted in pra ti e, the imaginary parts of the
permittivity and permeability must not be set equal to zero in the integrands
of expressions of the type (44). To allow for empty-spa e regions, the limits
Im ε(r, ω)→ 0 and Imµ(r, ω)→0may be performed a posteriori, i.e., after tak-
ing the desired expe tation values and having arried out all spatial integrals.
In this sense, the theory provides the quantized ele tromagneti eld in the
presen e of an arbitrary arrangement of linear, ausal magneto-ele tri bodies
hara terized by their permittivities and permeabilities where Im ε(r, ω)≥ 0and Imµ(r, ω)≥ 0.
As outlined above, quantization of the ele tromagneti eld in the presen e of
dispersing and absorbing magneto-ele tri bodies an be performed by start-
ing from the ma ros opi Maxwell equations in luding noise terms asso iated
with absorption, expressing the ele tromagneti eld in terms of these noise
terms and relating them to Bosoni dynami al variables in an appropriate
way ( f. also Refs. [453455). Alternatively, absorption an be a ounted for
by expressing the ele tromagneti eld in terms of auxiliary elds with the
dynami s of the auxiliary elds being su h that the Maxwell equations are
fullled [456. It has been shown that the two approa hes are equivalent [457.
It is worth noting that the quantization s heme is in full agreement with the
results of (quasi-)mi ros opi models of diele tri matter where the polariza-
tion is modeled by harmoni -os illator elds and damping is a ounted for
by introdu ing a bath of additional harmoni os illators [458. After a Fano
diagonalization [459 of the total Hamiltonian of the system (whi h onsists of
the ele tromagneti eld, the polarization and the bath), an expression of the
form (59) is obtained. A model of this type was rst developed for homoge-
neous diele tri s [458 and later extended to inhomogeneous diele tri bodies
[460462, in luding bodies exhibiting non-lo al properties [463. In parti ular
in the latter ase, the dierential equation (32) for the Green tensor obviously
hanges to an integro-dierential equation and Eqs. (37) and (38) must be
modied a ordingly.
2.2 Atomeld intera tion
Let us onsider a system of nonrelativisti parti les of masses mα and harges
qα whi h form an atomi system, e.g., an atom or a mole ule, intera ting with
the medium-assisted ele tromagneti eld. The Hamiltonian governing the
25
dynami s of the atomi system (briey referred to as atom in the following) in
the absen e of the medium-assisted ele tromagneti eld is ommonly given
in the form
Hat =∑
α
p2α
2mα
+ 12
∫d3r ρat(r)ϕat(r) (65)
where ρat(r) and ϕat(r), respe tively, are the harge density and the s alar
potential whi h are attributed to the atom,
ρat(r) =∑
α
qαδ(r− rα), (66)
ϕat(r) =∫d3r′
ρat(r′)
4πε0|r− r′| =∑
α
qα4πε0|r− rα|
, (67)
and the standard ommutation relations
[rαi, pα′i′] = i~δαα′δii′ , (68)
[rαi, rα′i′] = 0 = [pαi, pα′i′] (69)
hold. Obviously, ϕat(r) and ρat(r) obey the Poisson equation
ε0∆ϕat(r) = −ρat(r), (70)
and the ontinuity equation
˙ρat(r) +∇· jat(r) = 0 (71)
is fullled where the atomi urrent density jat(r) reads
jat(r) =12
∑
α
qα[˙rαδ(r− rα) + δ(r− rα) ˙rα
]. (72)
It may be useful [464,465 to introdu e enter-of-mass and relative oordinates
rA =∑
α
mα
mArα, rα = rα − rA (73)
(mA =∑
αmα) with the asso iated momenta being
pA =∑
α
pα, pα = pα −mα
mA
pA. (74)
Combining Eqs. (65) and (74), the atomi Hamiltonian may be written in the
form
Hat =p2A
2mA+∑
α
p2α
2mα+ 1
2
∫d3r ρat(r)ϕat(r)
=p2A
2mA
+∑
n
En|n〉〈n| (75)
26
where En and |n〉 are the eigenenergies and eigenstates of the internal Hamil-
tonian. From the ommutation relations (68) and (69) it then follows that the
non-vanishing ommutators of the new variables are
[rAi, pAi′] = i~δii′ , (76)
[rαi, pα′i′
]= i~δii′
(δαα′ − mα′
mA
). (77)
In parti ular, when mα′/mA≪ 1, then
[rαi, pα′i′
]≃ i~δii′δαα′ . (78)
Further atomi quantities that will be of interest are the atomi polarization
Pat(r) and magnetization Mat(r) [466,
Pat(r) =∑
α
qαrα
∫ 1
0dσ δ
(r− rA − σrα
), (79)
Mat(r) =12
∑
α
qα
∫ 1
0dσ σ
[δ(r−rA−σrα
)rα× ˙
rα − ˙rα×rαδ
(r−rA−σrα
)];
(80)
it an be shown that for neutral atoms, the atomi harge and urrent densities
are related to the atomi polarization and magnetization a ording to
ρat(r) = −∇·Pat(r) (81)
and
jat(r) =˙Pat(r) +∇×Mat(r) + jr(r) (82)
where
jr(r) =12∇×
[Pat(r)× ˙rA − ˙rA×Pat(r)
](83)
whi h is due to the enter-of-mass motion, is known as the Röntgen urrent
density [254,464. Note that Eqs. (70) and (81) imply
ε0∇ϕat(r) = P‖at(r). (84)
Expanding the delta fun tions in Eqs. (79) and (80) in powers of the rela-
tive oordinates rα, we see that the leading-order terms are the ele tri and
magneti dipole densities asso iated with the atom,
Pat(r) = dδ(r− rA), (85)
Mat(r) = mδ(r− rA) (86)
27
where the ele tri and magneti atomi dipole moments read
d =∑
α
qαrα =∑
α
qαrα, (87)
m = 12
∑
α
qαrα× ˙rα. (88)
Note that the se ond equality in Eq. (87) only holds for neutral atoms. Using
the atomi Hamiltonian (75) together with the ommutation relation (77) and
the denition (74), one an easily verify the useful relation
∑
α
qαmα〈m|pα|n〉 = iωmndmn (89)
[ωmn = (Em − En)/~, dmn = 〈m|d|n〉 whi h in turn implies the well-known
sum rule
1
2~
∑
m
ωmn(dnmdmn + dmndnm) =∑
α
q2α2mα
I . (90)
2.2.1 Minimal oupling
Having established the Hamiltonians of the medium-assisted eld and the
atom, we next onsider the atomeld intera tion. A ording to the mini-
mal oupling s heme ( f., e.g., Ref. [254), this may be done by making the
repla ement pα 7→ pα − qαA(rα) in the atomi Hamiltonian (65), summing
the Hamiltonians of the medium-assisted eld and the atom and adding the
Coulomb intera tion of the atom with the medium-assisted eld, leading to
[448,465
H =∑
λ=e,m
∫d3r
∫ ∞
0dω ~ω f
†λ(r, ω)· fλ(r, ω) + 1
2
∑
α
m−1α
[pα − qαA(rα)
]2
+ 12
∫d3r ρat(r)ϕat(r) +
∫d3r ρat(r)ϕ(r)
= Hmf + Hat + Hint (91)
where ϕ(r) and A(r) must be thought of as being expressed in terms of the
dynami al variables fλ(r, ω) and f†λ(r, ω), a ording to Eqs. (50) and (51).
Hen e, the atomeld intera tion energy reads
Hint =∑
α
qαϕ(rα)−∑
α
qαmα
pα ·A(rα) +∑
α
q2α2mα
A2(rα). (92)
Note that the s alar produ t of pα and A(rα) ommutes in the Coulomb gauge
used.
28
The total ele tromagneti eld in the presen e of the atom reads
E(r) = E(r)−∇ϕat(r), B(r) = B(r), (93)
D(r) = D(r)− ε0∇ϕat(r), H(r) = H(r). (94)
Obviously, B(r) and D(r) obey the Maxwell equations
∇·B(r) = 0, (95)
∇·D(r) = ρat(r), (96)
and it is a straightforward al ulation [448,465 to verify that the Hamiltonian
(91) generates the remaining two Maxwell equations
∇×E(r) + ˙B(r) = 0, (97)
∇×H(r)− ˙D(r) = jat(r) (98)
and the Newton equations of motion for the harged parti les,
mα¨rα = qαE(rα) +
12qα[˙rα×B(rα)− B(rα)× ˙rα
](99)
where
˙rα = m−1α
[pα − qαA(rα)
]. (100)
In many ases of pra ti al interest one may assume that the atom is small
ompared to the wavelength of the relevant ele tromagneti eld. It is hen e
useful to employ enter-of-mass and relative oordinates [Eqs. (73) and (74)
and apply the long-wavelength approximation by performing a leading-order
expansion of the intera tion Hamiltonian (92) in terms of the relative parti le
oordinates rα. Considering a neutral atom and re alling Eq. (50), one nds
Hint = −d·E‖(rA)−∑
α
qαmα
pα ·A(rA) +∑
α
q2α2mα
A2(rA). (101)
Note that the last term on the r.h.s. of Eq. (101) is independent of the relative
parti le oordinates and hen e does not a t on the internal state of the atom.
When onsidering pro esses aused by strong resonant transitions between
dierent internal states of the atom, it may therefore be negle ted.
2.2.2 Multipolar oupling
An equivalent des ription of the atomeld intera tion that is widely used is
based on the multipolar- ouplingHamiltonian.
19For a neutral atom, the tran-
19For an extension of the formulas given below to the ase of more than one atoms,
see Ref. [467.
29
sition from the minimal- oupling Hamiltonian (91) to the multipolar- oupling
Hamiltonian is a anoni al transformation of the dynami al variables, orre-
sponding to a unitary transformation with the transformation operator being
given by
U = exp[i
~
∫d3r Pat(r)·A(r)
](102)
where A(r) and Pat(r) are dened by Eqs. (51) and (79), respe tively. This
transformation is ommonly known as the PowerZienauWoolley transfor-
mation [468,469; obviously it does not hange rα,
r′α = U rαU† = rα (103)
and a straightforward al ulation yields [448,465
p′α = U pαU
† = pα − qαA(rα)−∫
d3r Ξα(r)×B(r) (104)
and
f ′λ(r, ω) = U fλ(r, ω)U† = fλ(r, ω) +
1
~ω
∫d3r′ P⊥
at(r′)·G∗
λ(r′, r, ω) (105)
where
Ξα(r) = qαrα
∫ 1
0dσ σδ
(r− rA − σrα
)
− mα
mA
∑
β
qβ rβ
∫ 1
0dσ σδ
(r− rA − σrβ
)+mα
mA
Pat(r). (106)
Now we may express the minimal- oupling Hamiltonian (91) in terms of the
transformed variables to obtain the multipolar- oupling Hamiltonian in the
form
H =∑
λ=e,m
∫d3r
∫ ∞
0dω ~ωf ′†λ (r, ω)· f ′λ(r, ω) +
1
2ε0
∫d3r P′2
at(r)
+∑
α
1
2mα
[p′α +
∫d3r Ξ′
α(r)×B′(r)]2−∫d3r P′
at(r)·E′(r). (107)
Here, E′(r) and B′(r), respe tively, are given by Eqs. (44) and (47) with
fλ(r, ω) [f†λ(r, ω) being repla ed with f ′λ(r, ω) [f
′†λ (r, ω). Note that r′α = rα,
r′α= rα, r′A= rA, P
′at(r)= Pat(r), Ξ
′α(r)= Ξα(r), B
′(r)= B(r), but
E′(r) = E(r) + ε−10 P⊥
at(r) (108)
whi h means that the transformed (medium-assisted) ele tri eld E′(r) hasthe physi al meaning of a displa ement eld, in ontrast to E(r) whi h has
the physi al meaning of an ele tri eld.
30
Hamiltonian (107) an be de omposed into three parts,
H = Hmf ′ + Hat′ + Hint′ (109)
where Hmf ′ is given by Eq. (59) with the primed variables in pla e of the
unprimed ones,
Hmf ′ =∑
λ=e,m
∫d3r
∫ ∞
0dω ~ω f
′†λ (r, ω)· f ′λ(r, ω), (110)
Hat′ is the atomi Hamiltonian,
Hat′ =p′2A
2mA+∑
α
p′2α
2mα+
1
2ε0
∫d3r P′2
at(r)
=p′2A
2mA
+∑
n
E ′n|n′〉〈n′| (111)
and Hint′ is the oupling term,
Hint′ = −∫
d3r P′at(r)·E′(r)−
∫d3r
ˆM′
at(r)·B′(r)
+∑
α
1
2mα
[∫d3r Ξ′
α(r)×B′(r)]2
+1
mA
∫d3r p′
A ·P′at(r)×B′(r) (112)
where
ˆM′
at(r) =∑
α
qα2mα
∫ 1
0dσ σ
[δ(r−r′A−σr′α
)r′α×p′
α − p′α×r′αδ
(r−r′A−σr′α
)].
(113)
Note that in ontrast to the physi al magnetization Mat(r) [Eq. (80),ˆMat(r)
is dened in terms of the anoni ally onjugated momenta rather than the
velo ities, as is required in a anoni al formalism. The Hamiltonian (107)
implies the relation
mα˙r′α = p′
α +∫d3r Ξ′
α(r)×B′(r) (114)
and it is not di ult to see [re all Eqs. (100) and (104) that mα˙r′α=mα
˙rα. Itshould be pointed out that the eigenenergies E ′
n of the internal Hamiltonian
in Eq. (111) may be dierent from the orresponding ones of the internal
Hamiltonian in Eq. (75), be ause of the additional term ontained in
1
2ε0
∫d3r P′2
at(r) =12
∫dr ρ′at(r)ϕ
′at(r) +
1
2ε0
∫d3r
[P′⊥
at (r)]2. (115)
A ordingly, the eigenstates of the two internal Hamiltonians are not related
to ea h other via the unitary transformation U [Eq. (102) in general.
31
One of the advantages of the multipolar oupling s heme is the fa t that it al-
lows for a systemati expansion in terms of the ele tri and magneti multipole
moments of the atom. In parti ular, in the long-wavelength approximation, by
retaining only the leading-order terms in the relative oordinates r′α, the in-
tera tion energy (112) reads
Hint′ = − d′ ·E′(r′A)− ˆm′ ·B′(r′A) +∑
α
q2α8mα
[ˆr′α×B′(r′A)
]2
+3
8mA
[d′×B′(rA)
]2+
1
mA
p′A ·d′×B′(r′A) (116)
where
ˆm′ =∑
α
qα2mα
r′α×p′α. (117)
Note that, in ontrast to m [Eq. (88),
ˆm is dened in terms of the anoni al
momenta. The rst two terms on the r.h.s. of Eq. (116) represent ele tri and
magneti dipole intera tions, respe tively; the next two terms des ribe the
(generalized) diamagneti intera tion; and the last term is the Röntgen inter-
a tion due to the enter-of-mass motion. For non-magneti atoms, Eq. (117)
redu es to the intera tion Hamiltonian in ele tri -dipole approximation,
Hint′ = −d′ ·E′(r′A) +p′A
mA·d′×B′(r′A) (118)
whi h in ases where the inuen e of the enter-of-mass motion on the atom
eld intera tion does not need to be taken into a ount, redu es to
Hint′ = −d′ ·E′(r′A). (119)
3 For es on bodies
Ele tromagneti for es are Lorentz for es. As known, the total Lorentz for e
FL a ting on the matter ontained in a volume V is given by
FL =∫
Vd3r
[ρ(r)E(r) + j(r)×B(r)
]. (120)
Here, the ele tromagneti eld a ts on the the total harge and urrent den-
sities ρ(r) and j(r), respe tively, whi h in general in lude the internal harge
and urrent densities ρin(r) and jin(r), respe tively, whi h are attributed to a
medium [Eqs. (18) and (19) as well as those due to the presen e of additional
sour es, su h as ρat(r) and jat(r) [Eqs. (66) and (72). With the help of the
Maxwell equations [as given by Eqs. (12)(15) with ρin(r) 7→ ρ(r), jin(r) 7→ j(r)
32
one easily nds
ρ(r)E(r) + j(r)×B(r) = ∇·T (r)− ε0∂
∂t
[E(r)×B(r)
](121)
so that
FL =∫
∂Vda·T (r)− ε0
d
dt
∫
Vd3r E(r)×B(r) (122)
where the Maxwell stress tensor
T (r) = ε0E(r)E(r) + µ−10 B(r)B(r)− 1
2
[ε0E
2(r) + µ−10 B2(r)
]I (123)
has been introdu ed. In parti ular, if the volume integral in the se ond term
on the r.h.s. of Eq. (122) does not depend on time, then the total for e redu es
to the surfa e integral
FL =∫
∂VdFL (124)
where
dFL = da·T (r) = T (r)·da (125)
may be regarded as the innitesimal for e element a ting on an innitesimal
surfa e element da. Note that a onstant term in the stress tensor does not
ontribute to the integral in Eq. (124) and an therefore be omitted.
If the Minkowski stress tensor
T
(M)(r) = D(r)E(r) + H(r)B(r)− 12
[D(r)·E(r) + H(r)·B(r)
]I
= T (r) + P(r)E(r)− M(r)B(r)− 12
[P(r)·E(r)− M(r)·B(r)
]I (126)
(whi h agrees with Abraham's stress tensor [470) is used in Eq. (124) [together
with Eq. (125) instead of the Maxwell stress tensor T (r) to al ulate the for e,one nds
dF(M) = da·T (M)(r) = dFL
+ da·P(r)E(r)− M(r)B(r)− 1
2
[P(r)·E(r)− M(r)·B(r)
]I
, (127)
and it is seen that in general
dFL 6= da·T (M)(r). (128)
That is to say, the use of the Minkowski stress tensor is expe ted not to
yield the Lorentz for e, in general. Indeed, a areful analysis and interpreta-
tion of lassi al ele tromagneti for e experiments [471478 shows that the
(energymomentum four-tensor asso iated with the) Lorentz for e passes the
theoreti al and experimental tests and qualies for a orre t des ription of
the energymomentum properties of the ele tromagneti eld in ma ros opi
ele trodynami s [479 (also see Se s. 3.1 and 3.2).
33
In lassi al ele trodynami s, ele tri ally neutral material bodies at zero tem-
perature whi h do not arry a permanent polarization and/or magnetization
are not subje t to a Lorentz for e in the absen e of external ele tromagneti
elds. As already noted in Se . 1.1, the situation hanges in quantum ele -
trodynami s, sin e the ground-state u tuations of the body-assisted ele tro-
magneti eld and the body's polarization/magnetization harge and urrent
densities an give rise to a non-vanishing ground-state expe tation value of
the Lorentz for ethe Casimir for e [480
F =∫
Vd3r
〈0|
[ρ(r)E(r′) + j(r)×B(r′)
]|0〉
r′→r
. (129)
Here, the oin iden e limit r′ → r must be performed in su h a way that
unphysi al (divergent) self-for e ontributions are dis arded after the va uum
expe tation value has been al ulated for r′ 6= r, an expli it pres ription will
be given below Eq. (134).
To al ulate the Casimir for e, let us onsider linear media that lo ally respond
to the ele tromagneti eld and an be hara terized by a spatially varying
omplex permittivity ε(r, ω) and a spatially varying omplex permeability
µ(r, ω). Following Se . 2.1, we may write the medium-assisted ele tri and
indu tion elds in the form of Eqs. (44) and (47). Provided that the volume of
interest V does not ontain any additional harges or urrents, the harge and
urrent densities that are subje t to the Lorentz for e (120) are the internal
ones, ρ(r) = ρin(r) and j(r) = jin(r) [re all Eqs. (18) and (19). Making use of
Eqs. (24) and (25) together with Eqs. (28)(32), one an easily see that
ρ(r, ω) = −ε0∇·[ε(r, ω)− 1]E(r, ω)
+ (iω)−1
∇· jN(r, ω) (130)
and
j(r, ω) = − iωε0[ε(r, ω)− 1]E(r, ω)
+ ∇×κ0[1− κ(r, ω)]B(r, ω)
+ j
N(r, ω). (131)
Taking into a ount that E(r, ω) and B(r, ω) an be given in the forms (30)
and (46), respe tively, and that the Green tensor G(r, r′, ω) obeys the dier-ential equation (32), one may perform Eqs. (130) and (131) to obtain
ρ(r, ω) =iω
c2
∫d3r′ ∇·G(r, r′, ω)· j
N(r′, ω), (132)
j(r, ω) =∫
d3r′[∇×∇×−ω
2
c2
]G(r, r′, ω)· j
N(r′, ω). (133)
In this way, the elds ρ(r, ω), j(r, ω), E(r, ω) [Eq. (30) and B(r, ω) [Eq. (31)
are expressed in terms of the noise urrent density jN(r, ω). Making use of
34
Eq. (27) together with Eqs. (37) and (38) and re alling the ommutation rela-
tions (39) and (40), one an easily al ulate the ground-state orrelation fun -
tion 〈0|jN(r, ω)j
†
N(r′, ω′)|0〉 whi h an then be used, on re alling Eqs. (30),
(31), (132) and (133), to al ulate all the orrelation fun tions relevant to the
Casimir for e, as given by Eq. (129). The result is [481
F =~
π
∫
Vd3r
∫ ∞
0dω
(ω2
c2∇·ImG (r, r′, ω)
+ Tr
I×
[∇×∇×−ω
2
c2
]ImG (r, r′, ω)×←−∇′
)
r′→r
= − ~
π
∫
Vd3r
∫ ∞
0dξ
(ξ2
c2∇·G(r, r′, iξ)
− Tr
I×
[∇×∇×+
ξ2
c2
]G (r, r′, iξ)×←−∇′
)
r′→r
(134)
[(TrT )j=T ljl,←−∇ introdu es dierentiation to the left where it is now appar-
ent that in the oin iden e limit r′ → r the Green tensor has to be repla ed
with its s attering part at ea h spa e point. In parti ular, when the mate-
rial in the spa e region V is homogeneous, then the Green tensor therein an
be globally de omposed into a bulk part G
(0)(r, r′, ω) and a s attering part
G
(1)(r, r′, ω),
G(r, r′, ω) = G
(0)(r, r′, ω) +G
(1)(r, r′, ω) (r ∈ V ). (135)
In this ase, the oin iden e limit r′ → r simply means that the Green ten-
sor G(r, r′, ω) an be globally repla ed by its well-behaved s attering part
G
(1)(r, r′, ω).
A ording to Eqs. (123)(125), the Casimir for e an be equivalently rewritten
as a surfa e integral over a stress tensor [480,
F =∫
∂Vda·T (r, r′)r′→r (136)
where
T (r, r′) = 〈0|ε0E(r)E(r
′) + µ−10 B(r)B(r′)
− 12
[ε0E(r)·E(r′) + µ−1
0 B(r)·B(r′)]I
|0〉 (137)
whi h leads to
T (r, r′) = S(r, r′)− 12
[TrS(r, r′)
]I (138)
35
with
S(r, r′) =~
π
∫ ∞
0dω
[ω2
c2ImG(r, r′, ω)−∇×ImG(r, r′, ω)×←−∇′
]
= − ~
π
∫ ∞
0dξ
[ξ2
c2G (r, r′, iξ) +∇×G(r, r′, iξ)×←−∇′
]. (139)
Both Eq. (134) and Eq. (136) [together with Eqs. (138) and (139) are valid
for arbitrary bodies that linearly respond to the ele tromagneti eld, sin e
the for e is fully determined by the Green tensor of the lassi al, ma ros opi
Maxwell equations with the material properties entering the for e formulas
only via the Green tensor. Moreover, Eqs. (134) and (139) reveal that the
for e is proportional to ~ and hen e represents a pure quantum ee t. The
results an be generalized to nite temperatures T in a straightforward way,
by averaging in Eqs. (129) and (137) over the thermal state instead of the
va uum state. As a onsequen e, the r.h.s. of the rst equalities of Eqs. (134)
and (139) are modied a ording to [480
∫ ∞
0dω . . . 7→
∫ ∞
0dω coth
(~ω
2kBT
). . . , (140)
(kB, Boltzmann onstant) so that the nal forms of these equations hange as
~
π
∫ ∞
0dξ f(iξ) 7→ 2kBT
∞∑
n=0
(1− 1
2δn0)f(iξn) (141)
with
ξn =2πkBT
~n (142)
being the Matsubara frequen ies.
3.1 Casimir stress in planar stru tures
Let us apply the theory to a planar magneto-ele tri stru ture dened a ord-
ing to
ε(r, ω) =
ε−(z, ω) z < 0,
ε(ω) 0 < z < d,
ε+(z, ω) z > d,
(143)
µ(r, ω) =
µ−(z, ω) z < 0,
µ(ω) 0 < z < d,
µ+(z, ω) z > d
(144)
36
and restri t our attention to the zero-temperature limit. To determine the
Casimir stress in the interspa e 0< z < d, we need the s attering part of the
Green tensor in Eq. (139) for both spatial arguments within the interspa e
(0 < z = z′ < d). Sin e the omponent q of the wave ve tor parallel to the
interfa es is onserved and the polarizations σ = s, p de ouple, the required
Green tensor (as given in App. B) an be expressed in terms of ree tion
oe ients rσ± = rσ±(ω, q) (q = |q|) referring to ree tion of waves at the
right (+) and left (−) wall, respe tively, as seen from the interspa e. Expli it
(re urren e) expressions for the ree tion oe ients are available if the walls
are multi-slab magneto-ele tri s, f. Eqs. (B.7) and (B.8).
20In the simplest
ase of two homogeneous, semi-innite half spa es, the oe ients rσ± redu e
to the well-known Fresnel amplitudes, Eq. (B.10).
In order to determine the Casimir for e, it is lear for symmetry reasons that
one requires the z omponent Tzz(r)≡ Tzz(r, r)r′→r of the stress tensor in the
interspa e 0<z<d whi h, upon using the Green tensor from App. B, an be
given in the form [480
Tzz(r) = −~
8π2
∫ ∞
0dξ∫ ∞
0dq
q
bµ(iξ)g(z, iξ, q) (145)
where the fun tion g(z, ξ, q) is dened by
g(z, iξ, q) = − 2[b2(1 + n−2) + q2(1− n−2)
]e−2bd rs+rs−D
−1s
− 2[b2(1 + n−2)− q2(1− n−2)
]e−2bd rp+rp−D
−1p
+ (b2 − q2)(1− n−2)[e−2bzrs− + e−2b(d−z)rs+
]D−1
s
− (b2 − q2)(1− n−2)[e−2bzrp− + e−2b(d−z)rp+
]D−1
p (146)
with
n = n(iξ) =√ε(iξ)µ(iξ) , (147)
b = b(iξ, q) =
√
n2(iξ)ξ2
c2+ q2 , (148)
Dσ = Dσ(iξ, q) = 1− rσ+rσ−e−2bd. (149)
A ording to Eq. (136), Eq. (145) [together with Eqs. (146)(149) gives the
for e per unit area between two arbitrary planar multilayer sta ks of (lo ally
responding) dispersing and absorbing magneto-ele tri material where the in-
terspa e between them may ontain an additional magneto-ele tri medium.
It is worth noting that many spe i planar systems that an be addressed
by means of Eq. (145) have been studied by using alternative methods: The
most prominent example is the ase of two ele tri half spa es separated by
20For ontinuous wall proles, Ri ati-type equations have to be solved [482.
37
va uum, as rst onsidered by Lifshitz [360,361 and later readdressed [362
365,378,381, inter alia based on normal-mode QED [325327,329. Extended
s enarios range from ele tri half spa es separated by an ele tri medium (as
studied by means of ele trostati theory [204,205,236,241, normal-mode QED
[321 and an extended Lifshitz theory [371) over ele tri plates of nite thi k-
ness (as addressed on the basis of the Lifshitz theory [373 and linear-response
theory [396), ele tri multilayer sta ks (as treated by generalizing the results
of the Lifshitz theory [375,383,384 as well as normal-mode QED [342) to
magneto-ele tri half spa es (as studied by means of Lifshitz theory [393 as
well as normal-mode QED [333337,372). For purely ele tri multilayer sys-
tems, various ee ts not being taken into a ount by Eq. (145), have also
been addressed in a number of works, su h as the inuen e on the for e of -
nite temperature [324,328,330332,335,337,360,361,366369,379,380,391, sur-
fa e roughness [318320,239,240,370,385389 and non-lo ally responding ma-
terials [208,332,368,374. As outlined above, nite temperature an be easily
in luded in Eq. (145) by applying Eqs. (141) and (142) [480, whereas surfa e
roughness as well as non-lo al material response an be taken into a ount
by returning to the more general formula (136) [together with Eqs. (138) and
(139) and spe ifying the Green tensor appropriately.
To further (numeri ally) evaluate Eq. (145), knowledge of the ξ- and q-depen-den e of the ree tion oe ients whi h depend on the respe tive planar sys-
tem (see, e.g., the examples studied in Refs. [445,446,483485), is required.
Let us here restri t our attention to the limit of perfe tly ondu ting surfa es,
i.e., rp±=−rs±=1 and assume that the wall separation d is su iently large,
so that the permittivity and the permeability of the medium in the interspa e
an be repla ed by their stati values ε≡ ε(0) and µ≡ µ(0). It is then not
di ult to al ulate the simplied integrals in Eq. (145) analyti ally to obtain
the attra tive Casimir for e per unit area, F =Tzz(d) [re all Eq. (136) whi ha ts between two perfe tly ree ting plates as
21
F =π2~c
240
õ
ε
(2
3+
1
3εµ
)1
d4. (150)
In parti ular, when the interspa e is empty (ε = 1, µ = 1), then Eq. (150)
redu es to
F =π2~c
240
1
d4, (151)
in agreement with the famous result (7) rst obtained by Casimir on the basis
21Note that the terms proportional to e−2b(d−z)
in Eq. (146) give rise to divergent
integrals in Eq. (145) in the limit z→ d whi h obviously results from the assumptions
of frequen y-independent response of the plates and the intervening medium and
innite lateral extension of the plates. Sin e in a realisti system these ontributions
are an eled by similar ontributions o urring at the ba ks of the plates [480, they
an be dis arded.
38
of a normal-mode expansion [242 and subsequently rederived [315,317, inter
alia based on lassi al orbits [393,397 or dimensional arguments [314.
In the same approximation, the for e that a ts on a perfe tly ondu ting
plate in a planar avity bounded by perfe tly ondu ting walls and lled with
a magneto-ele tri medium obviously reads
F =π2~c
240
õ
ε
(2
3+
1
3εµ
)(1
d4r− 1
d4l
)(152)
where dl (dr) is the left (right) platewall separation. On the ontrary, use of
the Minkowski stress tensor (126) leads, for µ=1, to [483
F (M) =π2~c
240
1√ε
(1
d4r− 1
d4l
). (153)
Comparing the two results for µ=1, we see that |F |≤ |F (M)|. Introdu tion of
a (polarizable) medium into the interspa e between the plate and the avity
walls is obviously asso iated with some s reening, thereby redu ing the for e
a ting on the plate. Sin e the internal harges and urrents of the interspa e
medium are fully in luded only in the Lorentz for e [re all Eqs. (120)(125),
the for e based on the Minkowski stress tensor or an equivalent quantity un-
derestimates the s reening ee t and is hen e larger than the Lorentz for e in
general.
3.2 Ma ro- and mi ro-obje ts
Let us return to the general formula (134) and onsider the Casimir for e
a ting on ele tri matter of sus eptibility χ(r, ω)= ε(r, ω)−1 in some parti -
ular spa e region V in the presen e of arbitrary linearly responding bodies
(outside V ) in more detail. If G (r, r′, ω) and G(r, r′, ω), respe tively, denotethe Green tensors in the absen e and presen e of the ele tri matter in Vwith both of them taking into a ount the bodies in the remaining spa e, the
dierential equation (32) for G(r, r′, ω) an be onverted into the Dyson-type
integral equation
G(r, r′, ω) = G(r, r′, ω) +ω2
c2
∫
Vd3s χ(s, ω)G(r, s, ω)·G(s, r′, ω) (154)
where, for r ∈ V , the Green tensor G(r, r′, ω) satises the same dierential
equation as the free-spa e Green tensor,
[∇×∇×−ω
2
c2
]G(r, r′, ω) = δ(r− r′)I , (155)
39
from whi h it follows that
ω2
c2∇·G(r, r′, ω) = −∇δ(r − r′) (156)
for r∈V . Equations (154) and (156) imply (r ∈ V , ω real)
∇·ImG(r, r′, ω) = −∇·Im[χ(r, ω)G(r, r′, ω)]. (157)
In a similar way, one nds that (r ∈ V , ω real)
[∇×∇×−ω
2
c2
]ImG (r, r′, ω)×←−∇′ =
ω2
c2Im[χ(r, ω)G(r, r′, ω)]×←−∇′. (158)
Substituting Eqs. (157) and (158) into Eq. (134) one an then show that the
Casimir for e a ting on an ele tri body of volume VI whi h is an inner part
of a larger ele tri body (o upying volume V ) reads [481
F = − ~
2π
∫ ∞
0dξ
ξ2
c2
∫
VI
d3r χ(r, iξ)∇Tr[G(r, r′, iξ)]r′→r
− 2∫
∂VI
da·χ(r, iξ)[G(r, r′, iξ)]r′→r
. (159)
In parti ular, in the ase of an isolated body, i.e., when the region V ⊃ VI isempty apart from the ele tri matter ontained in VI, then the surfa e integral
an be dropped, hen e
F = − ~
2π
∫
VI
d3r∫ ∞
0dξ
ξ2
c2χ(r, iξ)∇Tr[G (r, r′, iξ)]r′→r. (160)
Let us briey ompare Eq. (159) with the equation obtained on the basis of
the Minkowski stress tensor,
F(M) =~
2π
∫
VI
d3r∫ ∞
0dξ
ξ2
c2[∇χ(r, iξ)] Tr[G(r, r, iξ)]r′→r. (161)
It diers from Eq. (159) by a surfa e integral, in general [481. Hen e, the two
for e formulas agree in the ase of an isolated body where the surfa e integrals
do not ontribute to the for e and both equations redu e to Eq. (160). In
ontrast to Eq. (159), appli ation of Eq. (161) to any inner, homogeneous part
of a body leads to the paradoxi al result that the for e identi ally vanishes,
be ause of ∇χ(r, iξ)=0. In other words, the only atoms that are subje t to a
for e are those at the surfa e of the body. On the ontrary, it is known that
the van der Waals for es on all atoms of a body ontribute to the Casimir
for e (Se . 3.2.1).
We have seen that within the framework of ma ros opi QED, Casimir for es
on linearly responding bodies an be expressed in terms of the respe tive
40
Green tensor of the Maxwell equations for the body-assisted ele tromagneti
eld. Hen e, the main problem to be solved in pra ti e is the determination
of the Green tensors for the spe i systems of interest. Sin e losed formulas
for Green tensors are only available for highly symmetri systems (see, e.g.,
Ref. [482), approximative and numeri al methods are required. For exam-
ple, one an start from an appropriately hosen Green tensor as zeroth-order
approximation to the exa t one and perform a Born expansion of the exa t
Green tensor by iteratively solving the orresponding Dyson-type equation. In
parti ular, iteratively solving Eq. (154) yields the Born series
G(r, r′, ω) = G(r, r′, ω) +∞∑
K=1
(ω
c
)2K
K∏
J=1
∫
Vd3sJ χ(sJ , ω)
×G (r, s1, ω)·G(s1, s2, ω) · · ·G(sK , r′, ω). (162)
3.2.1 Weakly polarizable bodies, mi ro-obje ts and atoms
The for e formulas (159) and (160) whi h follow from ma ros opi QED with-
out involved mi ros opi onsiderations, do not only apply to ele tri ma ro-
obje ts but also to mi ro-obje ts. Moreover they also allow for studying the
limiting ase of individual atoms and determining in this way even the disper-
sion for es with whi h bodies a t on atoms and atoms a t on ea h other in the
presen e of bodies. To see this, let us onsider diele tri bodies whi h may be
typi ally thought of as onsisting of distinguishable (ele tri ally neutral but
polarizable) mi ro- onstituents (again briey referred to as atoms), so that
the ClausiusMossotti relation [451,486
χ(r, ω) = ε−10 η(r)α(ω)[1− η(r)α(ω)/(3ε0)]−1
= ε−10 η(r)α(ω) [1 + χ(r, ω)/3] (163)
may be assumed to be valid where α(ω) is the atomi polarizability and η(r)their number density.
22Let VI be the volume of an isolated diele tri body
of sus eptibility χ(r, ω). The Born series (162) and the ClausiusMossotti
relation (163) imply that when the body is su iently small and/or weakly
polarizable, then the for e, as given by Eq. (160), is essentially determined by
the leading-order term proportional to χ(r, ω)≃ε−10 η(r)α(ω), so that Eq. (160)
approximates to
23
F = −~µ0
2π
∫
VI
d3r η(r)∫ ∞
0dξ ξ2α(iξ)∇TrG (1)(r, r, iξ) (164)
22Note that Eq. (163) is onsistent with the requirement that both α(ω) and χ(r, ω)
be Fourier transforms of response fun tions i η(r)α(0)/(3ε0)< 1.23For a small and/or weakly polarizable body that is an inner part of a larger body,
see Refs. [443,481,487.
41
where, a ording to the de omposition
G(r, r′, ω) = G
(0)(r, r′, ω) +G
(1)(r, r′, ω) (r ∈ V ) (165)
[ f. Eq. (135), G
(1)(r, r′, ω) is simply the s attering part of the Green tensor
G(r, r′, ω) of the system without the diele tri body under onsideration.
It an be easily seen that Eq. (164) may be rewritten as [481
F =∫
VI
d3r η(r)F(r) (166)
where
F(r) = −∇U(r) (167)
with
U(r) =~µ0
2π
∫ ∞
0dξ ξ2α(iξ) TrG (1)(r, r, iξ) (168)
being nothing but the van der Waals potential of a single ground-state atom
of polarizability α(ω) at position r in the presen e of arbitrary linearly re-
sponding bodies at zero temperature (Se . 4). Note that in the limiting ase
when VI → 0 and η → ∞ but ηVI = 1, su h that VI overs a single atom at
position rA, then F redu es to F(rA)the for e a ting on a single atom. Note
that a relation of the kind (166) was already used by Lifshitz to dedu e the
dispersion for e between a single atom and an ele tri half spa e from that
between a diele tri and an ele tri half spa e [360,361.
Equation (166) reveals that the for e a ting on a weakly polarizable diele tri
body is the sum of the for es a ting on all body atoms due to their intera tion
with other bodies giving rise to the Green tensor G(r, r′, ω). Let us onsiderin more detail the intera tion of a weakly polarizable body with a se ond iso-
lated diele tri body of volume V ′I whi h is also weakly polarizable [χ′(r, ω)≃
ε−10 η′(r)α′(ω). Denoting the Green tensor asso iated with all remaining bodies
ex ept for the two under onsideration by G (r, r′, ω), expanding G(r, r′, ω), by
starting from G(r, r′, ω) in the Born series [i.e., using Eq. (162) with G 7→G ,
G 7→ G and V 7→ V ′I and again omitting terms of higher than linear order in
the sus eptibility, Eq. (164) leads to [481
F =∫
VI
d3r η(r)∫
V ′I
d3r′ η′(r)F(r, r′) (169)
where
F(r, r′) = −∇U(r, r′), (170)
is the for e with whi h an atom of polarizability α′(ω) at position r′ a ts on
an atom of polarizability α(ω) at position r with
U(r, r′) = −~µ20
2π
∫ ∞
0dξ ξ4α(iξ)α′(iξ)Tr
[G(r, r′, iξ)·G(r′, r, iξ)
](171)
42
being the two-atom van der Waals potential [467,488. Equation (169) learly
shows that the Casimir for e is a volume for e and not a surfa e for e as
ould be suggested on the basis of the Minkowski stress tensor. A ording
to Eq. (169), the Casimir for e between weakly polarizable diele tri bodies
is the sum of all two-atom van der Waals for es between the body atoms
a result whi h was already obtained by Lifshitz for the spe ial ase of two
diele tri half spa es [360,361. In fa t, su h a relation formed the basis of early
al ulations of dispersion for es between bodies [230,231 and it is still used for
treating bodies exhibiting surfa e roughness [436 or ontaining ex ited media
[281,282.
The for e between a polarizable atom and a magnetizable one an be obtained
in a similar way [489. For this purpose, we onsider the intera tion of polar-
izable atoms ontained in the rst, weakly polarizable body (volume VI) witha se ond, weakly magnetizable body of volume V ′
I and magneti sus eptibility
ζ(r, ω)=µ(r, ω)−1=µ0η′(r)β ′(ω) where β ′(ω) denotes the magnetizability of
the atoms ontained in V ′I . Again expanding the Green tensor G(r, r′, ω) asso-
iated with all the bodies ex ept for the rst one by starting from the Green
tensor G(r, r′, ω) (asso iated with all the bodies ex ept for the two under
onsideration) and retaining only the linear order in ζ(r, ω), one obtains
G(r, r′, ω) = G(r, r′, ω)−∫
V ′I
d3s ζ(s, ω)[G(r, s, ω)×←−∇s
]·∇s×G(s, r′, ω).
(172)
Upon substitution of Eq. (172), the for e on the rst body (164) an again
be written as a sum over two-atom for es, Eqs. (169) and (170) where the
potential of a polarizable atom intera ting with a magnetizable one reads
[489
U(r, r′) = −~µ20
2π
∫ ∞
0dξ ξ2α(iξ)β ′(iξ)
× Tr[G(r, s, iξ)×←−∇r
]·∇s×G (s, r, iξ)
s=r′
. (173)
3.2.2 Many-atom van der Waals intera tions
In general, not only two-atom intera tions but all many-atom intera tions
must be taken into a ount to obtain exa t dispersion for es involving ma ro-
s opi bodies. To illustrate this point, let us return to Eq. (168) and onsider
the intera tion of a single atom with a diele tri body (volume V ), whose sus- eptibility χ(r, ω) is given by the ClausiusMossotti relation (163). Re all from
Se . 3.2.1 that G (r, r′, ω) denotes the Green tensor of the whole arrangement
of bodies and G(r, r′, ω) is the Green tensor of all (ba kground) bodies ex ept
for the one under onsideration. Substituting the Born series (162) [G 7→G ,
43
G 7→ G into Eq. (168), one an write the atombody potential in the form
U(r) =∞∑
K=0
UK(r) (174)
where
U0(r) =~µ0
2π
∫ ∞
0dξ ξ2α(iξ)TrG
(1)(r, r, iξ) (175)
is the atomi potential due to the ba kground bodies
24and (K≥ 1)
UK(r) =(−1)K~µ0
2πc2K
K∏
J=1
∫
Vd3sJ χ(sJ , iξ)
∫ ∞
0dξ ξ2K+2α(iξ)
× Tr[G(r, s1, iξ)·G(s1, s2, iξ) · · · G(sK , r, iξ)
](176)
is the ontribution to the potential that is of Kth order in the sus eptibility
of the diele tri body. To further treat the sum on the right-hand side of
Eq. (176), the Green tensors therein are de omposed into singular and regular
parts a ording to
G (r, r′, ω) = −13
(c
ω
)2
δ(r− r′)I + G
′(r, r′, ω) (177)
and use is made of the ClausiusMossotti relation (163). A somewhat lengthy
al ulation then leads to the result that [488,490
U(r) = U0(r) +∞∑
K=1
1
K!
K∏
J=1
∫d3sJ η(sJ)
U(r, s1, . . . , sK) (178)
where
U(r1, r2, . . . , rN) =(−1)N−1
~µN0
(1 + δ2N )π
∫ ∞
0dξ ξ2Nα1(iξ) . . . αN (iξ)
× S Tr[G
′(r1, r2, iξ)·G ′(r2, r3, iξ) · · · G ′(rN , r1, iξ)]
(179)
is the N-atom van der Waals potential in the presen e of arbitrary linearly
responding (ba kground) bodies at zero temperature and hen e generalizes the
free-spa e result given in Refs. [263,264. In Eq. (179), the symbol S introdu es
the symmetrization pres ription
Sf(r1, r2, . . . , rN) =1
(2− δ2N )N∑
Π∈P (N)
f(rΠ(1), rΠ(2), . . . , rΠ(N)) (180)
where P (N) denotes the permutation group of the numbers 1, 2, . . . , N . Note
that G
′(r, r′, ω) = G (r, r′, ω) for r 6= r′. Clearly, for N = 2, Eq. (179) redu esto the two-atom potential already given, Eq. (171).
24Note that U0(r)=0 for free-spa e ba kground, i.e., if there are no further bodies.
44
Equation (178) reveals that under very general onditions the intera tion of a
single ground-state atom with a diele tri body of ClausiusMossotti sus epti-
bility may be regarded as being due to all many-atom intera tions of the atom
in question with the body atoms. A relation of this type was rst derived for
the spe ial ase of a homogeneous half spa e lled with harmoni -os illator
atoms [174,175,433 and later extended to homogeneous diele tri bodies of
arbitrary shapes with va uum ba kground by means of the EwaldOseen ex-
tin tion theorem [434. Note that in lose analogy to Eq. (178), the dispersion
for e between two diele tri bodies is due to all many-atom intera tions of
atoms in the rst body with atoms in the se ond one; this was expli itly ver-
ied for the ases of two homogeneous half spa es [175,433 and spheres [235
and was also shown for two homogeneous bodies of arbitrary shapes [234.
4 For es on atoms
As demonstrated in Se s. 3.2.1 and 3.2.2, for es on individual ground-state
atoms in the presen e of linearly responding bodies an be dedu ed from
the for es between diele tri bodies of ClausiusMossotti type in the limiting
ase of the bodies being weakly polarizable. Alternatively, these for es an be
derived by expli itly studying the intera tion of atoms with the body-assisted
ele tromagneti eld a ording to Se . 2.2. This approa h to dispersion for es
on atoms allows for studying the inuen e of the internal atomi dynami s on
the for es; in parti ular, ex ited atoms an also be onsidered.
4.1 Ground-state atoms
Atoms initially prepared in their ground state will remain in this state provided
that the body-assisted eld is also initially prepared in the ground state. In
addition, the atomeld intera tion in this ase will involve only virtual, o-
resonant transitions of the atoms and the body-assisted eld. Consequently,
dispersion for es on ground-state atoms may adequately be des ribed within
the framework of time-independent perturbation theory.
4.1.1 Single-atom for e
Following the idea of Casimir and Polder [107, one an derive the for e on a
single atom at zero temperature from the shift ∆E of the system's ground-
state energy E for given enter-of-mass position of the atom whi h arises from
the atomeld oupling. The potential U(rA), whose negative gradient gives
the sought van der Waals for e, is the position-dependent part of this energy
45
shift,
25
∆E = ∆(0)E + U(rA). (181)
It an be seen that the ee tive enter-of-mass Hamiltonian
Heff =p2A
2mA
+ U(rA) (182)
leads to the equation of motion
F(rA) = mA¨rA = − 1
~2
[Heff ,
[Heff , mArA
]]= −∇AU(rA). (183)
Making use of the intera tion Hamiltonian (119), one obtains the ground-
state energy shift for a non-magneti atom in se ond-order (i.e., leading-order)
perturbation theory
26as
∆E =∑
k
∑
λ=e,m
∫d3rP
∫ ∞
0dω
∣∣∣〈0|〈0| −d·E(rA)|1λ(r, ω)〉|k〉∣∣∣2
−~(ωk0 + ω)(184)
[P, prin ipal part; |1λ(r, ω)〉= f†λ(r, ω)|0〉. Using Eqs. (39)(41), (44) and
(45), one derives
∆E = −µ0
π
∑
k
P∫ ∞
0
dω
ωk0 + ωω2d0k ·ImG (rA, rA, ω)·dk0 (185)
where G(r, r′, ω) is the Green tensor of the body onguration onsidered.
By dis arding the position-independent ontribution ∆E(0)asso iated with
G
(0)(rA, rA, ω) [re all Eqs. (135) and (181) whi h may be thought of as being
already in luded in the unperturbed energy, the van der Waals potential an
be written in the form [465,491,492
U(rA) =~µ0
2π
∫ ∞
0dξ ξ2Tr
[α(iξ)·G (1)(rA, rA, iξ)
](186)
where
α(ω) = limǫ→0
2
~
∑
k
ωk0d0kdk0
ω2k0 − ω2 − iωǫ
(187)
25The position-independent part ∆(0)E is a ontribution to the Lamb shift in free
spa e; for a dis ussion of the Lamb shift within the multipolar oupling s heme,
see, e.g., Ref. [468.
26In the following, the multipolar oupling s heme will be employed and the primes
dis riminating the respe tive atomi and eld variables from the minimal oupling
ones will be dropped, for notational onvenien e. Equation (119) an be employed,
be ause the se ond term in Eq. (118) gives rise to a ontribution of order v/c (v, enter-of-mass speed) [465 whi h an be negle ted.
46
is the ground-state polarizability of the atom. For isotropi atoms, it simplies
to
α(ω) = α(ω)I = limǫ→0
2
3~
∑
k
ωk0|d0k|2ω2k0 − ω2 − iωǫ
I , (188)
so the potential simplies to
U(rA) =~µ0
2π
∫ ∞
0dξ ξ2α(iξ) TrG (1)(rA, rA, iξ). (189)
The perturbative result hen e agrees with what has been inferred from the
for e on weakly polarizable bodies and renders an expli it expression for the
polarizability. Note that the s attering Green tensor G
(1)in Eq. (189) has
exa tly the same meaning as G in Eq. (168). From Eq. (189) together with
Eq. (188) it an be seen that the potential an be given in the equivalent form
U(rA) = −~µ0
2π
∫ ∞
0dω ω2Im
[α(ω)TrG (1)(rA, rA, ω)
](190)
whi h allows for a simple physi al interpretation of the for e as being due to
orrelation of the u tuating ele tromagneti eld with the orresponding in-
du ed ele tri dipole of the atom plus the orrelation of the u tuating ele tri
dipole with its indu ed ele tri eld [409. It should be pointed out that an
analogous treatment based on the minimal- oupling Hamiltonian (101) leads
to the formally same result [465 where of ourse the unperturbed eigenstates
and energies o urring in the polarizability (187) are now determined by the
atomi Hamiltonian (65) in pla e of (111). Needless to say that both results
are approximations to the same Hamiltonian of the total system. Bearing in
mind that the ground-state energy shift is entirely due to virtual, o-resonant
transitions, it is ru ial to retain the A2term in the minimal oupling s heme
whi h ontributes to the ground-state energy shift already in rst-order per-
turbation theory.
Equation (186) gives the potential of a single ground-state atom in the presen e
of an arbitrary arrangement of linearly responding bodies at zero temperature
in terms of the polarizability of the atom and the Green tensor of the body-
assisted ele tromagneti eld. A relation of this kind was rst derived for arbi-
trary ele tri bodies on the basis of linear-response theory [404,405,407, re all
Eq. (11); alternatively, it was obtained from a QED path-integral approa h
[394 and semi lassi al onsiderations [200. A perturbative derivation based
on ma ros opi QED very similar to that presented here is given in Refs. [493
495. The linear-response approa h has also been applied to magneto-ele tri
bodies [416 and nite temperatures [408410. Note that in lose analogy to
the ase of the Casimir for e, the single-atom potential at nite temperature
an be obtained from the zero-temperature result (186) or (190) by making
the repla ements (141) or (140), respe tively.
47
4.1.2 Two-atom for e
The intera tion potential of two polarizable ground-state atoms in the pres-
en e of linearly responding bodies giving rise to the Green tensor G(r, r′, ω) an also be obtained by means of time-independent perturbation theory. The
leading ontribution is now of fourth order in the atomeld intera tion and
a somewhat lengthy al ulation yields [467,488
U(rA, rB) = −~µ2
0
2π
∫ ∞
0dξ ξ4
× Tr[αA(iξ)·G(rA, rB, iξ)·αB(iξ)·G(rB, rA, iξ)] (191)
whi h for isotropi atoms redu es to
U(rA, rB) = −~µ2
0
2π
∫ ∞
0dξ ξ4αA(iξ)αB(iξ)
× Tr[G(rA, rB, iξ)·G(rB, rA, iξ)]. (192)
Note that Eq. (192) agrees with Eq. (171) [G
′(r1, r2, ω) 7→ G (rA, rB, ω) for
r1 6= r2. The total for e a ting on atom A (B) an be obtained by supple-
menting the single-atom for e F(rA(B)) with the two-atom for e
F(rA(B), rB(A)) = −∇A(B)U(rA, rB) (193)
where in general F(rA, rB) 6= −F(rB, rA), due to the presen e of the bodies.
Equations (191)(193) form a general basis for al ulating two-atom poten-
tials in the presen e of linearly responding bodies at zero temperature. An
equation of the type (192) was rst derived for the ase of ele tri bodies
by means of linear-response theory [216. Derivations based on semi lassi al
models of harmoni -os illator atoms intera ting in the presen e of perfe tly
ondu ting [411 and ele tri bodies [200 were given and extended to allow
for nite temperatures [430. Equation (192) has been used to study the inter-
a tion of two atoms embedded in an ele trolyte [429, situated near perfe tly
ondu ting [430, non-lo al metalli [215, ele tri [216,415,431 and magneto-
ele tri half spa es [467,489, pla ed inside perfe tly ondu ting [411,430 and
ele tri planar avities [432.
Let us onsider the simplest ase of two atoms in free spa e where the single-
atom for e identi ally vanishes and the two-atom potential (192) an be al u-
lated by using the free-spa e Green tensor G (r, r′, ω)=G free(r, r′, ω) (App. B),
leading to (r= |rA− rB|)
U(rA, rB) = −~
32π3ε20r6
∫ ∞
0dξ αA(iξ)αB(iξ)g(ξr/c) (194)
48
where
g(x) = 2e−2x(3 + 6x+ 5x2 + 2x3 + x4
), (195)
whi h shows that the intera tion between two polarizable ground-state atoms
is always attra tive. Equations (194) and (195) are in agreement with the
famous result of Casimir and Polder [107, whose derivation was based on
fourth-order perturbation theory and normal-mode QED. The problem has
been re onsidered many times, inter alia within the frameworks of normal-
mode QED [243,244,246,250252,256,257 and linear-response theory [404;
and it has even be ome a ommon textbook example [245,253,254.
In the retarded limit where r≫ c/ωmin (ωmin denoting the minimum of the
relevant resonan e frequen ies of atoms A and B), the fun tion g(ξr/c) ee -tively limits the ξ integral in Eq. (194) to a range where αA(B)(iξ)≃αA(B)(0),so the potential approa hes
U(rA, rB) = −23~cαA(0)αB(0)
64π3ε20r7
, (196)
as already pointed out in Ref. [107, f. Eq. (8). In the non-retarded limit where
r≪ c/ωmax (ωmax denoting the maximum of the relevant resonan e frequen ies
of atoms A and B), the integral is limited by the polarizabilities αA(B)(iξ) toa range where g(iξ)≃ g(0)= 6, leading to
U(rA, rB) = −3~
16π3ε20r6
∫ ∞
0dξ αA(iξ)αB(iξ). (197)
Upon re alling Eq. (188), one may easily verify that this non-retarded asymp-
tote is nothing but the well-known London potential (2) whi h was origi-
nally obtained from a perturbative treatment of the Coulomb intera tion [164
( f. Refs. [169,170 for similar derivations).
It is illustrative to ompare the potential between two polarizable atoms with
the potential between a polarizable atom A of polarizability αA(ω) and a
magnetizable atom B of magnetizability βB(ω) whi h, a ording to Eq. (173),is given by
U(rA, rB) = −~µ2
0
2π
∫ ∞
0dξ ξ2αA(iξ)βB(iξ)
× Tr[G(rA, r, iξ)×
←−∇
]·∇×G(r, rA, iξ)
r=rB
. (198)
When the two atoms are in free spa e so that G (r, r′, ω)=G free(r, r′, ω), then
Eq. (198) reads
U(rA, rB) =~µ2
0
32π3r4
∫ ∞
0dξ ξ2αA(iξ)βB(iξ)h(ξr/c) (199)
49
where
h(x) = 2e−2x(1 + 2x+ x2
)(200)
whi h is in agreement with results found on the basis of normal-mode QED
[270,274. In ontrast to the attra tive intera tion between two polarizable
atoms, the intera tion between a polarizable and a magnetizable atom is al-
ways repulsive, as an be easily seen from Eq. (199) together with Eq. (200).
In parti ular in the retarded and non-retarded limits, respe tively, Eq. (199)
redu es to
U(rA, rB) =7~cµ0αA(0)βB(0)
64π3ε0r7(201)
and
U(rA, rB) =~µ2
0
16π3r4
∫ ∞
0dξ ξ2αA(iξ)βB(iξ) (202)
whi h was already given in Refs. [268,269 and [178,180.
Comparing Eqs. (196) and (201), we see that in the retarded limit the ab-
solute value of the for e between two polarizable atoms and that between a
polarizable and a magnetizable atom follow the same 1/r8 power law with
the strength being weaker in the latter ase by a fa tor 7/23. Comparison of
Eqs. (197) and (202) shows that in the non-retarded limit the absolute value
of the for e between a polarizable and a magnetizable atom whi h follows a
1/r5 power law, is more weakly diverging than that between two polarizable
atoms whi h follows a 1/r7 power law.
4.1.3 Atom in a planar stru ture
Let us return to Eq. (186) for the potential of a single ground-state atom
in the presen e of an arbitrary arrangement of linearly responding bodies
at zero temperature. It has been used to al ulate the potential for a va-
riety of parti ular geometries, in luding dierent planar stru tures (see be-
low) as well as perfe tly ondu ting [221,420, non-lo al metalli [222,223,
diele tri [221,395,414,421,422,496 and magneto-ele tri spheres [488; diele -
tri [226,414,423,424 and non-lo al metalli ylinders [224,225; magneto-
diele tri rings [490; ele tri ylindri al shells [493495; ele tri [427 and
non-lo al metalli spheri al avities [229; ele tri ylindri al avities [424
and perfe tly ondu ting wedge-shaped avities [395,422.
To illustrate the theory, let us onsider an atom pla ed in a free-spa e region
between two planar magneto-ele tri walls, as dened by Eqs. (143) and (144)
with ε(ω)=µ(ω)=1. Inserting the Green tensor for this system (App. B) into
50
Eq. (189) leads to the single-atom potential [491,497
U(zA) =~µ0
8π2
∫ ∞
0dξ ξ2α(iξ)
∫ ∞
0dq
q
b
e−2bzA
[rs−Ds−(1 + 2
q2c2
ξ2
)rp−Dp
]
+ e−2b(d−zA)
[rs+Ds
−(1 + 2
q2c2
ξ2
)rp+Dp
](203)
where zA is the separation of the atom from the left wall, d is the separation ofthe two walls, b and Dσ are given by Eqs. (148) and (149), respe tively, with
n(iξ) = 1, and rσ± = rσ±(ξ, q) are again the ree tion oe ients asso iated
with the left/right walls. If the atom is pla ed near a single wall, say the right
wall is missing, Eq. (203) redu es to (rσ≡ rσ−)
U(zA) =~µ0
8π2
∫ ∞
0dξ ξ2α(iξ)
∫ ∞
0dq
q
be−2bzA
[rs −
(1 + 2
q2c2
ξ2
)rp
]. (204)
4.1.3.1 Perfe tly ree ting plate Consider rst an atom pla ed near
a perfe tly ree ting ele tri (i.e., perfe tly ondu ting) plate, rp =−rs = 1.By hanging the integration variable in Eq. (204) from q to b [Eq. (148), theresulting integral an be performed to obtain
U(zA) = −~
16π2ε0z3A
∫ ∞
0dξ α(iξ) e−2ξzA/c
1 + 2
(ξzAc
)+ 2
(ξzAc
)2, (205)
in agreement with the result found by Casimir and Polder on the basis of
normal-mode QED [107 ( f. also Refs. [247,250) whi h has been reprodu ed
by means of linear-response theory [404,405,407 and dynami al image-dipole
treatments [290. In the retarded limit, zA≫ c/ωmin, the exponential e−2ξzA/c
ee tively limits the ξ integral to the region where α(iξ)≃ α(0), so the poten-tial approa hes
U(zA) = −3~cα(0)
32π2ε0z4A
, (206)
as already noted in Refs. [107,245,249, f. Eq. (9). In the non-retarded limit,
zA ≪ c/ωmax, the polarizability α(iξ) restri ts the integration to the region
where ξzA/c≃ 0, leading to
U(zA) = −1
48πε0z3A
∑
k
|d0k|2 = −〈0|d2|0〉48πε0z3A
, (207)
in agreement with the result (3) obtained by Lennard-Jones on the basis of
an ele trostati al ulation [177 [re all Eq. (188).
In ontrast, the potential of an atom in front of an innitely permeable plate
51
PSfrag repla ements
(a) (b)
d
d′
mm′
−zA−zA zA zAz z
− −
−
− + +++
Fig. 1. The image dipole onstru tion for an (a) ele tri (b) magneti dipole in front
of a perfe tly ree ting ele tri plate, is shown.
is repulsive, as an be seen by setting rp=−rs=−1 in Eq. (204),
U(zA) =~
16π2ε0z3A
∫ ∞
0dξ α(iξ)e−2ξzA/c
1 + 2
(ξzAc
)+ 2
(ξzAc
)2 . (208)
It approa hes
U(zA) =3~cα(0)
32π2ε0z4A(209)
in the retarded limit ( f. also Ref. [309) and
U(zA) =〈0|d2|0〉48πε0z3A
(210)
in the non-retarded limit.
The dierent signs of the non-retarded potentials (207) and (210) in the ases
of a perfe tly ree ting ele tri and a perfe tly ree ting magneti plate, re-
spe tively, an be understood from an image-dipole model [177. The non-
retarded potential an be regarded as being due to the Coulomb intera tion of
an ele tri dipole d= (dx, dy, dz) situated at distan e zA from the plate with
its image d′ = (−dx,−dy, dz) in the plate [Fig 1(a). The average intera tion
energy of the dipole and its image hen e reads [451
27
U(zA) =1
2
〈0|d·d′ − 3dzd′z|0〉4πε0(2zA)3
= −〈0|d2 + d2z|0〉
64πε0z3A= −〈0|d
2|0〉48πε0z3A
(211)
[〈0|d2x|0〉= 〈0|d2y|0〉= 〈0|d2z|0〉= (1/3)〈0|d2|0〉, in agreement with Eq. (207).
Sin e the intera tion of a polarizable atom with an innitely permeable plate is
equivalent to the intera tion of a magnetizable atom with a perfe tly ree ting
ele tri plate by virtue of the duality of ele tri and magneti elds, a magneti
27The fa tor 1/2 in Eq. (211) a ounts for the fa t that the se ond dipole is indu ed
by the rst one.
52
dipole m= (mx, my, mz) in front of a perfe tly ree ting ele tri plate an be
onsidered. A magneti dipole behaves like a pseudo-ve tor under ree tion,
so its image is given by m′= (mx, my,−mz) [Fig 1(b). The intera tion energyof the magneti dipole and its image reads
U(zA) =1
2
〈0|m·m′ − 3mzm′z|0〉
4πε0(2zA)3=〈0|m2|0〉48πε0z3A
(212)
whi h by means of a duality transformation is equivalent to Eq. (210). The
dierent signs of the potentials (207) and (210) an thus be understood from
the dierent ree tion behavior of ele tri and magneti dipoles.
4.1.3.2 Magneto-ele tri half spa e To be more realisti , let us next
onsider an atom in front of a semi-innite half spa e of given ε(ω) and µ(ω).Upon substitution of the Fresnel ree tion oe ients (B.10), Eq. (204) takes
the form [491,497
U(zA) =~µ0
8π2
∫ ∞
0dξ ξ2α(iξ)
∫ ∞
0dq
q
be−2bzA
[µ(iξ)b− b1µ(iξ)b+ b1
−(1 + 2
q2c2
ξ2
)ε(iξ)b− b1ε(iξ)b+ b1
](213)
with b1 ≡ b1− dened as in Eq. (B.9), in agreement with the result found
by means of linear-response theory [416. From Eq. (213), the results ob-
tained by means of normal-mode QED [252,306,309 and linear-response the-
ory [216,405,407 for an ele tri half spa e an also be re overed.
One an show that in the retarded limit zA ≫ c/ωmin (with ωmin being the
minimum of all relevant atom and medium resonan e frequen ies) the potential
takes the asymptoti form [491,497
28
U(zA) = −3~cα(0)
64π2ε0z4A
∫ ∞
1dv
[(2
v2− 1
v4
)ε(0)v −√ε(0)µ(0)− 1 + v2
ε(0)v +√ε(0)µ(0)− 1 + v2
− 1
v4µ(0)v −
√ε(0)µ(0)− 1 + v2
µ(0)v +√ε(0)µ(0)− 1 + v2
](214)
whi h an be attra tive or repulsive, depending on the strengths of the om-
peting magneti and ele tri properties of the half spa e. Figure 2 shows the
borderline between attra tive and repulsive potentials in the ε(0)µ(0)-plane.
28Obviously this limit does not apply for metals where the ondition an never be
fullled. Similarly, Eqs. (215), (220) and (221) only hold for diele tri s.
53
1
3
5
7
9
11
1 1.5 2 2.5 3
PSfrag repla ements
ε(0)
µ(0)
U(zA) > 0
U(zA) < 0
Fig. 2. Borderline of attra tive and repulsive retarded potentials of a ground-state
atom in front of a magneto-diele tri half spa e.
In parti ular, repulsion o urs i µ(0)−1>3.29[ε(0)−1] or µ(0)>5.11ε(0) forweak and strong magneto-diele tri properties, respe tively.
In the non-retarded limit, n(0)zA≪ c/ωmax [ωmax, maximum of all relevant
atom and medium resonan e frequen ies; n(0) =√ε(0)µ(0), the situation is
more omplex, be ause ele tri and magneti medium properties give rise to
potentials with dierent asymptoti power laws. In parti ular, the potential
approa hes
U(zA) = −~
16π2ε0z3A
∫ ∞
0dξ α(iξ)
ε(iξ)− 1
ε(iξ) + 1(215)
in the ase of a purely diele tri half spa ein agreement with the result (4)
found by onsidering the Coulomb intera tion and using image-dipole methods
[194 or linear-response theory [199and
U(zA) =~
32π2ε0zA
∫ ∞
0dξ
(ξ
c
)2
α(iξ)[µ(iξ)− 1][µ(iξ) + 3]
µ(iξ) + 1(216)
in the ase of a purely magneti one [491,497. Thus for a magneto-diele tri
half spa e the attra tive 1/z3A potential asso iated with the polarizability of
the half spa e will always dominate the repulsive 1/zA potential related to its
magnetizability. It should be noted that the non-retarded limit is in general
in ompatible with the limit of perfe t ree tivity onsidered in Se . 4.1.3.1.
So, Eq. (216) does not approa h Eq. (210) as µ(iξ) tends to innity. On the
ontrary, Eq. (215) onverges to Eq. (207) as ε(iξ) tends to innity [304.
Combining the observations from the retarded and non-retarded limits, one
may thus expe t a potential barrier, provided that the permeability of the
54
0
0
PSfrag repla ements
zAω10/c
U(z
A)1
2π2ε 0
c3/(
ω3 10d
2 01)
µ(0) = 1.00
µ(0) = 2.00
µ(0) = 3.25
µ(0) = 4.06
µ(0) = 5.00
µ(0) = 6.06
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
0
−0.001
0.001
0.002
0.003
Fig. 3. The potential of a ground-state two-level atom in front of a magneto-diele tri
half spa e, Eq. (213), is shown as a fun tion of the distan e between the atom and the
half spa e for dierent values of µ(0) (ωPe/ω10=0.75, ωTe/ω10=1.03, ωTm/ω10=1,γe/ω10 = γm/ω10 =0.001).
half spa e is su iently large [491,497. This is illustrated in Fig. 3 where
the potential of a two-level atom as a fun tion of its distan e from the half
spa e, is shown for various values of the (stati ) permeability. In the gure,
the permittivity and permeability of the half spa e have been assumed to be
of DrudeLorentz type,
ε(ω) = 1 +ω2Pe
ω2Te − ω2 − iωγe
, µ(ω) = 1 +ω2Pm
ω2Tm − ω2 − iωγm
. (217)
From the gure it is seen that with in reasing value of µ(0), a potential barrierbegins to form at intermediate distan es, as expe ted. It is shifted to smaller
distan es and in reases in height as the value of µ(0) is further in reased.
4.1.3.3 Plate of nite thi kness Consider now an atom in front of
magneto-ele tri plate of nite thi kness d. Evaluating the relevant ree tion oe ients (B.7) and (B.8) (d≡ d1−), one nds that Eq. (204) takes the form
55
PSfrag repla ements
zAω10/c
U(z
A)1
2π2ε 0
c3/(
ω3 10d
2 01)
dω10/c=0.01
dω10/c=0.10
dω10/c=0.55
dω10/c=1.50
dω10/c=4.00
dω10/c→∞
0
2 4 6 8
0.0012
0.0008
0.0004
Fig. 4. The potential of a ground-state two-level atom in front of a magneto-diele tri
plate, Eq. (218), is shown as a fun tion of the atomplate separation for dierent
values of the plate thi kness d [µ(0)= 5; whereas all other parameters are the same
as in Fig. 2.
[491,497
U(zA) =~µ0
8π2
∫ ∞
0dξ ξ2α(iξ)
∫ ∞
0dq
q
be−2bzA
×
[µ2(iξ)b2 − b21] tanh(b1d)2µ(iξ)bb1 + [µ2(iξ)b2 + b21] tanh(b1d)
−(1 + 2
q2c2
ξ2
)[ε2(iξ)b2 − b21] tanh(b1d)
2ε(iξ)bb1 + [ε2(iξ)b2 + b21] tanh(b1d)
(218)
whi h redu es to the result in Ref. [310 in the spe ial ase of an ele tri plate.
For an asymptoti ally thi k plate, d≫ zA, the exponential fa tor restri ts theintegral in Eq. (218) to a region where b1d∼ d/(2zA)≫ 1. One may hen e make
the approximation tanh(b1d)≃1, leading ba k to Eq. (213) whi h demonstrates
that the semi-innite half spa e is a good model provided that d≫ zA.
On the ontrary, in the limit of an asymptoti ally thin plate, n(0)d≪ zA, the
56
approximation b1d≪ 1 results in [491,497
U(zA) =~µ0d
8π2
∫ ∞
0dξ ξ2α(iξ)
∫ ∞
0dq
q
be−2bzA
[µ2(iξ)b2 − b21
2µ(iξ)b
−(1 + 2
q2c2
ξ2
)ε2(iξ)b2 − b21
2ε(iξ)b
](219)
whi h in the retarded limit approa hes
U(zA) = −~cα(0)d
160π2ε0z5A
[14ε2(0)− 9
ε(0)− 6µ2(0)− 1
µ(0)
]. (220)
In the non-retarded limit one an again distinguish between a purely diele tri
plate and a purely magneti plate. Equation (219) approa hes
U(zA) = −3~d
64π2ε0z4A
∫ ∞
0dξ α(iξ)
ε2(iξ)− 1
ε(iξ)(221)
in the former ase and
U(zA) =~d
64π2ε0z2A
∫ ∞
0dξ
(ξ
c
)2
α(iξ)[µ(iξ)− 1][3µ(iξ) + 1]
µ(iξ)(222)
in the latter ase. Comparing Eqs. (220)(222) with Eqs. (214)(216), we see
that the power laws hange from z−nA to z
−(n+1)A when the plate thi kness
hanges from being innitely large to being innitely small.
If the permeability is su iently big, a magneto-diele tri plate of nite thi k-
ness features a potential wall [491,497, as illustrated in Fig. 4 for a two-level
atom, with the permittivity and permeability of the plate being again given
by Eq. (217). It is seen that for a thin plate the barrier is very low. It raises
with in reasing thi kness of the plate, rea hes a maximal height for some in-
termediate thi kness and then lowers slowly towards the asymptoti half spa e
value as the thi kness is further in reased.
4.1.3.4 Planar avity When an atom is pla ed between two magneto-
ele tri plates, then the ompeting ee ts of attra tive and repulsive intera -
tion with the two plates an result in the formation of a trapping potential
[491,497. Let us model a magneto-ele tri planar avity by two identi al half
spa es of permittivity ε(ω) and permeability µ(ω) whi h are separated by
a distan e d. 29 Substitution of the Fresnel ree tion oe ients (B.10) into
29Purely ele tri planar avities have been modeled with various degrees of detail,
e.g., by two perfe tly ondu ting plates [227,290,293,298301,426, two ele tri half
spa es [426, or even two ele tri plates of nite thi kness [310,311.
57
0
0
PSfrag repla ements
zAω10/c
U(z
A)1
2π2ε 0
c3/(
ω3 10d
2 01)
(a)
(b)
( )
0 5 10 15
0
−0.002
−0.001
0.001
0.002
Fig. 5. The potential of a ground-state two-level atom pla ed between two (a) mag-
neto-diele tri (all parameters as in Fig. 3), (b) purely diele tri [µ(ω) = 1, otherparameters as in (a), and ( ) purely magneti [ε(ω) = 1, other parameters as in
(a) half spa es of separation d= 15c/ω10, Eq. (223), is shown as a fun tion of the
position of the atom.
Eq. (203) yields the potential of an atom pla ed within a avity bounded by
the half spa es:
U(zA) =~µ0
8π2
∫ ∞
0dξ ξ2α(iξ)
∫ ∞
0dq
q
b
[e−2bzA + e−2b(d−zA)
][ 1
Ds
µ(iξ)b− b1µ(iξ)b+ b1
−(1 + 2
q2c2
ξ2
)1
Dp
ε(iξ)b− b1ε(iξ)b+ b1
]. (223)
As expe ted, the potential is in general not the sum of the potentials asso iated
with the left and right plates separately, as a omparison of Eq. (223) with
Eq. (213) shows. Clearly, the dieren e is due to the ee t of multiple ree tion
between the two plates whi h gives rise to the denominators Dσ,
1
Dσ=
∞∑
n=0
(rσ−e
−bdrσ+e−bd)n, (224)
re all Eq. (149).
58
The formation of a potential well is illustrated in Fig. 5 where the potentials
of an atom pla ed between purely diele tri and purely magneti plates, are
also shown. It is seen that the attra tive (repulsive) potentials asso iated with
ea h of two purely diele tri (magneti ) plates ombine to an innite potential
wall (well) at the enter of the avity, while a potential well of nite depth
an be realized within the avity in the ase of two magneto-diele tri plates
of su iently large permeability.
4.1.4 Asymptoti power laws
As we have seen, the dispersive intera tion of polarizable/magnetizable obje ts
in their ground states an often be given in terms of simple asymptoti power
laws in the retarded and non-retarded limits. Typi al examples are given in
Tab. 1 where the asymptoti power laws for the dispersion for e on an atom
intera ting with another atom [Eqs. (196), (197), (201) and (202), a small
sphere [488, thin ring [490, a thin plate [Eqs. (220)(222) and a semi-innite
half spa e [Eqs. (214)(216), and for the for e per unit area between two half
spa es [372,485, are shown.
Comparing the dispersion for es between obje ts of dierent shapes and sizes,
it is seen that the signs are always the same, while the leading inverse powers
are the same or hanged by some global power when moving from one row of
the table to another. This an be understood by assuming that the leading
inverse power is determined by the ontribution to the for e whi h results
from the two-atom intera tion [row (a) by pairwise summation. Obviously,
integration of two-atom for es over the (nite) volumes of a small sphere (b)
or a thin ring ( ) does not hange the respe tive power law, while integration
over an innite volume lowers the leading inverse power a ording to the
number of innite dimensions. So, the leading inverse powers are lowered by
two and three for the intera tion of an atom with a thin plate of innite lateral
extension (d) and a half spa e (e), respe tively. The power laws for the for e
between two half spa es (f) an then be obtained from the atomhalf-spa e
for e (e) by integrating over the three innite dimensions where integration
over z lowers the leading inverse powers by one while the trivial integrations
over x and y yield an innite for e, i.e., a nite for e per unit area. It follows
from the table that many-atom intera tions do not hange the leading power
laws resulting from the summation of pairwise intera tions, but only modify
the proportionality fa tors.
All dispersion for es in Tab. 1 are seen to be attra tive for two polarizable
obje ts and repulsive for a polarizable obje t intera ting with a magnetizable
one. It an further be noted that in the retarded limit the for es de rease more
rapidly with in reasing distan e than might be expe ted from onsidering only
the non-retarded limit. Finally, the table shows that the retarded dispersion
59
Distan e → Retarded Nonretarded
Polarizability → p↔ p p↔ m p↔ p p↔ m
(a)
PSfrag repla ements
r
− 1
r8+
1
r8− 1
r7+
1
r5
(b)
PSfrag repla ements
rA
− 1
r8A+
1
r8A− 1
r7A+
1
r5A
( )
PSfrag repla ements ρA− 1
ρ8A+
1
ρ8A− 1
ρ7A+
1
ρ5A
(d)
PSfrag repla ements
zA
− 1
z6A+
1
z6A− 1
z5A+
1
z3A
(e)
PSfrag repla ements
zA
− 1
z5A+
1
z5A− 1
z4A+
1
z2A
(f)
PSfrag repla ements
z− 1
z4+
1
z4− 1
z3+1
z
Table 1
Asymptoti power laws for the for es between (a) two atoms, (b) an atom and a
small sphere, ( ) an atom and a thin ring, (d) an atom an a thin plate, (e) an atom
and a half spa e and (f) for the for e per unit area between two half spa es. In the
table heading, p stands for a polarizable obje t and m for a magnetizable one. The
signs + and − denote repulsive and attra tive for es, respe tively.
for es between polarizable/polarizable and polarizable/magnetizable obje ts
follow the same power laws, while in the non-retarded limit the for es between
polarizable and magnetizable obje ts are weaker than those between polariz-
able obje ts by two powers in the obje t separation. This an be understood
by regarding the for es as being due to the ele tromagneti eld reated by
the rst obje t intera ting with the se ond. While the ele tri and magneti
far elds reated by an os illating ele tri dipole display the same distan e de-
penden e, the ele tri near eld (whi h an intera t with a se ond polarizable
obje t) is stronger than the magneti near eld (whi h intera ts with a se ond
magnetizable obje t) by one power in the obje t separation (giving rise to a
dieren e of two powers in se ond-order perturbation theory).
60
4.2 Ex ited atoms
In a rst attempt, dispersion for es on atoms in ex ited energy eigenstates
an also be derived from perturbative energy shifts. A straightforward gener-
alization of the al ulation outlined in Se . 4.1.1 to an atom prepared in an
arbitrary energy eigenstate |m〉 yields the potential [465,491,492
Um(rA) = Uorm (rA) + U r
m(rA) (225)
where
Uorm (rA) =
~µ0
2π
∫ ∞
0dξ ξ2Tr
[αm(iξ)·G (1)(rA, rA, iξ)
](226)
and
U rm(rA) = −µ0
∑
k
Θ(ωmk)ω2mkdmk ·ReG (1)(rA, rA, ωmk)·dkm (227)
[Θ(z), unit step fun tion are the o-resonant and resonant ontributions to
the potential, respe tively, and
αm(ω) = limǫ→0
1
~
∑
k
[dmkdkm
ωkm − ω − iǫ+
dkmdmk
ωkm + ω + iǫ
](228)
is the atomi polarizability tensor. Equation (225) [together with Eqs. (226)
and (227) obviously redu es to the ground-state result (186) in the spe ial
ase m=0. Note that the resonant ontribution vanishes in the ground state;
it is only present for an ex ited atom that an undergo real transitions. Equa-
tions (225)(227) whi h an also be obtained by means of linear-response
theory [412,413, have been used to al ulate the potential of an ex ited atom
near a perfe tly ondu ting [412,413, diele tri [413, birefringent diele tri
half spa e [428 and an ele tri ylinder [425.
The above mentioned approa hes are time-independent and essentially per-
turbative and inspe tion of Eqs. (225)(228) reveals that the appli ation of
(stati ) perturbative methods to ex ited atoms is problemati in several re-
spe ts. Firstly, the potential is determined by quantities that are attributed to
the unperturbed atomi transitions whi h do not take into a ount the ee t
of line broadening, whereas in pra ti e nite line widths are observed whi h
are known to strongly ae t resonant transitions. Se ondly, the potential and
hen e also the for e remains onstant in time; this is not very realisti for
ex ited atoms whi h undergo spontaneous de ay with the allowed (dipole-)
transitions being the same as those entering the potential. And thirdly, per-
turbation theory does not apply to the ase of strong atomeld oupling.
These problems an be over ome by a dynami al approa h to the al ulation
of for es a ting on ex ited atoms.
61
4.2.1 Dynami al approa h
Instead of deriving the dispersion for e from an energy shift by some means or
other, we return to the origin of the for e by starting from the Lorentz for e
a ting on an atom and al ulating its expe tation value for a given initial
state. In parti ular, when the ele tromagneti eld is initially in its ground
state, then this expression yields the sought dispersion for e whi h is genuinely
time-dependent for atoms initially prepared in ex ited states.
Summing the physi al momenta mα˙rα of the parti les onstituting the atom
[as given by Eq. (114), one obtains for the atom as a whole
mA˙rA = pA +
∫d3r Pat(r)×B(r). (229)
Hen e, the enter-of-mass motion is governed by the Newton equation
mA¨rA = FL (230)
where, a ording to Eq. (229), the Lorentz for e is given by
FL =i
~
[H, pA
]+
d
dt
∫d3r Pat(r)×B(r) (231)
with Pat(r) from Eq. (79). The rst term in Eq. (231) an be further evaluated
by re alling Eq. (107) and using the ommutation relations (76). By making
use of the identity ∇APat(r)= −∇Pat(r) [re all Eq. (79), one an show that
i
~
[1
2ε0
∫d3r P2
at(r), pA
]=
1
2ε0
∫d3r∇P2
at(r) = 0 (232)
and by re alling Eq. (106) and using the denitions (79) and (80), one derives
i
~
[∑
α
1
2mα
pα +
∫d3r Ξα(r)×B(r)
2
, pA
]
= ∇A
∫d3r
[Mat(r) + Pat(r)× ˙rA
]·B(r)
. (233)
Equations (232) and (233) then imply that Eq. (231) an be written as
FL =∇A
∫d3r Pat(r)·E(r) +
∫d3r
[Mat(r) + Pat(r)× ˙rA
]·B(r)
+d
dt
∫d3r Pat(r)×B(r). (234)
It should be mentioned that by using Eqs. (81)(83) together with the Maxwell
equations (95) and (97), this equation an be given in the equivalent form
FL =∫
d3r[ρat(r)E(r) + jat(r)×B(r)
](235)
62
whi h orresponds to the Eq. (120) used in Se . 3 as a starting point for
al ulating dispersion for es on bodies.
30
From Eq. (234), the Lorentz for e in long-wavelength approximation an be
obtained by performing a leading-order expansion in the relative parti le o-
ordinates rα, resulting in
FL = ∇A
[d·E(rA) + m·B(rA) + d× ˙rA ·B(rA)
]+
d
dt
[d×B(rA)
], (236)
[re all Eqs. (87) and (88) where
d
dt
[d×B(rA)
]=
i
~
[H, d×B(rA)
]=
˙d×B(rA) + d× ˙
B(r)∣∣∣r=rA
+ 12d×
[(˙rA ·∇A
)B(rA) + B(rA)
(←−∇A · ˙rA
)]. (237)
Dis arding all terms proportional to
˙rA (whi h are of the order v/c and thus
negligible for nonrelativisti enter-of-mass motion), as well as the ontribution
from the magneti intera tions, Eq. (236) redu es to
FL =
∇
[d·E(r)
]+
d
dt
[d×B(r)
]
r=rA
, (238)
whose expe tation value
F = 〈FL〉 (239)
quite generally provides a basis for al ulating ele tromagneti for es on non-
magneti atoms, in luding dispersion for es. Needless to say that Eq. (238) is
valid regardless of the state the atom and the body-assisted eld are prepared
in.
At this point we re all that, a ording to Eqs. (44) and (47), the ele tri
and the magneti indu tion elds are expressed in terms of the dynami al
variables fλ(r, ω) and f†λ(r, ω). It is not di ult to prove that in ele tri -dipole
approximation, fλ(r, ω) obeys the Heisenberg equation of motion
˙fλ(r, ω) =
i
~
[H, fλ(r, ω)
]= −iωfλ(r, ω) +
i
~d·G ∗
λ(rA, r, ω) (240)
[re all the Hamiltonian (109) together with Eqs. (110), (111) and (119), whose
formal solution reads
fλ(r, ω, t) = fλfree(r, ω, t) + fλsource(r, ω, t) (241)
30Note that the eld reated by the atom only gives rise to internal for es, so that
one may equivalently write Eq. (235) with the total elds E(r) and B(r) [Eq. (93)instead of E(r) and B(r).
63
where
fλfree(r, ω, t) = e−iω(t−t0)fλ(r, ω) (242)
and
fλsource(r, ω, t) =i
~
∫ t
t0dτ e−iω(t−τ)d(τ)·G ∗
λ[rA(τ), r, ω] (243)
(t0, initial time), respe tively, determine the free-eld parts Efree(r, ω, t) andBfree(r, ω, t) and the sour e-eld parts Esource(r, ω, t) and Bsource(r, ω, t) of theele tri and the indu tion eld in the ω domain. Substitution of Eqs. (241)
(243) together with Eqs. (44) and (47) into Eq. (239) together with Eq. (238)
and use of Eq. (45) leads to the following expression for the mean for e
[465,492:
F(t) = Ffree(t) + Fsource(t) (244)
with
Ffree(t) =∫ ∞
0dω
∇
⟨d(t)·Efree(r, ω, t)
⟩
+d
dt
[⟨d(t)×Bfree(r, ω, t)
⟩]
r=rA(t)
+ C.c. (245)
and
Fsource(t) = Felsource(t) + Fmag
source(t) (246)
where the omponents
Felsource(t) =
iµ0
π
∫ ∞
0dω ω2
∫ t
t0dτ e−iω(t−τ)
×∇
⟨d(t)·ImG [r, rA(τ), ω]·d(τ)
⟩
r=rA(t)
+ C.c. (247)
and
Fmagsource(t) =
µ0
π
∫ ∞
0dω ω
d
dt
∫ t
t0dτ e−iω(t−τ)
×⟨d(t)×
(∇×ImG [r, rA(τ), ω]
)·d(τ)
⟩
r=rA(t)
+ C.c. (248)
are related to the sour e-eld parts of the ele tri and the indu tion eld,
respe tively.
While Eq. (244) together with Eqs. (245)(248) gives the for e on a (non-
magneti ) atom subje t to an arbitrary ele tromagneti eld, the pure disper-
sion for e an be obtained by onsidering the ase where the (body-assisted)
ele tromagneti eld is initially prepared in the ground state |0〉 so that
〈0| · · · Efree(r, ω, t)|0〉 = 〈0| · · · Bfree(r, ω, t)|0〉 = 0 (249)
64
[re all Eq. (63) whi h implies that Ffree(t)=0. Hen e, Eq. (244) simply redu es
to
F(t) = Fsource(t) (250)
in this ase. In parti ular, for hosen atomi position, rA may be regarded as
a time-independent -number parameter [rA(t) 7→ rA, so that the expe tation
values to be taken in Eqs. (247) and (248) only refer to the internal state
of the atom. It should be pointed out that the on ept is not restri ted to
the al ulation of the mean for e but an be extended to higher-order for e
moments (for a dis ussion of for e u tuations, see also Ref. [294).
4.2.2 Weak atomeld oupling
The remaining task now onsists in the determination of the dipoledipole
orrelation fun tion
⟨d(t)d(τ)
⟩=∑
m,n
∑
m′,n′
dmndm′n′
⟨Amn(t)Am′n′(τ)
⟩(251)
in Eqs. (247) and (248) [Amn = |m〉〈n|, re all Eq. (111). To that end, the
problem of the internal atomi dynami s must be solved. Let rst onsider
the ase of weak atomeld oupling where the Markov approximation an
by used to onsiderably simplify the problem. Under the assumption that the
relevant atomi transition frequen ies are well separated from one another so
that diagonal and o-diagonal density matrix elements evolve independently,
appli ation of the quantum-regression theorem (see, e.g., Ref. [450) yields the
familiar result
⟨Amn(t)Am′n′(τ)
⟩= δnm′
⟨Amn′(τ)
⟩eiωmn(rA)−[Γm(rA)+Γn(rA)]/2(t−τ)
(252)
(t≥ τ , m 6= n). Here,
ωmn(rA) = ωmn + δωm(rA)− δωn(rA) (253)
are the atomi transition frequen ies in luding the position-dependent energy-
level shifts
31
δωm(rA) =∑
k
δωkm(rA), (254)
δωkm(rA) =
µ0
π~P∫ ∞
0dω ω2 dkm ·ImG
(1)(rA, rA, ω)·dmk
ωmk(rA)− ω(255)
31The Lamb shifts observed in free spa e are thought of as being already in luded
in the frequen ies ωmn.
65
( f. also Refs. [493495) whi h are due to the intera tion of the atom with
the body-assisted ele tromagneti eld, and similarly,
Γm(rA) =∑
k
Γkm(rA), (256)
Γkm(rA) =
2µ0
~Θ[ωmk(rA)]ω
2mk(rA)dkm ·ImG [rA, rA, ωmk(rA)]·dmk (257)
are the position-dependent level widths. Note that the position-dependent
energy shifts ~δωm(rA) as given by Eq. (254) together with Eq. (255) redu e
to those obtained by leading-order perturbation theory, Eqs. (225)(227), if
the frequen y shifts in the denominator on the r.h.s. of Eq. (255) are ignored.
Substituting Eqs. (251) and (252) into Eqs. (246)(248), one an then show
that the for e on an atom that is initially prepared in an arbitrary state an
be represented in the form [465,491,492
F(t) =∑
m,n
σnm(t)Fmn(rA) (258)
where the atomi density matrix elements σnm(t) = 〈Amn(t)〉 solve the intra-atomi master equation together with the respe tive initial ondition, and we
have
Fmn(rA) = Fel,ormn (rA) + Fel,r
mn(rA) + Fmag,ormn (rA) + Fmag,r
mn (rA) (259)
with the various ele tri /magneti , o-resonant/resonant for e omponents
being given as follows:
Fel,ormn (rA) = −
~µ0
2π
∫ ∞
0dξ ξ2
×(∇Tr
[αmn(rA, iξ) +αmn(rA,−iξ)]·G (1)(rA, r, iξ)
)r=rA
, (260)
Fel,rmn(rA) = µ0
∑
k
Θ(ωnk)Ω2mnk(rA)
×∇dmk ·G (1)[r, rA,Ωmnk(rA)]·dkn
r=rA
+ C.c., (261)
Fmag,ormn (rA) =
~µ0
2π
∫ ∞
0dξ ξ2Tr
[ωmn(rA)
iξαT
mn(rA, iξ)
− ωmn(rA)
iξαT
mn(rA,−iξ)]×[∇×G (1)(r, rA, iξ)
]
r=rA
, (262)
66
Fmag,rmn (rA) = µ0
∑
k
Θ(ωnk)ωmn(rA)Ωmnk(rA)
×(dmk×
∇×G (1)[r, rA,Ωmnk(rA)]·dkn
)r=rA
+ C.c. (263)
Here, Ωmnk(rA) and αmn(rA, ω), respe tively, are the omplex atomi transi-
tion frequen ies and the generalized polarizability tensor:
Ωmnk(rA) = ωnk(rA) + i[Γm(rA) + Γk(rA)]/2, (264)
αmn(rA, ω) =1
~
∑
k
[dmkdkn
−Ωmnk(rA)− ω+
dkndmk
−Ω∗nmk(rA) + ω
]. (265)
Equations (258)(263) show that the for e omponents Fmn(rA) (m 6=n) asso- iated with (non-vanishing) o-diagonal elements of the atomi density matrix
ontain ontributions arising from the intera tion of the atom with both the
ele tri and the magneti eld, where the magneti for e omponents display
a ve tor stru ture whi h is entirely dierent from that of the ele tri ones.
Sin e under the assumptions made, diagonal and o-diagonal density matrix
elements are not oupled to ea h other so that
σnm(t) = eiωmn(rA)−[Γm(rA)+Γn(rA)]/2(t−t0)σnm(t0) (266)
(m 6= n), for e omponents asso iated with o-diagonal density-matrix ele-
ments an only be observed if the atom is initially prepared in an at least par-
tially oherent superposition of energy eigenstates. A ordingly, if the atom is
initially prepared in an in oherent superposition of energy eigenstates, then
only for e omponents Fmm(rA) whi h are asso iated with diagonal density-
matrix elements and whi h are ele tri al by their nature,
Fmm(rA) = Fel,ormm (rA) + Fel,r
mm(rA) ≡ Formm(rA) + Fr
mm(rA), (267)
are observed, with the density matrix elements obeying the balan e equations
σmm(t) = −Γm(rA)σmm(t) +∑
k
Γmk (rA)σkk(t). (268)
In parti ular, when the level shifts and broadenings are negle ted, then the
for e omponents Formm(rA) and Fr
mm(rA) as follow from Eqs. (260) and (261)
obviously redu e to those that are obtained from the perturbative poten-
tial (225)(227) by means of Eq. (183). Note that the gradient in Eqs. (260)
and (261) a ts only on the Green tensor and not on the additional position-
dependent quantities, so that this result annot be derived from a potential in
the usual way. Sin e the for e omponents asso iated with ex ited-state den-
sity matrix elements are transient, they are only observable on time s ales of
the order of magnitude of the respe tive de ay times Γ−1m (rA) whi h are known
to sensitively depend on the atomi position [450. Needless to say that the
67
-3
0
3
1.12 1.13 1.14
PSfrag repla ements
ω10/ωTe
Fr 11(z
A)3
2πε 0
λ4 T
e/(
3[d
2 01+
(d01·e
z)2
]) 3 × 109
0
−3 × 109
1.12 1.13 1.14
Fig. 6. The resonant omponent of the for e on a two-level atom in the upper state
pla ed in front of a diele tri half spa e, Eq. (271), is shown as a fun tion of the
unperturbed transition frequen y ω10 (solid line) (ωPe/ωTe = 0.75, γe/ωTe = 0.01,ω2Te[d
201 + (d01 ·ez)2]/3π~ε0c3 = 10−7
, zA/λTe = 0.0075, λTe = 2πc/ωTe). For om-
parison, both the perturbative result as obtained from Eq. (227) (dashed lines) and
the separate ee ts of level shifting (dotted lines) and level broadening (dash-dotted
lines), are shown.
for e F(t) that a ts on an initially ex ited atom approa hes the ground-state
for e F00(rA) after su iently long times, limt→∞〈F(t)〉= F00(rA).
In order to illustrate the ee t of the body-indu ed level shifting and broaden-
ing on the for e, let us onsider a two-level atom whi h is situated at distan e
zA very lose to a diele tri half spa e. By means of the respe tive Green ten-
sor (App. B), it turns out that in the non-retarded limit the shift and width
of the transition frequen y are determined by
δω(zA) = δω1(zA)−δω0(zA) = −d201 + (d01 ·ez)232π~ε0z3A
|ε[ω10 + δω(zA)]|2 − 1
|ε[ω10 + δω(zA)] + 1|2 (269)
and
Γ(zA) = Γ1(zA) =d201 + (d01 ·ez)28π~ε0z3A
Im ε[ω10 + δω(zA)]
|ε[ω10 + δω(zA)] + 1|2 , (270)
respe tively, where the transition-dipole matrix element has been assumed
to be real and the (small) o-resonant ontribution to the frequen y shift
has been omitted. Note that due to the appearan e of the frequen y shift
on the r.h.s. of Eq. (269), this equation determines the shift only impli itly.
68
The dominant ontribution to the for e on the atom in the upper state is the
resonant one, i.e., F11(rA)≃Fr11(rA). Substituting the half-spa e Green tensor
(App. B) into Eqs. (261) and (267), one an show that [Fr11(rA) =F r
11(zA)ez[465,491,492
F r11(zA) = −
3[d201 + (d01 ·ez)2]32π~ε0z
4A
|ε[Ω110(zA)]|2 − 1
|ε[Ω110(zA)] + 1|2 (271)
where, a ording to Eq. (264),
Ω110(zA) = ω10(zA) + iΓ(zA)/2 = ω10 + δω(zA) + iΓ(zA)/2. (272)
In parti ular, for a medium whose permittivity is of DrudeLorentz type,
Eq. (217) leads to (γe,Γ≪ωTe)
ε[Ω110(zA)] = 1 +ω2Pe
ω2Te − ω2
10(zA)− i[Γ(zA) + γe]ω10(zA), (273)
showing that the absorption parameter of the half-spa e medium, γe, is re-pla ed with the total absorption parameter, i.e., the sum of γe and the spon-
taneous-de ay onstant Γ(zA) of the atom. Figure 6 displays the resonant
omponent of the for e on a two-level atom in the upper state pla ed near a
(single-resonan e) diele tri half spa e as a fun tion of the unperturbed tran-
sition frequen y ω10. It is seen that in the vi inity of the (surfa e-plasmon)
frequen y ωS=√ω2Te + ω2
Pe/2, an enhan ed for e is observed whi h is attra -
tive (repulsive) for red (blue) detuned atomi transition frequen ies ω10<ωS
(ω10>ωS)a result already known from perturbation theory [413. However,
it is also seen that due to body-indu ed level shifting and broadening the ab-
solute value of the for e an be noti eably redu ed. Interestingly, the positions
of the extrema of the for e remain nearly un hanged, be ause level shifting
and broadening give rise to ompeting ee ts that almost an el.
The al ulation of the o-resonant omponent of the for e, Eq. (267) together
with Eq. (260), leads to [For11(rA)= F or
11(zA)ez
F or11(zA) =
3[d201 + (d01 ·ez)2]32π2~ε0z4A
∫ ∞
0dξ
ε(iξ)− 1
ε(iξ) + 1
× ω10(zA)
ω210(zA) + [ξ + Γ(zA)/2]2
ω210(zA) + ξ2 + Γ2(zA)/4
ω210(zA) + [ξ − Γ(zA)/2]2
. (274)
Equation (274) reveals that the o-resonant omponent of the for e is only
weakly inuen ed by the level broadening [the leading-order dependen e be-
ing O(Γ2) whi h is in agreement with the physi al requirement that the vir-
tual emission and absorption pro esses governing the o-resonant omponent
should be only weakly ae ted by de ay-indu ed broadening. Formally, the
69
0.0172
0.0173
0.0174
1.12 1.13 1.14
0
3 10
6 10
PSfrag repla ements
ω10/ωTe
For
11(z
A)3
2πε 0
λ4 T
e/(
3[d
2 01+
(d01·e
z)2
])
1.74 × 107
1.73 × 107
1.72 × 107
1.12 1.13 1.14
1.12 1.13 1.14
60
30
0
Fig. 7. The o-resonant omponent of the for e on a two-level atom in the upper
state pla ed in front of a diele tri half spa e, Eq. (274), is shown as a fun tion of
the unperturbed transition frequen y (solid line), the parameters being the same as
in Fig. 6. For omparison, the perturbative result is also shown (dashed lines). The
inset displays the dieren e between the for e with and without onsideration of
level broadening (solid lines). In addition, the same dieren e is displayed when the
level shifts are ignored (dashed lines).
absen e of a linear-order term O(Γ) is due to the fa t that the atomi polariz-
ability (265) enters the o-resonant for e omponents (260) only in the om-
bination [αmm(rA, iξ)+αmm(rA,−iξ)], whi h ould not have been anti ipated
from the perturbative result (226) [where in fa t, αm(rA, iξ) and αm(rA,−iξ) oin ide, re all Eq. (228). The ee ts of level shifting and broadening are il-
lustrated in Fig. 7. Compared to the perturbative result, the frequen y shift
has the ee t of raising or lowering the for e for ω10<ωS or ω10>ωS, respe -
tively, whereas the ee t of broadening is not visible in the urves. Only by
plotting the dieren e between the results with and without broadening, a
slight redu tion of the for e be omes visible in the vi inity of ωS where Γ is
largest. Sin e this behavior is generally typi al of o-resonant omponents, the
perturbative result may be regarded as a good approximation for the for es
on ground-state atoms where no resonant omponents are present.
70
4.2.3 Strong atomeld oupling
Strong atomeld oupling may o ur if an initially ex ited atom intera ts
resonantly with a sharply peaked (quasi-)mode of a body-assisted eld, as
it is observed in avity-like systems. In this ase, the atomeld dynami s
an no longer be des ribed within the Markov approximation. Typi ally, a
single atomi transition is in resonan e with su h a mode, so the (resonant
part of the) dispersion for e an be studied, to a good approximation, by
employing the two-level model in rotating-wave approximation with respe t to
the intera tion Hamiltonian (119) (see, e.g., Ref. [450). To be more spe i ,
let us onsider the intera tion of a two-level atom initially prepared in the
upper state |1〉 with the body-assisted ele tromagneti eld in the ground
state |0〉 and al ulate the ele tri part of the resonant omponent of the
for e a ting on the atom, i.e., in the S hrödinger pi ture,
F(t) ≃ 〈ψ(t)|∇
[d·E(r)
]r=rA
|ψ(t)〉, (275)
with the state ve tor |ψ(t)〉 [|ψ(t = t0)〉 = |0〉|1〉 being represented in the
form
|ψ(t)〉 = ψ1(t)|0〉|1〉
+∑
λ=e,m
∫d3r
∫ ∞
0dω
ψ0(ω, t)
~g(rA, ω)d01 ·G ∗
λ(rA, r, ω)·|1(rA, ω)〉|0〉. (276)
It is normalized to unity provided that
|ψ1(t)|2 +∫ ∞
0dω |ψ0(ω, t)|2 = 1 (277)
and
g2(rA, ω) =µ0
π~ω2d10 ·ImG(rA, rA, ω)·d01. (278)
Substituting Eq. (276) into the S hrödinger equation
i~∂
∂t|ψ(t)〉 = H|ψ(t)〉, (279)
with H being given a ording to Eq. (109) together with Eqs. (110), (111) and
(119), one obtains the following oupled dierential equations for ψ1(t) andψ0(ω, t):
ψ1(t) = −i
~E1ψ1(t) + i
∫ ∞
0dω g(rA, ω)ψ0(ω, t), (280)
ψ0(ω, t) = −i
~(E0 + ~ω)ψ0(ω, t) + ig(rA, ω)ψ1(t). (281)
Equation (281) together with the initial ondition ψ0(ω, t= t0)=0 an be for-
mally integrated in a straightforward way. Inserting the result into Eqs. (276)
71
and (280) then yields
|ψ(t)〉 = ψ1(t)|0〉|1〉+i
~
∑
λ=e,m
∫d3r
∫ ∞
0dω
∫ t
t0dτ e−i(E0/~+ω)(t−τ)ψ1(τ)
× d01 ·G∗λ(rA, r, ω)·|1(rA, ω)〉|0〉 (282)
and
ψ1(t) = −iE1
~ψ1(t)−
∫ ∞
0dω g2(rA, ω)
∫ t
t0dτ e−i(E0/~+ω)(t−τ)ψ1(τ), (283)
respe tively. Combining Eqs. (275) and (282) and making use of the integral
relation (45), one nds that
F(t) =iµ0
π
∫ ∞
0dω ω2
∇
[d10 ·ImG
(1)(r, rA, ω)·d01
]r=rA
×∫ t
t0dτ ψ∗
1(t)ψ1(τ)e−i(E0/~+ω)(t−τ) + C.c. (284)
Sin e so far nothing has been said about the strength of the atomeld ou-
pling, Eq. (284) gives the ele tri part of the resonant omponent of the dis-
persion for e on a two-level atom whi h is initially prepared in the upper state
for arbitrary oupling strengths. Let us now approximate that part of the ex-
itation spe trum of the body-assisted ele tromagneti eld whi h may give
rise to strong atomeld oupling in the resonant transition by a quasi-mode
(labeled by ν) of Lorentzian shape,
g2(rA, ω) = g2(rA, ων)γ2ν/4
(ω − ων)2 + γ2ν/4+ g′2(rA, ω) (285)
and assume that the ee t of the residual part of the eld whi h is des ribed
by the term g′2(rA, ω) is weakly oupled to the atom, so that it an be treated
in the Markov approximation. From Eq. (283) it then follows that [498
ψ1(t) = e[−iE1/~−iδω′1(rA)−Γ′
1(rA)/2](t−t0)φ1(t) (286)
where φ1(t) is the solution to the dierential equation
φ1(t) + i∆ω(rA) + [γν − Γ′1(rA)] /2 φ1(t) +
14Ω2
R(rA)φ1(t) = 0 (287)
together with the initial onditions φ1(t = t0) = 1, φ1(t = t0) = 0. Here,
∆ω(rA)=ων − ω′10(rA) and ΩR(rA) =
√2πγνg2(rA, ων), respe tively, are the
detuning and the va uum Rabi frequen y and
δω′1(rA) = δω1(rA) +
Ω2R(rA)
4
∆ω(rA)
[∆ω(rA)]2 + γ2ν/4(288)
72
and
Γ′1(rA) = Γ1(rA)−
Ω2R(rA)
4
γν[∆ω(rA)]2 + γ2ν/4
, (289)
respe tively, are the shift and width of the upper level asso iated with the
residual part of the eld where δω1(rA) and Γ1(rA), are dened a ording to
Eqs. (254)(257) with the shifted transition frequen y being given by
32
ω′10(rA) = ω10 + δω′
1(rA) (290)
in pla e of Eq. (253). Equation (287) an easily be solved to obtain
φ1(t) = c+(rA)eΩ+(rA)(t−t0) + c−(rA)e
Ω−(rA)(t−t0)(291)
where
c±(rA) =Ω∓(rA)
Ω∓(rA)− Ω±(rA)(292)
and
Ω±(rA) =− 12
i∆ω(rA)+[γν−Γ′
1(rA)]/2
∓ 12
√i∆ω(rA)+[γν−Γ′
1(rA)]/22 − Ω2
R(rA) . (293)
Combination of Eqs. (284), (286) and (291) then leads to the sought for e
[498:
F(t) =µ0
π
∫ ∞
0dω ω2s(rA, ω, t− t0)
∇
[d10 ·ImG
(1)(r, rA, ω)·d01
]
r=rA
+ C.c.
(294)
with
s(rA, ω, t)
= |c+(rA)|2e[−Γ′
1(rA)+Ω∗+(rA)+Ω+(rA)]t − ei[ω
′10(rA)−ω]−Γ′
1(rA)/2+Ω∗+(rA)t
ω − ω′10(rA) + iΓ′
1(rA)/2− iΩ+(rA)
+ c∗+(rA)c−(rA)e[−Γ′
1(rA)+Ω∗+(rA)+Ω−(rA)]t − ei[ω
′10(rA)−ω]−Γ′
1(rA)/2+Ω∗+(rA)t
ω − ω′10(rA) + iΓ′
1(rA)/2− iΩ−(rA)
+ c∗−(rA)c+(rA)e[−Γ′
1(rA)+Ω∗−(rA)+Ω+(rA)]t − ei[ω
′10(rA)−ω]−Γ′
1(rA)/2+Ω∗−(rA)t
ω − ω′10(rA) + iΓ′
1(rA)/2− iΩ+(rA)
+ |c−(rA)|2e[−Γ′
1(rA)+Ω∗−(rA)+Ω−(rA)]t − ei[ω
′10(rA)−ω]−Γ′
1(rA)/2+Ω∗−(rA)t
ω − ω′10(rA) + iΓ′
1(rA)/2− iΩ−(rA). (295)
Let us rst make onta t with result obtained in the limit of weak atomeld
oupling where the rst term under the square root in Eq. (293) is mu h larger
32Note that ontrary to Eq. (253), the ground-state shift is absent here as a onse-
quen e of the rotating-wave approximation.
73
than the se ond one. This is the ase when for given transition dipole moment,
the spe trum of the eld in the resonan e region is su iently at,
γν ≫ 2ΩR(rA) (296)
or when the atomi transition is su iently far detuned from the eld reso-
nan e,
|∆ω(rA)| ≫ 2Ω2R(rA)/γν . (297)
By means of Taylor expansion it an then be shown that
Ω±(rA) ≃
−i∆ω(rA)− [γν − Γ′1(rA)]/2,
iΩ2R(rA)
4
∆ω(rA)
[∆ω(rA)]2 + γ2ν/4− Ω2
R(rA)
8
γν[∆ω(rA)]2 + γ2ν/4
,
(298)
so c+(rA)≃ 1, c−(rA)≃ 0 and Eq. (284) [together with Eqs. (286) and (291)
approximates to [498
F(t) = e−Γ1(rA)(t−t0)µ0
π
∫ ∞
0dω ω2
[∇d10 ·ImG
(1)(r, rA, ω)·d01
]r=rA
ω − ω10(rA)− iΓ1(rA)/2+ C.c.
≃ e−Γ1(rA)(t−t0)F1(rA) (299)
with
F1(rA) = µ0Ω210(rA)
∇d10 ·G (1)[r, rA,Ω10(rA)]·d01
r=rA
+ C.c. (300)
and
Ω10(rA) = ω10(rA) + iΓ1(rA)/2 (301)
whi h orresponds to the term σ11(t)Fel,r11 (rA) in Eqs. (258) and (259) with
Fel,r11 (rA) being given a ording to Eq. (261).
The strong- oupling limit is realized if the spe trum of the eld features a
su iently sharp peak and the atomi transition is near resonant with this
peak, su h that
γν ≤ 2ΩR(rA) and |∆ω(rA)| ≪ 2Ω2R(rA)/γν. (302)
In this ase, the square root in Eq. (293) be omes approximately real,
Ω±(rA) ≃ −12
i∆ω(rA) +
12[γν − Γ′
1(rA)]∓ 1
2iΩ(rA) (303)
where
Ω(rA) =√Ω2
R(rA) + [∆ω(rA)]2 − [γν − Γ′1(rA)]
2/4 (304)
74
so that the oe ients c±(rA) [Eq. (292) an be given in the form
c±(rA) =Ω(rA)∓∆ω(rA)± i[γν−Γ′
1(rA)]/2
2Ω(rA). (305)
Substituting Eqs. (303) and (305) into Eq. (294) [together with Eq. (295),
one nds that for real dipole matrix elements F(t) approximates to [498
F(t) = 2e−[γν+Γ′1(rA)](t−t0)/2 sin2[Ω(rA)(t− t0)/2]
× [∆ω(rA)]2 − [γν−Γ′
1(rA)]2/4
Ω2R(rA) + [∆ω(rA)]2 − [γν−Γ′
1(rA)]2/4
F1(rA) (306)
where F1(rA) is given a ording to Eq. (300) with
Ω′10(rA) = ω′
10(rA) + iΓ′1(rA)/2 (307)
in pla e of Eq. (301). Note that [γν +Γ′1(rA)]/2=γν/2 if |∆ω(rA)|≪ γν/2 and
[γν + Γ′1(rA)]/2=Γ1(rA)/2 if γν/2≪|∆ω(rA)|≪ 2Ω2
R(rA)/γν.
Comparing Eq. (306) with Eq. (299), we see that while the resonant ompo-
nent of the for e in the limit of weak atomeld oupling simply exponentially
de reases as a fun tion of time, Rabi os illations of the for e are typi ally
observed in the strong- oupling limitin agreement with the well-known fea-
tures of spontaneous emission in the two oupling regimes. As a onsequen e
of the appearan e of Rabi os illations, the magnitude of the for e hanges
periodi ally; for appropriate spatial stru ture of the resonantly intera ting
quasi-mode, the atom may be trapped with the trap being set by the atom
itself, f. also Refs. [499,500. Rabi os illations do not o ur if the system is
initially prepared in a dressed state; in this ase the (exponentially de aying)
for e is simply given by the gradient of the position-dependent part±~Ω(rA)/2[re all Eq. (304) of the respe tive dressed-state energy [501,502.
5 Con luding remarks
Dispersion for es are a parti ular signature of the quantum nature of the inter-
a tion of matter with the ele tromagneti eld. As soon as the intera ting mat-
ter onsists of a large number of elementary atomi parti les, exa t mi ros opi
al ulations be ome very involved. Therefore most theoreti al approa hes to
dispersion for es make use of assumptions typi al of ma ros opi ele trody-
nami s by introdu ingsooner oder laterfamiliarma ros opi on epts su h
as boundary onditions at surfa es of dis ontinuity and/or onstitutive rela-
tions averaged over a su iently large number of the elementary onstituents
of the respe tive material obje ts. Ma ros opi ele trodynami s whose appli-
ability surprisingly ranges even to nano-stru tures, has the benet of being
75
universally valid, be ause it uses only very general physi al properties, without
the need of involved ab initio al ulations. Moreover, all the relevant quan-
tities used for hara terizing the material obje ts an easily be inferred from
measurements. This on ept does not only apply to lassi al ele trodynami s
but also to QED. Ma ros opi QED has been well elaborated for the ase
of lo ally responding media des ribed in terms of omplex-valued, position-
and frequen y-dependent permittivities and permeabilities. It an be extended
to arbitrary linear media, in luding spatially dispersing media, sin e the de-
s ription of the quantized eld in terms of urrent densities and the Green
tensor asso iated with the ma ros opi Maxwell equations is independent of
the parti ular medium des ription. When supplemented with standard atom
eld oupling terms, a powerful tool for studying medium-assisted quantum
ee ts in QED is obtained. Clearly, the appli ability of the theory is restri ted
to bodybody and bodyatom separations that are su iently large ompared
with the length s ale on whi h the atomisti stru ture of the bodies begins to
play a role.
In parti ular, the so established ma ros opi QED provides a unied approa h
to the various types of dispersion for esan approa h whi h in orporates the
benets of normal-mode and linear-response approa hes, while exa tly taking
into a ount real material properties. In parti ular, dispersion for es between
ele tri ally neutral, unpolarized and unmagnetized ground-state bodies sim-
ply ree t the for es whi h are due to the a tion of the u tuating body-
assisted ele tromagneti va uum on the u tuating harge and urrent den-
sities of the bodies. Sin e all the relevant hara teristi s of the bodies enter
the so obtained for e formulas via the Green tensor of the asso iated ma ro-
s opi Maxwell equations, they are valid for arbitrary (linear) bodies. Both
the Casimir stress and the Casimir for e density an thus be introdu ed in
a natural way. Moreover, by appropriate Born-series expansions of the Green
tensor, relations between dispersion for es on bodies and dispersion for es on
atoms an be established whi h learly demonstrate the ommon origin of all
these for es. In parti ular, the for e on an atom in the presen e of arbitrary
bodies as well as the for e between two atoms an be obtained as limiting
ases of the bodybody for e.
In this arti le we have restri ted our attention to ground-state bodies, i.e,
to bodies that at zero temperature intera t with the ele tromagneti eld
where the ee t of dispersion for es is purely quantum by nature. As outlined,
an extension of the entral results to in lude equilibrium systems at nite
temperatures an be obtained in a straightforward way by simply repla ing
the va uum averages by thermal averages. In this ontext it should be pointed
out that the entral assumption of linear-response theories a ording to whi h
the thermal average of the eld u tuations is related to the imaginary part
of the eld response fun tion, is expli itly fullled within the framework of
ma ros opi QED.
76
As we have seen, dispersion for es on ground-state atoms turn out to be lim-
iting ases of dispersion for es on ma ros opi bodies, so the orresponding
formulas an be obtained without expli itly addressing the underlying atom
eld intera tion. Of ourse, they an also be derived by expli itly solving the
quantum-me hani al problem of individual atoms intera ting with the ele tro-
magneti eld, with the presen e of ma ros opi bodies being again des ribed
within the framework of ma ros opi QED. For ground-state atoms where
only virtual transitions o ur, this leads to results that agree with the ones
obtained from the purely ma ros opi approa h, as expe ted. In fa t, expli -
itly addressing the atomeld intera tion is more exible, be ause it an also
be applied to non-equilibrium systems, su h as initially ex ited atoms where
also real transitions are involved in the atomeld intera tion. In this ase,
a dynami al des ription is in general preferred to be employed, leading to
time-dependent expressions for the for es, a ording to the temporal evolu-
tion of the atomi quantum state. In parti ular for weak atomeld oupling,
the for e on an initially ex ited atom is a sum of omponents whose tempo-
ral evolution follows that of the asso iated atomi density matrix elements
whi h is in turn governed by the familiar master equation of an atomi system
undergoing radiative damping. For strong atomeld oupling, damped Rabi
os illations may o ur whi h periodi ally hange the magnitude of the for e.
The dynami al approa h ould serve as a starting point for studying disper-
sion for es on bodies that are not in thermal equilibrium, by appropriately
modeling su h bodies as olle tions of ex ited atoms [281,282.
In luding linearly responding bodies in ma ros opi QED has the advantage
that from the very beginning of all al ulations the ee t of the bodies is taken
into a ount in a onsistent manner, without the need to spe ify the properties
of the bodies at an early stage. In this way very general results of broad appli-
ability an be obtained. This naturally applies not only to dispersion for es,
but also to other quantum phenomena of radiationmatter intera tion whi h
are strongly inuen ed by the presen e of ma ros opi bodiesphenomena
that may be subsumed under the term Casimir ee t in the broadest sense
of the word. Typi al examples are the enhan ement and inhibition of sponta-
neous emission, resonant energy transfer between atoms or mole ules and the
wide eld of avity-QED ee ts.
A knowledgements
We would like to a knowledge fruitful ollaboration with Ho Trung Dung, T.
Kampf, C. Raabe and H. Safari. Furthermore, we are grateful to L. Arntzen,
G. Barton, I. Bondarev, M. DeKieviet, A. Guzmán, A. Lambre ht, S. Linden,
E. Shamonina, Y. Sherkunov, L. Rizzuto, M. S. Toma² and C. Víllarreal for
stimulating dis ussions.
77
A Overview over s enarios
In order to provide for an overview over the various theoreti al works on
dispersion for es, referen es ontaining work on bodybody, atombody and
atomatom for es are given in separate tables. In the tables, the referen es are
stru tured a ording to the s enarios onsidered, regardless of the methods
used to address these s enarios.
Material → Magneto-
Geometry ↓Perfe t ond. Ele tri
ele tri
[242,314316 [175,204,205,208,239241,281,282 [333,334
[322,385,386 [323,325,230232,236,321,326,329 [336,372
Half spa e [397,398 [362365,370,371,374,378,379,382 [393,485
+ half spa e [391
T[387,388,399,433,436438, [324
T[335
T
[318320
L[328,330332,359361,366369
T[337
T
[389
L, [348,390
Tq[339
T
Half spa e [445,446
+ plate [487,480
Half spa e [377,397,398 [231,436, [330
T
+ sphere
Half spa e [343,377
+ ylinder
Plate [327,373,381,396,435,483,484
+ plate [347
Tq
Plate [345
+ sphere
Sphere [393,397 [235,237,344
+ sphere
Table A.1
S hedular summary of referen es asso iated with theoreti al work on bodybody
for es. The supers ripts indi ate that nite temperature (T), lateral for es (L)
and/or torques (Tq) are in luded.
78
Material → Magneto-
Geometry ↓Perfe t ondu tor Ele tri
ele tri
[107,177,189191 [174,175,189,190,194,196199 [416,443
[245,192,247251 [201203,206209,211213,216 [491,492
[290,294,404,405 [217,219,220,252,305,306,405 [497, [309
M
[407, [287,295
E[407,414,415,417,419,433,441
Half spa e
[296,304,412
E[490,[195,218,281,282,304
E
[413
E, [269
M[307,308,413,418,428,439
E
[284,408
T[465,491,492
E, [406
M, [360
T
[361,409,410,442
T
Plate [444
T[491,497
[221,420 [221223,395,414,421,422,440 [488
Sphere
[496
[224226,414,423,424,440
Cylinder
[493495, [425
E, [444
T
[227,290,310,426 [310,426, [311
T[491,497
Planar
[291,297301
E
Cavity
[292
E,M, [293
T
Spher. av. [228,229,427,440, [312
E
Cyl. av. [424,440
Parab. av. [302,303
Table A.2
S hedular summary of referen es asso iated with theoreti al work on atombody
for es. Unless otherwise stated, nonmagneti ground-state atoms are onsidered.
The supers ripts indi ate that ex ited atoms (E), magneti atoms (M) and/or nite
temperature (T) are in luded.
79
Material → Magneto-
Geometry ↓Perfe t ondu tor Ele tri
ele tri
[107,164,168170,174,175,181183,243257,265,404,433,489,490
Free spa e [276282
E,[179,184
E,M, [178,180,258,266,268272,274,489
M
[273
M,T, [283286,360,361,408,447
T
[429 [467,488,503
Bulk medium
[446
M
Half Spa e [214,287289, [430
T[215,216,267,415,431 [467,489
Planar avity [411, [430
T[267, [432
T
Table A.3
S hedular summary of referen es asso iated with theoreti al work on atomatom
for es, possibly in the presen e of bodies. Unless otherwise stated, nonmagneti
ground-state atoms are onsidered. The supers ripts indi ate that ex ited atoms
(E), magneti atoms (M) and/or nite temperature (T) are in luded.
B Green tensors
The Green tensor in free spa e is given by [448
G free(r, r′, iξ) =
1
3
(c
ξ
)2
δ(ρ)I +c2e−ξρ/c
4πξ2ρ3
[a(ξρ/c)I − b(ξρ/c)eρeρ
](B.1)
(ρ= r− r′; ρ= |ρ|; eρ=ρ/ρ) where
a(x) = 1 + x+ x2, b(x) = 3 + 3x+ x2. (B.2)
The s attering Green tensor for the planar magneto-ele tri stru ture hara -
terized by Eqs. (143) and (144) is given by [482,504
G
(1)(r, r′, iξ) =∫
d2q eiq·(r−r′)G
(1)(q, z, z′, iξ) for 0 < z, z′ < d (B.3)
(q ⊥ ez) with
G
(1)(q, z, z′, iξ) =µ(iξ)
8π2b
∑
σ=s,p
rσ−rσ+e
−2bd
Dσ
[e+σ e
+σ e
−b(z−z′) + e−σ e−σ e
b(z−z′)]
+1
Dσ
[e+σ e
−σ rσ−e
−b(z+z′) + e−σ e+σ rσ+e
−2bdeb(z+z′)]. (B.4)
80
Here, b and Dσ are dened by Eqs. (148) and (149), respe tively,
e±s = eq×ez, e±p = −1
k(iqez ± beq) (B.5)
(eq =q/q, q= |q|) withk =
ξ
c
√ε(iξ)µ(iξ) (B.6)
are the polarization ve tors for s- and p-polarized waves propagating in the
positive (+) and negative (−) z-dire tions, and r±σ = r±σ (ξ, q) with σ = s, pdes ribe the ree tion of these waves at the right (+) and left (−) walls,
respe tively.
In parti ular, assume that both walls are multi-slab magneto-ele tri s on-
sisting of N± homogeneous layers of thi knesses dj± (j= 1, . . . , N±) with dN±
±
=∞, permittivity εj±(ω) and permeability µj±(ω). In this ase the ree tion
oe ients an be obtained from the re urren e relations [rσ±≡ r0σ±; d≡ d0±;ε(ω)≡ ε0±(ω); µ(ω)≡ µ0
±(ω)
rjs± =(µj+1
± bj± − µj±b
j+1± ) + (µj+1
± bj± + µj±b
j+1± ) e−2bj+1
±dj+1± rj+1
s±
(µj+1± bj± + µj
±bj+1± ) + (µj+1
± bj± − µj±b
j+1± ) e−2bj+1
±dj+1± rj+1
s±
, (B.7)
rjp± =(εj+1
± bj± − εj±bj+1± ) + (εj+1
± bj± + εj±bj+1± ) e−2bj+1
±dj+1± rj+1
p±
(εj+1± bj± + εj±b
j+1± ) + (εj+1
± bj± − εj±bj+1± ) e−2bj+1
±dj+1± rj+1
p±
(B.8)
(j=0, . . . , N±− 1) with rN±
σ± =0 where
bj± =
√ξ2
c2εj±(iξ)µ
j±(iξ) + q2 . (B.9)
For single, semi-innite slabs, Eqs. (B.7) and (B.8) redu e to the Fresnel o-
e ients
rs± =µ1±b− µb1±µ1±b+ µb1±
, rp± =ε1±b− εb1±ε1±b+ εb1±
. (B.10)
Referen es
[1 Y. Kim, H. Meyer, Multiphoton spe tros opy of NORg (Rg = rare gas) van
der Waals systems, Int. Rev. Phys. Chem. 20 (2001) 219.
[2 M. C. Heaven, Spe tros opy and dynami s of hydride radi al van der Waals
omplexes, Int. Rev. Phys. Chem. 24 (2005) 375.
[3 P. W. Milonni, The Quantum Va uum, A ademi Press, New York, 1994.
81
[4 R. S hmid, Re ent advan es in the des ription of the stru ture of water, the
hydrophobi ee t, and the like-dissolves-like rule, Monatsh. Chem. 132 (2001)
1295.
[5 Y. A. Freiman, H. J. Jodl, Solid oxygen, Phys. Rep. 401 (2004) 1.
[6 U. Tartaglino, T. Zykova-Timan, F. Er olessi, E. Tosatti, Melting and
nonmelting of solid surfa es and nanosystems, Phys. Rep. 411 (2005) 291.
[7 L. W. Bru h, Theory of physisorption intera tions, Surf. S i. 125 (1983) 194.
[8 L. W. Bru h, M. W. Cole, E. Zaremba, Physi al Adsorption: For es and
Phenomena, Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1997.
[9 G. P. Brivio, M. I. Trioni, The adiabati mole ulemetal surfa e intera tion:
Theoreti al approa hes, Rev. Mod. Phys. 71 (1999) 231.
[10 D. Bonn, Wetting transitions, Curr. Opin. Colloid In. 6 (2001) 22.
[11 D. Bonn, D. Ross, Wetting transitions, Rep. Prog. Phys. 64 (2001) 1085.
[12 J. R. Henderson, Physi s beyond van der Waals, Heterogen. Chem. Rev. 2
(1995) 233.
[13 B. V. Derjaguin, Problems of adhesion, Prog. Surf. S i. 45 (1994) 223.
[14 T. F. Tadros, Industrial appli ations of dispersions, Adv. Colloid Interfa . 46
(1993) 1.
[15 J. Gregory, The role of olloid intera tions in solidliquid separation, Water
S i. Te hnol. 27 (1993) 1.
[16 D. F. Lawler, Physi al aspe ts of o ulationfrom mi ros ale to ma ros ale,
Water S i. Te hnol. 27 (1993) 165.
[17 D. N. Thomas, S. J. Judd, N. Faw ett, Flo ulation modelling: A review, Water
Res. 33 (1999) 1579.
[18 T. Poppe, J. Blum, T. Henning, New experiments on ollisions of solid grains
related to the preplanetary dust aggregation, Adv. Spa e Res. 23 (1999) 1197.
[19 J. N. Israela hvili, Van der Waals for es in biologi al systems, Q. Rev. Biophys.
6 (1974) 341.
[20 P. C. W. Davies, Does quantum me hani s play a non-trivial role in life?,
Biosystems 78 (2004) 69.
[21 S. Nir, Van der Waals intera tions between surfa es of biologi al interest, Prog.
Surf. S i. 8 (1976) 1.
[22 K. Autumn, M. Sitti, Y. A. Liang, A. M. Peattie, W. R. Hansen, S. Sponberg,
T. W. Kenny, R. Fearing, J. N. Israela hvili, R. J. Full, Eviden e for van der
Waals adhesion in ge ko setae, P. Natl. A ad. S i. USA 99 (2002) 12252.
82
[23 A. B. Kesel, A. Martin, T. Seidl, Getting a grip on spider atta hment: An
AFM approa h to mi rostru ture adhesion in athropods, Smart Mater. Stru t.
13 (2004) 512.
[24 J. T. G. Overbeek, M. J. Sparnaay, Experiments on long-range attra tive for es
between ma ros opi obje ts, J. Colloid S i. 7 (1952) 343.
[25 J. T. G. Overbeek, M. J. Sparnaay, Londonvan der Waals attra tion between
ma ros opi obje ts, Dis uss. Faraday So . 18 (1954) 12.
[26 A. P. Prosser, J. A. Kit hener, Dire t measurement of long-range van der Waals
for es, Nature 178 (1956) 1339.
[27 J. A. Kit hener, A. P. Prosser, Dire t measurement of long-range van der Waals
for es, Pro . R. So . London, Ser. A 242 (1957) 403.
[28 W. Bla k, J. G. V. de Jongh, J. T. G. Overbeek, M. J. Sparnaay, Measurements
of retarded van der Waals' for es, Trans. Faraday So iety 56 (1960) 1597.
[29 M. J. Sparnaay, Measurements of attra tive for es between at plates, Physi a
24 (1958) 751.
[30 A. van Silfhout, Dispersion for es between ma ros opi obje ts. I., Pro . K.
Ned. Akad. B - Ph. 69 (1966) 501.
[31 A. van Silfhout, Dispersion for es between ma ros opi obje ts. II., Pro . K.
Ned. Akad. B - Ph. 69 (1966) 516.
[32 A. van Silfhout, Dispersion for es between ma ros opi obje ts. III., Pro . K.
Ned. Akad. B - Ph. 69 (1966) 532.
[33 G. C. J. Rouweler, J. T. G. Overbeek, Dispersion for es between fused sili a
obje ts at distan es between 25 and 350 nm, Trans. Faraday So iety 67 (1971)
2117.
[34 P. H. G. M. Van Blokland, J. T. G. Overbeek, Van der Waals for es between
obje ts overed with a hromium layer, J. Chem. So . Farad. T. 1 74 (1978)
2637.
[35 P. H. G. M. Van Blokland, J. T. G. Overbeek, Dispersion for es between obje ts
of fused sili a, J. Colloid. Interf. S i. 68 (1979) 96.
[36 Y. I. Rabinovi h, B. V. Derjaguin, N. V. Churaev, Dire t measurements of
long-range surfa e for es in gas and liquid media, Adv. Colloid Interfa . 16
(1982) 63.
[37 C. J. Coakley, D. Tabor, Dire t measurement of van der Waals for es between
solids in air, J. Phys. D: Appl. Phys. 11 (1978) L77.
[38 B. V. Derjaguin, I. I. Abrikosova, E. M. Lifshitz, Dire t measurement of
mole ular attra tion between solids separated by a narrow gap, Q. Rev. Chem.
So . 10 (1956) 295.
83
[39 I. I. Abrikosova, B. V. Derjaguin, Measurement of mole ular attra tion between
solid bodies of dierent nature at large distan es, in: Pro eedings of the 2nd
International-Congress on Surfa e-A tivity, Vol. 3, 1957, p. 398.
[40 B. V. Derjaguin, I. I. Abrikosova, Dire t measurements of mole ular attra tion
of solids, J. Phys. Chem. Solids 5 (1958) 1.
[41 B. V. Derjaguin, The for e between mole ules, S i. Am. 203 (1960) 47.
[42 V. S. J. Craig, An histori al review of surfa e for e measurement te hniques,
Colloid. Surfa e. A 130 (1997) 75.
[43 S. K. Lamoreaux, Demonstration of the Casimir for e in the 0.6 to 6 µm range,
Phys. Rev. Lett. 78 (1997) 5.
[44 M. Bordag, U. Mohideen, V. M. Mostepanenko, New developments in the
Casimir ee t, Phys. Rep. 353 (2001) 1.
[45 S. K. Lamoreaux, The Casimir for e: Ba kground, experiments, and
appli ations, Rep. Prog. Phys. 68 (2005) 201.
[46 U. Mohideen, A. Roy, Pre ision measurement of the Casimir for e from 0.1 to
0.9 µm, Phys. Rev. Lett. 81 (1998) 4549.
[47 A. Roy, C. Y. Lin, U. Mohideen, Improved pre ision measurement of the
Casimir for e, Phys. Rev. D 60 (1999) 111101.
[48 A. Roy, U. Mohideen, Demonstration of the nontrivial boundary dependen e
of the Casimir for e, Phys. Rev. Lett. 82 (1999) 4380.
[49 B. W. Harris, F. Chen, U. Mohideen, Pre ision measurement of the Casimir
for e using gold surfa es, Phys. Rev. A 62 (2000) 052109.
[50 F. Chen, B. Harris, A. Roy, U. Mohideen, Measurements of the normal and
shape dependent Casimir for es using an atomi for e mi ros ope, Int. J. Mod.
Phys. A 17 (2002) 711.
[51 F. Chen, U. Mohideen, G. L. Klim hitskaya, V. M. Mostepanenko, Investigation
of the Casimir for e between metal and semi ondu tor test bodies, Phys. Rev.
A 72 (2005) 020101.
[52 F. Chen, U. Mohideen, Re ent experimental advan es in pre ision Casimir for e
measurements with the atomi for e mi ros ope, J. Phys. A: Math. Gen. 39
(2006) 6233.
[53 F. Chen, U. Mohideen, G. L. Klim hitskaya, V. M. Mostepanenko,
Demonstration of the lateral Casimir for e, Phys. Rev. Lett. 88 (2002) 101801.
[54 F. Chen, U. Mohideen, G. L. Klim hitskaya, V. M. Mostepanenko,
Experimental and theoreti al investigation of the lateral Casimir for e between
orrugated surfa es, Phys. Rev. A 66 (2002) 032113.
[55 A. M. Stewart, V. V. Yaminsky, S. Ohnishi, Measurement of retarded dispersion
for es of mi a, Langmuir 18 (5) (2002) 1453.
84
[56 V. V. Yaminsky, A. M. Stewart, Intera tion of glass surfa es in air: Dispersion
for es in the retarded regime, Langmuir 19 (2003) 4037.
[57 R. S. De a, D. Lopez, E. Fis hba h, D. E. Krause, Measurement of the Casimir
for e between dissimilar metals, Phys. Rev. Lett. 91 (2003) 050402.
[58 R. S. De a, D. Lopez, H. Chan, E. Fis hba h, G. L. Klim hitskaya, D. E.
Krause, V. M. Mostepanenko, Pre ise determination of the Casimir for e and
rst realization of a Casimir less experiment, J. Low Temp. Phys. 135 (2004)
63.
[59 M. Lisanti, D. Iannuzzi, F. Capasso, Observation of the skin-depth ee t on the
Casimir for e between metalli surfa es, P. Natl. A ad. S i. USA 102 (2005)
11989.
[60 D. Iannuzzi, M. Lisanti, J. N. Munday, F. Capasso, The design of long range
quantum ele trodynami al for es and torques between ma ros opi bodies,
Solid State Commun. 135 (2005) 618.
[61 D. Iannuzzi, M. Lisanti, C. Federi o, Ee t of hydrogen-swit hable mirrors on
the Casimir for e, P. Natl. A ad. S i. USA 101 (2004) 4019.
[62 S. Hunklinger, H. Geisselmann, W. Arnold, A dynami method for measuring
the van der Waals for es between ma ros opi bodies, Rev. S i. Instrum. 43
(1972) 584.
[63 W. Arnold, S. Hunklinger, K. Dransfeld, Inuen e of opti al absorption on the
van der Waals intera tion between solids, Phys. Rev. B 19 (1979) 6049.
[64 B. Gady, D. S hleef, R. Reifenberger, D. Rimai, L. P. DeMejo, Identi ation of
ele trostati and van der Waals intera tion for es between a mi rometer-size
sphere and a at substrate, Phys. Rev. B 53 (1996) 8065.
[65 G. Bressi, G. Carugno, R. Onofrio, G. Ruoso, Measurement of the Casimir
for e between parallel metalli surfa es, Phys. Rev. Lett. 88 (2002) 041804.
[66 H. B. Chan, V. A. Aksyuk, R. N. Kleiman, D. J. Bishop, F. Capasso, Quantum
me hani al a tuation of mi roele trome hani al systems by the Casimir for e,
S ien e 291 (2001) 1941.
[67 H. B. Chan, V. A. Aksyuk, R. N. Kleiman, D. J. Bishop, F. Capasso, Nonlinear
mi rome hani al Casimir os illator, Phys. Rev. Lett. 87 (2001) 211801.
[68 P. Bushev, A. Wilson, J. Es hner, C. Raab, F. S hmidt-Kaler, C. Be her,
R. Blatt, For es between a single atom and its distant mirror image, Phys.
Rev. Lett. 92 (2004) 223602.
[69 D. M. Harber, J. M. Obre ht, J. M. M Guirk, E. A. Cornell, Measurement
of the CasimirPolder for es through enter-of-mass os illations of a Bose
Einstein ondensate, Phys. Rev. A 72 (2005) 033610.
[70 I. Carusotto, L. Pitaevskii, S. Stringari, G. Modugno, M. Ingus io, Sensitive
measurement of for es at the mi ron s ale using Blo h os illations of ultra old
atoms, Phys. Rev. Lett. 95 (2005) 093202.
85
[71 D. Be k, H. J. Loes h, Atom-Atom-Streuexperimente: Ges hwindigkeits-
abhängigkeit einiger totaler Streuquers hnitte, Z. Phys. 195 (1966) 444.
[72 D. Be k, H. J. Loes h, Interatomares Potential aus Streuexperimenten: KHg,
Z. Phys. 196 (1966) 66.
[73 C. H. Chen, P. E. Siska, Y. T. Lee, Intermole ular potentials from rossed beam
dierential elasti s attering measurements VIII. He+Ne, He+Ar, He+Kr,
He+Xe, J. Chem. Phys. 59 (1973) 601.
[74 P. Dehmer, L. Wharton, Absolute total ross se tions for
7Li on He, Ne, Kr,
and Xe, J. Chem. Phys. 57 (1972) 4821.
[75 V. Aquilanti, G. Liuti, F. Pirani, F. Ve hio attivi, G. G. Volpi, Absolute total
elasti ross se tions for ollisions of oxygen atoms with rare gases at thermal
energies, J. Chem. Phys. 65 (1976) 4751.
[76 B. Brunetti, F. Pirani, F. Ve hio attivi, E. Luzzatti, Absolute total ross
se tions for elasti s attering of Ne by Ar, Kr, and Xe: Chara terization of
long-range intera tions, Chem. Phys. Lett. 55 (1978) 565.
[77 B. Brunetti, G. Luiti, E. Luzzatti, F. Pirani, G. G. Volpi, The intera tion
of atomi and mole ular nitrogen with argon by s attering measurements, J.
Chem. Phys. 79 (1983) 273.
[78 G. A. Parker, M. Keil, A. Kuppermann, S attering of thermal He beams by
rossed atomi and mole ular beams. V. Anisotropi intermole ular potentials
for He + CO2, H2O, C2N2, J. Chem. Phys. 78 (1983) 1145.
[79 R. Brandt, M. Henkel, B. Pfeil, W. Seidel, Ainsotropi intermole ular potentials
for HeC6H6 and HeC5H5N from total ross se tion measurements, J. Chem.
Phys. 95 (1991) 135.
[80 M. Henkel, B. Pfeil, W. Seidel, Anisotropi intera tion potentials for HeCH4,
HeCH3Cl, HeCH2Cl2, HeCHCl3, and HeCCl4 from mole ular beam s attering,
J. Chem. Phys. 96 (1992) 5054.
[81 D. W. Martin, R. W. Gregor, R. M. Jordan, P. E. Siska, Dierential elasti
s attering of He∗ (21S) by Ar, Kr, and Xe: Repulsive rainbows and opti al
potentials, J. Chem. Phys. 69 (1978) 2833.
[82 D. Raskin, P. Kus h, Intera tion between a neutral atomi or mole ular beam
and a ondu ting surfa e, Phys. Rev. 179 (1969) 712.
[83 A. Shih, D. Raskin, P. Kus h, Investigation of the intera tion potential between
a neutral mole ule and a ondu ting surfa e, Phys. Rev. A 9 (1974) 652.
[84 A. Shih, Van der Waals for e between a Cs atom or a CsCl mole ule and metal
or diele tri surfa es, Phys. Rev. A 9 (1974) 1507.
[85 A. Shih, V. A. Parsegian, Van der Waals for e between heavy alkali atoms and
gold surfa es: Comparison of measured and predi ted values, Phys. Rev. A 12
(1975) 835.
86
[86 A. Anderson, S. Haro he, E. A. Hinds, W. Jhe, D. Mes hede, Measuring the
van der Waals for es between a Rydberg atom and a metalli surfa e, Phys.
Rev. A 37 (1988) 3594.
[87 E. A. Hinds, C. I. Sukenik, M. G. Boshier, D. Cho, Dee tion of an atomi
beam by the Casimir for e, in: J. C. Zorn, R. R. Lewis (Eds.), Atomi Physi s
12, Ameri an Institute of Physi s, New York, 1991, p. 283.
[88 C. I. Sukenik, M. G. Boshier, D. Cho, V. Sandoghdar, E. A. Hinds,
Measurement of the Casimir-Polder for e, Phys. Rev. Lett. 70 (1993) 560.
[89 M. Kasevi h, K. Moler, E. Riis, E. Sundermann, D. Weiss, S. Chu, Appli ations
of laser ooling and trapping, in: J. C. Zorn, R. R. Lewis (Eds.), Atomi Physi s
12, Ameri an Insitute of Physi s, New York, 1991, p. 47.
[90 A. Landragin, J.-Y. Courtois, G. Labeyrie, N. Vansteenkiste, C. I. Westbrook,
A. Aspe t, Measurement of the van der Waals for e in an atomi mirror, Phys.
Rev. Lett. 77 (1996) 1464.
[91 N. Westbrook, C. I. Westbrook, A. Landragin, G. Labeyrie, L. Cognet,
V. Savalli, G. Horvath, A. Aspe t, C. Hendel, K. Moelmer, J. Y. Courtois,
W. Phillips, R. Kaiser, V. Bagnato, New physi s with evanes ent wave atomi
mirrors: The van der Waals for e and atomi dira tion, Phys. S ripta T78
(1998) 7.
[92 A. K. Mohapatra, C. S. Unnikrishnan, Measurement of the van der Waals for e
using ree tion of old atoms from magneti thin-lm atom mirrors, Europhys.
Lett. 73 (2006) 839.
[93 H. Friedri h, G. Ja obi, C. G. Meister, Quantum ree tion by Casimirvan der
Waals potential tails, Phys. Rev. A 65 (2002) 032902.
[94 V. U. Nayak, D. O. Edwards, N. Masuhara, S attering of
4He atoms grazing
the liquid-
4He surfa e, Phys. Rev. Lett. 50 (1983) 990.
[95 V. Druzhinina, M. DeKieviet, Experimental observation of quantum ree tion
far from threshold, Phys. Rev. Lett. 91 (2003) 193202.
[96 T. A. Pasquini, Y. Shin, C. Sanner, M. Saba, A. S hirotzek, D. E. Prit hard,
W. Ketterle, Quantum ree tion from a solid surfa e at normal in iden e, Phys.
Rev. Lett. 93 (2004) 223201.
[97 T. A. Pasquini, G. Jo, M. Saba, Y. Shin, S. Will, D. E. Prit hard,
W. Ketterle, Atom opti s with Bose-Einstein ondensates: Quantum ree tion
and interferometry, J. Phys. Conf. Ser. 19 (2005) 139.
[98 F. Shimizu, Spe ular ree tion of very slow metastable neon atoms from a solid
surfa e, Phys. Rev. Lett. 86 (2001) 987.
[99 H. Oberst, Y. Tashiro, K. Shimizu, F. Shimizu, Quantum ree tion of He* on
sili on, Phys. Rev. A 71 (2005) 052901.
87
[100 R. E. Grisenti, W. S höllkopf, J. P. Toennies, G. C. Hegerfeldt, T. Köhler,
Determination of atomsurfa e van der Waals potentials from transmission-
grating dira tion intensities, Phys. Rev. Lett. 83 (1999) 1755.
[101 A. Cronin, J. D. Perreault, Phasor analysis of atom dira tion from a rotated
material grating, Phys. Rev. A 70 (2004) 043607.
[102 J. D. Perreault, A. D. Cronin, Observation of phase shifts indu ed by van der
Waals atomsurfa e intera tions, Phys. Rev. Lett. 95 (2005) 133201.
[103 J. D. Perreault, A. P. Cronin, T. A. Savas, Using atomi dira tion of Na
from material gratings to measure atomsurfa e intera tions, Phys. Rev. A 71
(2005) 053612.
[104 R. Brühl, P. Fouquet, R. E. Grisenti, J. P. Toennies, G. C. Hegerfeldt,
T. Köhler, M. Stoll, C. Walter, The van der Waals potential between
metastable atoms and solid surfa es: Novel dira tion experiments vs. theory,
Europhys. Lett. 59 (2002) 357.
[105 W. S höllkopf, R. E. Grisenti, J. P. Toennies, Time-of-ight resolved
transmission-grating dira tion of mole ular beams, Eur. Phys. J. D 28 (2004)
125.
[106 J.-C. Karam, N. Wipf, J. Gru ker, F. Perales, M. Boustimi, G. Vassilev,
V. Bo varski, C. Mainos, J. Baudon, J. Robert, Atom dira tion with a
`natural' metastable atom nozzle beam, J. Phys. B: At. Mol. Opt. Phys. 38
(2005) 2691.
[107 H. B. G. Casimir, D. Polder, The inuen e of retardation on the London-van
der Waals for es, Phys. Rev. 73 (1948) 360.
[108 V. Sandoghdar, C. I. Sukenik, E. A. Hinds, S. Haro he, Dire t measurement of
the van der Waals intera tion between an atom and its image in a mi ron-sized
avity, Phys. Rev. Lett. 68 (1992) 3432.
[109 V. Sandoghdar, C. I. Sunenik, S. Haro he, E. A. Hinds, Spe tros opy of atoms
onned to the single node of a standing wave in a parallel-plate avity, Phys.
Rev. A 53 (1996) 1919.
[110 M. Marro o, M. Weidinger, R. T. Sang, H. Walther, Quantum ele trodynami
shifts of Rydberg energy levels between parallel metal plates, Phys. Rev. Lett.
81 (1998) 5784.
[111 D. J. Heinzen, M. S. Feld, Va uum radiative level shift and sponteneous-
emission linewidth of an atom in an opti al resonator, Phys. Rev. Lett. 59
(1987) 2623.
[112 M. Brune, P. Nussenzveig, F. S hmidt-Kaler, F. Bernadot, A. Maali, J. M.
Raimond, S. Haro he, From Lamb shift to light shifts: Va uum and subphoton
avity elds measured by atomi phase dete tion, Phys. Rev. Lett. 72 (1994)
3339.
88
[113 V. V. Ivanov, R. A. Cornelussen, H. B. van Linden van den Heuvell, R. J. C.
Spreeuw, Observation of modied radiative properties of old atoms in va uum
near a diele tri surfa e, J. Opt. B: Quantum Semi lass. Opt. 6 (2004) 454.
[114 R. J. C. Spreeuw, V. V. Ivanov, R. A. Cornelussen, H. B. van Linden
van den Heuvell, QED-modied radiative properties and dynami s of old
atoms moving through an evanes ent wave, Opt. Spe tros . (USSR) 99 (2005)
477.
[115 M. A. Wilson, P. Bushev, J. Es hner, F. S hmidt-Kaler, C. Be her, R. Blatt,
U. Dorner, Va uum-eld level shifts in a single trapped ion mediated by a single
distant mirror, Phys. Rev. Lett. 91 (2003) 213602.
[116 M. Du loy, M. Fi het, General theory of frequen e-modulated sele tive
ree tion. Inuen e of atom surfa e intera tions, J. Phys. II 1 (1991) 1429.
[117 M. Oria, M. Chevrollier, D. Blo h, M. Fi het, M. Du loy, Spe tral observation
of surfa e-indu ed van der Waals attra tion on atomi vapour, Europhys. Lett.
14 (1991) 527.
[118 M. Chevrollier, D. Blo h, G. Rahmat, M. Du loy, Van der Waals indu ed
spe tral distortions in sele tive-ree tion spe tros opy of Cs vapour: The strong
atomsurfa e intera tion regime, Opt. Lett. 16 (1991) 1879.
[119 M. Chevrollier, M. Fi het, M. Oria, G. Rahmat, D. Blo h, M. Du loy, High
resolution sele tive ree tion spe tos opy as a probe of long-range surfa e
intera tion: Measurement of the surfa e van der Waals attra tion exerted on
ex ited Cs atoms, J. Phys. II 2 (1992) 631.
[120 J. Guo, J. Cooper, A. Gallagher, Sele tive ree tion from a dense atomi
vapour, Phys. Rev. A 53 (1996) 1130.
[121 P. Wang, A. Gallagher, J. Cooper, Sele tive ree tion by Rb, Phys. Rev. A 56
(1997) 1598.
[122 M. Gorri-Neveux, P. Monnot, M. Fi het, M. Du loy, R. Barbé, J. C. Keller,
Doppler-free ree tion spe tros opy of rubidium D1 line in opti ally dense
vapour, Opt. Commun. 134 (1997) 85.
[123 M. Chevrollier, M. Oria, J. G. de Souza, D. Blo h, M. Fi het, M. Du loy,
Sele tive ree tion spe tros opy of a resonant vapor at the interfa e with a
metalli layer, Phys. Rev. E 63 (2001) 046610.
[124 H. Faila he, S. Saltiel, M. Fi het, D. Blo h, M. Du loy, Resonant van der Waals
repulsion between ex ited Cs atoms and sapphire surfa e, Phys. Rev. Lett. 83
(1999) 5467.
[125 H. Faila he, S. Saltiel, M. Fi het, D. Blo h, M. Du loy, Resonant oupling in
the van der Waals intera tion between an ex ited alkali atom and a diele tri
surfa e: An experimental study via stepwise sele tive ree tion spe tro opy,
Eur. Phys. J. D 23 (2003) 237.
89
[126 M. Bordag, B. Geyer, G. Klim hitskaya, V. M. Mostepanenko, Stronger
onstraints for nanometer s ale Yukawa-type hypotheti al intera tions from
the new measurement of the Casimir for e, Phys. Rev. D 60 (1999) 055004.
[127 M. Bordag, B. Geyer, G. L. Klim hitskaya, V. M. Mostepanenko, New
onstraints for non-Newtonian gravity in the nanometer range from the
improved pre ision measurement of the Casimir for e, Phys. Rev. D 62 (2000)
011701.
[128 E. Fis hba h, D. E. Krause, V. Mostepanenko, M. Novello, New onstraints
on ultrashort-ranged Yukawa intera tions from atomi for e mi ros opy, Phys.
Rev. D 64 (2001) 075010.
[129 R. S. De a, E. Fis hba h, G. L. Klim hitskaya, D. Krause, D. Lopez,
V. M. Mostepanenko, Improved tests of extra-dimensional physi s and thermal
quantum eld theory from new Casimir for e measurements, Phys. Rev. D 68
(2003) 116003.
[130 G. Binnig, C. F. Quate, C. Gerber, Atomi for e mi ros ope, Phys. Rev. Lett.
56 (1986) 930.
[131 F. J. Giessibl, Advan es in atomi for e mi ros opy, Rev. Mod. Phys. 75 (2003)
949.
[132 F. M. Serry, D. Walliser, G. J. Ma lay, The role of the Casimir ee t in the
stati dee tion and sti tion of membrane strips in mi roele trome hani al
systems (MEMS), J. Appl. Phys. 84 (1998) 2501.
[133 E. Buks, M. L. Roukes, Sti tion, adhesion energy, and the Casimir ee t in
mi rome hani al systems, Phys. Rev. B 63 (2001) 033402.
[134 E. Buks, M. L. Roukes, Metastability and the Casimir ee t in mi rome hani al
systems, Europhys. Lett. 54 (2001) 220.
[135 M. Chevrollier, E. G. Lima, O. Di Lorenzo, A. Lezama, M. Oria, Magneto-
opti al trap near a surfa e, Opt. Commun. 136 (1997) 22.
[136 Y.-j. Lin, I. Teper, C. Chin, V. Vuleti¢, Impa t of the CasimirPolder potential
and Johnson noise on BoseEinstein ondensate stability near surfa es, Phys.
Rev. Lett. 92 (2004) 050404.
[137 C. G. Amino, A. M. Steane, P. Bouyer, P. Desbiolles, J. Dalobard, C. Cohen-
Tannoudji, Cesium atoms boun ing in a stable gravitational avity, Phys. Rev.
Lett. 71 (1993) 3083.
[138 P. Desbiolles, M. Arndt, P. Szriftgiser, J. Dalibard, Elementary Sisyphus
pro ess lose to a diele tri interfa e, Phys. Rev. A 54 (1996) 4292.
[139 Y. B. Ov hinnikov, I. Manek, R. Grimm, Surfa e trap for Cs atoms based on
evanes ent-wave oupling, Phys. Rev. Lett. 79 (1997) 2225.
[140 M. Hammes, D. Ry htarik, B. Engeser, H.-C. Nägerl, R. Grimm, Evanes ent-
wave trapping and evaporative ooling of an atomi gas at the rossover to two
dimensions, Phys. Rev. Lett. 90 (2003) 173001.
90
[141 Y. Colombe, D. Kadio, M. Olshanii, B. Mer ier, V. Lorent, H. Perrin, S hemes
for loading a Bose-Einstein ondensate into a two-dimensional dipole trap, J.
Opt. B: Quantum Semi lass. Opt. 5 (2003) S155.
[142 H. Ito, K. Sakawi, W. Jhe, M. Ohtsu, Atomi funnel with evanes ent light,
Phys. Rev. A 56 (1997) 712.
[143 J. Dens hlag, D. Cassettari, A. Chenet, S. S hneider, J. S hmiedmayer, A
neutral atom and a wire: towards mesos opi atom opti s, Appl. Phys. B 69
(1999) 291.
[144 F. L. Kien, V. I. Balykin, K. Hakuta, Atom trap and waveguide using a two-
olor evanes ent light eld around a sub-wavelength-diameter opti al ber,
Phys. Rev. A 70 (2004) 063403.
[145 M. J. Renn, E. A. Donley, E. A. Cornell, C. E. Wieman, D. Z. Anderson,
Evanes ent-wave guiding of atoms in hollow opti al bers, Phys. Rev. A 53
(1996) R648.
[146 H. Ito, K. Sakaki, M. Ohstu, W. Jhe, Evanes ent-wave guiding of atoms through
hollow opti al ber for opti ally ontrolled atomi deposition, Appl. Phys. Lett.
70 (1997) 2496.
[147 C. S. Adams, M. Sigel, J. Mlynek, Atom opti s, Phys. Rep. 240 (1994) 143.
[148 H. Oberst, M. Morinaga, F. Shimizu, K. Shimizu, One-dimensional fo using of
an atomi beam by a at ree tor, Appl. Phys. B 76 (2003) 801.
[149 H. Oberst, D. Kouznetsov, K. Shimizu, J.-i. Fujita, F. Shimizu, Fresnel
dira tion mirror for an atomi wave, Phys. Rev. Lett. 94 (2005) 013203.
[150 F. Shimizu, J.-i. Fujita, Ree tion-type hologram for atoms, Phys. Rev. Lett.
88 (2002) 123201.
[151 V. I. Balykin, V. S. Letokhov, Y. B. Ov hinnikov, A. I. Sidorov, Quantum-
state-sele tive mirror ree tion of atoms by laser light, Phys. Rev. Lett. 60
(1988) 2137.
[152 R. G. S ott, A. M. Martin, T. M. Fromhold, F. W. Sheard, Anomalous quantum
ree tion of Bose-Einstein ondensates from a sili on surfa e: The role of
dynami al ex itations, Phys. Rev. Lett. 95 (2005) 073201.
[153 J. B. Pendry, A. J. Holden, D. J. Robbins, W. J. Stewart, Magnetism
from ondu tors and enhan ed nonlinear phenomena, IEEE Trans. Mi rowave
Theory Te h. 47 (1999) 2075.
[154 D. R. Smith, W. J. Padilla, D. C. Vier, S. C. Nemat-Nasser, S. S hultz, Com-
posite medium with simultaneously negative permeability and permittivity,
Phys. Rev. Lett. 84 (2000) 4184.
[155 S. Linden, C. Enkri h, M. Wegener, J. Zhou, T. Kos hny, C. M. Soukoulis,
Magneti response of metamaterials at 100 terahertz, S ien e 306 (2004) 1351.
91
[156 C. Enkri h, M. Wegener, S. Linden, S. Burger, L. Zs hiedri h, F. S hmidt,
J. F. Zhou, T. Kos hny, C. M. Soukoulis, Magneti metamaterials at
tele ommuni ation and visible frequen ies, Phys. Rev. Lett. 95 (2005) 203901.
[157 G. Dolling, C. Enkri h, M. Wegener, J. F. Zhou, C. M. Soukoulis, S. Linden,
Cut-wire pairs and plate pairs as magneti atoms for opti al metamaterials,
Opt. Lett. 30 (2005) 3198.
[158 A. N. Grigorenko, A. K. Geim, H. F. Gleeson, Y. Zhang, A. A. Firsov, I. Y.
Khrush hev, J. Petrovi , Nanofabri ated media with negative permeability at
visible frequen ies, Nature 438 (2005) 335.
[159 S. Zhang, W. Fan, N. C. Panoiu, K. J. Malloy, R. M. Osgood, S. R. J. Brue k,
Experimental demonstration of near-infrared negative-index metamaterials,
Phys. Rev. Lett. 95 (2005) 137404.
[160 V. G. Veselago, The ele trodynami s of substan es with simultaneous negative
values of ε and µ, Sov. Phys. Uspekhi 10 (1968) 509.
[161 R. M. Bozorth, Ferromagnetism, D. Van Nostrand Company, In ., New York,
1951.
[162 R. C. O'Handley, Modern Magneti Materials, Wiley, New York, 2000.
[163 D. J. Snee, Ee ts of omposition and ooling rate on the initial permeability
of mumetal, J. Appl. Phys. 38 (1967) 1172.
[164 F. London, Zur Theorie und Systematik der Molekularkräfte, Z. Phys. 63 (1930)
245.
[165 B. M. Axilrod, E. Teller, Intera tion of the van der Waals type between three
atoms, J. Chem. Phys. 11 (1943) 299.
[166 B. M. Axilrod, The triple-dipole intera tion between atoms and ohesion in
rystals of the rare gases, J. Chem. Phys. 17 (1949) 1349.
[167 B. M. Axilrod, Triple-dipole intera tion. I. Theory, J. Chem. Phys. 19 (1951)
719.
[168 J. S. Dahler, J. O. Hirs hfelder, Long-range intermole ular for es, J. Chem.
Phys. 25 (1956) 986.
[169 W. L. Bade, J. G. Kirkwood, Drude model al ulation of dispersion for es. I.
General theory, J. Chem. Phys. 27 (1957) 1280.
[170 J. I. Musher, Cal ulation of Londonvan der Waals energies, J. Chem. Phys.
39 (1963) 2409.
[171 D. E. Stogryn, Pairwise nonadditive dispersion potential for asymmetri
mole ules, Phys. Rev. Lett. 24 (1970) 971.
[172 W. L. Bade, J. G. Kirkwood, Drude model al ulation of dispersion for es. III.
Fourth-order ontribution, J. Chem. Phys. 28 (1958) 282.
92
[173 M. J. Sparnaay, On the additivity of Londonvan der Waals for es, Physi a 25
(1959) 217.
[174 M. J. Renne, B. R. A. Nijboer, Mi ros opi derivation of ma ros opi van der
Waals for es, Chem. Phys. Lett. 1 (1967) 317.
[175 M. J. Renne, B. R. A. Nijboer, Mi ros opi derivation of ma ros opi van der
Waals for es. II, Chem. Phys. Lett. 2 (1968) 35.
[176 P. Pie u h, Higher-order intera tion energies for a system of N arbitrary
mole ules in the liight of spheri al tensor theory, J. Math. Phys. 27 (1986)
2165.
[177 J. E. Lennard-Jones, Pro esses of absorption and diusion on solid surfa es,
Trans. Faraday So iety 28 (1932) 333.
[178 W. J. Meath, J. O. Hirs hfelder, Relativisti intermole ular for es, moderately
long range, J. Chem. Phys. 44 (1966) 3197.
[179 W. J. Meath, Retarded intera tion energy between like atoms in dierent
energy states, J. Chem. Phys. 48 (1968) 227.
[180 C. Farina, F. C. Santos, A. C. Tort, A simple model for the nonretarded
dispersive for e between an ele tri ally polarizable atom and a magneti ally
polarizable one, Am. J. Phys. 70 (2002) 421.
[181 H. Margenau, The role of quadrupole for es in van der Waals attra tions, Phys.
Rev. 38 (1931) 747.
[182 H. Margenau, Quadrupole ontributions to London's dispersion for es, J.
Chem. Phys. 9 (1938) 896.
[183 Y. M. Chan, A. Dalgarno, The long-range intera tion of atoms and mole ules,
Mol. Phys. 9 (1965) 349.
[184 W. J. Meath, Relativisti intera tion energies between atoms in degenerate
states, J. Chem. Phys. 45 (1966) 4519.
[185 X. Li, L. C. Hunt, Nonadditive, three-body dipoles and for es on nu lei: New
interrelations and an ele trostati interpretation, J. Chem. Phys. 105 (1996)
4076.
[186 F. London, The general theory of mole ular for es, Trans. Faraday So iety 33
(1937) 8.
[187 H. Margenau, Van der Waals for es, Rev. Mod. Phys. 11 (1939) 1.
[188 H. Margenau, N. R. Kestner, Theory of Intermole ular For es, Pergamon Press,
Oxford, 1969.
[189 X.-P. Jiang, F. Toigo, M. W. Cole, Quadrupole ontribution to the
physisorption intera tion, Chem. Phys. Lett. 101 (1983) 159.
[190 C. Holmberg, P. Apell, Van der Waals intera tion in atomsurfa e s attering,
Phys. Rev. B 30 (1984) 5721.
93
[191 P. Apell, C. Holmberg, Multipole ontributions to atomsurfa e s attering
potential, Solid State Commun. 49 (1984) 1059.
[192 K. Ganesan, K. T. Taylor, Rydberg states of the hydrogen atom near a metal
surfa e, J. Phys. B: At. Mol. Opt. Phys. 29 (1996) 1293.
[193 J.-Y. Courtois, J.-M. Courty, J. C. Mertz, Internal dynami s of multilevel atoms
near a va uum-diele tri interfa e, Phys. Rev. A 53 (1996) 1862.
[194 F. S huller, G. Nienhuis, M. Du loy, Flu tuationdissipation approa h to van
der Waals potentials between atoms and diele tri bodies, Mol. Phys. 104
(2006) 229.
[195 F. S huller, Dispersion potentials between atoms and diele tri bodies, Z.
Naturfors h. A 49 (1994) 885.
[196 H. Margenau, W. G. Pollard, The for es between neutral mole ules and metalli
surfa es, Phys. Rev. 60 (1941) 128.
[197 J. Bardeen, The image and van der Waals for es at a metalli surfa e, Phys.
Rev. 58 (1940) 727.
[198 E. J. R. Prosen, R. G. Sa hs, The intera tion between a mole ule and a metal
surfa e, Phys. Rev. 61 (1942) 65.
[199 E. Zaremba, W. Kohn, Van der Waals intera tion between an atom and a solid
surfa e, Phys. Rev. B 13 (1976) 2270.
[200 J. Mahanty, B. W. Ninham, Dispersion For es, A ademi Press, London, 1976.
[201 P. Nordlander, J. Harris, The intera tion of helium with smooth metal surfa es,
J. Phys. C: Solid State 17 (1984) 1141.
[202 J. F. Annett, P. M. E henique, Van der Waals intera tion between an atom
and a surfa e at nite separations, Phys. Rev. B 34 (1986) 6853.
[203 C. Holmberg, P. Apell, J. Giraldo, Saturation ee ts of the atommetal van
der Waals intera tion, Phys. S ripta 33 (1986) 173.
[204 R. A. Craig, For es between parallel diele tri surfa es, J. Chem. Phys. 58
(1973) 2988.
[205 R. A. Craig, Intera tion energy of dissimilar diele tri surfa es, J. Chem. Phys.
60 (1974) 3523.
[206 G. Mukhopadhyay, J. Mahanty, The van der Waals intera tion between
mole ule and metal surfa e, Solid State Commun. 16 (1975) 597.
[207 J. Mahanty, B. V. Paranjape, Van der Waals intera tion between a mole ule
and a metal surfa e: Ee t of spatial dispersion, Solid State Commun. 24 (1977)
651.
[208 G. Barton, Some surfa e ee ts in the hydrodynami model of metals, Rep.
Prog. Phys. 42 (1979) 963.
94
[209 P. R. Rao, G. Mukhopadhyay, Van der Waals intera tion between metal and
atom, Solid State Commun. 52 (1984) 697.
[210 Y. C. Cheng, K. C. Lin, Image potential and harge-transfer phenomena in
atom (ion)-surfa e ollisions, Chinese J. Phys. 26 (1988) 212.
[211 G. Mukhopadhyay, On the intera tion of a planar metal-surfa e with a harge
and with a mole ule, Phys. S ripta 36 (1987) 676.
[212 Y.-C. Cheng, H.-T. Huang, Van der Waals intera tion between a mole ule and
a solid surfa e, Chinese J. Phys. 31 (1993) 137.
[213 J. Harris, P. J. Feibelman, Asymmetry of the van der Waals intera tion between
a mole ule and a surfa e, Surf. S i. 115 (1982) L133.
[214 O. Sinano§lu, K. S. Pitzer, Intera tions between mole ules adsorbed on a
surfa e, J. Chem. Phys. 32 (1960) 1279.
[215 J. Mahanty, N. H. Mar h, B. V. Paranjape, Intera tion between rare gas atoms
outside metal surfa es: Role of plasma ex itations, Appl. Surf. S i. 33/34 (1988)
309.
[216 A. D. M La hlan, Van der Waals for es between an atom and a surfa e, Mol.
Phys. 7 (1964) 381.
[217 A. Bambini, E. J. Robinson, Potential energy of atoms near a metal surfa e,
Phys. Rev. A 45 (1992) 4661.
[218 M. Fi het, F. S huller, D. Blo h, M. Du loy, Van der Waals intera tions
between ex ited-state atoms and dispersive diele tri surfa es, Phys. Rev. A
51 (1995) 1553.
[219 G. Barton, Resonan e intera tion between a mole ule an a metal-surfa e, Solid
State Commun. 27 (1978) 95.
[220 N. J. M. Horing, L. Y. Chen, Magnetoimage ee ts in the van der Waals
intera tion of an atom and a bounded, dynami , nonlo al plasmalike medium,
Phys. Rev. A 66 (2002) 042905.
[221 T. L. Ferrell, R. H. Rit hie, Dynami al and geometri al ee ts on the
physisorption of atoms, Phys. Rev. A 21 (1980) 1305.
[222 B. Labani, C. Girard, S. Maghezzi, Van der Waals intera tions between a
mole ule and a small metalli sphere, Mol. Phys. 69 (1990) 85.
[223 C. Girard, S. Marghezzi, F. Ha he, Multipolar propagators near a small metalli
sphere: A self- onsistent al ulation, J. Chem. Phys. 91 (1989) 5509.
[224 M. Boustimi, J. Baudon, P. Candori, J. Robert, Van der Waals intera tion
between an atom and a metalli nanowire, Phys. Rev. B 65 (2002) 155402.
[225 M. Boustimi, J. Baudon, J. Robert, Mole ules intera ting with a metalli
nanowire, Phys. Rev. B 67 (2003) 045407.
95
[226 Y.-C. Cheng, J. S. Yang, Enhan ement of the van der Waals energy between
an atom and a ylindri al surfa e: Appli ation to the edges of stepped surfa es,
Phys. Rev. B 41 (1990) 1196.
[227 P. V. Panat, V. V. Paranjape, Dipolar and quadrupolar ontrigutions to self-
energy of a hydrogeni atom pla ed between two metalli slabs, Solid State
Commun. 110 (1999) 443.
[228 B. Labani, M. Boustimi, J. Baudon, Van der Waals intera tion between a
mole ule and a spheri al avity in a metal: Nonlo ality and anisotropy ee ts,
Phys. Rev. B 55 (1997) 4745.
[229 M. Boustimi, J. Baudon, J. Robert, A. Semali, B. Labani, Single atom inside
or outside a diele tri or metalli bubble, Phys. Rev. B 62 (2000) 7593.
[230 J. H. de Boer, The inuen e of van der Waals' for es and primary bonds
on binding energy, strength and orientation, with spe ial referen e to some
arti ial resins, Trans. Faraday So iety 32 (1936) 10.
[231 H. C. Hamaker, The Londonvan der Waals intera tion between spheri al
parti les, Physi a 4 (1937) 1058.
[232 S. Nir, Long range intermole ular for es between ma ros opi bodies:
Ma ros opi and mi ros opi approa hes, J. Theor. Biol. 53 (1975) 83.
[233 V. A. Parsegian, Van der Waals For es: A Handbook for Biologists, Chemists,
Engineers, and Physi ists, Cambridge University Press, New York, 2005.
[234 D. Langbein, Mi ros opi al ulation of ma ros opi dispersion energy, J. Phys.
Chem. Solids 32 (1971) 133.
[235 D. Langbein, Non-retarded dispersion energy between ma ros opi spheres, J.
Phys. Chem. Solids 32 (1971) 1657.
[236 N. G. Van Kampen, B. R. A. Nijboer, K. S hram, On the ma ros opi theory
of van der Waals for es, Phys. Lett. A 26 (1968) 307.
[237 D. J. Mit hell, B. W. Ninham, Van der Waals for es between two spheres, J.
Chem. Phys. 56 (1972) 1117.
[238 A. A. Lu as, A. Ronveaux, M. S hmeits, F. Delanaye, Van der Waals theory
between voids in diele tri s, Phys. Rev. B 12 (1975) 5372.
[239 A. A. Maradudin, P. Mazur, Ee ts of surfa e roughness on the van der Waals
for e between ma ros opi bodies, Phys. Rev. B 22 (1980) 1677.
[240 P. Mazur, A. A. Maradudin, Ee ts of surfa e roughness on the van der Waals
for e between ma ros opi bodies. II. Two rough surfa es, Phys. Rev. B 23
(1981) 695.
[241 B. Davies, B. W. Ninham, Van der Waals for es in ele trolytes, J. Chem. Phys.
56 (1972) 5797.
96
[242 H. B. G. Casimir, On the attra tion of two perfe tly ondu ting plates, Pro .
K. Ned. Akad. Wet. 51 (1948) 793.
[243 E. A. Power, S. Zienau, On the radiative ontributions to the van der Waals
for e, Nuovo Cim. 6 (1957) 7.
[244 M. R. Aub, E. A. Power, S. Zienau, The inuen e of retardation on the London
van der Waals for e, Phil. Mag. 2 (1957) 571.
[245 E. A. Power, Introdu tory Quantum Ele trodynami s, Longmans, London,
1964.
[246 W. R. Meath, J. O. Hirs hfelder, Long-range (retarded) intermole ular for es,
J. Chem. Phys. 44 (1966) 3210.
[247 M. J. Renne, Retarded van der Waals intera tion in a system of harmoni
os illators, Physi a 53 (1971) 193.
[248 T. H. Boyer, Unretarded Londonvan der Waals for es derived from lassi al
ele trodynami s with lassi al ele tromagneti zero-point radiation, Phys. Rev.
A 6 (1972) 314.
[249 T. H. Boyer, Asymptoti retarded van der Waals for es derived from lassi al
ele trodynami s with lassi al ele tromagneti zero-point radiation, Phys. Rev.
A 5 (1972) 1799.
[250 T. H. Boyer, Retarded van der Waals for es at all distan es derived from
lassi al ele trodynami s with lassi al ele tromagneti zero-point radiation,
Phys. Rev. A 7 (1973) 1832.
[251 P. W. Milonni, Casimir for es without the va uum radiation eld, Phys. Rev.
A 25 (1982) 1315.
[252 P. W. Milonni, M.-L. Shih, Sour e theory of the Casimir for e, Phys. Rev. A
45 (1992) 4241.
[253 G. Compagno, R. Passante, F. Persi o, AtomField Intera tions and Dressed
Atoms, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1995.
[254 D. P. Craig, T. Thirunama handran, Mole ular Quantum Ele trodynami s,
Dover, New York, 1998.
[255 E. A. Power, CasimirPolder potential from rst prin iples, Eur. J. Phys. 22
(2001) 453.
[256 R. Passante, F. Persi o, L. Rizzuto, Spatial orrelations of va uum u tuations
and the CasimirPolder potential, Phys. Lett. A 316 (2003) 29.
[257 F. Ci arello, E. Karpov, R. Passante, Exa tly solvable model of two three-
dimensional harmoni os illators intera ting with the quantum ele tromagneti
eld: The far-zone CasimirPolder potential, Phys. Rev. A 72 (2005) 052106.
[258 K. Pa hu ki, Relativisti orre tions to the long-range intera tion between
losed-shell atoms, Phys. Rev. A 72 (2005) 062706.
97
[259 M. R. Aub, S. Zienau, Studies on the retarded intera tion between neutral
atoms I. Three-body Londonvan der Waals intera tion of neutral atoms, Pro .
R. So . London, Ser. A 257 (1960) 464.
[260 M. Cirone, R. Passante, Va uum eld orrelations and the three-body Casimir
Polder potential, J. Phys. B: At. Mol. Opt. Phys. 29 (1996) 1871.
[261 R. Passante, F. Persi o, L. Rizzuto, Causality, non-lo ality and three-body
Casimir-Polder energy between three ground-state atoms, J. Phys. B: At. Mol.
Opt. Phys. 39 (2005) S685.
[262 R. Passante, F. Persi o, L. Rizzuto, Va uum eld orrelations and three-body
Casimir-Polder potential with one ex ited atom, J. Mod. Opt. 52 (2005) 1957.
[263 E. A. Power, T. Thirunama handran, The non-additive dispersion energies for
N mole ules: A quantum ele trodynami al theory, Pro . R. So . London, Ser.
A 401 (1985) 267.
[264 E. A. Power, T. Thirunama handran, Zero-point energy dieren es and many-
body dispersion for es, Phys. Rev. A 50 (1994) 3929.
[265 M. A. J. Mi hels, L. G. Suttorp, Multipole expansion of the retarded
interatomi dispersion energy I. Derivation from quantum ele trodynami s,
Physi a 59 (1972) 609.
[266 M. A. J. Mi hels, L. G. Suttorp, Multipole expansion of the retarded
interatomi potential energy IV. Indu tion energy for degenerate ground-state
atoms, Physi a 61 (1972) 517.
[267 M. Cho, R. J. Silbey, Suppression and enhan ement of van der Waals
intera tions, J. Chem. Phys. 104 (1996) 8730.
[268 G. Feinberg, J. Su her, General form of the retarded van der Waals potential,
J. Chem. Phys. 48 (1968) 3333.
[269 T. H. Boyer, Re al ulations of long-range van der Waals potentials, Phys. Rev.
180 (1969) 19.
[270 G. Feinberg, J. Su her, General theory of the van der Waals intera tion: A
model-independent approa h, Phys. Rev. A 2 (1970) 2395.
[271 E. Lubkin, Addendum to a formula by Feinberg and Su her, Phys. Rev. A 4
(1971) 416.
[272 M. Marines u, L. You, CasimirPolder long-range intera tion potentials
between alkali-metal atoms, Phys. Rev. A 59 (1999) 1936.
[273 G. Barton, Long-range CasimirPolderFeinbergSu her intermole ular po-
tential at nonzero temperature, Phys. Rev. A 64 (2001) 032102.
[274 C. Farina, F. C. Santos, A. C. Tort, On the for e between an ele tri ally
polarizable atom and a magneti ally polarizable one, J. Phys. A: Math. Gen.
35 (2002) 2477.
98
[275 G. Feinberg, J. Su her, C. K. Au, The dispersion theory of dispersion for es,
Phys. Rep. 180 (1989) 83.
[276 R. R. M Lone, E. A. Power, Long range van der Waals for es between
nonidenti al systems, Pro . R. So . London, Ser. A 286 (1965) 573.
[277 M. R. Philpott, Retarded intera tion between ele troni ally ex ited mole ules,
Pro . Phys. So . London 87 (1966) 619.
[278 L. Gombero, R. R. M Lone, E. A. Power, Long-range retarded potentials
between mole ules, J. Chem. Phys. 44 (1966) 4148.
[279 E. A. Power, T. Thirunama handran, Dispersion for es between mole ules with
one or two mole ules ex ited, Phys. Rev. A 51 (1995) 3660.
[280 L. Rizzuto, R. Passante, F. Persi o, Dynami al CasimirPolder energy between
an ex ited- and a ground-state atom, Phys. Rev. A 70 (2004) 012107.
[281 Y. Sherkunov, Van der Waals intera tion of ex ited media, Phys. Rev. A 72
(2005) 052703.
[282 Y. Sherkunov, CasimirPolder intera tion between an ex ited atom and a gas
diele tri medium, Phys. Rev. A 75 (2007) 012705.
[283 G. H. Goede ke, R. C. Wood, Casimir-Polder intera tion at nite temperature,
Phys. Rev. A 60 (1999) 2577.
[284 T. H. Boyer, Temperature dependen e of van der Waals for es in lassi al
ele trodynami s with lassi al ele tromagneti zero-point radiation, Phys. Rev.
A 11 (1975) 1650.
[285 P. W. Milonni, A. Smith, Van der Waals dispersion for es in ele tromagneti
elds, Phys. Rev. A 53 (1996) 3484.
[286 H. Wennerström, J. Dai i , B. W. Ninham, Temperature dependen e of atom
atom intera tion, Phys. Rev. A 60 (1999) 2581.
[287 E. A. Power, Thirunama handran, Quantum ele trodynami s in a avity, Phys.
Rev. A 25 (1982) 2473.
[288 N. Topor, S. Piatek, Van der Waals intera tion of two atoms near a metalli
plane, Mod. Phys. Lett. B 10 (1996) 161.
[289 S. Spagnolo, R. Passante, L. Rizzuto, Field u tuations near a perfe tly
ondu ting plate and CasimirPolder for es in the presen e of boundary
onditions, Phys. Rev. A 73 (2006) 062117.
[290 S. M. Barnett, A. Aspe t, P. W. Milonni, On the quantum nature of the
CasimirPolder intera tion, J. Phys. B: At. Mol. Opt. Phys. 33 (2000) L143.
[291 C. A. Lütken, F. Ravndal, Energy-level shifts in atoms between metalli planes,
Phys. Rev. A 31 (1985) 2082.
99
[292 M. Babiker, G. Barton, Quantum ele trodynami s between ondu ting plates.
II. Spin-dependent ee ts in neutral atoms, Pro . R. So . London, Ser. A 326
(1972) 255.
[293 T. Nakajima, P. Lambropoulos, H. Walther, Level shift and depopulation by
bla kbody radiation of a Rydberg atom between two metalli plates, Phys.
Rev. A 56 (1997) 5100.
[294 C.-H. Wu, C.-I. Kuo, L. H. Ford, Flu tuations of the retarded van der Waals
for e, Phys. Rev. A 65 (2002) 062102.
[295 G. Barton, Frequen y shifts near an interfa e: Inadequa y of two-level atomi
models, J. Phys. B: At. Mol. Opt. Phys. 7 (1974) 2134.
[296 D. Mes hede, W. Jhe, E. A. Hinds, Radiative properties of atoms near a
ondu ting plane: An old problem in a new light, Phys. Rev. A 41 (1990)
1587.
[297 G. Barton, Quantum ele trodynami s of spinless parti les between ondu ting
plates, Pro . R. So . London, Ser. A 320 (1970) 251.
[298 G. Barton, The intera tion of an atom with ele tromagneti va uum
u tuations in the presen e of a pair of perfe tly ondu ting plates, Pro . R.
So . London, Ser. A 367 (1979) 117.
[299 G. Barton, Quantum-ele trodynami level shifts between parallel mirrors
Analysis, Pro . R. So . London, Ser. A 410 (1987) 141.
[300 W. Jhe, QED level shifts of atoms between two mirrors, Phys. Rev. A 43 (1991)
5795.
[301 W. Jhe, Level shifts of simple atoms between parallel mirrors, Phys. Rev. A 44
(1991) 5932.
[302 L. H. Ford, N. F. Svaiter, Fo using va uum u tuations, Phys. Rev. A 62 (2000)
062105.
[303 L. H. Ford, N. F. Svaiter, Fo using va uum u tuations. II, Phys. Rev. A 66
(2002) 062106.
[304 M. Babiker, G. Barton, Quantum frequen y shifts near a plasma surfa e, J.
Phys. A: Math. Gen. 9 (1976) 129.
[305 C. Mavroyannis, The intera tion of neutral mol ules with diele tri surfa es,
Mol. Phys. 6 (1963) 593.
[306 Y. Tiko hinsky, L. Spru h, Retarded Casimir intera tion in the asymptoti
domain of an ele tron and a diele tri wall, Phys. Rev. A 48 (1993) 4223.
[307 H. F. Arnoldus, Atomi linewidths and line shifts near a diele tri layer, and
the limit of a semi-innite medium, Surf. S i. 444 (2000) 221.
[308 C. Eberlein, S.-T. Wu, Methods of asymptoti analysis in avity quantum
ele trodynami s, Phys. Rev. A 68 (2003) 033813.
100
[309 Y. Tiko hinsky, L. Spru h, Retarded ele tri and magneti Casimir intera tion
of a polarizable system and a diele tri permeable wall, Phys. Rev. A 48 (1993)
4236.
[310 F. Zhou, L. Spru h, Van der Waals and retardation (Casimir) intera tions of
an ele tron or an atom with multilayered walls, Phys. Rev. A 52 (1995) 297.
[311 M. Boström, B. E. Sernelius, Van der Waals energy of an atom in the proximity
of thin metal lms, Phys. Rev. A 61 (2000) 052703.
[312 J.-M. Daul, P. Grangier, Va uum-eld atom trapping in wide aperture spheri al
resonator, Eur. Phys. J. D 32 (2005) 195.
[313 K. A. Milton, The Casimir ee t: Re ent ontroversies and progress, J. Phys.
A: Math. Gen. 37 (2004) R209.
[314 D. L. Andrews, L. C. Dávila Romero, Con eptualization of the Casimir ee t,
Eur. J. Phys. 22 (2001) 447.
[315 F. J. Belinfante, The Casimir ee t revisited, Am. J. Phys. 55 (1987) 134.
[316 R. L. Jae, Casimir ee t and the quantum va uum, Phys. Rev. D 72 (2005)
021301(R).
[317 J. Mehra, Temperature orre tion to the Casimir ee t, Physi a 37 (1967) 145.
[318 T. Emig, A. Hanke, R. Golestanian, M. Kardar, Normal and lateral Casimir
for es between deformed plates, Phys. Rev. A 67 (2003) 022114.
[319 R. Büs her, T. Emig, Nonperturbative approa h to Casimir intera tion in
periodi geometries, Phys. Rev. A 69 (2004) 062101.
[320 R. Büs her, T. Emig, Geometry and spe trum of Casimir for es, Phys. Rev.
Lett. 94 (2005) 133901.
[321 M. S haden, L. Spru h, F. Zhou, Unied treatment of some Casimir energies
and Lamb shifts: A diele tri between two ideal ondu tors, Phys. Rev. A 57
(1998) 1108.
[322 M. Bordag, D. Robars hik, E. Wie zorek, Quantum eld theoreti treatment
of the Casimir ee t, Ann. Phys. 165 (1985) 192.
[323 M. Bordag, K. S harnhorst, O(α) radiative orre tion to the Casimir energy
for penetrable mirrors, Phys. Rev. Lett. 81 (1998) 3815.
[324 B. W. Ninham, V. A. Parsegian, G. H. Weiss, On the ma ros opi theory of
temperature-dependent van der Waals for es, J. Stat. Phys. 2 (1970) 323.
[325 E. Gerla h, Equivalen e of van der Waals for es between solids and the surfa e-
plasmon intera tion, Phys. Rev. B 4 (1971) 393.
[326 K. S hram, On the ma ros opi theory of retarded van der Waals for es, Phys.
Lett. A 43 (1973) 283.
101
[327 D. Kupiszewska, J. Mostowski, Casimir ee t for diele tri plates, Phys. Rev.
A 41 (1990) 4636.
[328 B. Geyer, G. L. Klim hitskaya, V. M. Mostepanenko, Thermal quantum eld
theory and the Casimir intera tion between diele tri s, Phys. Rev. D 72 (2005)
085009.
[329 G. L. Klim hitskaya, U. Mohideen, V. M. Mostepanenko, Casimir and van der
Waals for es between two plates or a sphere (lens) above a plate made of real
metals, Phys. Rev. A 61 (2000) 062107.
[330 G. L. Klim hitskaya, V. M. Mostepanenko, Investigation of the temperature
dependen e of the Casimir for e between real metals, Phys. Rev. A 63 (2001)
062108.
[331 B. Geyer, G. L. Klim hitskaya, V. M. Mostepanenko, Surfa e-impedan e
approa h solves problems with the thermal Casimir for e between real metals,
Phys. Rev. A 67 (2003) 062102.
[332 B. E. Sernelius, Finite-temperature Casimir for e between metal plates: Full
in lusion of spatial dispersion resolves a long-standing ontroversy, J. Phys. A:
Math. Gen. 39 (2006) 6741.
[333 T. H. Boyer, Van der Waals for es and zero-point energy for diele tri and
permeable materials, Phys. Rev. A 9 (1974) 2078.
[334 V. Hushwater, Repulsive Casimir for e as a result of va uum radiation pressure,
Am. J. Phys. 65 (1997) 381.
[335 F. C. Santos, A. Tenório, A. C. Tort, Zeta fun tion method and repulsive
Casimir for es for an unusual pair of plates at nite temperature, Phys. Rev.
D 60 (1999) 105022.
[336 P. Ri hmond, B. W. Ninham, A note on the extension of the Lifshitz theory of
van der Waals for es to magneti media, J. Phys. C: Solid State 4 (1971) 1988.
[337 O. Kenneth, I. Kli h, A. Mann, M. Revzen, Repulsive Casimir for es, Phys.
Rev. Lett. 89 (2002) 033001, see also D. Iannuzzi, F. Capasso, Comment on
Repulsive Casimir For es, Phys. Rev. Lett. 91 (2003) 029101.
[338 O. Kenneth, I. Kli h, A. Mann, M. Revzen, Reply: Repulsive Casimir for es,
Phys. Rev. Lett. 91 (2003) 029102.
[339 E. Buks, M. L. Roukes, Casimir for e hanges sign, Nature 419 (2002) 119.
[340 W. Lukosz, Ele tromagneti zero-point energy and radiation pressure for a
re tangular avity, Physi a 56 (1971) 109.
[341 S. Ha yan, R. Jauregui, C. Víllarreal, Spe trum of quantum ele tromagneti
u tuations in re tangular avities, Phys. Rev. A 47 (1993) 4204.
[342 V. A. Parsegian, B. W. Ninham, Van der Waals for es in many-layered
stru tures: Generalizations of the Lifshitz result for two semi-innite media,
J. Theor. Biol. 38 (1973) 101.
102
[343 T. Emig, R. L. Jae, M. Kardar, A. S ardi hio, Casimir intera tion between
a plate and a ylinder, Phys. Rev. Lett. 96 (2006) 080403.
[344 D. Langbein, Retarded dispersion energy between ma ros opi bodies, Phys.
Rev. B 2 (1970) 3371.
[345 L. H. Ford, Casimir for e between a diele tri sphere and a wall: A model for
ampli ation of va uum u tuations, Phys. Rev. A 58 (1998) 4279.
[346 I. Brevik, J. B. Aarseth, J. S. Høye, Casimir problem of spheri al diele tri s:
Numeri al evaluation for general permittivities, Phys. Rev. E 66 (2002) 026119.
[347 S. J. van Enk, Casimir torque between diele tri s, Phys. Rev. A 52 (1995) 2569.
[348 J. C. Torres-Guzmán, W. L. Mo hán, Casimir torque, J. Phys. A: Math. Gen.
39 (2006) 6791.
[349 H. B. G. Casimir, Introdu tory remarks on quantum ele trodynami s, Physi a
19 (1953) 846.
[350 T. H. Boyer, Quantum ele tromagneti zero-point energy of a ondu ting
spheri al shell and Casimir model for a harged parti le, Phys. Rev. 174 (1968)
1764.
[351 B. Davies, Quantum ele tromagneti zero-point energy of a ondu ting
spheri al shell, J. Math. Phys. 13 (1972) 1234.
[352 G. Barton, Perturbative he k on the Casimir energies of nondispersive
diele tri spheres, J. Phys. A: Math. Gen. 32 (1999) 525.
[353 G. Lambiase, V. V. Nesterenko, M. Bordag, Casimir energy of a ball and
ylinder in the zeta fun tion te hnique, J. Math. Phys. 40 (1999) 6254.
[354 I. Kli h, Casimir energy of a ondu ting sphere and of a dilute diele tri ball,
Phys. Rev. D 61 (2000) 025004.
[355 I. Brevik, V. N. Mara hevsky, K. A. Milton, Identity of the van der Waals
for e and the Casimir ee t and the irrelevan e of these phenomena to
sonolumines en e, Phys. Rev. Lett. 82 (1999) 3948.
[356 I. Kli h, A. Romeo, Regularized Casimir energy for an innite diele tri
ylinder subje t to light-velo ity onservation, Phys. Lett. B 476 (2000) 369.
[357 G. Barton, Perturbative Casimir energies of dispersive spheres, ubes and
ylinders, J. Phys. A: Math. Gen. 34 (2001) 4083.
[358 G. Plunien, B. Müller, W. Greiner, The Casimir ee t, Phys. Rep. 134 (1986)
87.
[359 V. M. Mostepanenko, V. B. Bezerra, R. S. De a, B. Geyer, E. Fis hba h,
L. Klim hitskaya, D. E. Krause, D. Lopez, C. Romer, Present status of
ontroversies regarding the thermal Casimir for e, J. Phys. A: Math. Gen.
39 (2006) 6589.
103
[360 E. M. Lifshitz, The theory of mole ular attra tive for es between solids, Sov.
Phys. JETP 2 (1956) 73.
[361 I. E. Dzyaloshinskii, E. M. Lifshitz, L. P. Pitaevskii, The general theory of van
der Waals for es, Avd. Phys. 10 (1961) 165.
[362 L. H. Ford, Spe trum of the Casimir ee t and the Lifshitz theory, Phys. Rev.
A 48 (1993) 2962.
[363 C. Henkel, K. Joulain, J.-P. Mulet, J.-J. Greet, Coupled surfa e polaritons
and the Casimir for e, Phys. Rev. A 69 (2004) 023808.
[364 F. Intravaia, A. Lambre ht, S. Reynaud, Casimir for e and surfa e plasmons,
J. Phys. IV 119 (2004) 199.
[365 F. Intravaia, A. Lambre ht, Surfa e plasmon modes and the Casimir energy,
Phys. Rev. Lett. 94 (2005) 110404.
[366 J. S. Høye, I. Brevik, J. B. Aarseth, K. A. Milton, Does the transverse ele tri
zero mode ontribute to the Casimir ee t for a metal?, Phys. Rev. E 67 (2003)
056116.
[367 J. S. Høye, I. Brevik, J. B. Aarseth, K. A. Milton, Temperature dependen e of
the Casimir ee t, Phys. Rev. E 71 (2005) 056101, see also V. B. Bezerra, R. S.
De a, E. Fis hba h, B. Geyer, G. L. Klim hitskaya, D. E. Krause, D. Lopez,
V. M. Mostepanenko, C. Romero, Comment on Temperature dependen e of
the Casimir ee t, Phys. Rev. E 73 (2006) 280101.
[368 V. B. Svetovoy, R. Esquivel, Nonlo al impedan es and the Casimir entropy at
low temperatures, Phys. Rev. E 72 (2005) 036113.
[369 V. B. Svetovoy, R. Esquivel, The Casimir free energy in high- and low-
temperature limits, J. Phys. A: Math. Gen. 39 (2006) 6777.
[370 M. Bordag, G. L. Klim hitskaya, V. M. Mostepanenko, Corre tions to the
Casimir for e between plates with sto hasti surfa es, Phys. Lett. A 200 (1995)
95.
[371 R. Nir, S.and Rein, L. Weiss, On the appli ability of ertain approximations
of the Lifshitz theory to thin lms, J. Theor. Biol. 34 (1972) 135.
[372 C. Henkel, K. Joulain, Casimir for e between designed materials: What is
possible and what not, Europhys. Lett. 72 (2005) 929.
[373 M. Boström, B. E. Sernelius, Fra tional van der Waals intera tion between
thin metalli lms, Phys. Rev. B 61 (2000) 2204.
[374 R. Esquivel-Sirvent, C. Víllarreal, W. L. Mo hán, A. M. Contreras-Reyes, V. B.
Svetovoy, Spatial dispersion in Casimir for es: A brief review, J. Phys. A: Math.
Gen. 39 (2006) 6323.
[375 B. W. Ninham, V. A. Parsegian, Van der Waals intera tions in multilayer
systems, J. Chem. Phys. 53 (1970) 3398.
104
[376 J. Bªo ki, J. Randrup, W. J. wiate ki, C. F. Tsang, Proximity for es, Ann.
Phys. 105 (1977) 427.
[377 H. Gies, K. Klingmüller, Casimir ee t for urved geometries: Proximity-for e-
approximation validity limits, Phys. Rev. Lett. 96 (2006) 220401.
[378 A. Lambre ht, S. Reynaud, Casimir for e between metalli mirrors, Eur. Phys.
J. D 8 (2000) 309.
[379 C. Genet, A. Lambre ht, S. Reynaud, Temperature dependen e of the Casimir
ee t between metalli mirrors, Phys. Rev. A 62 (2000) 012110.
[380 C. Genet, A. Lambre ht, S. Reynaud, Correlation between plasma and
temperature orre tions to the Casimir for e, Int. J. Mod. Phys. A 17 (2002)
761.
[381 C. Genet, A. Lambre ht, S. Reynaud, Casimir for e and the quantum theory
of lossy opti al avities, Phys. Rev. A 67 (2003) 043811.
[382 R. Esquivel, C. Víllarreal, W. L. Mo hán, Exa t surfa e impedan e formulation
of the Casimir for e: Appli ation to spatially dispersive metals, Phys. Rev. A
68 (2003) 052103.
[383 A. Lambre ht, M.-T. Jaekel, S. Reynaud, The Casimir for e for passive mirrors,
Phys. Lett. A 225 (1997) 188.
[384 R. Esquivel-Sirvent, C. Víllarreal, G. H. Co oletzi, Superlatti e-mediated
tuning of Casimir for es, Phys. Rev. A 64 (2001) 052108.
[385 C. Genet, A. Lambre ht, P. M. Neto, S. Reynaud, The Casimir for e between
rough metalli plates, Europhys. Lett. 62 (2003) 484.
[386 P. A. M. Neto, A. Lambre ht, S. Reynaud, Casimir ee t with rough metalli
mirrors, Phys. Rev. A 72 (2005) 012115.
[387 P. A. M. Neto, A. Lambre ht, S. Reynaud, Roughness orre tion to the Casimir
for e: Beyond the proximity for e approximation, Europhys. Lett. 69 (2005)
924.
[388 P. A. M. Neto, A. Lambre ht, S. Reynaud, Roughness orre tion in the Casimir
ee t with metalli plates, J. Phys. A: Math. Gen. 39 (2006) 6517.
[389 R. B. Rodrigues, P. A. M. Neto, A. Lambre ht, S. Reynaud, Lateral Casimir
for e beyond the proximity-for e approximation, Phys. Rev. Lett. 96 (2006)
100402.
[390 R. B. Rodrigues, P. A. Maia Neto, A. Lambre ht, S. Reynaud, Va uum-indu ed
torque between orrugated metalli plates, Europhys. Lett. 76 (2006) 822.
[391 L. S. Brown, G. J. Ma lay, Va uum stress between ondu ting plates: An image
solution, Phys. Rev. A 184 (1969) 1272.
[392 R. Balian, B. Duplantier, Ele tromagneti waves near perfe t ondu tors. II.
Casimir ee t, Ann. Phys. 112 (1978) 165.
105
[393 M. S haden, L. Spru h, Innity-free semi lassi al evaluation of Casimir ee ts,
Phys. Rev. A 58 (1998) 935.
[394 J. S hwinger, L. L. DeRaad Jr., K. A. Milton, Casimir ee t in diele tri s,
Ann. Phys. 115 (1978) 1.
[395 V. N. Mara hevsky, Casimir ee t and quantum eld theory in diele tri s,
Theor. Math. Phys. 131 (2002) 468.
[396 R. Matloob, H. Falinejad, Casimir for e between two diele tri slabs, Phys.
Rev. A 64 (2001) 042102.
[397 M. S haden, L. Spru h, Fo using virtual photons: Casimir energies for some
pairs of ondu tors, Phys. Rev. Lett. 84 (2000) 459.
[398 R. L. Jae, A. S ardi hio, Casimir ee t and geometri opti s, Phys. Rev.
Lett. 92 (2004) 070402.
[399 R. Golestanian, Lifshitz intera tion between diele tri bodies of arbitrary
geometry, Phys. Rev. Lett. 95 (2005) 230601.
[400 M. P. Hertzberg, R. L. Jae, M. Kardar, A. S ardi hio, Attra tive Casimir
for es in a losed geometry, Phys. Rev. Lett. 95 (2005) 250402.
[401 O. Kenneth, I. Kli h, Opposites attra tA theorem about the Casimir for e,
Phys. Rev. Lett. 97 (2006) 160401.
[402 I. Brevik, H. Kolbenstvedt, The Casimir ee t in a solid ball when εµ = 1,Ann. Phys. 143 (1982) 179.
[403 L. L. DeRaad, K. A. Milton, Casimir self-stress on a perfe tly ondu ting
ylindri al shell, Ann. Phys. 136 (1981) 229.
[404 A. D. M La hlan, Retarded dispersion for es between mole ules, Pro . R. So .
London, Ser. A 271 (1963) 387.
[405 G. S. Agarwal, Quantum ele trodynami s in the presen e of diele tri s and
ondu tors. II. Theory of dispersion for es, Phys. Rev. A 11 (1975) 243.
[406 M. J. Mehl, W. L. S hai h, The van der Waals intera tion between an atom
and a solid, Surf. S i. 99 (1980) 553.
[407 J. M. Wylie, J. E. Sipe, Quantum ele trodynami s near an interfa e, Phys.
Rev. A 30 (1984) 1185.
[408 A. D. M La hlan, Retarded dispersion for es in diele tri s at nite
temperatures, Pro . R. So . London, Ser. A 274 (1963) 80.
[409 C. Henkel, K. Joulain, J.-P. Mulet, J.-J. Greet, Radiation for es on small
parti les in thermal near elds, J. Opt. A: Pure Appl. Opt. 4 (2002) S109.
[410 M. Antezza, L. P. Pitaevskii, S. Stringari, New asymptoti behaviour of the
surfa eatom for e out of thermal equilibrium, Phys. Rev. Lett. 95 (2005)
113202.
106
[411 J. Mahanty, B. W. Ninham, Boundary ee ts on the dispersion for e between
os illators, J. Phys. A: Math. Gen. 6 (1973) 1140.
[412 G. S. Agarwal, Coheren e in spontaneous emission in the presen e of a
diele tri , Phys. Rev. Lett. 32 (1974) 703.
[413 J. M. Wylie, J. E. Sipe, Quantum ele trodynami s near an interfa e. II, Phys.
Rev. A 32 (1985) 2030.
[414 A. M. Marvin, F. Toigo, Van der Waals intera tion between a point parti le
and a metalli surfa e. I. Theory, Phys. Rev. A 25 (1982) 782.
[415 H. Imura, K. Okano, Van der WaalsLifshitz for es between anisotropi
ellipsoidal parti les, J. Chem. Phys. 58 (1973) 2763.
[416 S. Kryszewski, On the van der Waals intera tion between an atom and a
diele tri medium, Mol. Phys. 78 (1993) 1225.
[417 J. Mahanty, P. Summerside, B. V. Paranjape, Retarded van der Waals for e
near a metal surfa e, Phys. Rev. B 18 (10) (1978) 5174.
[418 C. Henkel, V. Sandoghdar, Single-mole ule spe tros opy near stru tured
diele tri s, Opt. Commun. 158 (1998) 250.
[419 C. S hwartz, Role of diele tri s reening in atomsurfa e intera tions, J. Chem.
Phys. 83 (1985) 437.
[420 W. Jhe, J. W. Kim, CasimirPolder energy shift of an atom near a metalli
sphere, Phys. Lett. A 197 (1995) 192.
[421 W. Jhe, J. W. Kim, Atomi energy level shifts near a diele tri mi rosphere,
Phys. Rev. A 51 (1995) 1150.
[422 I. Brevik, M. Lygren, V. N. Mara hevsky, CasimirPolder ee t for a perfe tly
ondu ting wedge, Ann. Phys. 267 (1998) 134.
[423 A. M. Marvin, F. Toigo, Van der Waals intera tion between a point parti le
and a metalli surfa e. II. Appli ations, Phys. Rev. A 25 (1982) 803.
[424 H. Nha, W. Jhe, Cavity quantum ele trodynami s for a ylinder: Inside a hollow
diele tri and near a solid diele tri ylider, Phys. Rev. A 56 (1997) 2213.
[425 D. P. Fussell, R. C. M Phedran, C. M. de Sterke, De ay rate and level shift in
a ir ular diele tri waveguide, Phys. Rev. A 71 (2005) 013815.
[426 H. Nha, W. Jhe, Cavity quantum ele trodynami s between parallel diele tri
surfa es, Phys. Rev. A 54 (1996) 3505.
[427 W. Jhe, K. Jang, Cavity quantum ele trodynami s inside a hollow spheri al
avity, Phys. Rev. A 53 (1996) 1126.
[428 M.-P. Gorza, S. Saltiel, H. Faila he, M. Du loy, Quantum theory of van der
Waals intera tions between ex ited atoms and birefringent diele tri surfa es,
Eur. Phys. J. D 15 (2001) 113.
107
[429 J. T. Dunie , J. Mahanty, B. W. Ninham, Ee t of spatial dispersion on van
der Waals intera tions between mole ules, Solid State Commun. 23 (1977) 381.
[430 M. Boström, J. J. Longdell, B. W. Ninham, Atomatom intera tions at and
between metal surfa es at nonzero temperature, Phys. Rev. A 64 (2001) 062702.
[431 H.-Y. Kim, M. W. Cole, F. Toigo, D. Ni holson, Dispersion intera tion between
adsorbed linear mole ules, Surf. S i. 198 (1988) 555.
[432 M. Mar ovit h, H. Diamant, Enhan ed dispersion intera tion in onned
geometry, Phys. Rev. Lett. 95 (2005) 223203.
[433 M. J. Renne, Mi ros opi theory of retarded van der Waals for es between
ma ros opi diele tri bodies, Physi a 56 (1971) 125.
[434 P. W. Milonni, P. B. Lerner, Extin tion theorem, dispersion for es, and latent
heat, Phys. Rev. A 46 (1992) 1185.
[435 D. Kupiszewska, Casimir ee t in absorbing media, Phys. Rev. A 46 (1992)
2286.
[436 J. L. M. J. van Bree, J. A. Poulis, B. J. Verhaar, The inuen e of surfa e
irregularities upon the van der Waals for es between ma ros opi bodies,
Physi a 78 (1974) 187.
[437 M. Bordag, G. L. Klim hitskaya, V. M. Mostpanenko, Casimir for e between
two parallel plates with small distortions of dierent types, Mod. Phys. Lett.
A 9 (1994) 2515.
[438 M. Bordag, G. L. Klim hitskaya, V. M. Mostepanenko, The Casimir for e
between plates with small deviations from plane parallel geometry, Int. J. Mod.
Phys. A 10 (1995) 2661.
[439 Y. Sherkunov, Casimir intera tion between ex ited media in ele tromagneti
elds, eprint quant-ph/0604046 (2006).
[440 V. M. Nabutovski
i, V. R. Belosludov, A. M. Korotkikh, Intera tion potential
between small neutral parti les and spheri al or ylidri al surfa es, Sov. Phys.
JETP 50 (1979) 352.
[441 V. B. Bezerra, G. L. Klim hitskaya, C. Romero, Surfa e roughness ontribution
to the Casimir intera tion between an isolated atom and a avity wall, Phys.
Rev. A 61 (2000) 022115.
[442 M. Antezza, L. P. Pitaevskii, S. Stringari, Ee t of the Casimir-Polder for e on
ther olle tive os illations of a trapped Bose-Einstein ondensate, Phys. Rev.
A 70 (2004) 053619.
[443 M. S. Toma², Va uum for e on an atom in a magnetodiele tri avity, Phys.
Rev. A 72 (2005) 034104, note erratum Phys. Rev. A 73 (2006) 039904(E) .
[444 E. V. Blagov, G. L. Klim hitskaya, V. M. Mostepanenko, Van der Waals
intera tion between mi roparti le and uniaxial rystal with appli ation to
hydrogen atoms and multiwall arbon nanotubes, Phys. Rev. B 71 (2005)
235401.
108
[445 M. S. Toma², S reened Casimir for es, Phys. Rev. A 71 (2005) 060101(R).
[446 M. S. Toma², Medium-modied Casimir for es, J. Phys. A: Math. Gen. 39
(2006) 6785.
[447 B. W. Ninham, J. Dai i , Lifshitz theory of Casimir for es at nite temperature,
Phys. Rev. A 57 (1998) 1870.
[448 L. Knöll, S. S heel, D.-G. Wels h, QED in dispersing and absorbing diele tri
media, in: J. Pe°ina (Ed.), Coheren e and Statisti s of Photons and Atoms,
Wiley, New York, 2001, p. 1.
[449 D. T. Ho, S. Y. Buhmann, L. Knöll, D.-G. Wels h, S. S heel, J. Kästel,
Ele tromagneti -eld quantization and spontaneous de ay in left-handed
media, Phys. Rev. A 68 (2003) 43816.
[450 W. Vogel, D.-G. Wels h, Quantum Opti s, 3rd Edition, Wiley-VCH, Berlin,
2006.
[451 J. D. Ja kson, Classi al Ele trodynami s, 3rd Edition, Wiley, New York, 1998.
[452 C. Raabe, S. S heel, D.-G. Wels h, Unied approa h to QED in arbitrary linear
media, Phys. Rev. A 75 (2007) 053813.
[453 R. Matloob, R. Loudon, S. M. Barnett, J. Jeers, Ele tromagneti eld
quantization in absorbing diele tri s, Phys. Rev. A 52 (1995) 4823.
[454 R. Matloob, Ele tromagneti eld quantization in a linear isotropi diele tri ,
Phys. Rev. A 69 (2004) 052110.
[455 R. Matloob, Ele tromagneti eld quantization in a linear isotropi permeable
diele tri medium, Phys. Rev. A 70 (2004) 022108.
[456 A. Tip, Linear absorptive diele tri s, Phys. Rev. A 57 (1998) 4818.
[457 A. Tip, L. Knöll, S. S heel, D.-G. Wels h, Equivalen e of Langevin and
auxiliary-eld quantization methods for absorbing diele tri s, Phys. Rev. A
63 (2001) 043806.
[458 B. Huttner, S. M. Barnett, Quantization of the ele tromagneti eld in
diele tri s, Phys. Rev. A 46 (1992) 4306.
[459 U. Fano, Atomi theory of ele tromagneti intera tions in dense materials,
Phys. Rev. 103 (1956) 1202.
[460 M. Wubs, L. G. Suttorp, Transient QED ee ts in absorbing diele tri s, Phys.
Rev. A 63 (2001) 043809.
[461 L. G. Suttorp, M. Wubs, Field quantization in inhomogeneous absorptive
diele tri s, Phys. Rev. A 70 (2004) 013816.
[462 L. G. Suttorp, A. J. van Wonderen, Fano diagonalization of a polariton model
for an inhomogeneous absorptive diele tri , Europhys. Lett. 67 (2004) 766.
109
[463 O. Di Stefano, S. Savasta, R. Girlanda, Mi ros opi al ulation of noise urrent
operators for ele tromagneti eld quantization in absorbing material systems,
J. Opt. B: Quantum Semi lass. Opt. 3 (2001) 288.
[464 C. Baxter, M. Babiker, R. Loudon, Canoni al approa h to photon pressure,
Phys. Rev. A 47 (1993) 12781287.
[465 S. Y. Buhmann, D. T. Ho, L. Knöll, D.-G. Wels h, CasimirPolder for es: A
nonperturbative approa h, Phys. Rev. A 70 (2004) 52117.
[466 C. Cohen-Tannoudji, J. Dupont-Ro , G. Grynberg, Photons and Atoms, Wiley,
New York, 1989.
[467 H. Safari, S. Y. Buhmann, D. T. Ho, D.-G. Wels h, Body-assisted van der
Waals intera tion between two atoms, Phys. Rev. A 74 (2006) 042101.
[468 E. A. Power, S. Zienau, Coulomb gauge in non-relativisti quantum
ele trodynami s and the shape of spe tral lines, Phil. Trans. R. So . London
Ser. A 251 (1959) 427.
[469 R. G. Woolley, Mole ular quantum ele trodynami s, Pro . R. So . London,
Ser. A 321 (1971) 557.
[470 V. L. Ginzburg, Appli ations of ele trodynami s in theoreti al physi s and
astrophysi s, se ond revised Edition, Gordon and Brea h s ien e publishers,
New York, 1989.
[471 R. P. James, A simplest ase experiment resolving AbrahamMinkowski
ontroversy on ele tromagneti momentum in matter, Pro . Natl. A ad. S i.
61 (1968) 1149.
[472 R. P. James, For e on permeable matter in time-varying elds, Ph.D. thesis,
Department of Ele tri al Engineering, Stanford University (1968).
[473 G. B. Walker, D. G. Lahoz, Experimental observation of Abaraham for e in a
diele tri , Nature 253 (1975) 339.
[474 G. B. Walker, D. G. Lahoz, G. Walker, Measurement of Abraham for e in
barium-titanate spe imen, Can. J. Phys. 53 (1975) 2577.
[475 G. B. Walker, G. Walker, Me hani al for es of ele tromagneti origin, Nature
263 (1976) 401.
[476 G. B. Walker, G. Walker, Unusual ele tromagneti surfa e for e, Nature 265
(1977) 324.
[477 G. B. Walker, G. Walker, Me hani al for es in a diele tri due to
ele tromagneti -elds, Can. J. Phys. 55 (1977) 2121.
[478 I. Brevik, Experiments in phenomenologi al ele trodynami s and the
ele tromagneti energymomentum tensor, Phys. Rep. 52 (1979) 133.
[479 Y. N. Obukhov, F. W. Hehl, Ele tromagneti energy-momentum and for es in
matter, Phys. Lett. A 311 (2003) 277.
110
[480 C. Raabe, D.-G. Wels h, Casimir for e a ting on magnetodiele tri bodies
embedded in media, Phys. Rev. A 71 (2005) 013814, see also L. P. Pitaevskii,
Comment on Casimir for e a ting on magnetodiele tri bodies embedded in
media, Phys. Rev. A 73 (2006) 047801; C. Raabe, D.-G. Wels h, Reply to
Comment on `Casimir for e a ting on magnetodiele tri bodies embedded in
media' , Phys. Rev. A 73 (2006) 047802.
[481 C. Raabe, D.-G. Wels h, Dispersive for es on bodies and atoms: A unied
approa h, Phys. Rev. A 73 (2006) 063822, note erratum Phys. Rev. A 74
(2006) 019901(E) .
[482 W. C. Chew, Waves and Fields in Inhomogeneous Media, IEEE, New York,
1995.
[483 M. S. Toma², Casimir for e in absorbing multilayers, Phys. Rev. A 66 (2002)
52103.
[484 C. Raabe, L. Knöll, D.-G. Wels h, Three-dimensional Casimir for e between
absorbing multilayer diele tri s, Phys. Rev. A 68 (2003) 033810, note errata
Phys. Rev. A 68 (2003) 049902(E); Phys. Rev. A 69 (2004) 019901(E).
[485 M. S. Toma², Casimir for e between dispersive magnetodiele tri s, Phys. Lett.
A 342 (2005) 381.
[486 M. Born, E. Wolf, Prin iples of Opti s, sixth orre ted Edition, Cambridge
University Press, Cambridge, UK, 1998.
[487 C. Raabe, D.-G. Wels h, Matter-s reened Casimir for e and Casimir-Polder
for e in planar stru tures, J. Opt. B: Quantum Semi lass. Opt. 7 (2005) S610.
[488 S. Y. Buhmann, H. Safari, D.-G. Wels h, D. T. Ho, Mi ros opi origin of
CasimirPolder for es, Open Syst. Inf. Dyn. 13 (2006) 427.
[489 S. Y. Buhmann, H. Safari, D. T. Ho, D.-G. Wels h, Two-atom van der Waals
intera tion between polarizable/magnetizable atoms near magnetodiele tri
bodies, submitted to Opt. Spe tros . (USSR), eprint quant-ph/0606232
(2006).
[490 S. Y. Buhmann, D.-G. Wels h, Born expansion of the CasimirPolder
intera tion of a ground-state atom with diele tri bodies, Appl. Phys. B 82
(2006) 189.
[491 S. Y. Buhmann, D. T. Ho, T. Kampf, D.-G. Wels h, CasimirPolder intera tion
of atoms with magnetodiele tri bodies, Eur. Phys. J. D 35 (2005) 15.
[492 S. Y. Buhmann, D. T. Ho, T. Kampf, L. Knöll, D.-G. Wels h, Atoms near
magnetodiele tri bodies: van der Waals energy and the CasimirPolder for e,
Opt. Spe tros . (USSR) 99 (2005) 466.
[493 I. V. Bondarev, P. Lambin, The van der Waals intera tion of an atom near a
arbon nanotube, Opt. Spe tros . (USSR) 99 (2005) 475.
111
[494 I. V. Bondarev, P. Lambin, Van der Waals oupling in atomi ally doped arbon
nanotubes, Phys. Rev. B 72 (2005) 035451.
[495 I. V. Bondarev, P. Lambin, Near-eld ele trodynami s of atomi ally doped
arbon nanotubes, in: D. A. Martin (Ed.), Trends in Nanotubes Resear h,
Nova S ien e Publishers, New York, 2006, p. 139.
[496 S. Y. Buhmann, D. T. Ho, D.-G. Wels h, The van der Waals energy of atomi
systems near absorbing and dispersing bodies, J. Opt. B: Quantum Semi lass.
Opt. 6 (2004) S127, note erratum: J. Phys. B: At. Mol. Opt. Phys. 39 (2006),
3145.
[497 S. Y. Buhmann, T. Kampf, D.-G. Wels h, Ground-state van der Waals for es
in planar multilayer magnetodiele tri s, Phys. Rev. A 72 (2005) 032112.
[498 S. Y. Buhmann, D.-G. Wels h, CasimirPolder for es for strong atomeld
oupling, eprint quant-ph/0701151 (2007).
[499 P. H. W. Pinkse, T. Fis her, P. Maunz, G. Rempe, Trapping an atom with
single photons, Nature 404 (2000) 365.
[500 C. J. Hood, T. W. Lynn, A. C. Doherty, A. S. Parkins, H. J. Kimble, The atom-
avity mi ros ope: Single-atoms bound in orbit by single photons, S ien e 287
(2000) 1447.
[501 S. Haro he, M. Brune, J. M. Raimond, Trapping atoms by the va uum eld in
a avity., Europhys. Lett. 14 (1991) 19.
[502 B.-G. Englert, J. S hwinger, A. O. Barut, M. O. S ully, Ree ting slow atoms
from a mi romaser eld, Europhys. Lett. 14 (1991) 25.
[503 A. Sambale, S. Y. Buhmann, D.-G. Wels h, M. S. Toma², Lo al-eld orre tion
to one- and two-atom van der Waals intera tions, Phys. Rev. A 75 (2007)
042109.
[504 M. S. Toma², Green fun tion for multilayers: Light s attering in planar avities,
Phys. Rev. A 51 (1995) 2545.
112