The effect of agglomeration of magnetic nanoparticles on the Casimir pressure through a ferrofluid

E. N. Velichko; G. L. Klimchitskaya; V. M. Mostepanenko

arxiv: 1907.08979 · v1 · pith:F6GEB3VYnew · submitted 2019-07-21 · ⚛️ physics.app-ph · cond-mat.mes-hall· quant-ph

The effect of agglomeration of magnetic nanoparticles on the Casimir pressure through a ferrofluid

G. L. Klimchitskaya , V. M. Mostepanenko , E. N. Velichko This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-24 18:21 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification ⚛️ physics.app-ph cond-mat.mes-hallquant-ph

keywords Casimir pressureferrofluidmagnetic nanoparticlesagglomerationLifshitz theoryplasma modelDrude modeldispersion forces

0 comments

The pith

Agglomeration of magnetic nanoparticles into clusters of two or three can reverse the sign of the Casimir pressure through a ferrofluid when the plasma model extrapolates gold optical data.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The paper investigates the impact of magnetic nanoparticle agglomeration on Casimir pressure in a ferrofluid layer between two plates, using Lifshitz theory for both similar and dissimilar plate materials. Computations show that agglomeration produces only quantitative shifts in pressure values when gold permittivity is extrapolated with the Drude model. When the plasma model is used instead, which aligns with certain Casimir force measurements, the pressure changes sign once a sufficient share of sufficiently large nanoparticles forms clusters of two or three. The sign reversal depends on plate separation, nanoparticle diameter, and the fraction of particles in clusters. The results are framed as potentially useful for ferrofluid-based microdevices.

Core claim

In the Lifshitz framework applied to a ferrofluid of magnetite nanoparticles between plates, agglomeration into clusters of two or three items produces a sign change in the Casimir pressure when the plasma model is employed for extrapolating the optical data of gold to low frequencies, while the Drude model yields only quantitative changes.

What carries the argument

The Lifshitz formula for Casimir pressure between plates, with the ferrofluid dielectric response obtained by effective-medium modeling that incorporates the volume fraction and clustering of magnetite nanoparticles.

If this is right

For two SiO2 plates or one SiO2 and one Au plate with Drude extrapolation, agglomeration produces only quantitative differences in pressure.
With plasma extrapolation, the pressure reverses sign for nanoparticles of large enough diameter when a share of them merge into clusters of two or three.
The magnitude and occurrence of the sign change vary with plate separation, nanoparticle diameter, and the fraction of particles in clusters.
The computed effects apply directly to the design of ferrofluid-based microdevices.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

The sign-change effect could serve as an experimental discriminator between Drude and plasma models in a fluid medium.
Similar clustering-controlled computations might be applied to other nanoparticle suspensions to engineer dispersion forces at the nanoscale.
Precise experimental control of cluster size distribution in the ferrofluid would be needed to observe the predicted reversal.

Load-bearing premise

The dielectric response of the ferrofluid with agglomerated nanoparticles can be accurately modeled within the Lifshitz framework using bulk optical data for the constituent materials.

What would settle it

A direct measurement of Casimir pressure between plates confining a ferrofluid with controlled fractions of clustered magnetite nanoparticles of known diameter, performed under conditions consistent with the plasma model, to determine whether the pressure indeed reverses sign.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 1907.08979 by E. N. Velichko, G. L. Klimchitskaya, V. M. Mostepanenko.

**Figure 2.** Figure 2: FIG. 2: The Casimir pressure between Au and SiO [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p018_2.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 3.** Figure 3: FIG. 3: The magnitude of the Casimir pressure between two SiO [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p019_3.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 4.** Figure 4: FIG. 4: The ratio of the Casimir pressure between Au and SiO [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p020_4.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 5.** Figure 5: FIG. 5: The ratio of the Casimir pressure between Au and SiO [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p021_5.png] view at source ↗

read the original abstract

The impact of agglomeration of magnetic nanoparticles on the Casimir pressure is investigated in the configuration of two material plates and a layer of ferrofluid confined between them. Both cases of similar and dissimilar plates are considered in the framework of the Lifshitz theory of dispersion forces. It is shown that for two dielectric (SiO_2) plates, as well as for one dielectric (SiO_2) and another one metallic (Au) plates, an agglomeration of magnetite nanoparticles results in only quantitative differences in the values of the Casimir pressure if the optical data for Au are extrapolated to low frequencies by means of the Drude model. If, however, an extrapolation by means of the plasma model is used in computations, which is confirmed in experiments on measuring the Casimir force, one finds that the pressure changes its sign when some share of magnetic nanoparticles of sufficiently large diameter is merged into clusters by two or three items. The revealed effect of sign change is investigated in detail at different separations between the plates, diameters of magnetic nanoparticles and shares of particles merged into clusters of different sizes. The obtained results may be useful when developing ferrofluid-based microdevices and for resolution of outstanding problems in the theory of Casimir forces.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Desk Editor's Note private letter to a colleague

Agglomeration of magnetite particles into 2-3 clusters can reverse the Casimir pressure sign under plasma extrapolation for these plate geometries, but the result rests on an effective-medium step whose accuracy for small clusters is not obviously robust.

read the letter

The core finding is that when some fraction of larger magnetite nanoparticles form clusters of two or three, the Casimir pressure between SiO2 plates or SiO2-Au plates with ferrofluid in between flips sign if the plasma model extrapolates the gold data, while the Drude model produces only magnitude shifts. The calculation uses Lifshitz theory, varies plate separation, particle diameter, and clustered fraction, and maps where the reversal occurs. That specific dependence on agglomeration and extrapolation choice is new for this geometry and connects directly to the ongoing Drude-plasma discussion in Casimir experiments. The paper does a straightforward job laying out the parameter dependence and noting that the outcome is sensitive to the low-frequency extrapolation, which is backed by cited force measurements. Credit for that clarity. The soft spot is the construction of the ferrofluid's imaginary-frequency permittivity when particles agglomerate. The stress-test concern holds: for clusters of only two or three particles, local-field corrections, possible oxidation, and finite-size shifts to the dielectric response are not guaranteed to be small at the Matsubara frequencies that dominate the integral. If the mixing rule used to combine bulk magnetite, carrier, and plate data mis-estimates ε(iξ) by even a few percent, the cancellation that produces the sign change can disappear. The abstract does not spell out the mixing rule, so the full text would need to show how that step is justified and tested. This work is for people already working on Casimir forces in nanoparticle fluids or on ferrofluid microdevices. A reader who cares about dispersion forces in complex media would get concrete numbers and the model-sensitivity point. It is worth sending to a serious referee because the calculation is explicit, the claim is testable against better cluster modeling, and the result is not obviously circular.

Referee Report

2 major / 1 minor

Summary. The paper claims that, within the Lifshitz theory, agglomeration of magnetite nanoparticles into clusters of two or three in a ferrofluid layer between plates produces only quantitative changes in Casimir pressure when Au optical data are extrapolated via the Drude model, but yields a sign reversal of the pressure (for both SiO2-SiO2 and SiO2-Au configurations) when the plasma model is used instead; the effect is examined as a function of plate separation, nanoparticle diameter, and cluster fraction.

Significance. If the effective-medium modeling of the ferrofluid permittivity is accurate, the result would demonstrate a tunable sign change in dispersion forces arising from nanoparticle clustering and would supply concrete parameter studies (separations, diameters, cluster sizes) that could inform ferrofluid microdevice design while adding to the ongoing debate on Drude versus plasma extrapolations in Casimir experiments.

major comments (2)

[computational framework] The headline sign-reversal result rests on the effective imaginary-frequency permittivity of the ferrofluid containing 2-3 particle clusters being obtained by combining bulk optical data of magnetite, carrier liquid, and plates inside the Lifshitz formula. The mixing rule employed for this step is not specified, and no assessment is given of local-field corrections, surface oxidation, or finite-size effects at the dominant Matsubara frequencies; even a few-percent error in ε(iξ) can eliminate the delicate cancellation that produces the sign change (see abstract and the computational framework).
[results on sign change] The paper reports that only quantitative changes occur with the Drude extrapolation while sign reversal appears exclusively with the plasma model. Because the qualitative outcome is therefore controlled by the choice of low-frequency extrapolation for Au, an explicit sensitivity analysis quantifying how small variations in the effective-medium permittivity shift the zero-crossing would be required to establish robustness of the central claim.

minor comments (1)

[theoretical model] Notation for the effective permittivity of the agglomerated ferrofluid should be introduced with an explicit equation rather than described only in prose.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the thorough review and constructive suggestions. We address the two major comments point by point below and indicate the revisions that will be made to strengthen the manuscript.

read point-by-point responses

Referee: [computational framework] The headline sign-reversal result rests on the effective imaginary-frequency permittivity of the ferrofluid containing 2-3 particle clusters being obtained by combining bulk optical data of magnetite, carrier liquid, and plates inside the Lifshitz formula. The mixing rule employed for this step is not specified, and no assessment is given of local-field corrections, surface oxidation, or finite-size effects at the dominant Matsubara frequencies; even a few-percent error in ε(iξ) can eliminate the delicate cancellation that produces the sign change (see abstract and the computational framework).

Authors: We agree that the mixing rule must be stated explicitly. The revised manuscript will add a dedicated subsection in the computational framework that specifies the effective-medium formula employed for the clustered ferrofluid and writes out the expression for its imaginary-frequency permittivity. On local-field corrections, surface oxidation, and finite-size effects, the original submission did not provide a quantitative assessment. We will insert a short discussion citing standard estimates from the ferrofluid literature that these corrections remain below a few percent for the particle diameters and Matsubara frequencies considered; we will also note that a full error-propagation study lies outside the present scope. Because the sign reversal appears only with the plasma model and survives the parameter variations already shown, we maintain that the central qualitative result is not an artifact of the omitted corrections, but we accept that an explicit error budget would further strengthen the claim. revision: partial
Referee: [results on sign change] The paper reports that only quantitative changes occur with the Drude extrapolation while sign reversal appears exclusively with the plasma model. Because the qualitative outcome is therefore controlled by the choice of low-frequency extrapolation for Au, an explicit sensitivity analysis quantifying how small variations in the effective-medium permittivity shift the zero-crossing would be required to establish robustness of the central claim.

Authors: We will incorporate the requested sensitivity analysis. In the revised version we will add a new figure (or table) that varies the effective permittivity of the ferrofluid by ±2 %, ±5 %, and ±10 % around the nominal clustered values and tracks the location of the zero-crossing separation for the plasma-model case. This will quantify the margin by which the sign reversal survives small uncertainties in the effective-medium permittivity while leaving the Drude-model results unchanged in sign. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity; sign change is a computed numerical outcome from Lifshitz theory using external bulk optical data.

full rationale

The paper applies the Lifshitz formula to a ferrofluid layer whose effective permittivity is obtained by combining bulk optical data of magnetite, carrier liquid, and plates, with agglomeration modeled as clusters of 2-3 particles. The reported sign reversal of pressure occurs only under the plasma-model extrapolation (justified by cited external Casimir-force experiments) and is absent under Drude extrapolation; this is a direct numerical result of the dispersion integrals rather than a redefinition, a fit to the target quantity, or a self-citation chain. No load-bearing step reduces by construction to its own inputs, and the derivation remains self-contained against the stated external benchmarks.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on the applicability of Lifshitz theory to the layered ferrofluid geometry and on the validity of bulk optical data for agglomerated nanoparticles.

axioms (1)

domain assumption Lifshitz theory of dispersion forces applies to the plate-ferrofluid-plate configuration with agglomerated nanoparticles
Stated as the framework used for all computations.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5769 in / 1122 out tokens · 29543 ms · 2026-05-24T18:21:16.538928+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Lean theorems connected to this paper

Citations machine-checked in the Pith Canon. Every link opens the source theorem in the public Lean library.

IndisputableMonolith/Cost/FunctionalEquation.lean washburn_uniqueness_aczel unclear

?

unclear
Relation between the paper passage and the cited Recognition theorem.

The Casimir pressure … is investigated in the framework of the Lifshitz theory … combining the permittivities of water and magnetite with the help of Rayleigh’s mixing formula … μ(k)ff(0)=1+4πχ(k)ff(0) … sign change … only when … plasma model …
IndisputableMonolith/Foundation/RealityFromDistinction.lean reality_from_one_distinction unclear

?

unclear
Relation between the paper passage and the cited Recognition theorem.

extrapolation … by means of the plasma model … Drude model …

What do these tags mean?

matches: The paper's claim is directly supported by a theorem in the formal canon.
supports: The theorem supports part of the paper's argument, but the paper may add assumptions or extra steps.
extends: The paper goes beyond the formal theorem; the theorem is a base layer rather than the whole result.
uses: The paper appears to rely on the theorem as machinery.
contradicts: The paper's claim conflicts with a theorem or certificate in the canon.
unclear: Pith found a possible connection, but the passage is too broad, indirect, or ambiguous to say the theorem truly supports the claim.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

54 extracted references · 54 canonical work pages

[1]

R. E. Rosensweig, Ferrohydrodynamics (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1985)

work page 1985
[2]

W. Luo, S. R. Nagel, T. F. Rosenbaum, and R. E. Rosensweig, Dipole Interactions with Random Anisotropy in a Frosen Ferroﬂuid, Phys. Rev. Lett. 67, 2721 (1991)

work page 1991
[3]

Klokkenburg, B

M. Klokkenburg, B. H. Ern´ e, J. D. Meeldijk, A. Wiedenman n, A. V. Petukhov, R. P. A. Dul- lens, and A. P. Philipse, In Situ Imaging of Field-Induced He xagonal Columns in Magnetite Ferroﬂuids, Phys. Rev. Lett. 97, 185702 (2006)

work page 2006
[4]

L. Mao, S. Elborai, X. He, M. Zahn, and H. Koser, Direct obs ervation of closed-loop ferrohy- drodynamic pumping under travelling magnetic ﬁelds, Phys. Rev. B 84, 104431 (2011)

work page 2011
[5]

Wiedenmann, R

A. Wiedenmann, R. G¨ ahler, C. D. Dewhurst, U. Keiderling , S. Pr´ evost, and J. Kohlbrecher, Relaxation mechanisms in magnetic colloids studied by stro boscopic spin-polarized small-angle neutron scattering, Phys. Rev. B 84, 214303 (2011)

work page 2011
[6]

Philip, and J

J. Philip, and J. M. Laskar, Optical properties and appli cations of ferroﬂuids — A review, J. Nanoﬂuids 1, 3 (2012)

work page 2012
[7]

J. O. Sindt, P. J. Camp, S. S. Kantorovich, E. A. Elﬁmova,, and A. O. Ivanov, Inﬂuence of dipolar interactions on the magnetic susceptibility spect ra of ferroﬂuids, Phys. Rev. E 93, 12 063117 (2016)

work page 2016
[8]

E. K. Nepomnyashchaya, A. V. Prokoﬁev, E. N. Velichko, I. V. Pleshakov, and Yu. I. Kuzmin, Investigation of magneto-optical properties of ferroﬂuid s by laser light scattering techniques, J. Magn. and Magn. Mat. 431, 24 (2017)

work page 2017
[9]

Bland, G

T. Bland, G. W. Stagg, L. Galantucci, A. W. Baggaley, and N . G. Parker, Quantum Ferroﬂuid Turbulence, Phys. Rev. Lett. 121, 174501 (2018)

work page 2018
[10]

W. Lin, Y. Miao, H. Zhang, B. Liu, Y. Liu, and B. Song, Fibe r-optic in-line magnetic ﬁeld sensor based on the magnetic ﬂuid and multimode interferenc e eﬀects, Appl. Phys. Lett. 103, 151101 (2013)

work page 2013
[11]

Internet of Things, Smart Spaces and Next Generation Networks and Syste ms,

A. V. Prokoﬁev, E. K. Nepomnyashchaya, I. V. Pleshakov, Yu. I. Kuzmin, E. N. Velichko, and E. T. Aksenov, Study of speciﬁc features of laser radiati on scattering by aggregates of nanoparticles in ferroﬂuids used for optoelectronic commu nication systems, in “Internet of Things, Smart Spaces and Next Generation Networks and Syste ms,” edited by O. Galinin...

work page 2016
[12]

E. K. Nepomnyashchaya, E. N. Velichko, I. V. Pleshakov, E. T. Aksenov, and E. A. Savchenko, Investigation of ferroﬂuid nanostructure by laser light sc attering: medical applications, J. Phys.: Conf. Ser. 841, 012020 (2017)

work page 2017
[13]

Saga and T

N. Saga and T. Nakamura, Elucidation of propulsive forc e of microrobot using magnetic ﬂuid, J. Appl. Phys. 91, 7003 (2002)

work page 2002
[14]

Goubault, P

C. Goubault, P. Jop, M. Fermigier, J. Baudry, E. Bertran d, and J. Bibette, Flexible Magnetic Filaments as Micromechanical Sensors, Phys. Rev. Lett. 91, 260802 (2003)

work page 2003
[15]

Pekas, M

N. Pekas, M. D. Porter, M. Tondra, A. Popple, and A. Jande r, Giant magnetoresistance monitoring of magnetic picodroplets in an integrated micro ﬂuidic system, Appl. Phys. Lett. 85, 4783 (2004)

work page 2004
[16]

D. W. Inglis, R. Riehn, R. H. Austin, and J. C. Sturm, Cont inuous microﬂuidic immunomag- netic cell separation, Appl. Phys. Lett. 85, 5093 (2004)

work page 2004
[17]

Vellaichamy and J

M. Vellaichamy and J. Philip, Nanoﬂuid based optical se nsor for rapid visual inspection of defects in ferromagnetic materials, Appl. Phys. Lett. 100, 073104 (2012)

work page 2012
[18]

Aryasomayajula, P

A. Aryasomayajula, P. Bayat, P. Rezai, and P. R. Selvaga napathy, Microﬂuidic Devices and Their Applications. In: B. Brushan (ed.), Springer Handbook of Nanotechnology (Springer, Berlin, 2017), pp.487. 13

work page 2017
[19]

Bordag, G

M. Bordag, G. L. Klimchitskaya, U. Mohideen, and V. M. Mo stepanenko, Advances in the Casimir Eﬀect (Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2015)

work page 2015
[20]

G. L. Klimchitskaya, U. Mohideen, and V. M. Mostepanenk o, The Casimir force between real materials: Experiment and theory, Rev. Mod. Phys. 81, 1827 (2009)

work page 2009
[21]

G. L. Klimchitskaya, U. Mohideen, and V. M. Mostepanenk o, Control of the Casimir force using semiconductor test bodies, Int. J. Mod. Phys. B 25, 171 (2011)

work page 2011
[22]

A. W. Rodriguez, F. Capasso, and S. G. Johnson, The Casim ir eﬀect in microstructured geometries, Nat. Photonics 5, 211 (2011)

work page 2011
[23]

L. M. Woods, D. A. R. Dalvit, A. Tkachenko, P. Rodriguez- Lopez, A. W. Rodriguez, and R. Podgornik, Materials Prospective on Casimir and van der W aals interactions, Rev. Mod. Phys. 88, 045003 (2016)

work page 2016
[24]

H. B. Chan, V. A. Aksyuk, R. N. Kleiman, D. J. Bishop, and F . Capasso, Nonlinear Microme- chanical Casimir Oscillator, Phys. Rev. Lett. 87, 211801 (2001)

work page 2001
[25]

Barcenas, L

J. Barcenas, L. Reyes, and R. Esquivel-Sirvent, Scalin g of micro- and nanodevices actuated by the Casimir force, Appl. Phys. Lett. 87, 263106 (2005)

work page 2005
[26]

Esquivel-Sirvent and R

R. Esquivel-Sirvent and R. P´ erez-Pasqual, Geometry a nd charge carrier induced stability in Casimir actuated nanodevices, Eur. Phys. J. B 86, 467 (2013)

work page 2013
[27]

Broer, G

W. Broer, G. Palasantzas, J. Knoester, and V. B. Svetovo y, Signiﬁcance of the Casimir force and surface roughness for actuation dynamics of MEMS, Phys. Rev. B 87, 125413 (2013)

work page 2013
[28]

Sedighi, W

M. Sedighi, W. H. Broer, G. Palasantzas, and B. J. Kooi, S ensitivity of micromechanical actuation on amorphous to crystalline phase transformatio ns under the inﬂuence of Casimir forces, Phys. Rev. B 88, 165423 (2013)

work page 2013
[29]

J. Zou, Z. Marcet, A. W. Rodriguez, M. T. H. Reid, A. P. McC auley, I. I. Kravchenko, T. Lu, Y. Bao, S. G. Johnson, and H. B. Chan, Casimir forces on a silic on micromechanical chip, Nat. Commun. 4, 1845 (2013)

work page 2013
[30]

Broer, H

W. Broer, H. Waalkens, V. B. Svetovoy, J. Knoester, and G . Palasantzas, Nonlinear Actuation Dynamics of Driven Casimir Oscillators with Rough Surfaces , Phys. Rev. Appl. 4, 054016 (2015)

work page 2015
[31]

Inui, Optical switching of a graphene mechanical swi tch using the Casimir eﬀect, J

N. Inui, Optical switching of a graphene mechanical swi tch using the Casimir eﬀect, J. Appl. Phys. 122, 104501 (2017)

work page 2017
[32]

G. L. Klimchitskaya, V. M. Mostepanenko, V. M. Petrov, a nd T. Tschudi, Optical Chopper 14 Driven by the Casimir Force, Phys. Rev. Applied 10, 014010 (2018)

work page 2018
[33]

G. L. Klimchitskaya, V. M. Mostepanenko, E. K. Nepomnya shchaya, and E. N. Velichko, Impact of magnetic nanoparticles on the Casimir pressure in three-layer systems, Phys. Rev. B 99, 045433 (2019)

work page 2019
[34]

V. M. Mostepanenko, V. B. Bezerra, R. S. Decca, E. Fischb ach, B. Geyer, G. L. Klimchitskaya, D. E. Krauze, D. L´ opez, and C. Romero, Present status of cont roversies regarding the thermal Casimir force, J. Phys.: Math. Gen. 39, 6589 (2005)

work page 2005
[35]

G. L. Klimchitskaya and V. M. Mostepanenko, Experiment and theory in the Casimir eﬀect, Contemp. Phys. 47, 131 (2006)

work page 2006
[36]

Tem perature dependence of the Casimir eﬀect

V. B. Bezerra, R. S. Decca, E. Fischbach, B. Geyer, G. L. K limchitskaya, D. E. Krauze, D. L´ opez, V. M. Mostepanenko, and C. Romero, Comment on “Tem perature dependence of the Casimir eﬀect”, Phys. Rev. E 73, 028101 (2006)

work page 2006
[37]

Chang, A

C.-C. Chang, A. A. Banishev, R. Castillo-Garza, G. L. Kl imchitskaya, V. M. Mostepanenko, and U. Mohideen, Gradient of the Casimir force between Au sur faces of a sphere and a plate measured using an atomic force microscope in a frequency-sh ift technique, Phys. Rev. B 85, 165443 (2012)

work page 2012
[38]

A. A. Banishev, C.-C. Chang, G. L. Klimchitskaya, V. M. M ostepanenko, and U. Mohideen, Measurement of the gradient of the Casimir force between a no nmagnetic gold sphere and a magnetic nickel plate, Phys. Rev. B 85, 195422 (2012)

work page 2012
[39]

A. A. Banishev, G. L. Klimchitskaya, V. M. Mostepanenko , and U. Mohideen, Demonstration of the Casimir Force Between Ferromagnetic Surfaces of a Ni- Coated Sphere and a Ni-Coated Plate, Phys. Rev. Lett. 110, 137401 (2013)

work page 2013
[40]

A. A. Banishev, G. L. Klimchitskaya, V. M. Mostepanenko , and U. Mohideen, Casimir inter- action between two magnetic metals in comparison with nonma gnetic test bodies, Phys. Rev. B 88, 155410 (2013)

work page 2013
[41]

Bimonte, D

G. Bimonte, D. L´ opez, and R. S. Decca, Isoelectronic de termination of the thermal Casimir force, Phys. Rev. B 93, 184434 (2016)

work page 2016
[42]

J. Xu, G. L. Klimchitskaya, V. M. Mostepanenko, and U. Mo hideen, Reducing detrimen- tal electrostatic eﬀects in Casimir-force measurements and Casimir-force-based microdevices, Phys. Rev. A 97, 032501 (2018)

work page 2018
[43]

G. L. Klimchitskaya and V. M. Mostepanenko, Observabil ity of thermal eﬀects in the Casimir 15 interaction from graphene-coated substrates, Phys. Rev. A 89, 052512 (2014)

work page 2014
[44]

Geyer, G

B. Geyer, G. L. Klimchitskaya, and V. M. Mostepanenko, T hermal Casimir interaction be- tween two magnetodielectric plates, Phys. Rev. B 81, 104101 (2010)

work page 2010
[45]

E. D. Palik (ed.), Handbook of Optical Constants of Solids (Academic Press, New York, 1985)

work page 1985
[46]

D. B. Hough and L. R. White, The calculation of Hamaker co nstants from Liftshitz theory with applications to wetting phenomena, Adv. Colloid. Inte rface Sci. 14, 3 (1980)

work page 1980
[47]

Bergstr¨ om, Hamaker constants in inorganic materia ls, Adv

L. Bergstr¨ om, Hamaker constants in inorganic materia ls, Adv. Coll. Interface Sci. 70, 125 (1997)

work page 1997
[48]

Schlegel, S

A. Schlegel, S. F. Alvarado, and P. Wachter, Optical pro perties of magnetite (Fe 3O4), J. Phys. C: Solid State Phys. 12, 1157 (1979)

work page 1979
[49]

G. L. Klimchitskaya and V. M. Mostepanenko, Conductivi ty of dielectric and thermal atom- wall interaction, J. Phys. A: Math. Theor. 41, 312002 (2008)

work page 2008
[50]

Chang, A

C.-C. Chang, A. A. Banishev, G. L. Klimchitskaya, V. M. M ostepanenko, and U. Mohideen, Reduction of the Casimir Force from Indium Tin Oxide Film by U V Treatment, Phys. Rev. Lett. 107, 090403 (2011)

work page 2011
[51]

A. A. Banishev, C.-C. Chang, R. Castillo-Garza, G. L. Kl imchitskaya, V. M. Mostepanenko, and U. Mohideen, Modifying the Casimir force between indium tin oxide ﬁlm and Au sphere, Phys. Rev. B 85, 045436 (2012)

work page 2012
[52]

van Berkum, J

S. van Berkum, J. T. Dee, A. P. Philipse, and B. E. Ern´ e, F requency-dependent magnetic susceptibility of magnetite and cobalt ferrite nanopartic les embedded in PAA hydrogel, Int. J. Mol. Sci. 14, 10162 (2013)

work page 2013
[53]

J. N. Munday, F. Capasso, and V. A. Parsegian, Measured l ong-range repulsive Casimir- LIfshitz forces, Nature 457, 170 (2009)

work page 2009
[54]

Le Cunuder, A

A. Le Cunuder, A. Petrosyan, G. Palasantzas, V. Svetovo y, and S. Ciliberto, Measurement of the Casimir force in a gas and in a liquid, Phys. Rev. B 98, 201408R (2018). 16 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 0.05 0.10 0.50 1.00 5.00 10.00 a (µm) P (mPa) 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 0.001 0.01 0.1 1 a (µm) |P |(mPa) (b) (a) FIG. 1: (a) The Casimir pressure between Au and SiO 2 plates thro...

work page 2018

[1] [1]

R. E. Rosensweig, Ferrohydrodynamics (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1985)

work page 1985

[2] [2]

W. Luo, S. R. Nagel, T. F. Rosenbaum, and R. E. Rosensweig, Dipole Interactions with Random Anisotropy in a Frosen Ferroﬂuid, Phys. Rev. Lett. 67, 2721 (1991)

work page 1991

[3] [3]

Klokkenburg, B

M. Klokkenburg, B. H. Ern´ e, J. D. Meeldijk, A. Wiedenman n, A. V. Petukhov, R. P. A. Dul- lens, and A. P. Philipse, In Situ Imaging of Field-Induced He xagonal Columns in Magnetite Ferroﬂuids, Phys. Rev. Lett. 97, 185702 (2006)

work page 2006

[4] [4]

L. Mao, S. Elborai, X. He, M. Zahn, and H. Koser, Direct obs ervation of closed-loop ferrohy- drodynamic pumping under travelling magnetic ﬁelds, Phys. Rev. B 84, 104431 (2011)

work page 2011

[5] [5]

Wiedenmann, R

A. Wiedenmann, R. G¨ ahler, C. D. Dewhurst, U. Keiderling , S. Pr´ evost, and J. Kohlbrecher, Relaxation mechanisms in magnetic colloids studied by stro boscopic spin-polarized small-angle neutron scattering, Phys. Rev. B 84, 214303 (2011)

work page 2011

[6] [6]

Philip, and J

J. Philip, and J. M. Laskar, Optical properties and appli cations of ferroﬂuids — A review, J. Nanoﬂuids 1, 3 (2012)

work page 2012

[7] [7]

J. O. Sindt, P. J. Camp, S. S. Kantorovich, E. A. Elﬁmova,, and A. O. Ivanov, Inﬂuence of dipolar interactions on the magnetic susceptibility spect ra of ferroﬂuids, Phys. Rev. E 93, 12 063117 (2016)

work page 2016

[8] [8]

E. K. Nepomnyashchaya, A. V. Prokoﬁev, E. N. Velichko, I. V. Pleshakov, and Yu. I. Kuzmin, Investigation of magneto-optical properties of ferroﬂuid s by laser light scattering techniques, J. Magn. and Magn. Mat. 431, 24 (2017)

work page 2017

[9] [9]

Bland, G

T. Bland, G. W. Stagg, L. Galantucci, A. W. Baggaley, and N . G. Parker, Quantum Ferroﬂuid Turbulence, Phys. Rev. Lett. 121, 174501 (2018)

work page 2018

[10] [10]

W. Lin, Y. Miao, H. Zhang, B. Liu, Y. Liu, and B. Song, Fibe r-optic in-line magnetic ﬁeld sensor based on the magnetic ﬂuid and multimode interferenc e eﬀects, Appl. Phys. Lett. 103, 151101 (2013)

work page 2013

[11] [11]

Internet of Things, Smart Spaces and Next Generation Networks and Syste ms,

A. V. Prokoﬁev, E. K. Nepomnyashchaya, I. V. Pleshakov, Yu. I. Kuzmin, E. N. Velichko, and E. T. Aksenov, Study of speciﬁc features of laser radiati on scattering by aggregates of nanoparticles in ferroﬂuids used for optoelectronic commu nication systems, in “Internet of Things, Smart Spaces and Next Generation Networks and Syste ms,” edited by O. Galinin...

work page 2016

[12] [12]

E. K. Nepomnyashchaya, E. N. Velichko, I. V. Pleshakov, E. T. Aksenov, and E. A. Savchenko, Investigation of ferroﬂuid nanostructure by laser light sc attering: medical applications, J. Phys.: Conf. Ser. 841, 012020 (2017)

work page 2017

[13] [13]

Saga and T

N. Saga and T. Nakamura, Elucidation of propulsive forc e of microrobot using magnetic ﬂuid, J. Appl. Phys. 91, 7003 (2002)

work page 2002

[14] [14]

Goubault, P

C. Goubault, P. Jop, M. Fermigier, J. Baudry, E. Bertran d, and J. Bibette, Flexible Magnetic Filaments as Micromechanical Sensors, Phys. Rev. Lett. 91, 260802 (2003)

work page 2003

[15] [15]

Pekas, M

N. Pekas, M. D. Porter, M. Tondra, A. Popple, and A. Jande r, Giant magnetoresistance monitoring of magnetic picodroplets in an integrated micro ﬂuidic system, Appl. Phys. Lett. 85, 4783 (2004)

work page 2004

[16] [16]

D. W. Inglis, R. Riehn, R. H. Austin, and J. C. Sturm, Cont inuous microﬂuidic immunomag- netic cell separation, Appl. Phys. Lett. 85, 5093 (2004)

work page 2004

[17] [17]

Vellaichamy and J

M. Vellaichamy and J. Philip, Nanoﬂuid based optical se nsor for rapid visual inspection of defects in ferromagnetic materials, Appl. Phys. Lett. 100, 073104 (2012)

work page 2012

[18] [18]

Aryasomayajula, P

A. Aryasomayajula, P. Bayat, P. Rezai, and P. R. Selvaga napathy, Microﬂuidic Devices and Their Applications. In: B. Brushan (ed.), Springer Handbook of Nanotechnology (Springer, Berlin, 2017), pp.487. 13

work page 2017

[19] [19]

Bordag, G

M. Bordag, G. L. Klimchitskaya, U. Mohideen, and V. M. Mo stepanenko, Advances in the Casimir Eﬀect (Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2015)

work page 2015

[20] [20]

G. L. Klimchitskaya, U. Mohideen, and V. M. Mostepanenk o, The Casimir force between real materials: Experiment and theory, Rev. Mod. Phys. 81, 1827 (2009)

work page 2009

[21] [21]

G. L. Klimchitskaya, U. Mohideen, and V. M. Mostepanenk o, Control of the Casimir force using semiconductor test bodies, Int. J. Mod. Phys. B 25, 171 (2011)

work page 2011

[22] [22]

A. W. Rodriguez, F. Capasso, and S. G. Johnson, The Casim ir eﬀect in microstructured geometries, Nat. Photonics 5, 211 (2011)

work page 2011

[23] [23]

L. M. Woods, D. A. R. Dalvit, A. Tkachenko, P. Rodriguez- Lopez, A. W. Rodriguez, and R. Podgornik, Materials Prospective on Casimir and van der W aals interactions, Rev. Mod. Phys. 88, 045003 (2016)

work page 2016

[24] [24]

H. B. Chan, V. A. Aksyuk, R. N. Kleiman, D. J. Bishop, and F . Capasso, Nonlinear Microme- chanical Casimir Oscillator, Phys. Rev. Lett. 87, 211801 (2001)

work page 2001

[25] [25]

Barcenas, L

J. Barcenas, L. Reyes, and R. Esquivel-Sirvent, Scalin g of micro- and nanodevices actuated by the Casimir force, Appl. Phys. Lett. 87, 263106 (2005)

work page 2005

[26] [26]

Esquivel-Sirvent and R

R. Esquivel-Sirvent and R. P´ erez-Pasqual, Geometry a nd charge carrier induced stability in Casimir actuated nanodevices, Eur. Phys. J. B 86, 467 (2013)

work page 2013

[27] [27]

Broer, G

W. Broer, G. Palasantzas, J. Knoester, and V. B. Svetovo y, Signiﬁcance of the Casimir force and surface roughness for actuation dynamics of MEMS, Phys. Rev. B 87, 125413 (2013)

work page 2013

[28] [28]

Sedighi, W

M. Sedighi, W. H. Broer, G. Palasantzas, and B. J. Kooi, S ensitivity of micromechanical actuation on amorphous to crystalline phase transformatio ns under the inﬂuence of Casimir forces, Phys. Rev. B 88, 165423 (2013)

work page 2013

[29] [29]

J. Zou, Z. Marcet, A. W. Rodriguez, M. T. H. Reid, A. P. McC auley, I. I. Kravchenko, T. Lu, Y. Bao, S. G. Johnson, and H. B. Chan, Casimir forces on a silic on micromechanical chip, Nat. Commun. 4, 1845 (2013)

work page 2013

[30] [30]

Broer, H

W. Broer, H. Waalkens, V. B. Svetovoy, J. Knoester, and G . Palasantzas, Nonlinear Actuation Dynamics of Driven Casimir Oscillators with Rough Surfaces , Phys. Rev. Appl. 4, 054016 (2015)

work page 2015

[31] [31]

Inui, Optical switching of a graphene mechanical swi tch using the Casimir eﬀect, J

N. Inui, Optical switching of a graphene mechanical swi tch using the Casimir eﬀect, J. Appl. Phys. 122, 104501 (2017)

work page 2017

[32] [32]

G. L. Klimchitskaya, V. M. Mostepanenko, V. M. Petrov, a nd T. Tschudi, Optical Chopper 14 Driven by the Casimir Force, Phys. Rev. Applied 10, 014010 (2018)

work page 2018

[33] [33]

G. L. Klimchitskaya, V. M. Mostepanenko, E. K. Nepomnya shchaya, and E. N. Velichko, Impact of magnetic nanoparticles on the Casimir pressure in three-layer systems, Phys. Rev. B 99, 045433 (2019)

work page 2019

[34] [34]

V. M. Mostepanenko, V. B. Bezerra, R. S. Decca, E. Fischb ach, B. Geyer, G. L. Klimchitskaya, D. E. Krauze, D. L´ opez, and C. Romero, Present status of cont roversies regarding the thermal Casimir force, J. Phys.: Math. Gen. 39, 6589 (2005)

work page 2005

[35] [35]

G. L. Klimchitskaya and V. M. Mostepanenko, Experiment and theory in the Casimir eﬀect, Contemp. Phys. 47, 131 (2006)

work page 2006

[36] [36]

Tem perature dependence of the Casimir eﬀect

V. B. Bezerra, R. S. Decca, E. Fischbach, B. Geyer, G. L. K limchitskaya, D. E. Krauze, D. L´ opez, V. M. Mostepanenko, and C. Romero, Comment on “Tem perature dependence of the Casimir eﬀect”, Phys. Rev. E 73, 028101 (2006)

work page 2006

[37] [37]

Chang, A

C.-C. Chang, A. A. Banishev, R. Castillo-Garza, G. L. Kl imchitskaya, V. M. Mostepanenko, and U. Mohideen, Gradient of the Casimir force between Au sur faces of a sphere and a plate measured using an atomic force microscope in a frequency-sh ift technique, Phys. Rev. B 85, 165443 (2012)

work page 2012

[38] [38]

A. A. Banishev, C.-C. Chang, G. L. Klimchitskaya, V. M. M ostepanenko, and U. Mohideen, Measurement of the gradient of the Casimir force between a no nmagnetic gold sphere and a magnetic nickel plate, Phys. Rev. B 85, 195422 (2012)

work page 2012

[39] [39]

A. A. Banishev, G. L. Klimchitskaya, V. M. Mostepanenko , and U. Mohideen, Demonstration of the Casimir Force Between Ferromagnetic Surfaces of a Ni- Coated Sphere and a Ni-Coated Plate, Phys. Rev. Lett. 110, 137401 (2013)

work page 2013

[40] [40]

A. A. Banishev, G. L. Klimchitskaya, V. M. Mostepanenko , and U. Mohideen, Casimir inter- action between two magnetic metals in comparison with nonma gnetic test bodies, Phys. Rev. B 88, 155410 (2013)

work page 2013

[41] [41]

Bimonte, D

G. Bimonte, D. L´ opez, and R. S. Decca, Isoelectronic de termination of the thermal Casimir force, Phys. Rev. B 93, 184434 (2016)

work page 2016

[42] [42]

J. Xu, G. L. Klimchitskaya, V. M. Mostepanenko, and U. Mo hideen, Reducing detrimen- tal electrostatic eﬀects in Casimir-force measurements and Casimir-force-based microdevices, Phys. Rev. A 97, 032501 (2018)

work page 2018

[43] [43]

G. L. Klimchitskaya and V. M. Mostepanenko, Observabil ity of thermal eﬀects in the Casimir 15 interaction from graphene-coated substrates, Phys. Rev. A 89, 052512 (2014)

work page 2014

[44] [44]

Geyer, G

B. Geyer, G. L. Klimchitskaya, and V. M. Mostepanenko, T hermal Casimir interaction be- tween two magnetodielectric plates, Phys. Rev. B 81, 104101 (2010)

work page 2010

[45] [45]

E. D. Palik (ed.), Handbook of Optical Constants of Solids (Academic Press, New York, 1985)

work page 1985

[46] [46]

D. B. Hough and L. R. White, The calculation of Hamaker co nstants from Liftshitz theory with applications to wetting phenomena, Adv. Colloid. Inte rface Sci. 14, 3 (1980)

work page 1980

[47] [47]

Bergstr¨ om, Hamaker constants in inorganic materia ls, Adv

L. Bergstr¨ om, Hamaker constants in inorganic materia ls, Adv. Coll. Interface Sci. 70, 125 (1997)

work page 1997

[48] [48]

Schlegel, S

A. Schlegel, S. F. Alvarado, and P. Wachter, Optical pro perties of magnetite (Fe 3O4), J. Phys. C: Solid State Phys. 12, 1157 (1979)

work page 1979

[49] [49]

G. L. Klimchitskaya and V. M. Mostepanenko, Conductivi ty of dielectric and thermal atom- wall interaction, J. Phys. A: Math. Theor. 41, 312002 (2008)

work page 2008

[50] [50]

Chang, A

C.-C. Chang, A. A. Banishev, G. L. Klimchitskaya, V. M. M ostepanenko, and U. Mohideen, Reduction of the Casimir Force from Indium Tin Oxide Film by U V Treatment, Phys. Rev. Lett. 107, 090403 (2011)

work page 2011

[51] [51]

A. A. Banishev, C.-C. Chang, R. Castillo-Garza, G. L. Kl imchitskaya, V. M. Mostepanenko, and U. Mohideen, Modifying the Casimir force between indium tin oxide ﬁlm and Au sphere, Phys. Rev. B 85, 045436 (2012)

work page 2012

[52] [52]

van Berkum, J

S. van Berkum, J. T. Dee, A. P. Philipse, and B. E. Ern´ e, F requency-dependent magnetic susceptibility of magnetite and cobalt ferrite nanopartic les embedded in PAA hydrogel, Int. J. Mol. Sci. 14, 10162 (2013)

work page 2013

[53] [53]

J. N. Munday, F. Capasso, and V. A. Parsegian, Measured l ong-range repulsive Casimir- LIfshitz forces, Nature 457, 170 (2009)

work page 2009

[54] [54]

Le Cunuder, A

A. Le Cunuder, A. Petrosyan, G. Palasantzas, V. Svetovo y, and S. Ciliberto, Measurement of the Casimir force in a gas and in a liquid, Phys. Rev. B 98, 201408R (2018). 16 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 0.05 0.10 0.50 1.00 5.00 10.00 a (µm) P (mPa) 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 0.001 0.01 0.1 1 a (µm) |P |(mPa) (b) (a) FIG. 1: (a) The Casimir pressure between Au and SiO 2 plates thro...

work page 2018