You seem to have separated "absorbing a photon" and "accelerated by the E field" as intrinsically separate events. In reality, these are different words for the same thing. Classical electrodynamics doesn't have the concept of photons, and QED which brings in the discrete nature is hard to explain because quantum is weird. If you aren't familiar with them, I can post the classical EM equations that can be used to show how energy and momentum would balance for an electron being accelerated by the E-field.[1] These are perfectly valid equations as long as you are operating in the regime of large numbers (avoid quantum and individual photons), which should be good for an electron in a strong, roughly uniform E-field.
an interesting and peer reviewed article about the content of this discussion:Does the speed of light depend upon the vacuum ?
In an absolute empty vacuum the induced charges would be null because there would be no charges to be separated and the capacitance of our parallel-plate capacitor would go to zero when we would remove all molecules of the gas.
arXiv does not do peer reviews
QuotearXiv does not do peer reviewsbut EPJ doesThe quantum vacuum as the origin of the speed of light
If you have criticisms on Xavier's article send him an email and speak directly with him: you can improve the quality of his article.
However virtual pairs exist: it has been proven experimentally. (See the link in my first post).
If they exist, they affect the vacuum permittivity, the vacuum permeability, and the speed of light in the vacuum.
What happens if you delete them?
It's not my field of experience but reading the article from Scharnhorst I'm convinced that:...
If you think the articles you provided show this, you did not understand what they said.
astronomical data makes this extraordinarily improbable
QuoteIf you think the articles you provided show this, you did not understand what they said.from the first article <<We describe the ground state of the unperturbed vacuum as containing a finite density of charged ephemeral fermions antifermions pairs. Within this framework, ε0 and μ0 originate simply from the electric polarization and from the magnetization of these pairs when the vacuum is stressed by an electrostatic or a magnetostatic field respectively. Our calculated values for ε0 and μ0 are equal to the measured values when the fermion pairs are produced with an average energy of about 30 times their rest mass. The finite speed of a photon is due to its successive transient captures by these virtual particles. >>
You look very skeptical .... but what I'm most interested in is this:Quoteastronomical data makes this extraordinarily improbableCould you expand this point better?
so direct experimental observation is possible....it may seem obvious but it would be very important to do an experimental test considering the implications of the article.
Summarizing briefly:1) With an electric and / or magnetic field, the lifetime of virtual pairs increases and this results in a reduction in the speed of light.2) However, if the field is higher than Schwinger's limit, virtual dipoles break into electrons and positrons. Since a single electron or positron can not absorb a photon, the photons move in the vacuum without interacting: the value of c increases.Point 1 is in article "Does the speed of light depend upon the vacuum ?".Point 2 is my hypothesis: the only thing tried experimentally is that with a field larger than the Schwinger limit electrons and positrons appear in the vacuum....If you found any mistakes in the information provided and/or non-physical assumption please tell me: I am particularly concerned with errors in point 2. Thank you.
**** Hypothesis: ****Another way of seeing the main topic: (Breaking Schwinger limit and negative energy)Virtual pairs are created for a temporary violation of energy conservation.With such a large electrical field, it becomes a permanent violation, generating positive mass (ie positive energy).There must be a more general conservation law requiring that even negative energy be generated to compensate....
There is no energy violation that needs negative energy to account for it, because electromagnetic fields are transferring energy to the system
Because of relativity, being above the Schwinger limit actually requires multiple photons.
The multiple photons breaks the"can't be absorbed" rule, as does the fact that the electron and positron would be in close proximity after they separate.
QuoteThere is no energy violation that needs negative energy to account for it, because electromagnetic fields are transferring energy to the systemPerhaps there are so efficient ways of converting energy into an electric field (superconductors?) that the energy demands to power a field higher than the schwinger limit is less than the energy of the pairs created.Are there any theoretical considerations that can exclude with certainty that possibility?
and returning to the topic "Scharnhorst effect + EM field greater than the Schwinger limit =c value increase"can you explain better:QuoteBecause of relativity, being above the Schwinger limit actually requires multiple photons.
QuoteThe multiple photons breaks the"can't be absorbed" rule, as does the fact that the electron and positron would be in close proximity after they separate. Even if the two particles are in close proximity you can make the probability of the interaction with the photons as small as you want simply increasing the field.more intense the field => less time the two particles are close enough to absorb the photon
I don't see how the probability of interaction could ever change from 100%. No matter how strong the external field, the field of the particles will still be able make them interact with each other, allowing an energy and momentum balance to be created. That is without the fact that once you add in quantum (which you have to do at this scale) wave-particle duality means that these particles probably start out literally overlapping.