Re: Where Does A Permanent Magnet Get Its Magnetic Field?


"FrediFizzx" <fredifizzx@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:6434mmF29ppvrU1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
"Bill Miller" <billmillerkt4ye@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:eUWCj.24983$cQ1.17660@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

"FrediFizzx" <fredifizzx@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:642osbF28tj9cU1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
"Bill Miller" <billmillerkt4ye@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:aJVCj.24673$cQ1.6014@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
The title of the post pretty much says it all.

The participants of this list seem to have fairly clear agreement that
the primary *cause* of magnetic fields is the motion of charges.

With a few hold-outs, most folks seem to (finally) understand that an E
field does not *cause* an H field. (Those that disagree: p-l-e-a-s-e
read Jefimenko's "Causality" before jumping in to dispute this
statement.)

OK. So far, so good.

A permanent magnet has associated with it a magnetic field whose
characteristics seem to be indistinguishable from those of a magnetic
field that is caused by the motion of charges.

Where the H--- does the H come from? How do we know?

Well, I think we pretty much know that it comes from atomic alignment of
their electron's orbital angular momentum. So there is "local" motion
of charges all coordinated.
IOW, the atomic magnetic moments point in
the same direction and all add up. I don't think many physicists would
disagree with that.

Fred

OK

That answers the first part. Kinda

What is the second part that it doesn't answer?

You said that the effect is local.

How local is local? Atoms? Molecules? Magnetic domains? Blobs?

I do believe I said "atomic" above. However, keep in mind that atomic
"motion" of electrons is dealt with by quantum physics.

I'm perfectly happy to have someone use quantum physics to explain this.
Also, my question still stands.

To clarify. I can imagine a magnetic material in which every atom has
somehow gone into "lock step" with every other other one. I would expect
that would be a pretty powerful magnet. I can imagine a magnetic material
that contains just a pair. Pretty weak.

How are these alignments arrayed? What causes them to become arrayed?

Some permanent magnets appear to, indeed, be permanent. It is
hard-to-impossible to degauss them. Others, like soft steel, are
self-degaussing and their field (there's THAT word again) "decays" with
time. Presumably if we know what mechanisms cause the permanence, we can
understand and why they decay and vice-versa. Do we know why they decay (or
don't)?

How do we know that the theory that you are postulating is correct? IOW
what measurements have been done to validate the statement you have made?

It's not my theory

I did not say it was your theory. I carefully tried to avoid that situation
by saying "the theory that you are postulating."

and I would imagine

*imagine?!*

I'm sorry, Fred, but this is not an answer that is even close to acceptable!
Over the last year or two, I have made some kinda outrageous claims about EM
theory on this list. In every instance, I believe I have backed up those
claims with references to documentation that is clear and readily available.
(In fact, I hope you are reading one of those references now!)

you could find experimental references in a good solid state physics book.

Which ones? Author's names? Page references?

And I would also imagine

THAT word again!

that hard drive companies especially IBM should have some experimental
evidence for you.

If they do, how likely is it that I could write them and they would send it?

What about some_available_ references that show in a clear and unambiguous
way that the theory you postualted is valid?

Otherwise, its about as valid as phlogiston!

Cheers,

Bill

Best,

Fred Diether
Co-moderator sci.physics.foundations


.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: rotating magnetic field
    ... no density change takes place in rotation. ... when the orientation of that relative motion is not resulting in a change ... of the magnitude and direction of the magnet. ... I speculate that perhaps the spin alignment of the atoms of the magnet is ...
    (sci.physics.electromag)
  • Re: what motion? what velocity?
    ... |> | disk and the magnet. ... | Two counter rotating point charges will exert lorentz forces upon one ... | the rotating frame there should only be the Coulomb forces acting, ... | This extra force arises when the point charges are in motion relative ...
    (sci.physics.electromag)
  • Re: Check your idiots at the door, please
    ... >>magnetic force is repulsive because the charges are opposite. ... In the frame of the electrons, ... because there is no relative motion between the charges. ... hard magnet with a classical B field, the direction of the force on ...
    (sci.physics)
  • Re: Jefimenkoo, Panofskyy, Phillips And All The Rest
    ... ultimately caused by charged particles and their motion microscopically. ... If you toss a bar magnet thru a loop of wire, ... doubt it's an E field because it accelerates charges. ...
    (sci.physics.electromag)
  • Re: what motion? what velocity?
    ... | demonstration by Faraday he used a large spining magnet. ...  The same goes for non-rotation motion. ... he rotated the magnet and the conductive disk together, ... Suppose you have a conductor arranged to resemble a conveyor belt. ...
    (sci.physics.electromag)