What are magnetic field lines made of?

Hehe.

reply to post by JaxCavalera

Your idea to describe the magnetic field by two separated charges is called the electrostatic analogue. But it is not really needed.

There is a particle property called "spin" and there is also a angular momentum of electron moving relative to the nucleus creating a magnetic moment. You can say every atom is a elemental magnet depending on its configuration.

Wikipedia:

For example, the magnetic moment of an atom of hydrogen(consisting of a proton and an electron) is a vector sum of the following contributions: (1) the intrinsic moment of the electron, (2) the orbital motion of the electron around the proton, (3) the intrinsic moment of the proton. Similarly, the magnetic moment of a bar magnet is the sum of the intrinsic and orbital magnetic moments of the unpaired electrons of the magnet's material.

reply to post by JaxCavalera

This is an interesting concept, it made me think that perhaps the South end of a magnet is where all the Electrons reside and the North end is where the Protons reside and then you have the field lines being made up of Neutrons that allow the flow of the field to occur? (seems simplistic and no doubt wrong but still it's something that did occur to me as I read this).

It is good to see that you are trying to piece this intricate world together. The main error is with mixing sub atomic and atomic processes, there are strong relationships between these two but also differences. Except for nuclear reactions, the neutrons and protons of an atom remain the same and do not move from atom to atom. It is the electrons that move around and form the bindings of the weak nuclear force to form molecules (groups of atoms).

I mean in essence, it would more likely be that each pole were either a Proton and the opposite end a Neutron gathering point and the lines the Electrons. The only thing that makes me unsure of this is that if they were electrons, can electrons move other electrons?

This is getting closer and yes, electrons can move other other electrons. An electrical current flowing through a wire is one example of this. Within an atom there are a heap of electrons and protons, you can forget about the neutrons for now as they have no charge. Depending on their overall structure there is going to be one side of the atom that has a slight positive charge and the other end will have a slight negative charge. When all the atoms are facing the same way this slight difference in the polarity of the atom is reinforced and builds up due to all of its neighbours.

It seems to me that perhaps instead Neutrons may be able to move electrons due to them facilitating an attraction between the North and South poles of the magnet and thus they would substitute some of the Neutron field lines from connecting to the South end of the magnet (where the Electrons reside).

It is the supply of other electrons and the attractive forces of protons that move electrons.

Yes I am after some information relating to what the magnetic field lines are composed of as I also don't believe they are totally virtual being that they are a tangible force. Centrifugal force on the other hand is only a virtual force as it doesn't exist and I don't feel that it really is on the same level as the composition of magnetic field lines being that it's a term used to describe an effect, where as Magnetic Field Lines is a term used to describe physical (in the same sense as light or air are physical).

Magnetic and centrifugal force are both real. When moving between microscopic and macroscopic levels of scale there are many other interactions going on.

Moebius & kwakakev :

Firstly thank you again for even more information and further explanation. This is very helpful stuff. When I was younger in school, I never had the capacity to comprehend any of this stuff but as we all find out, a lot of it is of great use if we wish to create new innovative applications for things like this.

@ Moebius, This is very interesting indeed, so each Atom is an elemental magnet due to how Atoms work and connect together? Does this mean that perhaps a bar magnet for example would be pretty much a physical example of an Atom?

@ kwakakev. I read that for every Proton in the Nucleus, there exists 1 Electron outside the Nucleus and that each Electron is separated from one another by some kind of barrier (they had a diagram of a sphere).

My question is that if an Electron exists because a Proton exists and the Electron is a Negatively charged particle versus a positively charged Proton particle : Would the Electron's movement be a direct inverted representation of it's corresponding Proton?

Regarding Neutrons, I was more picturing them as the "Lan Cable" between 2 computers. It's a non charged particle that facilitates the connection between Relative Opposites and so it never leaves it's own "Atom" (magnet) but instead finds the path of least resistance between the 2 Opposites. So in the case of moving a Magnet near a wire, the electrons in the copper would be closer the other end of the magnet so the magnet would substitute. I think My problem with all of this is that I don't fully understand an Electron.

I thought I understood what an Electron was but I guess it's more complicated than just a Negatively Charged Particle. Or perhaps it's my understanding of a particle... OR perhaps I just got what you mean...

So for an Electron to move another Electron, it's actually an action of Repelling (pushing) and not Attracting (pulling)?

Sorry if these questions seem dumb but I find that this seems to be helping me to learn and understand all this stuff much quicker than I ever could from reading very lengthy and over technical wikipedia pages on their own. I am finding that all these helpful replies in conjunction with wikipedia, I'm getting much faster results.

Unfortunately, my brain is more on the creative side and not the logical side so this stuff doesn't come naturally to me but I'm more than happy to put in the extra work to understand it so I can get more creative with the new logical knowledge I obtain.

reply to post by JaxCavalera

Does this mean that perhaps a bar magnet for example would be pretty much a physical example of an Atom?

It is a physical example of a group of atoms. The macroscopic world is the sum of the microscopic interactions. I think Plato would have loved this one.
For some reason it is possible to superpose the fundamental forces. There is no shielding. It is all cancellation and/or amplification.

I thought I understood what an Electron was but I guess it's more complicated than just a Negatively Charged Particle.

You are not alone with this one. Even Richard Feynman had his fun with electrons. Read his Nobel lecture: nobelprize.org...

PS: You can skip the parts with the math.

reply to post by JaxCavalera

so each Atom is an elemental magnet due to how Atoms work and connect together? Does this mean that perhaps a bar magnet for example would be pretty much a physical example of an Atom?

This is a very good way to describe it. The one thing to remember with the bar magnet is that all these atomic magnets are aligned in the same direction. If all these atomic magnets where scattered in random directions then there would be overall magnetic strength as the atomic poles conflict and cancel each other out.

I read that for every Proton in the Nucleus, there exists 1 Electron outside the Nucleus and that each Electron is separated from one another by some kind of barrier (they had a diagram of a sphere).

For the atom to be stable there is a matching of electrons and protons. If the atom is missing an electron then it is more likely to attract one and if it has a spare electron then it is more likely to lose one. As electricity flows through a wire there is a consistent juggling of these atoms losing and gaining electrons as the force flows. It does get complex as there are other concepts like valance and electron shell that also affect how different elements react and share electrons.

Would the Electron's movement be a direct inverted representation of it's corresponding Proton?

It is an interesting concept, but do not know enough about the proton to comment. What I do know is that an electrons movement is governed by its environment with things like heat, charge and chemistry.

I think My problem with all of this is that I don't fully understand an Electron.

Then I suggest you start playing with electricity, there are self eduction kits you can get from places like Radio Shack that introduce the basic components and how it works. The most important part is understanding the relationships between voltage, amps and resistance. It does take time.

So for an Electron to move another Electron, it's actually an action of Repelling (pushing) and not Attracting (pulling)?

There is both. In a circuit, the electrons flow from the -ve to the +ve ends of the battery. At the -ve end there is a pushing as all the lose electrons are looking for somewhere to go, at the positive end there is a pulling as all the atoms are looking for and spare electrons.

It is good to see people taking the time to understand this world, just remember the only dumb questions are the ones never asked.

hmm it tripple posted this time :S

same as above :S



They should really give us the ability to "Delete" our own posts for when this happens.

Thanks again guys for even more wealth of information that you are so freely sharing.

I do understand the basic principles of electricity, just not the physics portion of it at this level. It's an exciting journey learning even more about this.

In my recent discoveries with Neo Magnets, I've been noticing that it's very eacrisy for a Magnet to pull against the force of gravity, without requiring any extra force to achieve this goal. I have also noticed that it takes a lot more effort for the magnets to push (repel) against gravity.

From the statement relating to Loose electrons gathering at the -ve end of a circuit and that being a (pushing) action and the electrons gathering at the +ve end of a circuit (pulling). It leads me to consider that the most efficient direction that a current could flow may in fact be from -ve to +ve (pulling) as this is the natural flow of electrons and a repelling or pushing flow or action is working against nature so you could assume that this would mean a greater loss in electron speed as it is being pushed away instead of being naturally drawn towards it's polar opposite Proton?

Moebius, I have had a reasonably quick read over that paper you linked me to. One thing that stands out to be fairly congruent to what I am hoping to achieve was this paragraph :

Therefore, I think equation guessing might be the best method to proceed to obtain the laws for the part of physics which is presently unknown. Yet, when I was much younger, I tried this equation guessing and I have seen many students try this, but it is very easy to go off in wildly incorrect and impossible directions. I think the problem is not to find the best or most efficient method to proceed to a discovery, but to find any method at all. Physical reasoning does help some people to generate suggestions as to how the unknown may be related to the known. Theories of the known, which are described by different physical ideas may be equivalent in all their predictions and are hence scientifically indistinguishable. However, they are not psychologically identical when trying to move from that base into the unknown. For different views suggest different kinds of modifications which might be made and hence are not equivalent in the hypotheses one generates from them in ones attempt to understand what is not yet understood. I, therefore, think that a good theoretical physicist today might find it useful to have a wide range of physical viewpoints and mathematical expressions of the same theory (for example, of quantum electrodynamics) available to him. This may be asking too much of one man.

I have been doing a lot of reading up on non-conventional energy and at the moment I am hoping to discover a way in which I can get the flow of electrons to form a vortex and combine research done in implosion theory with this technology. I have come up with several models thus far but this new line of direction that prompted me to question what exactly a magnetic field line is made up of has been one of the more rewarding directions my thoughts have taken.

In some ways, I'm a bit turned away from conventional physics as it still hasn't managed to answer a lot of these grey area questions to a level that I would be satisfied I could work with and so I feel if I were to study conventional physics from textbooks etc.. I will only end up locking my brain into what we already know instead of keeping my ability to take big (and usually wrong) jumps in alternative directions that the conventional text books and theories would not permit my thoughts to follow. I hope that makes sense, I'm not quite as literate this morning as I usually am.

It's really good to have people like you guys that are willing to assist me in this journey like you are, Looking forward to learning more if you guys are willing to help more.

reply to post by JaxCavalera


It's weirder than you think. Electrons aren't zipping out of the battery and around the loop. What happens is that the battery creates a potential drop around the load. Electrons then drift along the loop due to the potential drop.

In a "normal" sort of circuit, the type you might have around the house with just a few mA or an amp or two, and fairly conductive wiring, the electron drift might not be more than a slow walk, averaged out. The more the current flow, or the worse the conductivity of the wiring, the faster it goes.

reply to post by Bedlam


I'm not sure how this applies to what we are discussing though as we aren't really using a battery as th emans by which electrons are contributed into a closed circuit. Somehow the magnetic field from a magnet is able to .. (for lack of better understanding) .. introduce extra electrons into a circuit as they cut through loops of copper windings..

When this happens, wouldn't the Magnet lose electrons? I may need more time to think over this again and I'm sure it will seem more applicable to this discussion when I do, but just now I don't see it.. perhaps you will be able to help further explain this out to me differently so I can more easily understand how the battery example cn be compared to a magnet in terms of this electron motion and the creation of this potential drop as I understand a battery would contain electrons stored and once a circuit completes it introduces them into the equation and that forces a directional flow of electrons due to the process you described.

I am just not seeing the similarities here unless you are stating that a Magnetic Field is Electrons that never run out or something or it's just displacement of electrons in the wire as those from the magnetic field intercept them?

Originally posted by JaxCavalera
reply to post by Bedlam

 

I'm not sure how this applies to what we are discussing though as we aren't really using a battery as th emans by which electrons are contributed into a closed circuit. Somehow the magnetic field from a magnet is able to .. (for lack of better understanding) .. introduce extra electrons into a circuit as they cut through loops of copper windings..

There were several posts there about batteries, but I digress.

Actually, no, the magnetic field of a magnet doesn't add electrons at all. Like the battery (here comes a tie-in) a changing magnetic field induces a potential. The potential flows around the load at the speed of light in that medium (will be less than in a vacuum) and begins to induce electron drift.

When this happens, wouldn't the Magnet lose electrons?

Nope - doesn't work that way. In fact, it's one of the beauties of transformer coupling, that there is no common electron path, just a magnetic coupling.

...as I understand a battery would contain electrons stored and once a circuit completes it introduces them into the equation and that forces a directional flow of electrons due to the process you described.

Again, the electrons don't zip out of the battery and pass through the load. Eventually some electrons will pass through the battery and into the load but it may take a while, perhaps as much as several minutes. Batteries make potential, just like time-varying magnetic fields.

... it's just displacement of electrons in the wire as those from the magnetic field intercept them?

As the magnetic field changes it creates the potential for the electrons to flow. But only when it's changing. Static magnetic fields do bupkis. At least as far as current flows go. A static magnetic field causes the electrons to spiral if THEY'RE moving. There's usually a "moving" or "changing" in there somewhere.

reply to post by Bedlam


Thanks for not taking offence to me not recognising the connection between the battery example and the constitution of a magnetic field. I was a bit worried you may which would be the opposite of what I was intending. I really just didn't understand the link due to the lack of knowledge relating to the way in which a battery functions.

See I always pictured a battery as a container.. as it is recharged or charged - it fills up with Potential Energy (in the form of electrons as these electrons would be needed to move electrons in the wires. I was under the impression that as you use up the Potential Energy in the battery, it gets more and more flat till it has none left to push into an electronic circuit.

When you refer to the phrase " Induces a Potential." It leaves me wondering what we are talking about : I'm not the sharpest tool in the shed when it comes to physics terminology but I didn't know the word Potential was a noun? What I mean is, .. a battery creates a potential .. what.? IS it the potential for movement? Sorry but you'll have to bear with my lack of comprehension regarding these terms till I am more familiar with what they are specifically referring to. The way it's used I would almost think that the term Potential could be interchanged with the word Current. I'm probably unsure as to how then the battery eventually ceases to work... does it run out of potential? what does this potential consist of?

Actually that last question there may be the one that will help me to better get this example : What does this potential consist of?

See essentially, whatever it is that potential consists of, that would be the very same thing that a moving magnetic field consists of... but a static magnetic field would not consist of this same thing.. somehow movement alters the constitution of a magnetic field is that right?

Thanks for helping thus far I do appreciate it and hope you don't find my (what I feel you would perceive as) simplistic questions too insulting.

Originally posted by kwakakev
The one thing to remember with the bar magnet is that all these atomic magnets are aligned in the same direction. If all these atomic magnets where scattered in random directions then there would be overall magnetic strength as the atomic poles conflict and cancel each other out.

Maybe not ALL of them. OK probably not ALL of them. Almost certainly not ALL of them?

But your point about random orientations canceling each other out is quite valid. All you really need is some imbalance in that random orientation to begin to be able to measure some magnet-like properties.

Would the Electron's movement be a direct inverted representation of it's corresponding Proton?

It is an interesting concept, but do not know enough about the proton to comment. What I do know is that an electrons movement is governed by its environment with things like heat, charge and chemistry.

In a solid like a metal, protons don't move much.

In a semiconductor like the ones in the computer you're using to post here, the negatively charged electron has a "theoretical" counterpart called an "electron hole".

An electron hole is the conceptual and mathematical opposite of an electron, useful in the study of physics, chemistry, and electrical engineering. The concept describes the lack of an electron at a position where one could exist in an atom or atomic lattice. It is different from the positron, which is the antimatter analogue of the electron.

In engineering we don't worry about positrons too much because they are so rare we can neglect them, but electron holes are very significant counterparts to electrons.

The way I think of it is like a game of musical chairs where there are 10 chairs in a circle (representing atoms). Think of the 11 people walking around while the music plays like electrons. The music stops, 10 people sit down and one has no chair, that's like an extra electron. So the 10 negative charges sitting cancel out the 10 positive charges of the atom. the net system charge is -1.

To visualize the electron hole, imagine the same circle of 10 chairs, but this time, there's only 9 people walking around in a circle. When they sit down, there's only 9 negative charges to offset the 10 positive charges in the atoms. Thus the net system charge 10-9 = +1

Thus there's no positively charged particle, but the missing spot where the 10th person would be sort of acts that way.

reply to post by Bedlam

Great answers.

Originally posted by JaxCavalera
Thanks again guys for even more wealth of information that you are so freely sharing.

I do understand the basic principles of electricity, just not the physics portion of it at this level. It's an exciting journey learning even more about this.

I have a gift for you.

It's a free book on the physics of magnetism (and electricity):

www.lulu.com...

If you see something about a price, that's for the hardcopy of the book, but click on the downloadable version and that's free. (I paid about $100 for my textbook, why couldn't my teacher use a free book? Or even a $10 book?)

Then go to page 147, definition of the magnetic field. That may give you some of the physics background you lack.

Originally posted by JaxCavalera
reply to post by Bedlam

 

Thanks for not taking offence to me not recognising the connection between the battery example and the constitution of a magnetic field. I was a bit worried you may which would be the opposite of what I was intending. I really just didn't understand the link due to the lack of knowledge relating to the way in which a battery functions.

See I always pictured a battery as a container.. as it is recharged or charged - it fills up with Potential Energy (in the form of electrons as these electrons would be needed to move electrons in the wires. I was under the impression that as you use up the Potential Energy in the battery, it gets more and more flat till it has none left to push into an electronic circuit.

When you refer to the phrase " Induces a Potential."

You have a pretty decent conceptual handle on that, but you just need to learn terminology. Page 84 of the book covers your conceptual example on stored energy.

Page 85 talks about "voltage" another word for potential. Physicists apply specific meanings to words that can be different in ordinary language use. And the word "potential" is especially confusing because it has more than one definition even for physicists. Bedlam used the word correctly but the book manages to avoid using the word and describes it in other terms, but again with a gravitational analogy very much like your conceptual understanding of stored energy.Their analogy isn't that great, but I'll give you a better one. Let's say a rock on the ground has zero gravitational potential.

Now you carry the rock up 10 flights of stairs to the roof. It now has 10 stories worth of gravitational potential. If you throw it off the roof, that potential is converted into kinetic energy which could, say, break the windshield of a car. Electrical potential is similar, it establishes an equivalent difference between the "ground state" and the "10 story high" state but for electrons instead of for a rock, and the difference is called "voltage" but it's also called potential. The dictionary fives the gravitational and the electrical definitions:

potential

2a : any of various functions from which the intensity or the velocity at any point in a field may be readily calculated
2b : the work required to move a unit positive charge from a reference point (as at infinity) to a point in question

Voltage is just another term for potential. Voltage is probably used more by engineers, and potential is probably used more by physicists.

en.wikipedia.org...

The SI unit of electric potential is the volt (in honor of Alessandro Volta), which is why electric potential is also known as voltage.

Originally posted by Arbitrageur
Voltage is just another term for potential. Voltage is probably used more by engineers, and potential is probably used more by physicists.

I'm a mutant hybrid of physicist and engineer so I just confuse both sides of the aisle by mixing conventions.

Alas.

reply to post by JaxCavalera


I’m not certain that a magnetic field line is made of anything per se. A magnetic field line is simply a way of pictorially visualizing simultaneous force throughout space, e.g., mathworld.wolfram.com... demonstrations.wolfram.com... & demonstrations.wolfram.com... versus at a point. Then again, maybe a magnetic field line is made of something? I don’t know. To the best of my knowledge a field in this context is an alteration of space that allows for the interaction of long range forces, such as the magnetic force. In contrast to the particle model that exists at one point in space, a field exists simultaneously at all points in space.

At the level of my understanding, this best explains the mechanism by which a long range force acts (and a magnetic field is a force). As for some of the other explanations I’ve read in this thread, it’s fair to admit that they exceed my knowledge base & understanding.

Interesting question: S&F

reply to post by POPtheKlEEN89


There are no stupid questions.

The questions people ask usually indicate the level and/or quality of education.

Answering questions from others is a different story, however.
We should take into account how difficult it is to explain something without either talking over someone's head or sounding condescending.

As for the magnetic lines, all I know is that they exist and have some use in the natural world. I have heard that some people can actually see the colors given off by magnets in a darkened area. Also of interest is that ancient people have assigned colors to the four directions and these colors correspond to the colors seen surrounding the magnets.

reply to post by Axebo


Hmm that is an interesting take on it that they are just a force. My thoughts on this would be that all forces are made up of something.. we just don't have the technology to accurately specify what constitutes some of these forces just yet.

For forces like wind, we know it's made up of air moving between High and Low pressure zones, for force of light we know it's made up of Photons (or at least I gather this is what it's made up of. each force seems to be able to interact with other compatible elements through a medium.

Even if it comes down to , what the cause of an exerted force is?

The only principles we do know are that a magnetic field exists because a magnet has a positive and negative end. Or 2 ends that are opposites to each other.

Does anyone know what decided if something is ferrite (able to be magnetised).. I thought it could have been to do with the electron count in the dominant element that makes up a mineral.. but this can't be true because things like Gold that have a high electron count are not able to be magnetised.. but they are excellent conductors of electricity

I get a strong sense that perhaps the answer may fall close by these hints that we already know of.

I believe the idea of 'magnetic field lines' stems mostly from the early methods of investigating the pattern IE putting a magnet under of piece of paper and sprinkling ferro-magnetic particles on the paper. The particles form what seems like discrete lines only because they are more 'permeable' than air or paper and concentrate the field through them and tend to join up forming a network in effect short-circuiting the poles of the magnet. The magnetic force in itself is more uniform and 'lineless' but does seek the path of least resistance through the higher permeability materials that are closest to it. Early measurements of magnetic field strength were expressed in 'lines/m^2' which only adds to the mis-conceptions.

Originally posted by butcherguy
I need to ask again.

What is transferred through a magnetic field to cause action at a distance?

Photons have been mentioned, but I don't like that answer, since a photon-opaque barrier can be placed between the objects in the interacting field and the action still takes place.

It wasn't "photon opaque" enough. Just because you can block terahertz E&M waves (e.g. light) with a photon-opaque barrier doens't mean you're blocking static or very very low frequency magnetic fields. Blocking magnetic fields is rather difficult to do completely but you can do well with a high permeability mu-metal.

For very low frequencies the 'photon description' is not very useful and classical descriptions are much more useful.