Author Topic: Magnet Myths and Misconceptions (Read 611861 times)

MarkE · « **Reply #315 on:** January 03, 2015, 04:02:10 PM »

Quote from: allcanadian on January 03, 2015, 02:48:33 PM

Couple interesting photo's.
The first is a science project my 10 year old son did proving the iron filing experiment found in every textbook is incorrect. The filings align forming lines due to magnetic induction which he showed on a larger scale with short suspended iron wires. It is not a true representation of the magnetic field it is an effect produced by magnetic induction due to the presence of a magnetic field. Magnetic viewing film is simply smaller pieces of iron suspended in a film and ferrofluid even smaller iron particles. The scale of the particles may change however the effect of magnetic induction is the same.

Do you or do you not understand that induction requires a changing magnetic field? Iron filing experiments are performed with static, unchanging magnetic fields. Kindly explain the induced field after: 1s, 5s, or 1 minute. Do the filings align differently in those time frames as the induced electric field diminishes towards zero?

Quote

The second picture is a bar magnets field captured using neutron spin, I believe, which is a more true representation of the field in my opinion. The reason for the curvature in my opinion is leakage, take one magnet and the field curls back on itself...the dipole field. Take two magnets together and the main field curls back plus each individual field of each magnet also curls back as flux leakage. Now take millions of dipole fields combined to produce the main field but all produce flux leakage in themselves which forms a field distortion. Obviously flux lines cannot cross because there are no lines in reality and it is a simple effect produced my magnetic induction. However the field can be distorted in the near field which is perfectly acceptable according to the laws we know.

The thing to remember is we know flux leakage occurs and we also know every magnetic field we see is the combined effort of many smaller magnetic fields. So why would we presume flux leakage occurs on one level but not the other?.

AC

No presumption for or against flux leakage is necessary to make correct observations using ordinary static magnets and iron filings. If you would like to investigate further, go buy one of those nice analog output Hall effect sensors from Allegro Microsystems probe, record, and plot the magnetic field orientation and magnitude around various magnets, permanent and electric. You will see that the conventional view offered with lowly iron filings is in fact correct.

tinman · « **Reply #316 on:** January 03, 2015, 05:39:52 PM »

Quote from: MarkE on January 03, 2015, 04:02:10 PM

You will see that the conventional view offered with lowly iron filings is in fact correct.

The iron filings do not show a correct representation of the magnetic field around a magnet,and the reason for this is because each individual iron filing becomes a tempoary magnet it self when in the presence of a magnetic field. So you are basically surounding your PM with very small PM's when you use iron filings. If you want to know what the actual field looks like around say a rod magnet,you simply put two tennis balls together--this represents the field shape around a rod magnet. The field strength of a magnet is at it's strongest at the center(between the two pole ends),but it is concentrated within the magnetic material,and thus the reason for the zero attraction force around the outside of the center of the magnet. Picture a figure 8,and you have your magnetic field shape.

Oh-by the way-the coriolis effect has nothing to do with this mistical bloch wall,and everything to do with a force that is acting in a direction that is perpendicular to the axis of the rotating mass.

MarkE · « **Reply #317 on:** January 03, 2015, 06:07:26 PM »

Quote from: tinman on January 03, 2015, 05:39:52 PM

The iron filings do not show a correct representation of the magnetic field around a magnet,and the reason for this is because each individual iron filing becomes a tempoary magnet it self when in the presence of a magnetic field. So you are basically surounding your PM with very small PM's when you use iron filings. If you want to know what the actual field looks like around say a rod magnet,you simply put two tennis balls together--this represents the field shape around a rod magnet. The field strength of a magnet is at it's strongest at the center(between the two pole ends),but it is concentrated within the magnetic material,and thus the reason for the zero attraction force around the outside of the center of the magnet. Picture a figure 8,and you have your magnetic field shape.

Oh-by the way-the coriolis effect has nothing to do with this mistical bloch wall,and everything to do with a force that is acting in a direction that is perpendicular to the axis of the rotating mass.

Tinman, the fact that iron filings magnetize is exactly why they are a good indicator of the the magnetic field orientation and strength.

If you want to test your hypothesis, then that is easy: Go purchase an analog Hall effect sensor and probe the field of a dipole magnet or any other magnet shape you care to look at. Or you have a large dipole, like a long wooden dowel or plastic rod with a winding along its length, then you can just use a compass. The figure eight idea you promote would cause the compass needle to turn 90 degrees at the dipole center when held off axis. That does not happen. Held off axis, the compass will always point most parallel to the dipole closest to the dipole center.

allcanadian · « **Reply #318 on:** January 03, 2015, 06:43:45 PM »

@Mark E

Quote

Do you or do you not understand that induction requires a
changing magnetic field? Iron filing experiments are performed
with static, unchanging magnetic fields. Kindly explain the
induced field after: 1s, 5s, or 1 minute. Do the filings align differently in
those time frames as the induced electric field diminishes towards zero?

Ah I see the problem you are thinking of Electromagnetic Induction and I am speaking of Magnetic Induction.
Magnetic Induction: 1.The process by which a substance, such as iron or steel becomes magnetized by a magnetic field. The Induced Magnetism is produced by the force of the field radiating from the poles of the magnet.

Quote

No presumption for or against flux leakage is necessary to make correct
observations using ordinary static magnets and iron filings. If you would like
to investigate further, go buy one of those nice analog output Hall effect
sensors from Allegro Microsystems probe, record, and plot the magnetic field
orientation and magnitude around various magnets, permanent and electric. You
will see that the conventional view offered with lowly iron filings is in fact
correct.

That was what I was using when I made the measurements, an analog hall effect sensor as well as a hall effect sensor array I built as I stated in my prior posts. Your not listening and inferring things which are incorrect. I did not say induction I specifically said "Magnetic Induction" which is a very simple and well know fundamental principal known to most everyone who understands basic physics. A permanent magnet having a magnetic field will induce a magnetic field of opposite polarity in a piece of iron within it's field of influence. The induced magnetic field in the iron is considered as a separate magnetic field in itself and can be measured as such even though it is a function of an external field.
To make my point, I try to avoid superficial observations which tend to confuse even most experts and concentrate on Primary Physics. This is the primary field phenomena such as the Electric, Magnetic and Gravic fields in their most fundamental forms. It avoids all the confusion I am seeing here and concentrates on the most fundamental interactions between the Primary Fields. You need to start studying the basics of Magnetic Induction and Electrostatic Induction and how they relate to one another in reality versus your textbook theory.

Now go back to the image on magnetic induction I posted until you actually understand it, my 10 year old son does so I am sure you can.

AC

MarkE · « **Reply #319 on:** January 03, 2015, 07:42:03 PM »

Quote from: allcanadian on January 03, 2015, 06:43:45 PM

@Mark EAh I see the problem you are thinking of Electromagnetic Induction and I am speaking of Magnetic Induction.
Magnetic Induction: 1.The process by which a substance, such as iron or steel becomes magnetized by a magnetic field. The Induced Magnetism is produced by the force of the field radiating from the poles of the magnet.That was what I was using when I made the measurements, an analog hall effect sensor as well as a hall effect sensor array I built as I stated in my prior posts. Your not listening and inferring things which are incorrect. I did not say induction I specifically said "Magnetic Induction" which is a very simple and well know fundamental principal known to most everyone who understands basic physics. A permanent magnet having a magnetic field will induce a magnetic field of opposite polarity in a piece of iron within it's field of influence. The induced magnetic field in the iron is considered as a separate magnetic field in itself and can be measured as such even though it is a function of an external field.
To make my point, I try to avoid superficial observations which tend to confuse even most experts and concentrate on Primary Physics. This is the primary field phenomena such as the Electric, Magnetic and Gravic fields in their most fundamental forms. It avoids all the confusion I am seeing here and concentrates on the most fundamental interactions between the Primary Fields. You need to start studying the basics of Magnetic Induction and Electrostatic Induction and how they relate to one another in reality versus your textbook theory.

Now go back to the image on magnetic induction I posted until you actually understand it, my 10 year old son does so I am sure you can.

AC

Do you understand that you just killed your own argument against iron filings? By inducing a pole that is opposite polarity, the magnetized soft iron reduces the reluctance gap between the poles. Ergo the field set-up by the newly magnetized soft iron only intensifies the field that was already in the region of the dipole they surround. Ergo their alignment does in fact correspond to the field direction. Ergo since they do not turn towards the dipole at the dipole center, the proposition that the field turns there is false.

EMJunkie · « **Reply #320 on:** January 03, 2015, 08:24:30 PM »

@All refuting the Iron Filing contrives!

Ever heard of Spin Polarisation - Please do some homework! Its basic Science!

Again something else that refutes Non-Sense of Magnets not having an equator - for the same reason Planets revolve the Galactic Plane, Why does the Frog become weightless in the "Middle" of the Field, where the Bloch Wall is:

EMJunkie · « **Reply #321 on:** January 03, 2015, 08:48:45 PM »

Quote from: MarkE on January 03, 2015, 07:42:03 PM

Do you understand that you just killed your own argument against iron filings? By inducing a pole that is opposite polarity, the magnetized soft iron reduces the reluctance gap between the poles. Ergo the field set-up by the newly magnetized soft iron only intensifies the field that was already in the region of the dipole they surround. Ergo their alignment does in fact correspond to the field direction. Ergo since they do not turn towards the dipole at the dipole center, the proposition that the field turns there is false.

MarkE and TK,

Magnetics since the very early days has stated: "magnetic field lines always form closed loops"

Iron Filings show clearly an approximate 70% LOSS of Magnetic Field Line Closure - How do you account for this AMAZING fact!

Really Ridiculous Science is no longer holding water! But yet its still being preached by the Priest's here on ou.com! People are smarter than that!

How is it that Ferro-Fluid can show a TOTALLY DIFFERENT Pattern to Iron Filings? Iron Fillings are Conductive! Conductivity is another part of Magnetism, that's why its now called Electromagnetism! Electric is at 90 Degrees to Magnetic! Really people please add some logic to your piffle! "Coriolis Effect" in Ferro Fluid:

Pirate88179 · « **Reply #322 on:** January 03, 2015, 08:57:42 PM »

Quote from: TinselKoala on January 03, 2015, 02:02:39 PM

Where did you ever learn that the Coriolis effect has anything to do with magnetism? I'd like to see that reference, please.

No where. What I said/meant was what I was taught about the Coriolis effect agreed with what Chis said about it. (It being the Coriolis Effect)..about the magnetism and equator Bloch wall, I said it was interesting and I will have to think about that.

Bill

MileHigh · « **Reply #323 on:** January 03, 2015, 08:58:05 PM »

Chris:

Yes, water is very slightly diamagnetic and in the presence of a strong enough magnetic field a frog can be made to float in air.

It looks to me like all that you are doing is paraphrasing stuff that you have read about magnetism from junk sources. In those books they talk about all sorts of stuff and try to connect it with magnetism. Unfortunately it's just not true. It's a form of alternative pulp fiction. I remember having a debate with a guy that told me that the moon was changing in its orbit and something "big" was going to happen. I told him that was impossible. I told him that there were tens of thousands of amateur astronomers and if it was really true we would hear about it. He had nothing to say, he was jut parroting stuff that he had read.

Can you make a case for a Bloch Wall being at the center of a bar magnet without talking about unrelated matters?

MileHigh

MarkE · « **Reply #324 on:** January 03, 2015, 09:12:42 PM »

Quote from: EMJunkie on January 03, 2015, 08:48:45 PM

MarkE and TK,

Magnetics since the very early days has stated: "magnetic field lines always form closed loops"

They do.

Quote

Iron Filings show clearly an approximate 70% LOSS of Magnetic Field Line Closure - How do you account for this AMAZING fact!

That's a nice assertion. Care to back it up? Care to show how if we introduce iron filings that 70% of the field lines that previously went pole to pole no longer make it? Care to show where the iron filings supposedly send those lines off to?

Quote

Really Ridiculous Science is no longer holding water! But yet its still being preached by the Priest's here on ou.com! People are smarter than that!

Actual reliable data always tells the true story. The story you are telling is just odd.

Quote

How is it that Ferro-Fluid can show a TOTALLY DIFFERENT Pattern to Iron Filings? Iron Fillings are Conductive! Conductivity is another part of Magnetism, that's why its now called Electromagnetism! Electric is at 90 Degrees to Magnetic! Really people please add some logic to your piffle! "Coriolis Effect" in Ferro Fluid:

Now you have just gone into left field. In a TEM wave the propagating electric field is at 90 degrees to the propagating magnetic field.

EMJunkie · « **Reply #325 on:** January 03, 2015, 09:17:38 PM »

Quote from: tinman on January 03, 2015, 05:39:52 PM

The iron filings do not show a correct representation of the magnetic field around a magnet...

You're EXACTLY RIGHT Tinman!

Quote from: tinman on January 03, 2015, 05:39:52 PM

Oh-by the way-the coriolis effect has nothing to do with this mistical bloch wall,and everything to do with a force that is acting in a direction that is perpendicular to the axis of the rotating mass.

And again you're right, the "Coriolis Effect" is NOT the Bloch Wall! Just as if you were to watch the Sun Rise, a Cloud passes the Light Rays of the Sun and a Silver Lining is seen around the Cloud! This Is not the Sun, and its not the cloud, but in-fact a mixture of effects showing another!

Why does Ferro Fluid not show a SINGLE Flux Line like the MAGICAL IRON FILINGS?

What could that space in the Middle of the Polar Regions be??? It sort of looks like an Equator??? Really - Surely by now the proof I have given you PREACHERS Should be enough! But alas, like I said, some here can not be converted! I am not trying to convert anyone! I am showing provable facts! Giving Evidence to backup my Well Researched Science!

NONE HERE Have done the Same! Verbal Non-Sense with not a single bit of factual evidence!

allcanadian · « **Reply #326 on:** January 03, 2015, 09:19:29 PM »

@Mark E

Quote

Do you understand that you just killed your own argument against iron
filings? By inducing a pole that is opposite polarity, the magnetized soft iron
reduces the reluctance gap between the poles. Ergo the field set-up by the
newly magnetized soft iron only intensifies the field that was already in the
region of the dipole they surround. Ergo their alignment does in fact
correspond to the field direction. Ergo since they do not turn towards the
dipole at the dipole center, the proposition that the field turns there is
false.

Good points now what have we learned, well we have learned absolutely nothing new have we which is exactly what always happens when an argument is based on winning the argument rather than understanding. Why anyone can play that game, all you have said is false and logically it must be false because some very intelligent scientists who produced the picture below have proven you false. You see I don't have to think about anything or learn anything or research anything and all I have to do is show a picture, I win, but we both lose don't we?.
LOL, I will have to consider your question further before posting an answer.
AC

EMJunkie · « **Reply #327 on:** January 03, 2015, 09:35:44 PM »

Quote from: MarkE on January 03, 2015, 09:12:42 PM

They do.That's a nice assertion. Care to back it up?

MarkE - Did I not provide visuals? Care to back up any argument to the Contrary?

Part of your argument actually agrees with what I had already said! Are you agreeing? Or are you trying to make a counter debate? Its really not clear?

Fact is Iron Filings For Viewing Magnetic Fields is one of the worst experiments that anyone can do! Simply because some don't know better! Spin Polarisation of Conductive Iron Fillings - is the reason! To dispute this is to dispute most of electrical Engineering!

Common MarkE - You sound like a fairly smart kind of a guy! Explain just some of the points I have brought up with the existing Imaginary Theory held in this forum!

The Earth has an Equator because of its Magnetic Field, A Magnet has an Equator too - if one does simple experiments, you can:

1: See it!
2: Feel it!
3: Measure it!

EMJunkie · « **Reply #328 on:** January 03, 2015, 09:39:44 PM »

Quote from: allcanadian on January 03, 2015, 09:19:29 PM

@Mark EGood points now what have we learned, well we have learned absolutely nothing new have we which is exactly what always happens when an argument is based on winning the argument rather than understanding. Why anyone can play that game, all you have said is false and logically it must be false because some very intelligent scientists who produced the picture below have proven you false. You see I don't have to think about anything or learn anything or research anything and all I have to do is show a picture, I win, but we both lose don't we?.
LOL, I will have to consider your question further before posting an answer.
AC

Nice Pic AC!!! I wonder what that could be showing, very clearly! Is that an Equator? I think it is!!!

EMJunkie · « **Reply #329 on:** January 03, 2015, 09:45:42 PM »

The Equator and the Bloch Wall are the same things!!!

News:

User Menu

Author Topic: Magnet Myths and Misconceptions (Read 611861 times)

MarkE

Re: Magnet Myths and Misconceptions

tinman

Re: Magnet Myths and Misconceptions

MarkE

Re: Magnet Myths and Misconceptions

allcanadian

Re: Magnet Myths and Misconceptions

MarkE

Re: Magnet Myths and Misconceptions

EMJunkie

Re: Magnet Myths and Misconceptions

EMJunkie

Re: Magnet Myths and Misconceptions

Pirate88179

Re: Magnet Myths and Misconceptions

MileHigh

Re: Magnet Myths and Misconceptions

MarkE

Re: Magnet Myths and Misconceptions

EMJunkie

Re: Magnet Myths and Misconceptions

allcanadian

Re: Magnet Myths and Misconceptions

EMJunkie

Re: Magnet Myths and Misconceptions

EMJunkie

Re: Magnet Myths and Misconceptions

EMJunkie

Re: Magnet Myths and Misconceptions