Comment on Perpetual motion eludes us again.

<- View Parent
reliv3@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago

Oh boy, this is very incorrect, because it sounds like you are attempting to explain magnetism with electrostatic forces. Here is a basic model which separated the difference between the two:

  1. Electrostatic forces are caused be the electric field. Something produces an electric field simply by having an unbalanced charge. Positive attracts negative, negative repels negative, positive repels positive.

  2. Magnetic forces are caused by the magnetic field. Something produces a magnetic field by having an unbalanced charge AND is moving.

This is when trying to explain how solid magnets work, we focus on the electrons because electrons are charged particles that are always moving. So they produce both an electric field (being charged) and a magnetic field (being a moving charged system).

Technically the higher post is correct, any solid has the capability of being a magnetic, but this takes an incredible amount of physics work where iron is special. Iron’s electrons are able to easily maintain a synchronous orbit with each other which results in the magnetic force being observable at a macroscopic scale (seeing iron magnets pull on each other). In most other materials, the electrons orbits are chaotic, so even though magnetic fields are still being produced by their electrons, the lack of order results in no magnetic force being observable on the macroscopic scale.

source
Sort:hotnewtop