Jump to content

Even particles have them?


questionposter
 Share

Recommended Posts

Is my understanding correct than somehow single charged particles such as an electron have two varying magnetic poles? How does this happen?

I think I was trying to figure out why magnetic monopoles are impossible, and I found out something about particles themselves having poles, so that even if you have something of pure electrons, it still somehow has two poles.

Edited by questionposter
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is my understanding correct than somehow single charged particles such as an electron have two varying magnetic poles? How does this happen?

I think I was trying to figure out why magnetic monopoles are impossible, and I found out something about particles themselves having poles, so that even if you have something of pure electrons, it still somehow has two poles.

 

I am only familiar with classic physics. Maybe in quantum realm, electrons are dipoles but not in classical models.

Magnetic monopoles are impossible because of Gauss Law. I remember watching a video of some MIT professor who brilliantly explained that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am only familiar with classic physics. Maybe in quantum realm, electrons are dipoles but not in classical models.

Magnetic monopoles are impossible because of Gauss Law. I remember watching a video of some MIT professor who brilliantly explained that.

 

I think with what I was thinking of, there was an analogy with a bar magnet. If you break a bar magnet in half, those halves both have two poles, and you can keep breaking them in half until you get to a single particle where even then mathematics says it has two poles.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think with what I was thinking of, there was an analogy with a bar magnet. If you break a bar magnet in half, those halves both have two poles, and you can keep breaking them in half until you get to a single particle where even then mathematics says it has two poles.

 

Poles generate in magnets because all the electrons in it have same orientation and alignment. Visualise all electrons spinning clockwise and a magnet would seem like a solenoid. Electron is a single indivisible unit. Why you say it has two poles?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Poles generate in magnets because all the electrons in it have same orientation and alignment. Visualise all electrons spinning clockwise and a magnet would seem like a solenoid. Electron is a single indivisible unit. Why you say it has two poles?

 

That's just what I remember seeing. I don't know if it's true or not.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is my understanding correct than somehow single charged particles such as an electron have two varying magnetic poles? How does this happen?

I think I was trying to figure out why magnetic monopoles are impossible, and I found out something about particles themselves having poles, so that even if you have something of pure electrons, it still somehow has two poles.

 

From where you got this idea?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Don't know, I just remember heating about it in some abstract physics.

 

People search for a permanent electric dipole moment, because it would be interesting if there was one, but the results are thus far consistent with zero. There's always experimental error, though; you can't measure something to be identically zero.

 

One needs to separate asking the question in "abstract physics" and the presence of experimental confirmation. It's only after the latter that you can legitimately discuss it being valid.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Don't know, I just remember heating about it in some abstract physics.

I don't understand. What do you mean when you say heating about it in some abstract physics.

Edited by pmb
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Like I wrote the word on a book then threw it in a fire...no, it was a mistake, suppose to say "heaRing"

If that was a joke then I don't get it. If it wasn't a joke then I don't understand your response. Please rephrase.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Of course it wasn't I joke, why wouldn't I write on books and then throw them in the fire for no reason? It's so much fun.

 

Then you failed to follow through with my question

then I don't understand your response. Please rephrase.

I'm not in the mood for sarcasm or jokes so please just answer my question. Thanks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

PMB - it was clearly a typo. Let's move on

 

QPoster

Apparently Dirac proved that if magnetic monopoles exist then all charge must be quantized - - but it doesn't necessarily imply the opposite; certainly at present none have been identified. One of Walter Lewin's lectures went in detail through a lovely explanation of Gauss Law and this. If you haven't watched them I couldn't recommend more highly - great subjects and one of our most natural educators

 

http://ocw.mit.edu/courses/physics/8-01-physics-i-classical-mechanics-fall-1999/

 

http://ocw.mit.edu/courses/physics/8-02-electricity-and-magnetism-spring-2002/

 

http://ocw.mit.edu/courses/physics/8-03-physics-iii-vibrations-and-waves-fall-2004/video-lectures/

 

There are many many hours of an entire course there - itunes have them as well

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Then you failed to follow through with my question

 

I'm not in the mood for sarcasm or jokes so please just answer my question. Thanks.

My appologies. I just reread my last post in this thread and saw how nasty I might have come across. If that is the case the please acceptmy appologies.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.