magnetic dipole interaction


by darkdave
Tags: magnetic dipole
darkdave
darkdave is offline
#19
Feb9-13, 03:13 PM
P: 21
There may be thousands of particles in the simulation, each with a magnetic dipole. Inwhich case the effects i assume would be multiplied?
mfb
mfb is offline
#20
Feb9-13, 03:36 PM
Mentor
P: 10,791
Or they could average out.

Again, it is impossible to be specific if you are so vague about the situation you want to simulate.
darkdave
darkdave is offline
#21
Feb9-13, 11:53 PM
P: 21
Quote Quote by mfb View Post
Or they could average out.

Again, it is impossible to be specific if you are so vague about the situation you want to simulate.
My point is either possibility exists in the simulator depending on how the particles are initialized. Using a first pson shooter as an analogy imagine if u were to say to me pistols do so little damage its not worth simulating in the game. Then ill say to u well if u do head shots with them up close to the enemy they will , then u come back and say, but the player may be wearing a helmet so its impossible to be specific if youre going to be vague, then ill say but he may not and there may be more friendly players on my team firing pistols at him simultaneusly...


My point is the situations can vary, im not being vague, im saying that my simulation can simulate many initial posibilities that may or may not make magnetic dipoles signficant, so i want to simulate them to,cater for those scenarios where they are.

Imagine a game where there are thousands of levels u can choose to load. Sme of those levels are pistols only levels, some are not. So some levels make pistols significant and some dont. S i still need to design pistols in the game for the sake of some of those levels that make them significant.

The only thing i need specifically from u is which formulas to use to simulate elctrons as tiny magnets so that their orientations will change according to their interactions. Wether they are significant or not is not relevant here because the simulaotr will have many levels some of which will make them significant.
mfb
mfb is offline
#22
Feb10-13, 07:19 AM
Mentor
P: 10,791
In every simulation, you have to make some approximations, and those approximations depend on the system you want to simulate. You won't find a simulation which can handle both proton-proton collisions in the LHC and vehicle collisions on a street in any reasonable way, as they require completely different analysis methods.

Do you want to simulate electrons in some material (which material? where? how?), electrons in a plasma (at which energy?), macroscopic charged objects, or whatever?
darkdave
darkdave is offline
#23
Feb10-13, 08:37 AM
P: 21
I want to simulate protons and electrons as individual particles as close to the bhor model as possible. So to answer your question: perhaps as a plasma. Temperature is something that I will also simulate eventually but I will worry about that later, first I want to put in the equations for magnetic fields interactions between the particles. At the moment it already has gravitational as well as electrostatic simulation accurately, I know because the elctron orbits the proton in a stable orbit when simulating a hydrogen atom with the correct distance between the electron and proton and the correct relative velocity of the electron. And yes while gravity is weak in the femto scale it does cause movements in the particles. I know because i disabled the electrostatic functions and there were tiny movements due to gravity when i accelerated time beyone 1 fempto second per real second the interactions due to gravity increased to more significant levels.

Similarly I want to simulate magnetic interactions because they may be significant at diferent time accelerations than the default settings of 1 fempto second per second.

I am not worried about collissions at the moment I will deal with that later. At the moment collisions do nothing, the particles just bounce off each other like billard balls and conserve momentum. Yes I am using the relativistic version of momentum.
mfb
mfb is offline
#24
Feb10-13, 09:14 AM
Mentor
P: 10,791
If you see effects from gravity at a timescale where you can simulate electrostatic interactions of elementary particles, something is wrong. The electrostatic forces between those particles is about a factor of 1040 stronger than gravity. And I don't think you want to calculate 10^15 steps (to get 1 second with femtosecond steps) - and even if you did, rounding errors would completely dominate over gravitational effects.

I know because the elctron orbits the proton in a stable orbit
Without quantum mechanics, this indicates another problem: You are missing synchrotron radiation. You cannot get stable orbits with a proper classical treatment. And you influence modify Bohr orbits (added "manually") without quantum mechanics.

I am not worried about collissions at the moment I will deal with that later.
There are no collisions of point-like particles anyway.
darkdave
darkdave is offline
#25
Feb10-13, 12:24 PM
P: 21
My simulation can accelerate time ^ 40 and beyond

'I told you i was doing a close to bhor model as possible. So I dont need synchrotron radiation at the moment, I'll worry about that when I want to do a more complex model closer to the quantum type. And believe me I DO HAVE stable electron proton orbits in my simulation... NO PROBLEM! I see the blue dot whirling around a red one and they dont fly apart unless i accelerate time to the point where there is data degredation of the simulation due to discrete steps being simlated being too long.

And yes there are no collissions thanks for pointing that out. So it's not something i need to worry about right away.
darkdave
darkdave is offline
#26
Feb10-13, 12:48 PM
P: 21
Read carefully what i said please... I said if i disabled electro static interactions... then only i see tiny effects and only if i accelerated time can the effects be more significant.

And no i dont calculate 10^15 steps per second, i never said i do, i do however simulate about 30 steps per real second and in each of those real seconds only 1 fempto second will pass in the simulation, but this can be accelerated well beyond 1 fempto seconds hence causing the simulation to be less accurate for simulating stronger forces in smaller scales.

Quote Quote by mfb View Post
If you see effects from gravity at a timescale where you can simulate electrostatic interactions of elementary particles, something is wrong. The electrostatic forces between those particles is about a factor of 1040 stronger than gravity. And I don't think you want to calculate 10^15 steps (to get 1 second with femtosecond steps) - and even if you did, rounding errors would completely dominate over gravitational effects.


Without quantum mechanics, this indicates another problem: You are missing synchrotron radiation. You cannot get stable orbits with a proper classical treatment. And you influence modify Bohr orbits (added "manually") without quantum mechanics.


There are no collisions of point-like particles anyway.
mfb
mfb is offline
#27
Feb10-13, 02:23 PM
Mentor
P: 10,791
Quote Quote by darkdave View Post
My simulation can accelerate time ^ 40 and beyond
But not with a reasonable model of electromagnetic interactions. Therefore, you can neglect gravity as soon as you model individual, charged particles. That's what I said, and nothing else.

'I told you i was doing a close to bhor model as possible. So I dont need synchrotron radiation at the moment, I'll worry about that when I want to do a more complex model closer to the quantum type.
Well, you cannot just pick some effects and ignore others like you want. The result will not resemble physics.

And believe me I DO HAVE stable electron proton orbits in my simulation... NO PROBLEM!.
It is a problem, as it gives wrong interactions between charged particles.

I see the blue dot whirling around a red one
... which leads to wrong positions for the particles as well.
darkdave
darkdave is offline
#28
Feb10-13, 02:26 PM
P: 21
Yes I can, if you want to see the effects of one force alone and ignore the rest as a thought experiment.

As for the wrong positions... it's a simulation. A simulation of the Bhor model. It does not have to simulate real life just a model of it.


Quote Quote by mfb View Post
But not with a reasonable model of electromagnetic interactions. Therefore, you can neglect gravity as soon as you model individual, charged particles. That's what I said, and nothing else.


Well, you cannot just pick some effects and ignore others like you want. The result will not resemble physics.


It is a problem, as it gives wrong interactions between charged particles.


... which leads to wrong positions for the particles as well.
mfb
mfb is offline
#29
Feb10-13, 02:41 PM
Mentor
P: 10,791
Quote Quote by darkdave View Post
Yes I can, if you want to see the effects of one force alone and ignore the rest as a thought experiment.
Sure, but the splitting of the electromagnetic interaction in separate "forces" is completely arbitrary.
As for the wrong positions... it's a simulation. A simulation of the Bhor model. It does not have to simulate real life just a model of it.
Just simulate what you want to simulate. If it does not have to be connected to real life, feel free to add anything you like ;).
darkdave
darkdave is offline
#30
Feb10-13, 02:44 PM
P: 21
Gravitational forces are NOT electromagnetic.

And it's not arbitrary if you want to see the significance of one type of force vs another at various types of time increments.

Quote Quote by mfb View Post
Sure, but the splitting of the electromagnetic interaction in separate "forces" is completely arbitrary.

Just simulate what you want to simulate. If it does not have to be connected to real life, feel free to add anything you like ;).
mfb
mfb is offline
#31
Feb10-13, 03:42 PM
Mentor
P: 10,791
Quote Quote by darkdave View Post
Gravitational forces are NOT electromagnetic.
Nobody said that

And it's not arbitrary if you want to see the significance of one type of force vs another at various types of time increments.
The definition of those "forces" itself is arbitrary.
There is one electromagnetic interaction. Each particle feels a single, electromagnetic force. You can divide this force into several components, but there are many possible ways to do that. Therefore, if you drop some of those components, this is always arbitrary. It can be reasonable, if those dropped parts are negligible, but it does not have to be.
darkdave
darkdave is offline
#32
Feb10-13, 04:03 PM
P: 21
You inferred it.

We were talking about simulating just gravity alone between particles vs electro static attractions.

If you would take your time to follow the line of conversation from start to where we are now you would be less confused.

Dropping components of forces that belong to the Electro magnetic category being arbitrary is in the eye of the beholder. There are reasons to do this that makes sense. Perhaps it's a failure of imagination on your part not to be able to see this. But do we really have to debate this?

Quote Quote by mfb View Post
Nobody said that


The definition of those "forces" itself is arbitrary.
There is one electromagnetic interaction. Each particle feels a single, electromagnetic force. You can divide this force into several components, but there are many possible ways to do that. Therefore, if you drop some of those components, this is always arbitrary. It can be reasonable, if those dropped parts are negligible, but it does not have to be.
mfb
mfb is offline
#33
Feb10-13, 04:17 PM
Mentor
P: 10,791
If you would take your time to follow the line of conversation from start to where we are now you would be less confused.
I don't think so. In addition, I don't think I am confused.

We were talking about simulating just gravity alone between particles vs electro static attractions.
Why did you try to include magnetic components then?

Perhaps it's a failure of imagination on your part not to be able to see this.
If you don't think I can help: Fine. I'll just delete my subscription to this thread and do not visit it again.


Edit: That is up to you.
darkdave
darkdave is offline
#34
Feb10-13, 04:28 PM
P: 21
Do you still want me to answer your questions since you are deleting your subscription to this thread? I'm sorry for hurting your feelings, i didn't mean to.

Quote Quote by mfb View Post
I don't think so. In addition, I don't think I am confused.


Why did you try to include magnetic components then?


If you don't think I can help: Fine. I'll just delete my subscription to this thread and do not visit it again.


Register to reply

Related Discussions
Magnetic dipole interaction Classical Physics 12
Why is there no constant magnetic dipole-dipole interaction? Quantum Physics 4
Dipole-Induced Dipole Interaction Advanced Physics Homework 6
Nuclear magnetic resonance dipole dipole interaction Quantum Physics 0
Derivation of dipole-dipole interaction energy Advanced Physics Homework 2