What Causes the Weakening of Magnetic Strength When Two Magnets are Joined?

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter scott_sieger
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Riddle
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the phenomenon of magnetic strength when two magnets are joined together. Participants explore the mechanics behind the interaction of the magnets, questioning the validity of a proposed design and the assumptions regarding magnetic attraction and rotation.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Technical explanation

Main Points Raised

  • One participant presents a diagram and seeks clarification on why their design may be invalid, suggesting it is self-explanatory.
  • Another participant questions the symmetry of the design and argues that there should be no net gravitational or magnetic force acting on the rings due to their symmetrical arrangement.
  • A third participant expresses confusion about the original poster's explanation, indicating a lack of clarity in the argument presented.
  • One participant describes the rings as cylinders with specific magnetic poles and claims that the joining of the rings creates a greater attraction at the bottom, suggesting that this could enable rotation.
  • Another participant challenges this claim, stating that the assumption of greater attraction at the bottom is incorrect and that the combined strength of the magnets when joined does not exceed their strength when apart.
  • A question is raised about whether the combined strength of two joined magnets is indeed less than or equal to their individual strengths when separated.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the mechanics of magnetic attraction and the validity of the proposed design. There is no consensus on the effectiveness of the design or the nature of the magnetic forces involved.

Contextual Notes

Participants have not fully resolved the assumptions regarding the symmetry and magnetic forces at play, and there are unresolved questions about the conditions under which the magnets operate.

scott_sieger
Hi guys,
Attached is a diagram design in principle i drew some time ago

It's pretty self explanitory

I was wondering if some one can tell my why it is invalid and doesn't work.
 

Attachments

Physics news on Phys.org
Perhaps I need some explanation after all. Your picture looks completely symmetric. I can so no reason why either ring should turn. The inner ring is already resting on a point below its center of gravity, so there is no net gravitational force.
The outer ring is symmetric about the inner so there is no net magnetic force.
On your picture you have a section that is NOT symmetric labeled "Horizon of greatest attraction". Why is that region not symmetric about the two rings?
 
'Tis indeed a perpetual riddle, 'cos I'll be damned if I can figure out what you're trying to say Scott
 
The rimgs are in fact cylinders that are poled magbets as shown.

The join of the two rings offers a greater attraction than the top of the rings there fore the bottom of the rings is attracted more strongly to the large attractor (magnet) to the right thus rotation is possible.
 
Originally posted by scott_sieger
The rimgs are in fact cylinders that are poled magbets as shown.

The join of the two rings offers a greater attraction than the top of the rings there fore the bottom of the rings is attracted more strongly to the large attractor (magnet) to the right thus rotation is possible.

The problem is the the bottom of the rings aren't attracted more strongly to the exterior magnet. Your assumption that they are is where you are making your mistake.
 
so when two magnets are joined the combined strength is not more than when apart?
 
Originally posted by scott_sieger
so when two magnets are joined the combined strength is not more than when apart?
No.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 22 ·
Replies
22
Views
5K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
5K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
6K
Replies
3
Views
9K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K