Are Magnetic Monopoles Possible in Physics?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the concept of magnetic monopoles in physics, exploring their theoretical existence and implications. Participants engage in a dialogue about the behavior of protons, magnetic fields, and the mechanics of particle acceleration, particularly in the context of the Large Hadron Collider (LHC).

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Debate/contested
  • Technical explanation

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants note that magnetic monopoles are generally considered non-existent, although there are reports of experiments suggesting their presence under impractical conditions.
  • Unix60959 questions whether a proton can be considered a monopole due to its positive charge and ability to be accelerated by electromagnets.
  • One participant asserts that atomic particles have both a north and south pole, indicating they are dipolar, which contradicts the idea of monopoles.
  • Another participant argues against the idea that protons can be accelerated, suggesting that it is the deficiency of electrons that causes a positive charge, not the movement of protons.
  • Some participants clarify that both protons and atoms missing electrons can be accelerated by electromagnets, emphasizing the distinction between electric and magnetic charges.
  • There is a discussion about the role of static magnetic fields in particle acceleration, with one participant explaining that while a static magnetic field can change the direction of a charged particle, it does not increase its kinetic energy.
  • Participants discuss the mechanics of particle accelerators, such as cyclotrons and synchrotrons, detailing how electric fields are used to add kinetic energy while magnetic fields are used for steering.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the acceleration of protons and the nature of magnetic fields. There is no consensus on whether protons can be considered monopoles or on the mechanics of their acceleration.

Contextual Notes

Some claims rely on specific definitions of magnetic and electric charges, and there are unresolved questions regarding the mechanics of particle acceleration in different contexts.

Unix60959
Messages
4
Reaction score
0
Hey guys, I'm new to this forum and I have no formal degree or education in physics of any type, but I'm very interested in physics and only know what I've researched on my own. I know that magnetic monopoles are not supposed to exist, although I did read of some experiments that yielded monopoles under unpractical circumstances. Anyway, I was watching a video about the LHC and how they strip electrons from the nucleus of a hydrogen atom, leaving the proton, so most of you know since the proton is positively charged it can be accelerated by electromagnets blah, blah, blah. In this case would the proton effectively be a monopole? I don't know anything about quantum physics so please hit me with as much information as possible :)

thanks,


Unix60959
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Atomic particles that have magnetic fields associated with them have a north and a south pole, making them dipolar.
 
Unix60959 said:
leaving the proton, so most of you know since the proton is positively charged it can be accelerated by electromagnets



I think that you are wrong over here, protons can not be accelerated its the deficiency of electrons which causes a positive charge on any atom...ergo protons can not move its electrons moving in the opposite directions (which ppl normally call protons moving like you )

Anyone agrees ?
 
An atom that is missing an electron has a +1 positive charge, and so does a proton, and they both can be accelerated by electromagnets.

Unix don't confuse electric (+) and (-) with magnetic north and south. They are related but different.
 
bongas said:
I think that you are wrong over here, protons can not be accelerated its the deficiency of electrons which causes a positive charge on any atom...ergo protons can not move its electrons moving in the opposite directions (which ppl normally call protons moving like you )

Anyone agrees ?
You'd better get a message to CERN about that, pretty quickly. They are relying on the fact that (they think) protons have a positive charge and can be accelerated by an electric field. :wink:
 
Dr Lots-o'watts said:
An atom that is missing an electron has a +1 positive charge, and so does a proton, and they both can be accelerated by electromagnets.

Unix don't confuse electric (+) and (-) with magnetic north and south. They are related but different.

thanks a lot man, that does make sense. my thinking is that, if a proton can be accelerated by and electromagnet it should be able to be accelerated by a permanent magnet right?
 
Look at this link. In CERN's LHC, this is how electromagnets are configured to accelerate charged particles. The first and second diagram show how either permanent or electromagnets are positioned.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quadrupole_magnet

The particle beam goes through/in between the magnet ends. CERN's LHC has 392 of these so-called quadrupole (electro-)magnets in series, successively giving a kick to the accelerated particle. It also has an additional 1232 dipole (electro-)magnets.
 
@ dr lots-o'watts

from what i read by following your link, that setup of magnets is used to steer and focus the electron beam, not accelerate it. my question is, can a permanent magnet push a proton by using repelling forces and pull a proton with attraction forces?
 
Unix60959 said:
@ dr lots-o'watts

from what i read by following your link, that setup of magnets is used to steer and focus the electron beam, not accelerate it. my question is, can a permanent magnet push a proton by using repelling forces and pull a proton with attraction forces?

Hmmm... a permanent magnet... no. A static magnetic field can accelerate a particle but it can't add energy to it. If I placed a moving charged particle in a static magnetic field it would just be accelerated to move into a circle and its kinetic energy remains the same. Instead, electric fields are used to accelerate the charged particles to add kinetic energy. The electric fields do the work, the magnetic fields steer and direct the charges.

One simple kind of particle accelerator is a cyclotron. A cyclotron is a spiral tube setup that is split in the middle to look like the letter D and its mirror image (circle cut in half). A constant magnetic field is applied so that an injected charged particle moves in a circular motion. A voltage is applied across the gap in the dees to create an electric field. The electric field accelerates the charge, the magnetic field directs it in a circular motion. Since the magnetic field is constant, as the charge moves faster the radius of motion increases and that is why the cyclotron is built as a spiral. So the charge particle is injected into the center of the spiral and it moves in a circle due to the magnetic field. The electric field across the gap is alternating so that it pulls the charge toward the gap and then pushes it away from the gap. Each time the charge crosses the gap it gets a boost and its radius increases until it finally works its way to the outer ring of the spiral and exits the cyclotron.

A synchrotron syncronizes the electric and magnetic fields so that the radius of the curved path is always the same. This way we do not need the spiraling design that we find in cyclotrons.
 
Last edited:
  • #10
A (static) magnetic field can accelerate (change the velocity of) a moving charged particle but only in as far as the direction is changed. Its Kinetic Energy will not be changed because the Force and Distance traveled are at right angles - hence no work is done and the speed is not changed.

The reason that magnets are used is that they are much more effective in deflecting the moving particle in a curve.
 
  • #11
Can someone explain where l wippler's post went?
I click on the link in the notification email and I get here - without being able to see the post.
Perhaps he deleted it?
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
3K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
6K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
7K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K