Force on point magnetic dipole

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the force on a magnetic dipole, specifically in the context of discrete bit patterned media and magnetic force microscopy. The key equation derived is F = ∇(m · B) = m × (∇ × B) + (m · ∇)B, with the simplification occurring under the assumption that the magnetic dipole moment m does not depend on coordinates. Participants explore the implications of assuming ∇ × B = 0 and the conditions under which bound and free currents are negligible, particularly in relation to the behavior of magnetic fields in permanent magnets.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of magnetic dipoles and their properties
  • Familiarity with vector calculus, particularly curl and gradient operations
  • Basic knowledge of electromagnetism, specifically Maxwell's equations
  • Experience with magnetic force microscopy techniques
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the derivation of the force on a magnetic dipole in detail
  • Learn about the implications of ∇ × B in different magnetic materials
  • Research the principles of magnetic force microscopy and its applications
  • Explore the concept of magnetization and its relation to bound currents
USEFUL FOR

Researchers in electromagnetism, physicists studying magnetic materials, and engineers working with magnetic force microscopy will benefit from this discussion.

Defennder
Homework Helper
Messages
2,590
Reaction score
4
Hi guys, I'm involved in a research project regarding discrete bit patterned media and I was tasked to figure out how a magnetic force microscope works for imaging magnetic islands on thin magnetic films coated on silicon substrate, as part of a preparatory literature review.

So I pulled out a few books from the library (and a paper Boyer, 1987) and came across this which was derived for an loop current model and which they attempted to show was conceptually equivalent to the one derived for magnetic dipole under the assumption of no-currents
\mathbf{F} = \nabla (\mathbf{m} \cdot \mathbf{B} ) = \mathbf{m} \times (\nabla \times \mathbf{B} ) + \mathbf{B} \times (\nabla \times \mathbf{m}) + (\mathbf{m} \cdot \nabla) \mathbf{B} + (\mathbf{B} \cdot \nabla)\mathbf{m}.

Somehow according to the paper, this reduces to \mathbf{F} = \nabla (\mathbf{m} \cdot \mathbf{B} ) = \mathbf{m} \times (\nabla \times \mathbf{B} ) + (\mathbf{m} \cdot \nabla) \mathbf{B} with the other two terms disappearing because, as the paper says that m doesn't depend on coordinates. What does that mean and why? I understand m is always perpendicular to the current loop (IdS, in fact). Further, a later assumption made was that \nabla \times \mathbf{B} = \mathbf{0} but I don't see why we should assume that bound and free current is 0. When is this valid and why?

I've done only a second-year EE E&M course so far where magnetic dipoles was omitted so the lecturer could start on transmission lines. So please do point out where I can read up on this. Thanks a lot.

P.S. I've seen https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=210771" as well, where pam says that curl B is only non-zero on the surface of a permanent magnet but I don't see why.

http://books.google.com/books?id=I-...&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=2#PPA102,M1"also seems to say curl B is nonzero at the point where the electric field is changing or alternatively when there is current or displacement current.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
its been a while but:

the curl of B? that's just current.

magnetization can be thought of as infinitesimal current loops (think 'tiny squares').
if the magnetization within the body of the permanent magnet (think 'grid of tiny squares') is constant (I'm guessing that's what it means by 'm doesn't depend on coordinates') then the currents cancel out everywhere except at the surface so that the magnet field of the permanent magnet can be though of as being due entirely to surface currents. hence curl is nonzero only at the surface.
 
Last edited:
Hi granpa. Yeah it's been I think about a semester since that I took that class. Amazingly short memory I have.

That explains a lot, so thanks for that. But it is assumed that the bound current (and hence the infinitesimal current loops) is 0, so how does that current model apply? We also assume that m is a constant vector (each magnetic dipole moment m). By definition of m, we assume that each m is due only to the bound current encircling a closed planar loop, so there's no reason to assume that m changes since neither I_b nor dS changes? But don't the dipoles interact with each other (just as you said currents cancel out everywhere) ? Doens't this cause I_b to change?
 
the bound current is zero in the interior because the magnetization is constant. the current in adjacent loops cancels out (if they are equal). it is nonzero on the surface.

picture 2 square loops adjacent to one another. imagine that each has a clockwise current. the current in the wire that they share is the sum of the 2 currents. the 2 currents are equal but in oppsite direction. so they cancel out completely.the rest of your post I can't make much sense out of
 
Last edited:
Defennder said:
Further, a later assumption made was that \nabla \times \mathbf{B} = \mathbf{0} but I don't see why we should assume that bound and free current is 0. When is this valid and why?
.

I'm confused. wouldn't that just be the curl of the applied magnetic field. unless current is actually passing through the magnetic material then the curl will certainly be zero there.
 
crickets chirping.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
637
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
906
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 36 ·
2
Replies
36
Views
5K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K