How Does Magnetic Potential Energy Affect Magnetism and Energy Transfer?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Chris
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Energy Magnets
AI Thread Summary
Magnetic potential energy exists and plays a role in the interaction between magnets and ferromagnetic materials, such as paperclips. When a magnet lifts a paperclip, energy is transferred, but the magnet does not lose energy permanently; it can regain energy when the paperclip is removed from the magnetic field. The interaction is somewhat analogous to gravitational energy transfer, but differs due to the nature of magnetic fields and the behavior of soft ferromagnets, which can demagnetize when removed from the magnetic field. The alignment and proximity of magnetic poles also influence the energy dynamics, making the situation more complex than gravitational interactions. Understanding these concepts can clarify the relationship between magnetism and energy transfer.
Chris
Messages
8
Reaction score
0
When a magnet is used to lift up a paperclip, clearly it gains gravitational potential energy. Where does this energy come from? Does the magnet lose energy to the paperclip? Does the magnet regain this energy when the paperclip is removed from the magnetic field? I have never heard of the phrase "magnetic potential energy"! :confused:
Thanks in advance for any insight anyone can provide!

Chris Carter
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Nevertheless, there is such a thing. Magnetic charges (monopoles) do not exist independently; the most elementary magnetic charge is a dipole. Since dipole fields are more complicated than say the electric field from a single charge, they, and their energy formulas don't appear in the most elementary textbooks. So most people do not run into the concept of magnetic potential energy.
 
Thanks krab.
So is this situation (paperclip in magnetic field) analagous to that of a mass in a gravitational field, in terms of energy transfers?
 
Macroscopically, almost...

Magnets might cause the paperclip to rotate, (but not gravity). So there is extra potential energy if the paperclip is previously magnetized, and if the paper clip and magnet are not aligned. The position of both poles (whether you use a bar or a horse shoe for example) might also come into play.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
To amplify on Gonzolo: The proximity of the magnet to the paper clip changes the paper clip, lining the magnetic domains up. In this sense, the situation is not analogous to gravity. The reason is that the paper clip is a "soft" ferromagnet; it magnetizes when another magnet is nearby, but demagnetizes if it is taken out of the external magnetic field. Gravity is more analogous to a situation of two permanent magnets. (Permanent magnets are "hard".) Except that in gravity there are only monopoles, while in magnetism therefore only dipoles. You can get round this problem by considering two very long bar magnets arranged N-S to N-S so they are almost touching. If they are sufficiently long, then you can neglect the outboard poles and consider the almost-touching poles alone. These will act like monopoles, and for short distances will have a force law similar to two gravitating bodies.
 
Thanks guys! :smile:
 
Thread 'Motional EMF in Faraday disc, co-rotating magnet axial mean flux'
So here is the motional EMF formula. Now I understand the standard Faraday paradox that an axis symmetric field source (like a speaker motor ring magnet) has a magnetic field that is frame invariant under rotation around axis of symmetry. The field is static whether you rotate the magnet or not. So far so good. What puzzles me is this , there is a term average magnetic flux or "azimuthal mean" , this term describes the average magnetic field through the area swept by the rotating Faraday...
It may be shown from the equations of electromagnetism, by James Clerk Maxwell in the 1860’s, that the speed of light in the vacuum of free space is related to electric permittivity (ϵ) and magnetic permeability (μ) by the equation: c=1/√( μ ϵ ) . This value is a constant for the vacuum of free space and is independent of the motion of the observer. It was this fact, in part, that led Albert Einstein to Special Relativity.

Similar threads

Back
Top