Macroscopic magnetic monopoles are possible?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the concept of magnetic monopoles and their potential existence, particularly in the context of a thought experiment involving a bar magnet placed on a planet with a nickel-iron core. Participants explore the differences between magnetic and electrostatic charges, questioning whether a magnetic monopole can be considered isolated in certain scenarios.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Exploratory

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants argue that placing a bar magnet upright on a planet creates an isolated N pole, suggesting that the S pole has "vanished."
  • Others counter that the south pole still exists and that magnetic field lines curve back to re-enter the magnet, indicating no monopole is present.
  • A participant proposes that the analogy between magnetic and electrostatic charges is flawed, emphasizing the difference in how field lines behave in each case.
  • Some participants express a desire to visualize the magnetic field lines from a bar magnet on an iron planet, speculating that they would spread out differently than in a thin plate scenario.
  • There is a suggestion that the divergence of the magnetic field should be examined to clarify the discussion on monopoles.
  • One participant muses about the conceptual gap between electrostatics and magnetics, questioning the existence of a magnetic equivalent to an isolated electrical charge.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus on the existence of magnetic monopoles or the validity of the proposed analogies between magnetic and electrostatic charges. Multiple competing views remain, with some asserting the impossibility of monopoles and others exploring the conceptual implications of the thought experiment.

Contextual Notes

Limitations include the reliance on hypothetical scenarios and the need for further mathematical examination of magnetic field behavior. The discussion also highlights the ambiguity in defining isolated charges in the magnetic domain compared to electrostatics.

jeffinbath
Gold Member
Messages
39
Reaction score
16
School physics has always taught us that the big difference between a magnetised object and an electrostatically charged object is that the latter has on it an isolated positive or negative charge whereas the former cannot be an isolated N or S pole, ie. you cannot have a magnetic monopole on a macroscopic level.

I have been bothered by that way of thinking because of the following thought experiment. An astronaut lands on a small planet whose outer mantle had been blown off so that it is nothing but a smooth cooled down nickel-iron core. He then places a large ordinary bar magnet upright on the surface with its N pole at the top. For all intents and purposes he now has an isolated N pole because the S pole has “vanished” and he can slide his monopole over the surface of the planet until he decides to lift it up.

How is this different in principle from our having on Earth an isolated negative charge at the end of a dry amber rod? Of course the rod can be moved about in a vacuum chamber and its isolated charge maintained until it touches a conductor whereas that monopole always has to have its conducting bar in contact with that “ferroplanet”, but that difference is just a matter of their respective magnetic or electrostatic domains is it not?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
jeffinbath said:
An astronaut lands on a small planet whose outer mantle had been blown off so that it is nothing but a smooth cooled down nickel-iron core. He then places a large ordinary bar magnet upright on the surface with its N pole at the top. For all intents and purposes he now has an isolated N pole because the S pole has “vanished” and he can slide his monopole over the surface of the planet until he decides to lift it up.

Not true. The south pole still exists. The field lines curve away from the N pole, enter the surface, and then re-enter at the S pole. There is no monopole here.

jeffinbath said:
How is this different in principle from our having on Earth an isolated negative charge at the end of a dry amber rod?

The field lines from an isolated negative charge all run into the charge, whereas for a magnet they curve back around to re-enter it, even in your example.
 
jeffinbath said:
For all intents and purposes he now has an isolated N pole because the S pole has “vanished”
This isn't true.

You don't need a situation as outlandish as the one you describe. You are simply touching two magnets together - that one of the magnets is the size of a planet is neither here nor there. What happens is just the same as if you touch two magnets together on Earth. The two magnetic fields interact, either reinforcing each other if they point in roughly the same direction or opposing each other if they point in roughly opposite directions.
 
Drakkith said:
Not true. The south pole still exists. The field lines curve away from the N pole, enter the surface, and then re-enter at the S pole. There is no monopole here.
The field lines from an isolated negative charge all run into the charge, whereas for a magnet they curve back around to re-enter it, even in your example.

Yes OK thanks for your point. I now think that the perfect electrostatic analogy should have been to use a permanently polarized bar shaped electret with its positive end sitting on an earthed conductor.
 
jeffinbath said:
Yes OK thanks for your point. I now think that the perfect electrostatic analogy should have been to use a permanently polarized bar shaped electret with its positive end sitting on an earthed conductor.

So? That doesn't change anything about the existence of magnetic monopoles.
 
Drakkith said:
So? That doesn't change anything about the existence of magnetic monopoles.

Well I was’nt seriously trying to claim that such an arrangement was a meaningful magnetic monopole but I was seriously trying to see that a magnet had an exact counterpart in the electrostatic domain. From the point that you made I wish I could see what the magnetic field lines would actually look like from a bar magnet standing up on an iron planet.
 
jeffinbath said:
Well I was’nt seriously trying to claim that such an arrangement was a meaningful magnetic monopole but I was seriously trying to see that a magnet had an exact counterpart in the electrostatic domain.

Ah okay. Yes, electric and magnetic dipoles are essentially identical in terms of what their field lines are doing if I remember correctly.

jeffinbath said:
From the point that you made I wish I could see what the magnetic field lines would actually look like from a bar magnet standing up on an iron planet.

They should look pretty similar to the following picture (from this site):

feaD5X0.png
 

Attachments

  • feaD5X0.png
    feaD5X0.png
    44.1 KB · Views: 798
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: davenn
Drakkith said:
They should look pretty similar to the following picture (from this site):
Well yeah. You can make a water fountain that sprays water in all directions -- if you don't count that little pipe coming up to where the orifices live.
 
Drakkith said:
Ah okay. Yes, electric and magnetic dipoles are essentially identical in terms of what their field lines are doing if I remember correctly.
They should look pretty similar to the following picture (from this site):

View attachment 215767

Thanks for this but I am not convinced that a steel plate is like the situation I described. Let’s say the whole planet is made of soft highly permeable iron. The whole planet now has become the bar magnet’s S pole . Surely the field lines from where the bar contacts the planet will be pulled well into the planet before bending round and they would not crowd just along the surface because they are not restricted as in a thin plate. Therefore the magnetic field lines will now be enormously spread out.
 
  • #10
jeffinbath said:
Thanks for this but I am not convinced that a steel plate is like the situation I described. Let’s say the whole planet is made of soft highly permeable iron. The whole planet now has become the bar magnet’s S pole . Surely the field lines from where the bar contacts the planet will be pulled well into the planet before bending round and they would not crowd just along the surface because they are not restricted as in a thin plate. Therefore the magnetic field lines will now be enormously spread out.

Perhaps. Someone else will have to answer that, as I admit I don't know.
 
  • #11
I do not understand all this. The argument seems to be based simply on hand-waving explanation.

Just pick a region in space and show that the divergence of the magnetic field is not zero. Till then, why would all of this matter?

Zz.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: davenn
  • #12
ZapperZ said:
I do not understand all this. The argument seems to be based simply on hand-waving explanation.

Just pick a region in space and show that the divergence of the magnetic field is not zero. Till then, why would all of this matter?

Zz.

I think it matters only if it helps us to narrow the conceptual gap between electrostatics and magnetics and I started this thread after musing about it. The big difference between the electrostatic and magnetic domains is obviously that there is apparently no magnetic equivalent of an isolated electrical charge……or is there? I mused. Whenever we generate say a negative electrical charge we must always leave behind the exact opposite positive charge . This positive charge will stay localized on a good insulator or distribute itself into planet Earth otherwise. To get a magnetic equivalent I then mused on what would happen if a bar magnet is placed upright on a planet made exclusively of soft iron. Whereupon in this thread Drakkith said :
“The field lines from an isolated negative charge all run into the charge, whereas for a magnet they curve back around to re-enter it, even in your example.”

But there is a contradiction in this statement, the electrostatic field lines must ultimately bend round to the Earth just as they do for the magnetic field lines on an iron planet, so there is an equivalence between the two domains.
 
Last edited:
  • #13
jeffinbath said:
The big difference between the electrostatic and magnetic domains is obviously that there is apparently no magnetic equivalent of an isolated electrical charge
As ZapperZ suggested above, it would be better to say that, unlike the electric field, the divergence of the magnetic field is always zero. The lack of isolated magnetic charges follows from this more precise and generally applicable statement.
Whenever we generate say a negative electrical charge we must always leave behind the exact opposite positive charge . This positive charge will stay localized on a good insulator or distribute itself into planet Earth otherwise. To get a magnetic equivalent I then mused on what would happen if a bar magnet is placed upright on a planet made exclusively of soft iron. Whereupon in this thread Drakkith said :
“The field lines from an isolated negative charge all run into the charge, whereas for a magnet they curve back around to re-enter it, even in your example.”

But there is a contradiction in this statement, the electrostatic field lines must ultimately bend round to the Earth just as they do for the magnetic field lines on an iron planet, so there is an equivalence between the two domains.
You are allowing yourself to be confused by the similarity between an electric dipole and a magnetic dipole. Yes, if you have a positive and a negative charge near one another, the resulting electric dipole will have field lines that "curve around" in a way that looks similar to the field lines of a magnet. But if you actually calculate the field intensity at various points near the two charges you will find that they aren't the same; the dipole is just a good approximation when the distance between the charges is small. This approximation breaks down as the distance between the charges increases.
 
  • #14
jeffinbath said:
I think it matters only if it helps us to narrow the conceptual gap between electrostatics and magnetics...
There's no gap to narrow - it was closed by James Maxwell 150 years ago. The key is that electrical and magnetic fields are just different special cases of the more general electromagnetic field, the behavior of which is described by Maxwell's equations.
 
  • #15
Nugatory said:
There's no gap to narrow - it was closed by James Maxwell 150 years ago. The key is that electrical and magnetic fields are just different special cases of the more general electromagnetic field, the behavior of which is described by Maxwell's equations.

Yes O.K., but to the vast majority of non-physicists that gap has certainly not been closed as they see the different effects of isolated electrostatic charges and magnets in their daily lives.
 
  • #16
jeffinbath said:
Yes O.K., but to the vast majority of non-physicists that gap has certainly not been closed as they see the different effects of isolated electrostatic charges and magnets in their daily lives.

The vast majority of non-physicists also believe in ghosts.

Zz.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: weirdoguy and Vanadium 50
  • #17
jeffinbath said:
Yes O.K., but to the vast majority of non-physicists that gap has certainly not been closed as they see the different effects of isolated electrostatic charges and magnets in their daily lives.
That's not where the gap comes from. The gap comes from having ended one's study with the "school physics" that you mentioned in the first post of this thread; that high school physics brings you up what we understood in 1785 (Coulomb discovered his law) or thereabouts. Thus, the first step in closing the gap is learning what's been discovered since then; only then are you able to look at the gap, see if it has been satisfactorily closed, and to suggest further steps forward if it has not been.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
4K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
6K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
4K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 33 ·
2
Replies
33
Views
10K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
6K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K