Magnetic field composition?

  • #1
So are there photons "flowing" from one end of a permanent magnet to the other? If so what determines the frequency?
 

Answers and Replies

  • #2
Vanadium 50
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Education Advisor
2019 Award
25,096
8,198
No, and that makes the second part moot.
 
  • #3
Of what then is the field composed?
 
  • #4
590
412
Nothing. Field is a field, entity that lives on it's own. Photons are "excitations" (whatever that means) of quantum electromagnetic field, but that doesn't justify the claim that em field is composed of anything.
 
  • #5
704
151
There was another thread just yesterday that veered off massively, so I think it's worth pointing out that "electromagnetic" isn't just a convenient moniker to refer to the magnetic and electric field together, but rather that they are really are one combined, inseparable entity. That is, the classic "electric field" and "magnetic field" are manifestations depending on the observer, and indeed different observers might entirely disagree on whether a certain action was caused by an electric field, or a magnetic field.
 
  • Like
Likes Nugatory
  • #6
Charles Link
Homework Helper
Insights Author
Gold Member
4,656
2,006
For the OP @Mediocrates The best simple explanation for the source of the magnetic field in a permanent magnet=[e.g. a cylindrical magnet with uniform magnetization vector ## \vec{M} ##,(that points from the "-" end to the "+" end), that essentially has a "plus" (north) magnetic pole on one endface and a "minus" (south) magnetic pole on the other endface], is the explanation of "bound surface currents" from the magnetization that "circulate" around the outer cylindrical surface with the same geometry as that of the currents of a solenoid. Since these currents are the resultant edge effect of what could be viewed in a simplistic model as currents from the magnetic moments of individual atoms, there is no actual electrical charge transport from these currents. In any case, the magnetic field ## \vec{B} ## of the permanent magnet, both inside and outside the magnet can be computed from these hypothesized "surface currents" using Biot-Savart's law, and the results are consistent with the magnetic field that is observed.
 
  • #7
704
151
@Charles Link , that is an engineering approximation that hardly elucidates the actual generation of the magnetic field in a permanent magnet.
 
  • #8
Charles Link
Homework Helper
Insights Author
Gold Member
4,656
2,006
@Charles Link , that is an engineering approximation that hardly elucidates the actual generation of the magnetic field in a permanent magnet.
The exchange effect is an additional effect necessary to explain ferromagnetism, but the magnetic surface currents can be quantified with what I believe are highly accurate results. For a simple calculation, see the following post: https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/magnetic-field-of-a-ferromagnetic-cylinder.863066/ Hopefully this doesn't start to lead too far off topic before the OP gets a chance to respond. ## \\ ## Also, Griffith's Electrodynamics book contains a very good derivation of the surface currents as he computes the vector potential ## \vec{A} ## from an arbitrary distribution of magnetization ## \vec{M} ##. I believe this result is in section 6.2 of his book.
 
Last edited:
  • #9
davenn
Science Advisor
Gold Member
2019 Award
9,287
7,739
The exchange effect is an additional effect necessary to explain ferromagnetism, but the magnetic surface currents can be quantified with what I believe are highly accurate results. For a simple calculation, see the following post: https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/magnetic-field-of-a-ferromagnetic-cylinder.863066/ Hopefully this doesn't start to lead too far off topic before the OP gets a chance to respond. ## \\ ## Also, Griffith's Electrodynamics book contains a very good derivation of the surface currents as he computes the vector potential ## \vec{A} ## from an arbitrary distribution of magnetization ## \vec{M} ##. I believe this result is in section 6.2 of his book.

Charles .... you are making this far more complex than what a B level topic should be :smile:
 
  • #10
Nothing. Field is a field, entity that lives on it's own. Photons are "excitations" (whatever that means) of quantum electromagnetic field, but that doesn't justify the claim that em field is composed of anything.
How would one determine the existence of a field in the absence of particles?
 
  • #11
704
151
That's probably more of a philosophical question since that scenario wouldn't be our universe.
 
  • #12
That's probably more of a philosophical question since that scenario wouldn't be our universe.
Quess my question was, "can there be a field without a particle?" I thought particles give rise to fields?
 
  • #13
590
412
I thought particles give rise to fields?
No it's the other way around, particles are states of (quantum) fields.
 

Related Threads on Magnetic field composition?

Replies
7
Views
4K
  • Last Post
Replies
4
Views
629
  • Last Post
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • Last Post
Replies
7
Views
7K
  • Last Post
3
Replies
50
Views
15K
  • Last Post
Replies
6
Views
1K
  • Last Post
Replies
6
Views
3K
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • Last Post
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • Last Post
Replies
7
Views
2K
Top