Magnetic field is made of photons?

[taylaron]

magnetic field question

hey guys,
as you all know magnets consist of fields; Made of virtual photons (as described in this thread) but if you all look at the picture of 1 level of a magnetic field using iron shavings on a piece of paper at:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Magnet0873.png"
you notice they form actual "lines" why don’t you see a solid "black" spot filled with iron by the magnet instead of "lines" or fields. I am surprised the fields are so far apart.
that’s one of my questions.

another is that as you see the photons "orbit" the magnet (correct?)
for indirect purposes of a monopole magnet, is there a way you can get those photons to go straight? if you can generate a magnet in which the magnetic field doesn’t loop around the magnet itself, abut continues in a straight line. in a since we managed to do it by inventing a laser to make photons go straight.
But I am talking about the field here not "light"
if we could make the photons from the magnet go straight and not come back, wouldn’t that create a monopole magnet? the usefulness of this would be amazing. or am i wrong?

I’ll hold of here for now.

the only problem that keeps staying in my mind is that
"if its possible, its already been done." -GAH!

 

[marlon]

hey guys,
as you all know magnets consist of fields; Made of virtual photons (as described in this thread)

It is not correct to just say that magnetic fields are made up of virtual photons. This was also not discussed in this thread. Virtual photons are the force carriers of the EM interaction. They most certainly do not constitute a magnetic field.

but if you all look at the picture of 1 level of a magnetic field using iron shavings on a piece of paper at:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Magnet0873.png"

To be clear, those lines are not virtual photons. Such photons are not even observable directly.

you notice they form actual "lines" why don’t you see a solid "black" spot filled with iron by the magnet instead of "lines" or fields.

Why would you expect to see a solid black spot ?

I am surprised the fields are so far apart.
that’s one of my questions.

Why ?

another is that as you see the photons "orbit" the magnet (correct?)

Incorrect. No photons are orbiting magnets. Where did you get this idea ?

for indirect purposes of a monopole magnet,

A monopole magnet does NOT exist. A magnet is a magnetic dipole, quadrupole etc etc

is there a way you can get those photons to go straight? if you can generate a magnet in which the magnetic field doesn’t loop around the magnet itself, abut continues in a straight line.

This violates the laws describing magnets and their magnetic field lines.

in a since we managed to do it by inventing a laser to make photons go straight.

Photons do not go straight in a laser. They are coherent, true, but we did NOt manage that. This is a natural property we get out of population inversion and stimuated emission. Especially the stimulated emission gives us photons with the same physical properties as the ones stimulating the emission (ie the photons already present in the laser, if you want).

But I am talking about the field here not "light"

You talk about photons right ? They are dual to EM waves (or fields) of which "light" is just a part of the spectrum.

if we could make the photons from the magnet go straight and not come back, wouldn’t that create a monopole magnet?

But we do NOT decide how the photons behave due to the magnet. That is a property of the magnet. Actually, it is this behaviour that DEFINES the magnet. Besides, we do not manipulate the trajectory of photons in that sense.

the usefulness of this would be amazing. or am i wrong?

I’ll hold of here for now.

the only problem that keeps staying in my mind is that
"if its possible, its already been done." -GAH!

It is NOT possible for the above reasons

greets
marlon

 

[taylaron]

thanks marlon.
obviously i have a lot to learn and to understand. i apologise for my misunderstanding.
regarding the "black spot" since i'd immagin that the fundimental particles that compose magnetic fields that are subatomic in size, the reason I am surprised that the iron shaving "lines" were so far apart is because of the size of the particles that they are "attracted" to. i don't understand why the iron shavings are so far apart.

 

[richerrich]

And photons are fundamental units of energy so they are not made of anything else.

Not even strings?

 

[Flux]

Strings are an interesting theory but I don't think it's been proven yet.

 

[richerrich]

Strings are an interesting theory but I don't think it's been proven yet.

The more i read about LHC and strings the more i think there is no such thing as nothing.
Nothing is just an illusion, something that our current knowledge and instruments can't test.

 

[taylaron]

Contemplating the mechanics of the universe-

The more i read about LHC and strings the more i think there is no such thing as nothing.
Nothing is just an illusion, something that our current knowledge and instruments can't test.

Similar contemplation you're having by myself has resulted in my development of the following perspective I attempt to employ when trying to better understand physics beyond what the standard model can currently explain.

I find it intellectually stimulating and potentially useful to describe and identify the features of the universe as not being fundamentally composed of what is currently identified as fields or fundamental particles in addition to quanta. Instead, imagine the microcosm and macrocosm as only being composed of an incomprehensible amount of fundamentally small units of energy. Each quantum of energy (which solely comprises everything 'we' see, touch, feel and observe) is manipulated and transformed in a defined combination of either finite or infinite number of existing dimensions. Just as Einstein described gravity as the warping of space-time, each additional dimension in this perspective would also have similar effects in its ability to alter the interactions of energy existing in other corresponding dimension(s). This perspective combines the scales of the very large and the very small into one comprehensible theory which describes the universe based on the both simple and elegant prerequisite of understanding how energy in each dimension affects other quanta in the remaining dimensions. Using this perspective, it seems simple and obvious that entities in this universe would be able to exist in dimensions other than the three of space. This realization opens an amazing number of doors for understanding entities that we know exist, but cannot directly observe or measure at this time.

From this perspective, the concept of a ‘force-field’ employed for the past several millennia seems both crude and incomplete in describing the effects of other dimensions interacting with one another. What is identified today as a different types of particles may be a multi-dimensional structured group of many units of energy of different characteristics; each interacting with one another to produce what we recognize as its characteristics (such as elements in the periodic table).

To help visualize, imagine the following Calabi-Yau Shape as possibly representing all existing dimensions as they could be imagined in three dimensional space. The effect of one dimension upon another could be visualized as selecting one of the membranes in the below shape and pushing on it (representing the insertion of energy at the point of finger contact). The morph results in the proportional displacement of other membranes/ dimensions.

Calabi-Yau Shape Link: http://members.wolfram.com/jeffb/visualization/stringtheory2.shtml

Use your imagination. Albert Einstein himself said "Imagination is more important than knowledge". Nothing can logically be declared impossible until humanity can precisely explain every entity in the universe in its entirety.


Note* The purpose of this post simply to encourage and stimulate richerrich to contemplate how the universe might work; nothing else. It is not my intent to violate any PF rules, policies or guidelines by posting this. This post can be considered a thoughtful enrichment exercise.

Regards,
-Taylaron

 

[mattmann111]

Will I be able to reflect magnetic waves from a permanent magnet just like you should reflect light with a mirror?
Because some say magnetic waves are virtual photons or something and light are just photons.


5+ years later...you get a response...lol

Yes, you can reflect magnetic waves from a magnet to a "mirror," but the mirror has to be rotating/spinning in order for the magnetic waves to be reflected...;) Hope this solves the problem...

 

[kurros]

Yes, you can reflect magnetic waves from a magnet to a "mirror," but the mirror has to be rotating/spinning in order for the magnetic waves to be reflected...;) Hope this solves the problem...

I didn't bother reading the whole thread because it generally seems to be full of (ancient) crazy-talk, and what you are saying just seems like more crazy-talk to me. Perhaps you could provide a reference because I have no idea what you mean by a "magnetic wave" in the first place nor what this reflection mechanism you speak of is.

 

[Ben dot 1]

unrelated, though interesting to note...

I apreaciate the thread and i have come to understand more about the energy packets emited by the interaction of EM.
However, if the photons have energy, why wouldn't they have mass, since E=mCC? and if they do why aren't they classified as matter?
And what happens if we can have a very long and thin magnet, would it exhibit the same classical properties?

 

[patfada]

II think it is very appropriate to call A^\mu the 'photon field' and to say that it is made up of photons (how else would one define 'made up of'?). Similarly, since E and B are written in terms of A, they are written in terms of creation and annihilation operators, so are also 'made up of' photons.

Isnt this like saying "the ocean is made of waves"?
Actually the ocean is made of sea water - waves are things that happen in the ocean.
So photons are excitations in the photon field (but don't ask me what the photon field is made of)

 

[mfb]

However, if the photons have energy, why wouldn't they have mass, since E=mCC? and if they do why aren't they classified as matter?

E₀=mc^2
Mass corresponds to rest energy - but photons are never at rest, they have no rest energy and no mass.

And what happens if we can have a very long and thin magnet, would it exhibit the same classical properties?

The same classical properties as what?

This thread is from 2006. If there are open questions, can you please open a new thread (in the appropriate forum, not high-energy physics)?

 

[ZapperZ]

I apreaciate the thread and i have come to understand more about the energy packets emited by the interaction of EM.
However, if the photons have energy, why wouldn't they have mass, since E=mCC? and if they do why aren't they classified as matter?
And what happens if we can have a very long and thin magnet, would it exhibit the same classical properties?

Please read this FAQ post:

https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=511175

This is a horribly old thread to revive. It is now closed.

Zz.