Momentum transfer between d-electrons and the nucleus in ferromagnetism?

[metastable]

If a copper wire is wound around a piece of iron, nickel or cobalt, and a voltage is applied to the wire, it takes a longer amount of time for the current to reach its maximum value, than if the iron were replaced with a different material, such as glass— a phenomenon known as inductance. My understanding is within the ferromagnetic substance, the d-orbital electrons come into alignment with the external magnetic field, in a process which substantially increases the flux density of the externally applied field. I was wondering whether it is thought there is any momentum transfer between the d-orbitals and the nucleus causing or facilitating the inductance property? As I side note I was wondering this while playing with the close packing of magnetic spheres with the same # of spheres as common isotope numbers of cobalt, nickel and iron, as well as gadolinium, dysprosium and holmium. Specifically the radial symmetrical geometry for these specific #’s of spheres observed was bipyramid & truncated bipyramid.

 

[hutchphd]

If a copper wire is wound around a piece of iron, nickel or cobalt, and a voltage is applied to the wire, it takes a longer amount of time for the current to reach its maximum value, than if the iron were replaced with a different material, such as glass— a phenomenon known as inductance. My understanding is within the ferromagnetic substance, the d-orbital electrons come into alignment with the external magnetic field, in a process which substantially increases the flux density of the externally applied field. I was wondering whether it is thought there is any momentum transfer between the d-orbitals and the nucleus causing or facilitating the inductance property? As I side note I was wondering this while playing with the close packing of magnetic spheres with the same # of spheres as common isotope numbers of cobalt, nickel and iron, as well as gadolinium, dysprosium and holmium. Specifically the radial symmetrical geometry for these specific #’s of spheres observed was bipyramid & truncated bipyramid.

The predominant source of ferromagnetism is the alignment of the intrinsic magnetic moment of unpaired electrons. This occurs easily only if the electron is unpaired in in the outer shell.
The intrinsic magnetic moment of the proton is very much smaller than that of the electron and interactions with the nucleus are tiny in this context. So I think the answer is "unlikely"
Do you have a table of the correlations you noticed? (i.e. data?)

 

[metastable]

Do you have a table of the correlations you noticed? (i.e. data?)

Only the close packing radial geometrical symmetry with the same number of spheres as nucleons in the ferromagnetic elements, and the observation that cobalt, nickel and iron (the only room temperature ferromagnetics) have the highest or nearly the highest binding energy and/or among the lowest mass per nucleon among all the elements.

https://www.mutah.edu.jo/eijaz/bindingenergymore.files/image002.gif
https://www.mutah.edu.jo/eijaz/bindingenergymore.files/image034.gif
56:

59:

62:

160:

163:

 

[Vanadium 50]

1. Ferromagnetism has nothing to do with nuclear binding
2. Your pictures of little spheres stuck together have nothing to do with nuclear structure
3. Gadolinium is a ferromagnet at or near room temperature too
4. Copper, one past nickel, is repelled by a magnetic field

 

[metastable]

So if I understand correctly, when the D-orbitals realign under the influence of an external magnetic field, the nucleus is unaffected.

 

[metastable]

I just thought of one follow up question. Most “permanent magnets” contain iron, nickel or cobalt. If I understand correctly, one would say the nucleus is not rotationally affected when the D-orbitals realign under an external magnetic field. But what about when an entire permanent magnet “accelerates” along a vector under the influence of an external magnetic field... are the d orbitals transferring momentum to the nuclei in this case?

 

[Vanadium 50]

Your personal theory idea is still wrong.

 

[metastable]

Assuming you are correct, if an experiment was done in which the inductance of the same copper solenoid was compared between being wound around either a pure Iron-56 or pure Iron-57 magnetic core, we shouldn’t expect to observe any significant change in the inductance?

 

[Vanadium 50]

How many times do I have to answer the same question? Ferromagnetism has nothing to do with nuclear binding. Once is a question, the second time is a personal theory, but by the third time it's getting close to crackpottery.

 

[metastable]

I’m sorry I thought it was a different question. The reason I asked about Iron-57 compared to Iron 56 is:

“Of these stable isotopes, only 57Fe has a nuclear spin (−1⁄2).”
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iron
&

“inductance is also equal to the ratio of magnetic flux to current[11][12][13][14]”
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inductance

&

“The intrinsic magnetic moment μ of a spin 1/2particle with charge q, mass m, and spin angular momentum S, is[10]”
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spin_(physics)

 

[Vanadium 50]

No matter how many times you ask, and how many irrelevant posts you make, the answer is still "Ferromagnetism has nothing to do with nuclear binding. "

 

[fresh_42]

"Ferromagnetism has nothing to do with nuclear binding."

I think this answers the question, so there is no point in discussing it any further.

Thread closed.