Repelling Non-Magnetized Metal

  • Thread starter Thread starter BigCheese
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Metal
AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the concept of using magnets to repel non-magnetized metal by rapidly flipping the magnet's polarity. The initial idea suggests that if a metal retains a charge after a magnet is removed, quickly reversing the magnet could create a momentary repulsion due to like charges. However, participants point out that the logic is flawed, as not all metals exhibit attraction to magnets, and the mechanism proposed does not align with established principles of magnetic levitation. The conversation highlights the role of electron realignment and induced currents in creating magnetic fields, referencing Lenz's Law as a more viable method for achieving repulsion. Ultimately, the feasibility of the proposed method remains uncertain, with suggestions leaning towards established magnetic levitation techniques.
BigCheese
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
So I've just been thinking about how one could possible use Magnets/Electromagnets to repel from a metal.

I came up with the following thought:

Metal is attracted to a magnet because the magnet aligns the electrons in the metal to the opposite of the magnet (ie. a N pole put to a metal will charge the side facing the magnet to be S).

If the metal keeps the charge somewhat after removing the magnet, could you not quickly flip the magnet so that the charge in the metal is now the same as the charge of the magnet?

Of course it would quickly realign the metal to attract, but for an instant wouldn't it repel with like charges?

If that's true, couldn't you repel a metal by quickly reversing the polarity of the magnet faster than the magnetic field of the metal can realign? As the charge began to realign, the magnet would stop repelling, but before it could fall, the pole would be flipped.

Is my logic faulty, or would this just be too impractical to time perfectly? Or is there an easier way to repel a metal without having to align the charge beforehand (the final idea would be to create a frictionless buffer around a metal flagpole).

Thanks!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
BigCheese said:
So I've just been thinking about how one could possible use Magnets/Electromagnets to repel from a metal.

I came up with the following thought:

Metal is attracted to a magnet because the magnet aligns the electrons in the metal to the opposite of the magnet (ie. a N pole put to a metal will charge the side facing the magnet to be S).

If the metal keeps the charge somewhat after removing the magnet, could you not quickly flip the magnet so that the charge in the metal is now the same as the charge of the magnet?

Of course it would quickly realign the metal to attract, but for an instant wouldn't it repel with like charges?

If that's true, couldn't you repel a metal by quickly reversing the polarity of the magnet faster than the magnetic field of the metal can realign? As the charge began to realign, the magnet would stop repelling, but before it could fall, the pole would be flipped.

Is my logic faulty, or would this just be too impractical to time perfectly? Or is there an easier way to repel a metal without having to align the charge beforehand (the final idea would be to create a frictionless buffer around a metal flagpole).

Thanks!

Your logic is faulty. If this is true, then ALL metal will be attracted to magnets. Would you like to check if this is true?

Zz.
 
I'm assuming the metal to be Steel, not a non-magnetic material.

I'm not quite sure which part of my logic is faulty. If the electrons aren't realigned when in a magnetic field, why exactly then is steel attract to a magnet? If they are realigned, why doesn't it provide a small field of itself?
 
Last edited:
BigCheese said:
... couldn't you repel a metal by quickly reversing the polarity of the magnet faster than the magnetic field of the metal can realign?...

Hmmm. I find that to be an interesting comment; worthy of a least some consideration.
Perhaps it's not possible at all, I don't know, but I sense a theoretical plausibility given that electron realignment is much slower than magnetic field propagation.
Just not sure about this. Interesting concept, though.
 
BigCheese said:
I'm assuming the metal to be Steel, not a non-magnetic material.

I'm not quite sure which part of my logic is faulty. If the electrons aren't realigned when in a magnetic field, why exactly then is steel attract to metal? If they are realigned, why doesn't it provide a small field of itself?

The material doesn't have to be steel, but your mechanism isn't one of the common magnetic levitation mechanisms. You're closest to levitation via Lenz' Law:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnetic_levitation
wikipedia.org said:
Induced currents

Main article: electrodynamic suspension

These schemes work due to repulsion due to Lenz's law. When a conductor is presented with a time-varying magnetic field electrical currents in the conductor are set up which create a magnetic field that causes a repulsive effect.
 
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.
Back
Top