Submitted by Ethan-Wakefield t3_1198h4o in askscience
Holgrin t1_j9oibf3 wrote
A permanent magnet is a magnetic dipole. It doesn't create "excitations," a magnetic field forms surrounding the two poles, pointing out of the north end and into the south end.
Moving a magnet doesn't typically create light because the motion doesn't typically produce a sufficient amount of energy to excite electrons and cause the excitation-decay process that occurs in, say, LEDs. Said another way, the material physics for free electrons recombining with "holes" simply doesn't exist here. Theoretically it should be possible to move a magnet with the right frequency and in the correct plane near an LED to produce a bit of light, but this would be rather difficult because the direct interaction between this magnet and the electrons in the semiconductor material would be rather weak. Obviously we can use motors to rotate magnets in an electric generator to produce electricity in cables and wires and then create useful circuits that way, but the physics of photon production a bit more complex than just moving a magnet around.
Moving a magnet can induce an electrical current in a conductive material, i.e. a copper wire. This is because the magnet interacts strongly with the free electrons in the conductive material, and the electrons move to produce a current. Photons are released most commonly when an electron "decays" energy states (it loses energy) and changes from a high energy state to a lower energy state. The frequency of light emitted depends on the energy difference between these states, known as the "band gap." Semiconductors have many different medium sized band gaps. Conductors have band gaps with actually "overlap" and cross each other, indicating little to no energy change is necessary for the electrons to change states. This is why they can move so freely in the conducting band to create current. Insulators, meanwhile, have very large band gaps and the amount of energy required for an electron to change states in an insulator often while break down the material, i.e. burn it.
When you move a magent around, you simply cause that magnetic dipole to "wiggle," but this is not a photon. A photon is a continuously oscillating electrical and magnetic field moving through spacetime, with those fields oriented perpindicular to each other. Only if you understand higher-order quantum field theory should you try to make sense of the description of a photon being an "excitation of the electromagnetic field." I don't like that description. It is not good for lay people, and I don't even know if it is agreed upon in the physics community. It is its own electromagnetic fields, and they are oscillating constantly. It's not a ripple of water propagating outwards from some disturbance losing energy as it travels, like you threw a pebble into a pool. It is a much more complicated particle and wave than that.
Edit: I want to add something else here. Some people have stated that moving around a magnet does produce light waves, but that is not necessarily true. A changing magnetic field can induce a current, but only where free electrons are present, and a current does not necessarily produce light, or at least any useful light beyond the imperceptible statistical stray photon. A photon is a "packet" of energy which exhibits the characteristics of both a particle and a wave. It is a fundamental piece or building block of energy in the universe. Moving a magnet around does not inherently induce some quantized amount of energy to be flung about the universe in the form of a photon. A moving magnetic field, in a vacuum, is not itself any form of energy, even though the movement of this magnetic field superficially is similar to the changing magnetic field of a photon. A changing magnetic field can induce a force - the electromagnetic force - on free charges, but no energy exchange takes place until electrons begin moving.
Whether the magnetic field itself uses photons - being the fundamental carrier particle for the EM force - to "communicate" with or "touch without touching" the electrons is something of a much higher level debate, to the best of my knowledge.
[deleted] t1_j9yaxkc wrote
[removed]
Ethan-Wakefield OP t1_j9p1zox wrote
Okay. So, fundamentally, I am correct to say that if I have a permanent magnet (an iron magnet for example), and I constantly accelerate it very, very quickly (for example, I throw it into a black hole), it will emit EM radiation all the way down? Is that correct? Could I (theoretically) detect a magnet falling into a black hole by observing the radio waves it emits, and infer that a magnet must be falling into the black hole?
What happens to a black hole that's rotating if it has charge? Does it emit EM radiation? Intuitively, I think the answer is "no" because a black hole can't emit anything. So I think I'm misunderstanding things. Where am I going wrong?
Holgrin t1_j9p2zlq wrote
>I am correct to say that if I have a permanent magnet it will emit EM radiation all the way down?
No. Not at all. I thought that specific part was pretty clear. A magnet does not simply emit EM radiation, moving it doesn't change that either. Moving it in the vicinity of free charged particles can induce a current, but that is not the same as light either.
Light - i.e. a photon - is a quantized packet of energy. You're not just flinging around energy by waving a magnet, no matter how fast it moves.
>Could I (theoretically) detect a magnet falling into a black hole by observing the radio waves it emits, and infer that a magnet must be falling into the black hole?
No, because it isn't emitting radio waves this way.
>What happens to a black hole that's rotating if it has charge? Does it emit EM radiation? Intuitively, I think the answer is "no" because a black hole can't emit anything. So I think I'm misunderstanding things. Where am I going wrong?
You're trying to make sense of black holes before you make sense of the basic properties of the EM force. You need to slow down and try to get a better understanding of the basics before trying to understand what happens near a singularity.
Ethan-Wakefield OP t1_j9p40ei wrote
>You're trying to make sense of black holes before you make sense of the basic properties of the EM force. You need to slow down and try to get a better understanding of the basics before trying to understand what happens near a singularity.
Yeah, I'm sorry. I'm trying to make sense of EM force, but I'm finding it really, really confusing.
Holgrin t1_j9p4m0m wrote
That's because it is. What is your formal level of education on the topic? We have to begin with where you are correct. You seem to be confusing a magnetic field with photons themselves.
Ethan-Wakefield OP t1_j9p9423 wrote
Honestly, zero. When I was in high school, I wanted to be a physics major in college, but I my math teacher told me I had no chance to ever learn the math necessary to do Physics, and it's just be a waste of my tuition money, so I abandoned that plan because I couldn't afford to fail my first year as a physics major and then need to change to a different program.
I've always kind of regretted my decision, and now I'm trying to self-study. I've been going through Taylor's Classical Mechanics, and basically picking up Calc and differential equations along the way as I go (I know, this is all a bad idea. Believe me, everybody has told me that I just have to take a bunch of math and make sure I'm 100% on that before I ever even look at a physics book, but I just can't do it. I hate math so much).
Taylor's Classical Mechanics is not exactly easy, but I felt like I was making some level of progress. I bought a used copy of Griffith's Electrodynamics because I found a used book store selling it for a really low price.
I'm confused now because I was trying to figure out what Maxwell's equations mean, and that took me to Stack Exchange, where somebody said that if we have a wave passing through the magnetic field, it induces an electrical field, and then that re-induces a magnetic field, which then self-propagates as the electrical wave makes a magnetic wave, and so on and so forth. We can this endless propagation a photon.
So then I thought, well wait that doesn't make sense. Because then moving a magnet through space would just make magnetic waves, and that would create photons? That makes no sense at all. But another comment said that photons are created by wave excitations in the EM field. Which sounds similar?
At that point I decided, okay I have no idea what is going on, I'd better ask.
And here we are.
That's all there is to it. I have no formal education at all. I'm just a humanities person who's in way over his head.
Holgrin t1_j9pfx49 wrote
Let's start here:
>my math teacher told me I had no chance to ever learn the math necessary to do Physics, and it's just be a waste of my tuition money
What a horrible teacher! I don't care how hopeless it looks, a teacher should never, ever discourage our curiosities! I don't care if you were struggling with basic algebraic principles, you can learn the math necessary if you are truly curious about physics!
>everybody has told me that I just have to take a bunch of math and make sure I'm 100% on that before I ever even look at a physics book, but I just can't do it. I hate math so much).
Also not the best advice for everybody. We all have areas of strengths and natural curiosities and other things are just work. This advice amounts to "you can never play an instrument if you don't learn nusic theory and how to read sheet music." It's just not true. You should try to learn the formal rules and principles, and respect the wisdom and truth they contain, but if you love to play music and can do it without reading sheet music, then do it! This is kind of the same thing, although you can't completely disregard the math in science, whereas you can have a successful career playing music even if you never learn to read a musical note.
>I was trying to figure out what Maxwell's equations mean, and that took me to Stack Exchange, where somebody said that if we have a wave passing through the magnetic field, it induces an electrical field, and then that re-induces a magnetic field, which then self-propagates as the electrical wave makes a magnetic wave, and so on and so forth. We can this endless propagation a photon.
Oof. I don't like that explanation at all. They might have some truth in some of it, but it is safe to just ignore this explanation. Also, Maxwell's equations are very difficult to understand intuitively. I'm an electrical engineer by profession, I have an undergrad degree in that and one in business, and I am deeply interested in the physics, I should have double majored or at least minored in physics. I also may later pursue a PhD in physics, but for now my career is to be an engineer, which I do enjoy.
Maxwell's equations describe basically the totality of the electromagnetic force. It helped einstein to come up with special relativity and it also provided clues to quantum theory. These equations described the electromagnetic force better than Newton described classical mechanics. Quantum theory doesn't blow up Maxwell's equations the way quantum mechanics blow up Newtonian physics. It's amazing. But it's also not very intuitive and I have no idea how I would even go about summarizing Maxwell's equations to a lay person. So don't sweat it if you don't "understand" these equations!
Now, here's a story.
Me, an EE who graduated with a 3.3 GPA from a top 50 school, loved math in high school but didn't love science. I struggled badly with my second semester of physics in college for my business degree. Then, after graduation, I read this book because I thought it would just be good general knowledge:
This book completely changed my perspective on physics principles that I never could grasp before. You can read the entirety while ignoring some of the math he presents. It's a textbook but reads very conversationally most of the time, and is meant to be very approachable for people who aren't necessarily STEM majors.
Now, I ask you before we go farther, what exactly do you want? Do you want to just gain a better layman's understanding of physics, or are you exploring going to college or a career change?
Because how we talk about this I think depends on your goals.
enderxzebulun t1_j9qcacy wrote
>Then, after graduation, I read this book because I thought it would just be good general knowledge: > >https://press.princeton.edu/books/hardcover/9780691135045/physics-and-technology-for-future-presidents
Just ordered this, thanks for the recommendation. FYI: coupon code PUP30 applies a 30% discount.
Holgrin t1_j9qcjhy wrote
I am very excited for you. If you were interested enough in the description to order that book I have no doubt you'll find it intriguing from cover to cover. Enjoy, and stay curious!
[deleted] t1_j9psd43 wrote
[removed]
[deleted] t1_j9sfrfa wrote
[removed]
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments