how /DO/ magnets work?

Fuckin magic man we ain't gotta explain shit

its pretty complicated according to Feynman.

To break it down, for ferromagnets the free energy is the lowest in state where spins of some electrons align in the same direction. There is also paramagnetism, ferrimagnetism, antiferromagnetism and diamagnetism but this is left as an exercise for the reader.

>>8603624
why is it when the spins of electrons align, they act like magnets?

File: 1482868907604.jpg (337KB, 1090x956px) Image search: [Google]

337KB, 1090x956px

>>8603624
>left as an exercise to the reader
I've never understood these, is the reader supposed go and research this content somewhere else because I'm led to believe they're reading the book so they can learn these things and not so they can be told to go and find it somewhere else

>>8603635
Spin is an inherent magnetic moment of a particle. When they align, they add up to the "magnetization". When you only have full orbitals the electron spins cancel each other -> no net magnetic field. There are also paramagnets where the unpaired electron spins are randomly distributed and only react to an external magnetic field.

>>8603641
Most of the time you can obtain these results by using methods from preveous chapters. It's just to save pages or to force you to practice the things you already learned. Sometimes it's just the authors laziness though.

>>8604288
>Spin is an inherent magnetic moment of a particle. When they align, they add up to the "magnetization".
Translation: That's just how it works.
The answer is that electromagnetism is a fundamental force, which means our knowledge ends at observation of the phenomenon. We don't know how or why it works. Without a prime cause, there is an inescapable infinite regress of causation. People who want God not to exist would never admit this to be the case, despite its obviousness.

time is actually the fifth dimension, and magnets change the density of space-time over four dimensions, not three. This means that in one pole space-time becomes less dense and in another it becomes more dense, resulting in a polarized force.

>>8604648
go from
>we don't know
to
>fukin miracles

somehow it feels like we've taken a step back

>>8604648
Knowledge ends at observation? You're fucking dumb.

>>8603641
>I want all the information spoon fed to me: the post

File: fckn-magnets.jpg (98KB, 625x332px) Image search: [Google]

98KB, 625x332px

fckn mangets, hao do tehy werk?

File: 3e424fe34e52433b50f6551f5e85e1ff.gif (490KB, 500x380px) Image search: [Google]

490KB, 500x380px

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=evfUTmx0uh8

I didn't want to start a new thread for this -
Can someone explain why a moving electron creates a magnetic field, but not a stationary one? *

>>8606833
So is he saying that electrons are connected end to end in a magnet to create 'strings', or that electrons have nothing to do with it period?

>>8603560
>>8606844
The motion of an electrically charged object creates a magnetic field. This is actually a consequence of special relativity - that is, a 'magnetic' field is actually just a manifestation of an object's electric field from a frame of reference in which the object appears to be in motion.

If you were in space, standing on the outside of your space ship and an electrically charged rock passed by at some speed, let's say 1 m/s, you would be able to measure a magnetic field from it. However, if you were to detach from your space ship and accelerate up to 1 m/s (relative to your space ship) alongside the rock, i.e. 0 m/s relative to it, then the magnetic field would seem to disappear. This is because certain properties have to be conserved - 'invariant' - when you move from one reference frame to another, and the direction of the force on a charged object being acted on by another charge moving relative to it makes it seem as though there's a 'magnetic' field there too, but this is in fact just the effect of a relativistic electric field.

Some materials may have permanent magnetic fields because particles have a property called spin which is essentially intrinsic angular momentum. It's not the same as them just spinning, because particles are not little billiard balls and so the idea of them rotating in that way doesn't make sense (and they'd also have to be rotating faster than the speed of light to have the angular momentum they do) but because they are charges with momentum it generates a magnetic field in the same way spinning a charged ball would. When the spins all align the individual magnetic moments add up and become detectable macroscopically.

>>8603597
>Feynman
There's a great interview with him on Youtube where he explains it pretty well.

>>8607023
That makes a bit more sense, thanks