Where does the energy of magnets come from?

[Garfield226]

@Ponster

Magnets do lose their power, and it happens every day.

But if I find a way to destablise the magnet, it’ll lose it’s power.

When you heat a magnet up it loses some of it’s power. as it cools down it regains it. but if I heat it up beyond a temperature known as the Curie temperature (Curie Temp of iron = 1043K), then the magent will lose all of it’s power, even when it cools down to room temp.

Another way is to apply an opposite magnetic field.

If I have 2 magnets, one much more powerful than the other, and I push them together so that they repel each other, the weaker magnet will become demagnetized much faster than it normally would.

Yes, but you can fix all those things. You can “remagnetize” the previously-magnetic chunk of metal.

Look at it this way:

This is a magnetic chunk of iron –

|||||
|||||
|||||
|||||
|||||

Each “|” is a “magnetic domain.” A magnetic domain is basically a bunch of atoms all oriented the same way. Each of those atoms is magnetic, and when they’re all oriented in the same way, their fields combine with each other into one big magnetic field.

This is a demagnetized chunk of iron –

|-\/|
-/|\|
\|//\
\--|/
/-|\|

Each symbol is a “magnetic domain.” Each of those atoms is STILL magnetic, but since they’re all mixed up, their fields can’t combine with each other to make one big one. If you rub another magnet over this one several times in the same direction, the domains will realign, as in the first example.

If the first chunk becomes like the second chunk, did it “lose its magnetism”? Well, the chunk as a whole did, but the magnetic force is still there…as a whole, it’s just cancelled out due to the opposing orientations of the magnetic domains (and individual atoms).

[Ponster]

@Garfield226

If the first chunk becomes like the second chunk, did it “lose its magnetism”? Well, the chunk as a whole did, but the magnetic force is still there…as a whole, it’s just cancelled out due to the opposing orientations of the magnetic domains (and individual atoms).

The question is “Does the damn thing stick to the fridge anymore?” and if it doesn’t, then to the average Joe Soap or John Smith, it isn’t a magnet

[erislover]

I believe hitting a magnet hard will also ruin its magnetic field. Taking a hammer to it, for example. The explanation I got for that was that it jostled the atoms.

[Jurph]

Hang on, I’ve got a hijack.

@Priceguy

Same way a bullet still accelerates after leaving the gun barrel but stops doing so after a while.

That can’t be right. I am not a gun owner, and it’s been six years since I’ve fired one, but I can’t figure out where you think the force is coming from. It’s possible that, in the first centimeter or two after leaving the barrel, the expanding gases continue to provide some (small) force. But “accelerate” in any meaningful way? I just can’t buy that.

Until today, I was blissfully certain that bullets were ballistic projectiles, accelerating down the barrel to their top speed, then slowing down for the rest of their flight due to air resistance. Far be it from me, however, to come down like a hammer and just say, “No, you’re wrong.” I concede that I may be missing something, and implore a more level-headed person to clear this up.

[Crafter_Man]

@Jurph

Hang on, I’ve got a hijack.

That can’t be right. I am not a gun owner, and it’s been six years since I’ve fired one, but I can’t figure out where you think the force is coming from. It’s possible that, in the first centimeter or two after leaving the barrel, the expanding gases continue to provide some (small) force. But “accelerate” in any meaningful way? I just can’t buy that.

Until today, I was blissfully certain that bullets were ballistic projectiles, accelerating down the barrel to their top speed, then slowing down for the rest of their flight due to air resistance. Far be it from me, however, to come down like a hammer and just say, “No, you’re wrong.” I concede that I may be missing something, and implore a more level-headed person to clear this up.

Your hunch is essentially correct… as soon as the bullet leaves the barrel, air resistance slows it down.

But when it comes to ballistics, things aren’t always as simple as they seem.

For some rifle bullets (e.g. the .50 BMG), the bullet is somewhat unstable during the first few hundred yards. After a few hundred yards, the bullet “goes to sleep” and becomes very stable. (An analogy is a spinning top; it is a little unstable when it starts to spin, and then becomes very stable after a few seconds.) This also has a direct affect on precision; the .50 BMG, for example, actually exhibits more precision at 600 yards vs. 100 yards, all else being equal. This is due to the bullet “going to sleep” a few hundred yards after leaving the barrel.

So here’s my question: does the .50 BMG bullet pick up a little velocity once it “goes to sleep”? I don’t know. I can only guess that there would be a slight increase in velocity once the bullet “goes to sleep,” but that this velocity (in absolute terms) is still less than the muzzle velocity due to the air resistance that is constantly acting on the bullet. I’m guessing that, if we graphed the velocity vs. distance from the time the bullet leaves the barrel, the overall slope would be negative, with a slight hump where the bullet “goes to sleep.”

[hajario]

@Alessan

Sure. I’ve seen “dead” magnets lots of times. Haven’t you ever had one that keeps on falling of your fridge for no reason? You can’t get around the Law of Conservation of Energy - each time a magnet exerts force, it loses a bit of its charge. Home magnets just don’t do much work so the charge can last for a very long time.

You may want to try cleaning the back of the magnets.

Haj

[Mort_Furd]

I’m probabla way the f… off base, but I’ve always considered it to be similar to the way a capacitor works.

A capacitor stores energy by distorting the electrical fields in the conducting plates. From what I’ve read/seen as diagrams, this equates to distorting the orbits of the electrons. Charge the plate, push the electron orbits out of whack. When you discharge the plates, the orbits snap back to normal by shedding the energy pushed into them by the charging process.

For magnets, I imagine something similar. A magnet by itself has no force or charge to exert. Then I coma along with a second magnet and push it against the field of the first magnet. This distorts the magnetic fields of both magnets, in effect charging them with potential energy. Now, I release the second magnet, and the distorted magnetic fields attempt to return to normal by shedding the energy that I put into the system by forcing them together.

Think of it maybe this way:

I’ve got a ton of lead sitting on the Earth’s surface. Compared to the Earth’s surface, that lead has a potential energy of zero. This is like the two magnets being separated by a large distance.

Now I use a crane and lift that block of lead fifty feet up from the ground. The lead now has potential energy that can be used to do work (smash somebody flat if he’s dumb enough to get under it.) This is like forcing the two magnets together. Forcing them together takes work, which puts energy into the system.

Now I cut the cable holding the lead. The potential energy (that I’ve stored in the system) becomes kinetic energy and the lead moves, accelerates, smashes into the ground and generates heat. Similarly, I can release the magnets and allow the potential energy to become kinetic energy and the magnets move away from one another.

The only energy involved is that which is used to force the two magnets together. A magent loses its effectiveness when the particles (the smaller mganets it is composed of) lose their alignment. Forcing two magnets to stay together may cause the alignment to be lost sooner.

Magnetism is an inherent property of the material, like gravitational attraction, and can’t really go away. Since magnetism is bipolar (unlike gravity, which is monopolar,) alignment is critical and can reduce the apparent strength even though the total magnetism of an object stays the same.

So. That’s my understanding of it.

Take it with a big grain of salt, since I’m not a physicist and my last physics class was like 16 years ago.

[Algernon]

@Crafter_Man

I’m guessing that, if we graphed the velocity vs. distance from the time the bullet leaves the barrel, the overall slope would be negative, with a slight hump where the bullet “goes to sleep.”

I’ll see you and raise you one. I’m guessing that the overall slope would be negative, with a plateau (no rise at all) where the bullet “goes to sleep”.

I’m basing this guess on the many, many discussions I’ve had with people on both the belief that a bullet rises after it leaves the barrel, and the belief that a pitched fast ball can rise.

[Algernon]

Oops. To clarify. I don’t believe a pitched fastball will rise, but I know of other people who believe this.

[tracer]

@scm1001

I think we are getting confused with force and energy.

God, yes. You wouldn’t believe how many crackpot “alternative physics” theories are based on a simple confusion of these two concepts.

All right, all you wackos out there who are thinking about creating your own perpetual motion machine, listen up and pay attention:

Exerting a force does not require any energy! It is only when a force is applied to a moving object over a distance that energy must be expended. Just because the muscles in your arms have to vibrate (thereby expending energy) in order to exert a static force against a motionless object does not mean that springs, magnets, gravity, etc. have to expend energy to exert a static force against a motionless object. If this were not the case, it would be impossible to set anything down on a table, because the table would have to expend energy to keep it from falling.

[Crafter_Man]

@Algernon

I’ll see you and raise you one. I’m guessing that the overall slope would be negative, with a plateau (no rise at all) where the bullet “goes to sleep”.

I’m basing this guess on the many, many discussions I’ve had with people on both the belief that a bullet rises after it leaves the barrel, and the belief that a pitched fast ball can rise.

I agree it’s impossible for a bullet to rise above the barrel axis. In fact, this is true regardless of the barrel’s elevation angle. But we’re talking about velocity here. My point is that it’s possible for the incremental change in velocity to be positive during the time the bullet goes from “partially stable” to “stable.”

[Thudlow_Boink]

@Priceguy

What energy causes the magnets to move as they slide across the table towards each other? What energy causes the magnets to resist my attempts to push them together?

More importantly, where is this energy stored? It cannot come from nowhere and there cannot be an infinite amount of it, so sooner or later every magnet must run dry, right? Why haven’t I ever heard of or encountered an “empty” magnet?

One could just as easily ask:

What energy causes a bowling ball to roll down a slanted ramp towards the floor? What energy causes the bowling ball to resist my attempts to push it back up the ramp? Where is this energy stored? Why haven’t I ever encountered an “empty” bowling ball?

I am not a physicist, but IIRC, gravitation and electromagnetism are two of the Four Basic Forces of the Universe. The answers to my questions involve gravity and potential energy; the answers to yours are analogous but involve magnetism. Right?

[Algernon]

@Crafter_Man

But we’re talking about velocity here. My point is that it’s possible for the incremental change in velocity to be positive during the time the bullet goes from “partially stable” to “stable.”

I confess that my subsequent comments about a rising bullet/fastball were confusing and irrelevant. Sorry. Yet, I still would think that the velocity curve would at best flatten out. I can’t quite grasp where the energy would come from to allow the bullet to speed up. Wouldn’t it simply decelerate more slowly. (that make any sense?)

[Dunderman]

@Thudlow Boink

One could just as easily ask:

What energy causes a bowling ball to roll down a slanted ramp towards the floor? What energy causes the bowling ball to resist my attempts to push it back up the ramp? Where is this energy stored? Why haven’t I ever encountered an “empty” bowling ball?

Apart from the last question (the bowling ball isn’t the thing doing the lion’s share of the work, if you catch my meaning), you’re right; there is a definite analogy. I hadn’t thought about it that way.

Could everyone please stop implying that I’m trying to build a perpetual motion machine? I was just wondering whence the energy comes to perform the work needed to move two magnets towards each other.

[CandidGamera]

@Crafter_Man

I agree it’s impossible for a bullet to rise above the barrel axis. In fact, this is true regardless of the barrel’s elevation angle. But we’re talking about velocity here. My point is that it’s possible for the incremental change in velocity to be positive during the time the bullet goes from “partially stable” to “stable.”

Disclaimer : I am not a physicist or ballistics expert, nor do I play one on TV. I do, however, have fairly recent experience with college level physics.

Ignoring the effect of gravity (which will begin to accelerate the bullet downward) there is nothing that would increase the velocity of a bullet after leaving the gun. Conservation of Momentum applies. As Algernon suggests, I suspect you’d see a decrease in the ‘air drag’ on the bullet… thus a decrease in the deceleration… but for the velocity to increase, the deceleration would have to drop all the way to zero, and become acceleration temporarily.

[MikeS]

scm1001 and Mort Furd have got the answer to the OP right: when you push two magnets together, you’re storing energy in the system, and once they’re released that energy can be converted back into mechanical motion (the magnets sticking together or flying apart, depending on their alignment.)

I’ll just add that the energy you put into the system when you push the two magnets together can be viewed as being stored in the combined magnetic fields of the two magnets. There’s an energy density per volume of space associated with an magnetic field (given by E = B[sup]2[/sup]/[symbol]m[/symbol][sub]0[/sub], where [symbol]m[/symbol][sub]0[/sub] is the “permeability of free space”.) When you push two magnets together, you increase the total energy present in the combined magnetic field of the two magnets, and thus the mechanical energy used to push them together is converted into field energy. Similarly, when you let go, the energy stored in the fields is converted into mechanical energy as the two magnets fly apart.

[Mort_Furd]

The energy needed to move two magnets together is harder to imagine.

Start with two magnets stuck together, north pole to south pole. If you pull them apart, then you must do work to get them to separate. If you don’t turn them, then the energy that you put into the system by separating the two magnets is the same energy that will be expended in pulling them back together.

But, you say, the two magnets were never together to begin with. This is the strange part. Regardless of whether the two have ever met, they have potential energy with respect to one another because of the magnetic fields and their physical relation with one another. In moving the one magnet around, you have done work in moving it such that its potential energy with respect to the other magnet has increased. It is this energy that then pulls the two together.
Will a real physicist please step in here and rescue us?

[Dunderman]

Great. Now my head hurts.

[theckhd]

GAH i had a great post whipped up and the hamsters ate it on preview.

Anyway, IAAP, so here’s the straight dope on magnetism.

Magnetic Fields are created by moving charges. In the case of a bar magnet, the moving charges are the electrons orbiting the atoms of the material the bar magnet is made out of. The moving electrons create what we call Magnetic Dipoles. If the Magnetic Dipoles of all of the constituent atoms line up, you have a bar magnet.

Magnetic fields do not, in fact, repel or attract one another. Magnetic fields can only act on moving charges. There’s a caveat though – in a uniform magnetic field, a magnetic dipole will feel no net force (a torque, perhaps, but not a force)! The reason bar magnets exert a force on one another is that their field is non-uniform, and thus they can exert a force on each others’ magnetic dipoles.

Mort Furd was correct about everything except how a capacitor works. A capacitor does not store energy by deforming fields within the plates, it stores energy by creating a buildup of opposite charges on either plate, which creates an electric field between the plates. The energy it stores is the energy stored in the electric field, with an energy density u=(1/2)epsilonE^2.

The same is true for magnets, in that there is an energy density associated with magnetic fields. MikeS’s explanation about how magnets push each other apart is exactly correct.

I have to run now, i hope this helps. If there are still questions, i’ll try to stop back later tonight.

[GargoyleWB]

Physics/engineering guy here…

Just to nitpick terminology…

Asking whether the velocity of a bullet decreases (or a baseball) is an improper way of asking the question…

It can be technically correct to say that the velocity of a bullet increases after being shot, because velocity is a vector. The downward velocity of the bullet steadily increases due to normal gravitational acceleration. The horizontal component of the bullet’s velocity is what is decreased by air resistance.

So one needs to be very explicit when asking questions of this sort, or you will get some unintended replies from the physicist/scientist crowd. Unfortunately, the layperson often is unaware or is confused by the differences between velocity/speed/momentum and force/energy and mass/weight.

As for the magnets and the OP’s question…

What you are thinking of the magnets’ “energy” is what we call the “potential energy” between the two respective magnetic fields of each magnet. When held static, there is a resultant force (that you are feeling) based on the attraction and repulsion of the accumated total of all of the individual magnetic dipoles of the atoms and molecules in the magnet (explained by another poster). You can think of it just like the force of a spring. When compressed, a spring does not get “energy” from anywhere in a literal sense, it is instead providing an increasing resistive force. Same with magnets. Things get quickly hairy to explain when we get into potential energy, stored field energy, and such however.

In a very small nutshell, there is a physical principle that charged particles possess an electric field, and charges in motion produce a magnetic field. Charges in motion within a magnetic field feel an induced force upon them. All of the wiggly electrons within the magnet are producing a magnetic field that all of the other wiggly electrons in the other magnet feel as a force.