Even particles have them?

[questionposter]

Is my understanding correct than somehow single charged particles such as an electron have two varying magnetic poles? How does this happen?

I think I was trying to figure out why magnetic monopoles are impossible, and I found out something about particles themselves having poles, so that even if you have something of pure electrons, it still somehow has two poles.

Edited April 15, 2012 by questionposter

[rktpro]

Is my understanding correct than somehow single charged particles such as an electron have two varying magnetic poles? How does this happen?

I think I was trying to figure out why magnetic monopoles are impossible, and I found out something about particles themselves having poles, so that even if you have something of pure electrons, it still somehow has two poles.

 

I am only familiar with classic physics. Maybe in quantum realm, electrons are dipoles but not in classical models.

Magnetic monopoles are impossible because of Gauss Law. I remember watching a video of some MIT professor who brilliantly explained that.

[questionposter]

I am only familiar with classic physics. Maybe in quantum realm, electrons are dipoles but not in classical models.

Magnetic monopoles are impossible because of Gauss Law. I remember watching a video of some MIT professor who brilliantly explained that.

 

I think with what I was thinking of, there was an analogy with a bar magnet. If you break a bar magnet in half, those halves both have two poles, and you can keep breaking them in half until you get to a single particle where even then mathematics says it has two poles.

[rktpro]

I think with what I was thinking of, there was an analogy with a bar magnet. If you break a bar magnet in half, those halves both have two poles, and you can keep breaking them in half until you get to a single particle where even then mathematics says it has two poles.

 

Poles generate in magnets because all the electrons in it have same orientation and alignment. Visualise all electrons spinning clockwise and a magnet would seem like a solenoid. Electron is a single indivisible unit. Why you say it has two poles?

[questionposter]

Poles generate in magnets because all the electrons in it have same orientation and alignment. Visualise all electrons spinning clockwise and a magnet would seem like a solenoid. Electron is a single indivisible unit. Why you say it has two poles?

 

That's just what I remember seeing. I don't know if it's true or not.

[juanrga]

Is my understanding correct than somehow single charged particles such as an electron have two varying magnetic poles? How does this happen?

I think I was trying to figure out why magnetic monopoles are impossible, and I found out something about particles themselves having poles, so that even if you have something of pure electrons, it still somehow has two poles.

 

From where you got this idea?

[questionposter]

From where you got this idea?

 

Don't know, I just remember heating about it in some abstract physics.

[Xittenn]

They have a spin magnetic moment, I am not sure what else you might be referring to.

[swansont]

Don't know, I just remember heating about it in some abstract physics.

 

People search for a permanent electric dipole moment, because it would be interesting if there was one, but the results are thus far consistent with zero. There's always experimental error, though; you can't measure something to be identically zero.

 

One needs to separate asking the question in "abstract physics" and the presence of experimental confirmation. It's only after the latter that you can legitimately discuss it being valid.

[pmb]

Don't know, I just remember heating about it in some abstract physics.

I don't understand. What do you mean when you say heating about it in some abstract physics.

Edited April 15, 2012 by pmb

[questionposter]

I don't understand. What do you mean when you say heating about it in some abstract physics.

 

Like I wrote the word on a book then threw it in a fire...no, it was a mistake, suppose to say "heaRing"

[pmb]

Like I wrote the word on a book then threw it in a fire...no, it was a mistake, suppose to say "heaRing"

If that was a joke then I don't get it. If it wasn't a joke then I don't understand your response. Please rephrase.

[questionposter]

If that was a joke then I don't get it. If it wasn't a joke then I don't understand your response. Please rephrase.

 

Of course it wasn't I joke, why wouldn't I write on books and then throw them in the fire for no reason? It's so much fun.

[pmb]

Of course it wasn't I joke, why wouldn't I write on books and then throw them in the fire for no reason? It's so much fun.

 

Then you failed to follow through with my question

then I don't understand your response. Please rephrase.

I'm not in the mood for sarcasm or jokes so please just answer my question. Thanks.

[imatfaal]

PMB - it was clearly a typo. Let's move on

 

QPoster

Apparently Dirac proved that if magnetic monopoles exist then all charge must be quantized - - but it doesn't necessarily imply the opposite; certainly at present none have been identified. One of Walter Lewin's lectures went in detail through a lovely explanation of Gauss Law and this. If you haven't watched them I couldn't recommend more highly - great subjects and one of our most natural educators

 

http://ocw.mit.edu/courses/physics/8-01-physics-i-classical-mechanics-fall-1999/

 

http://ocw.mit.edu/courses/physics/8-02-electricity-and-magnetism-spring-2002/

 

http://ocw.mit.edu/courses/physics/8-03-physics-iii-vibrations-and-waves-fall-2004/video-lectures/

 

There are many many hours of an entire course there - itunes have them as well

[pmb]

Then you failed to follow through with my question

 

I'm not in the mood for sarcasm or jokes so please just answer my question. Thanks.

My appologies. I just reread my last post in this thread and saw how nasty I might have come across. If that is the case the please acceptmy appologies.