As I recall, the Coulomb repulsion is an r^-2 effect whereas the forces between magnetic dipoles is more of an r^-3 effect. This means that the magnetic field effect falls off more quickly with radius, but on the other hand it increases more quickly with decreasing r. This is only true to a certain scale. At a distance between the nuclei commensurate with the Rydberg orbital radius, I think the r^-3 relationship no longer holds or it would form a singulatiry.
Its funny that in Winterberg's descriptions of the stacks of Rydberg clusters, that the strings that are magnetically aligned could vibrate/resonate like Ed Storms' hydrotons. On Sun, Jan 10, 2016 at 6:16 PM, <[email protected]> wrote: > In reply to Bob Higgins's message of Sun, 10 Jan 2016 16:23:21 -0700: > Hi, > >Since in this case we are talking about H or D Rydberg snowflakes, I > think the electrons are all in large planar Rydberg orbitals and this > hexagonal Rydberg snowflake would behave as a BEC. Because of that, if one > of the electrons were forced to take a different orbital, it may completely > disrupt the cluster. So I have been thinking about ways that the small > separation could occur that could work across an entire snowflake all at > once. > > > >I have mentally postulated that as more and more "snowflakes" align and > stack, perhaps the magnetic moment forces along the axis of the aligned > atoms squeeze the layers together, just as 3 magnet disks stacked will > produce a greater axial field than 2 magnet disks. In the case of disk > magnets, as the number in the stack increases, at some point the axial > field will not continue to increase - because of the high permeability of > the magnetic material, the field will leak out the sides. It could be that > these highly anisotropic Rydberg snowflakes may not suffer that effect and > the axial magnetic field may continue to increase for a large number of > stacked layers. > [snip] > > The problem I have with this approach is that while the magnetic > attraction does > increase with additional layers, so does the electrostatic repulsion, and > electrostatic force is always greater than or equal to magnetic force (or > not?) > > Regards, > > Robin van Spaandonk > > http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html > >
