On Wed, Nov 25, 2020 at 2:04 PM JonesBeene <[email protected]> wrote:
> Is a diamagnet the “opposite” of a magnet? If so, then the anwer is no. > > > > There is no dipolar attraction force with diamagnetism at all - for > reasons that are not well understood other than the obvious lack of poles.. > > > > In one sense, you could ask “why do force fields such as diamagnetism > always repel and never attract”? > > > > Here is a simple visual test showing that indeed there is a slight > repelling effect even with water which is slightly diamagnetic > > > > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jyqOTJOJSoU > > > > I would like to see this done with a large chunk of bismuth instead of a > PM. The repel would be less but the assumption is that it is there. > > > > The larger question is this – since magnetism is dipolar, and > diamagnetism is its opposite, why is symmetry lost and diamagnetism is > never dipolar? > > > Interesting. Also if a paramagnet and a ferromagnet attract iron, does a diamagnet attract iron? I may be wrong, but I expect it doesn't. Will it repel iron or have no effect? Harry > > > > > *From: *H LV <[email protected]> > > > > Coulomb's law -- like the notion of absolute zero -- is based on an > extrapolation. > > > > It is possible that the rule of repulsion between like charges and the > rule of attraction between opposite charges does not hold for very small > scales. > > > > Instead, suppose the relationship between certain charge combinations was > the net effect of two underlying attractive and repulsive tendencies. > > > > Ordinarily for opposite charges this would manifest as a net attraction > above a certain distance and for similar charges as a net repulsion above a > certain distance. Below a certain distance opposite charges would become > more repulsive and similar charges would become more attractive. > > > > This new rule would not alter the identity of the charge, i.e. it does not > violate charge conservation. > > > > Harry > > > > > > >
