How do magnets work?

[@TaylorShockey]

After 37 years, you've filled a major gap in my understanding of physics. Your explainations are truely gifts that benefit all of humanity. From the bottom of my heart, thank you.❤

[@sicfxmusic]

What were you doing 38 years ago?

[@misterphmpg8106]

same

[@v2ike6udik]

they lie mostly and produce false perseptions. satanists. it takes HUGEBALLS to admint, everything you know is false or somehow manipulated, so you would not understand important stuff. And you will be materialistdumbfk forever. You are cattle to "elite" (khmrptls). In reality it is just "Friends" for those who cant stand fake laughter. Useless entertainment and predictive programming so you would not whine when the steal money from every country.

[@charlesbrightman4237]

IN THE INTEREST OF FINDING THE THEORY OF EVERYTHING: SOME THINGS MODERN SCIENCE DOES NOT APPARENTLY KNOW: Consider the following: a. Numbers: Modern science does not even know how numbers and certain mathematical constants exist for math to do what math does. (And nobody as of yet has been able to show me how numbers and certain mathematical constants can come from the Standard Model Of Particle Physics). b. Space: Modern science does not even know what 'space' actually is nor how it could actually warp and expand. c. Time: Modern science does not even know what 'time' actually is nor how it could actually warp and vary. d. Gravity: Modern science does not even know what 'gravity' actually is nor how gravity actually does what it appears to do. And for those who claim that 'gravity' is matter warping the fabric of spacetime, see 'b' and 'c' above. e. Speed of Light: 'Speed', distance divided by time, distance being two points in space with space between those two points. But yet, here again, modern science does not even know what space and time actually are that makes up 'speed' and they also claim that space can warp and expand and time can warp and vary, so how could they truly know even what the speed of light actually is that they utilize in many of the formulas? Speed of light should also warp, expand and vary depending upon what space and time it was in. And if the speed of light can warp, expand and vary in space and time, how then do far away astronomical observations actually work that are based upon light and the speed of light that could warp, expand and vary in actual reality? f. Photons: A photon swirls with the 'e' and 'm' energy fields 90 degrees to each other. A photon is also considered massless. What keeps the 'e' and 'm' energy fields together across the vast universe? And why doesn't the momentum of the 'e' and 'm' energy fields as they swirl about not fling them away from the central area of the photon? And electricity is electricity and magnetism is magnetism varying possibly only in energy modality, energy density and energy frequency. Why doesn't the 'e' and 'm' of other photons and of matter basically tear apart a photon going across the vast universe? Also, 'if' a photon actually red shifts, where does the red shifted energy go and why does the photon red shift? And for those who claim space expanding causes a photon to red shift, see 'b' above. Why does radio 'em' (large 'em' waves) have low energy and gamma 'em' (small 'em' waves) have high energy? And for those who say E = hf; see also 'b' and 'c' above. (f = frequency, cycles per second. But modern science claims space can warp and expand and time can warp and vary. If 'space' warps and expands and/or 'time' warps and varies, what does that do to 'E'? And why doesn't 'E' keep space from expanding and time from varying?). g. Energy: Modern science claims that energy cannot be created nor destroyed, it's one of the foundations of physics. Hence, energy is either truly a finite amount and eternally existent, or modern science is wrong. First Law Of Thermodynamics: "Energy can neither be created nor destroyed." How exactly is 'energy' eternally existent? h. Existence and Non-Existence side by side throughout all of eternity. How?

[@v2ike6udik]

@@charlesbrightman4237 i´m pretty sure they know everything. they just dont tell you :D You seeme te be type wordy guy, I may explain some things. PS there is only one "constant". it is one. All othger "constants" come from one. That are trancentental values. Aka these are processes that affect evy level of the "symmetyry structure" [sorry, I do not have a "officially percice math language vocabulary]. Math as is scam anyways in so many levels, I dont want to start. Demons control the narratives. If you wanna chat live, please do that, i´m going show you smth... to become brighter man every day :D Occult scientist hide evrything or twist thing in that way, one cant get it, even if they are old math proffessors. :D

[@StarCh33se]

I actually feel like I have a pretty good grasp on how magnets work now, an excellent video as always Dr. Don! What was once utterly opaque has been rendered transparent (much like the universe ;D )

[@andyd8370]

Fun fact: We know our planet's magnetic pole flips regularly from observing "zebra stripe" patterns in the polarity of the metals in the seabed parallel to the lines where the crust is being renewed. The polarity of the domains in volcanic material align to the earth's field and are locked in once cooled.

[@poopsmcgee2k6]

Insane Clown Posse has entered the chat.

[@jeff5683]

Came to the comments section for this. Leaving satisfied.

[@almostinfamous42]

sane fermilab posse doesn't have quite the same ring

[@specific_pseudonym]

I love how ever since that video of theirs, everyone (including physicists) have fully accepted that magnets are basically magic. They represent physics at such a low level at such a large scale that we kinda just have to accept the mechanics, even if we have solid understanding of particle physics.

[@bryanreidsands6854]

Y’all lyin’. And gettin’ me pissed!

[@RedShift5]

I don't understand this reference

[@alvinmick218]

That was the clearest answer that I’ve heard to the question about why there are magnets. Thank you

[@Qermaq]

As a Juggalo, I appreciate the thorough explanation.

[@jamesschaefer9554]

On behalf of all the fans of the musical group Insane Clown Posse, I just want to say, this video is miraculous.

[@McKaySavage]

The step-wise explanation from small to larger of what has to happen for something to be a magnet was so helpful! That really cleared up the concept for me. I really wish schooling and even universities could use such clear conceptual explanations

[@wayneyadams]

2:15 One correction to Dr. Dan's narrative. Electrons are not FOUND INSIDE CLOUDS, they are most likely to be found in volumes of space that have different cloud shapes. There are no empty clouds into which electrons are located, the electrons themselves form clouds. 4:51 Unfortunately the term "electron spin" misleads people into thinking electrons are tiny particles spinning like tops or gyroscopes. Electrons exhibit a property similar to that which they would have if they did spin, but electrons DO NOT SPIN! In atoms the electron spin is the fourth quantum number for the electron and has values of +1/2 and -1/2, which we simplify this by saying up and down spin. Each orbital cannot be made up of two electrons with the same spin which limits each orbital to two electrons, one with spin +1/2 (up) and one with spin -1/2 (down). The ability to retain magnetism after the magnetic field has been removed is called spontaneous or remanent magnetization. There are four elements that exhibit this attribute, Iron (Fe), Cobalt (Co), Nickel (Ni), Atomic numbers 26, 27, 28 as well as Gadolinium (Gd) atomic number 64. Iron, Cobalt, and Nickel all get their magnetism from 3d orbitals having four (4), three (3) and two (2) unpaired 3d electrons respectively. Looking at Iron (Fe) on the periodic table we see that it has partially filled d orbitals. Iron has six (6) electrons forming d orbitals in the third energy level (3d) There are five (5) d orbitals each composed of two electrons. The rule is that all five orbitals must be formed by one electron before pairing occurs. Since there are six (6) electrons, one orbital has a pair of electrons leaving four (4) unpaired electrons. Cobalt (Co) has one more pair (one less unpaired), and Nickel has two more pairs (2 less unpaired). Gadolinium is different with the electron configuration, [Xe] 4f⁷ 5d¹ 6s², having seven (7) unpaired electrons in 4f orbitals as well as a single unpaired electron in the 5d orbital. We have all heard that neodymium magnets are the strongest magnets available, but they are not made of the element Neodymium (Nd) alone but are actually made of Nd2Fe14B (Neodymium, Iron, Boron).

[@daveangels]

I can't say how many times I've wondered about this, thank you for the simple explanation 🎉

[@willeykev]

Thanks so much Dr. Don for that explanation!! Like many others, I can now understand the basic concepts of how a magnet works at the atomic level. I do have another question though: now that we understand how magnets generate their fields, can you please make a short video on EXACTLY how the magnet performs the action of attraction to other Ferro-metals? Thanks again for all you do!!

[@Richardincancale]

Yes your last point has always worried me… if I hold a permanent magnet over a ferromagnetic object it accelerates towards the magnetic pole. What is doing that work, where does the energy to do that work come from, can I repeat that work an infinite number of times?

[@glasslinger]

@@Richardincancale Oh come on man! THINK A BIT! If you squeeze a spring where does that energy come from? DUH! For a magnet to attract or repel it has to be squeezed or stretched from what it is attracted or repelled from. The FDQ ( think and you can figure what that stands for!) is what is the invisible field itself!

[@larryeffler7108]

Very good question!

[@thebogsofmordor7356]

@@Richardincancale @willeykev That's one of the laws of nature yo

[@polyrhythmia]

As I understand it, the magnetic field itself has energy. Check out the energy density of the magnetic field of a magnetar.

[@BOBMAN1980]

Every time I see a video like this--or an earnest answer from a physicist to a truly vexing question--I think about how everyone dissed ICP for asking (in a song), "Magnets. How do they work?!"

[@anonymes2884]

I mean, we dissed them because it's _not_ "a truly vexing question" - it was well known when ICP asked (in bad faith BTW - their point was that scientists are liars) because it's been a standard part of university - and even high school - physics lessons for decades.

[@jrjeju1066]

😂 Please do not send this video to Violent J

[@jc_malone8217]

I can't as a scientist that question because he'll lie and get me pissed.

[@ThatBoomerDude56]

In other words, we don't know.

[@ollywright]

Thankyou. I have an additional question: when one permanent magnet is placed in the magnetic field of a second permanent magnet, it aligns. Where does the kinetic energy for that alignment come from? It doesn't come from the permanent magnet I assume (or it wouldn't be permanent). Does it only come from the kinetic energy used to move it into the field, creating a field potential that then becomes kinetic energy?

[@Appletank8]

It's kinda like gravity, the closer you get, the more you slide into the lower energy state going into the magnetic field.

[@RichardT2112]

The magic is really in Part 1 - why/how electrons are magnets. Great explanation of the rest!

[@r000tbeer]

Finally, after all these years, Insane Clown Posse has an answer to their timeless question.

[@crabapple1974]

How does the magnetic force propagate over distance? Does it work similar to gravity? I have studied some physics at university but never understood how that really worked.

[@MikeRosoftJH]

Sort of; magnetic force is a long-distance force, except for that it's a dipole field whose force decreases with a cube of the distance. (As opposed to a point field, like gravity of a point mass or electric force of a point electric charge, which decreases with a square of the distance. If there exist magnetic charges, or magnetic monopoles [which haven't been observed], they would also follow the inverse square rule.)

[@LorxusIsAFox]

Wait, then why *do* we use Neodymium in magnets? That wasn't one of the elements with roughly half-full outer shells!

[@tomhauer6528]

OK, this is the best explanation I've heard about permanent magnets. But I have a question no other website/chat room/blog has ever answered. If that bunch of atoms are holding up that paper clip they are doing work. I'd they are doing work they are expending energy. So does the permanent magnet lose its atomic alignment over time? Will my fridge magnets eventually fall off the fridge? Where does that energy come from? Thanks.

[@rasmodeus1]

I don't know if this is right, but I think of it the same way I think of stable atoms. The electrons spinning around are doing "work" but the atom can last billions of years or more.

[@drdon5205]

A magnet holding up a paperclip is doing no more work than a table holding up a plate. Work is force x distance. Since there is no distance, there is no work.

[@tomhauer6528]

@@drdon5205 True. I should not have used 'work'. But there is a force, correct? And the force requires energy? Just trying to wrap my head around something that sounds pretty close to perpetual motion.

[@drdon5205]

@@tomhauer6528 Do you think a table holding up a plate is an example of potential energy? Because it's the same thing, energetically speaking.

[@anonymes2884]

Yep, permanent magnets do indeed lose their magnetism over time (basically, the domains become unaligned) but left alone it's pretty slow - if you keep it away from other fields, heat/cold, collisions etc. a high quality magnet may only lose a few % of its strength per century. Your (probably fairly low quality) fridge magnets will degrade more quickly but it'll still likely take many years, maybe even decades, for them to lose all sticking power. And the energy of a permanent magnet's field comes from the original magnetic field that aligned its domains in the first place (so for natural permanent magnets that's the Earth's magnetic field). Just like Earth's field aligns a compass needle (itself a small permanent magnet), it can align the domains in ferrous rocks (most easily when molten).

[@majorrgeek]

how magnets work is an interesting question, because no one knows what magnetic force really is including Fermilab

[@classicaudioadventures]

There's another video in which Richard Feynman is asked the same question, but his philosophical answer left me somewhat unsatisfied. I appreciate your ability to explain material like this elegantly and in terms that a casual person like me can understand. Thank you, Dr. Lincoln!

[@ehrenloudermilk1053]

I agree. Feynman sort of seemed frustrated to be asked.

[@timjohnson979]

@@ehrenloudermilk1053 I think Feynman's general answer to "why" questions was "Shut up and calculate."

[@Slowekistan]

He didn't know the answer and got pissed.

[@anonymes2884]

@@Slowekistan Sure, Nobel laureate Richard Feynman didn't know undergraduate physics (a subject he's famous for teaching). Makes sense. Meanwhile, back in reality... Feynman's response isn't even about magnets - instead he uses the question to talk about the nature of explanation itself (but agreed, it's absolutely fair to be left unsatisfied by that if you just wanted to know how magnets work).

[@misterphmpg8106]

Watch again the Feynman video, “Feynman on magnets”, minute 5:30 where Feynman says: “…The question would then be: Why in iron it (the force) goes over a bigger distance than in ordinary (material)? In iron all electrons are spinning in the same direction. They all get lined up and they magnify the effect of the force until it’s large enough at a distance that you can feel it.” So Feynman knew and gave a perfect concise answer. But admittedly he talked 5:30 around this answer, pointing also at general questions about deeper understanding of physics.

[@lavkian]

ICP: How the f- do magnets work? Fermilab: How does ketchup on hot dogs work?

[@PhillStone]

Back in the day people were hatin' on ICP for asking the question, Magnets, how do they work? But its a fair question. Decade later and we still need fermilab to lay it down for us. Great video!

[@CosmoPhiloPharmaco]

The problem with ICP is that they said "scientists are liars." That is, their explanations of magnets can be dismissed.

[@anonymes2884]

Err no, "people were hatin' on ICP" because they took _their own_ ignorance to mean _no one_ knew i.e. the answer to "...magnets, how do they work ?" was _very_ well understood, even "back in the day" (I get that it's a revelation to lots of people but it's been a standard part of the undergraduate - and even high school - physics syllabus for _many_ decades). Kind of like how more recently Bill O'Reilly claimed no one knew how the tides work and most sensible people considered him an idiot for doing so (again, _he_ likely didn't but the mechanism of the tides has been understood since the time of Newton).

[@PhillStone]

@@CosmoPhiloPharmaco Scientists are human, and therefore could be liars. I'm genuinely not pointing fingers, just trying to get into the mindset of the general population. As pointed out in the video, scientist's grasp of how these things work on a quantum level is not exactly bulletproof. Can't entirely blame people for skepticism. And I should now admit I never listened to the rest of the song, I'm only remembering some of the memes.

[@CosmoPhiloPharmaco]

@@PhillStone Here's the lyrics: _"F*cking magnets, how do they work? And I don't wanna talk to a scientist Y'all motherf*ckers lying, and getting me p*ssed"_ Sure, scientists *could* lie, but 'could' isn't the same as 'do' and that's his assertion. Moreover, while *some* scientists do indeed lie (e.g., those involved with 'gender studies'), it is not clear that all or most of them do. It would be a fallacy from hasty generalization to make this inference. With regards to scientists' incomplete comprehension of things, that's not evidence of lying. All respected scientists admit that science hasn't figured out everything yet, and that their knowledge is incomplete and open to revision. So, to conclude, this guy is just wrong. There is no way around that.

[@ketanovas]

But we wanted a relativity-related explanation, because Einstein and stuff... Unless there isn't, then electromagnets are way cooler.. actually- supercool.

[@gubigm]

At 9:01, I don't agree. There is still magic. Your first point is about "There have to be magic". The other three is how the magic should be arranged in order to feel macroscopicly.

[@mytube001]

For reasons unknown, there was very slightly more ketchup than mustard when the universe came into existence, so when all the mustard had been annihilated by the ketchup, a tiny amount of ketchup remained, making up all the ketchup that we love and cherish today!

[@itemushmush]

how is this video related to special relativity where magnetism _comes from_?

[@ATP-synthase]

It's a good video. But again, there is no explanation - how exactly do the particles attract or repel? What are the mechanics of this process?

[@greggweber9967]

Where does the energy come from to lift something and not be dissipated by age or use? Or do they dissipate?

[@jonathannetherton6727]

I for one feel they're even more magical now - my understanding has passed from caution out of a sense of separateness from mystery into a sense of connection from wonder. Figuring out the universe seems to make it come even more alive to me. Thank you for the explainer!

[@benstallone6784]

"Nah! Magnets are a miracle and your explanation is getting me pissed "- Insane Clown Posse

[@briandonovan1725]

Well played on the hot dog - ketchup paradox. That's an interaction that just shouldn't exist in nature.

[@Bunker278]

Insane Clown Posse posed the same question in "Miracles". It's great to get an answer that's easy for anyone to understand.

[@StuMas]

For me, magnetic attraction at a distance is the 'magic' part. It's as if invisible arms are reaching out and pulling.

[@narfwhals7843]

That's the point of the field. The action is always local in the field. Any force is defined by the value of the field at that point. Do you ask the same question about gravity and electrostatic attraction?

[@kindlin]

If you think about it, gravity is exactly the same. The sun doesn't physically "touch" the earth and pull it around in a circle, but the earth goes around in a circle, regardless. The strong force is similar inside of individual nucleons, no quark actually "touches" another quark, but they are all constantly interacting via the strong force (via neutral pions) keeping them tightly packed. Once you fully couple the action (force) to the field (the math) in your head, it just kind of makes sense suddenly. Photons are pushing and pulling electrons. Pions are grabbing all the quarks together inside a nucleon. All the particles and the forces interact directly, via Feynman diagrams, and trying to to imagine the sum of all diagrams for the total force on a particle is quite a bit of effort.

[@KiwiExpressCream]

Brilliant, Don. I love your videos, you explain really complicated things in terms I can understand!

[@dathyr1]

Magnets work very well, thank you. Next question. End of story.

[@Ice_Karma]

Need to dial the Adobe AI audio enhancement back. Too much treble leading to clipping.

[@johndeaux8815]

When I saw the thumbnail I was really hoping he was going to say miracles instead of magic 😂

[@michaelblacktree]

I didn't realize ketchup on hotdogs was so controversial. People are weird.

[@fifferfiffer2]

3:02 i like that he has the courage to say that nobody knows why the electrone behaves like a magnet on its own the electron has a spin which makes is magnetic, but no one actually knows a whats a spin physically, they can only represent what they measre, so if you want to read about electron you will find a lot a description how does it behave, but what is it - no one knows. i think the biggest issue here is that we should measure what happens inside an electron, but as its an elementary particle it does not have any internal structure, and cannot be probed inside, if if that cannot be measured we might never know the answer.

[@theultimatereductionist7592]

I dunno. You gotta ask Insane Clown Posse.

[@InterdimensionalWiz]

with 2 north poles they repel and move appart, what is the repellingness constructed of? what is the mechanism that imparts/communicates the motive force? same question for repelling electrons. I cant find the answer anywhere, I am concluding that science does not know How magnets repel, nor How electrons repel.any ideas?actually same question with gravity, there is a communication between the ground and the object,what is it constructed of and How is the motive force transmitted? I can only find quantative answers,33ft per second etc.but not HOW. gravity happens with mass,yes yes... that is the circumstance when it happens, but not its mechanical opperation. looks to me science does not know how electricity,magnetism and gravity work. No answers. Man does not know How stuff falls down,or how a magnet creates an attraction or repulsion,science only seems to answer how strong the forces are but not how the forces are communicated. I get the idea einstien was saying when an object falls it is simply the space that shrinks..... mmmm..... is that honestly the best answer science has? perhaps the quark alliance and the nutrino confederation only work on week days and never at the weekends! that's also why it's difficult to get out of bed on a sunday.

[@yassinfarouk2800]

Simply there must be a source where magnets get thier infinite energy from and we can make an infinite generator using only permanent magnets

[@rhoddryice5412]

Ketchup on hotdogs is acceptable. Ketchup on spaghetti is a mortal sin.

[@mmenjic]

Title is how do magnets work, and we still don't know how do they work from this video.

[@GMPranav]

Electrons are basically magic anyway

[@grantbartley483]

'Yes, but it's more complicated than that...' is what physicists will be saying til the end of time.

[@coachhannah2403]

You need to ask the worlds' number one expert on magnets: Trump! 🤣

[@jemmanuel6674]

"Water, fire, air and dirt, f****** magnets, how do they work?"

[@areamusicale]

Clown Posse used to "How do magnets work?" .... well ... they got an answer finally.

[@dimension2788]

❤Doc Lincoln Rules. Nicely done closed captions. Love he admits no one knows why electrons are magnetic. In 2023 we have so much to learn about physics.

[@spectrum7virkeytroni]

This was really good. But I'd like to find a video explaining how a magnet and a magnetic substance know that they are in close proximity.

[@tildessmoo]

Huh. This explains why metal fillings are magnetic. I'd always thought something about the grinding process somehow made them magnetic (heat + high magnitude force with a distinct vector = teeny tiny magnets?), but it's actually just that grinding metal breaks off bits tiny enough that they were already magnets! Cool.

[@gatensio]

Nice, a video on Sheldon Cooper's kindergarten work

[@jorispattyn9690]

There is one question I think is important (people have wondered for ages ...)which remains largely unanswered in this video. If we have to make iron magnets by putting them under a very strong magnetic field, in order to align the domains, then how was magnetic iron formed naturally? Already the ancient Greeks knew how to find natural magnets, so, how was this formed? By what kind of natural magnetism?

[@DrDeuteron]

lightning, perhaps.

[@2Worlds_and_InBetween]

the Earth has a magnetic field

[@themcchuck8400]

Molten iron, like in a lava flow or primordial conditions, is easily magnetized by the Earth's own magnetic field. Which comes from a spinning iron core surrounded by molten material.

[@2Worlds_and_InBetween]

yep, I was going to go into lava flows, and how you can track the pole flips in them. Cheers for doing the typing 👍😊

[@manfredullrich483]

It all begins with galactic seed fields................how they f´get created is yet another fantastic stories, with still some gaps though.

[@Bassotronics]

It’s still magic because nobody still knows why magnets attract and repel. How far down can we go (Planck length) until the laws of magnetism itself breaks down?

[@Mirach84]

But why do opposite poles attract and like poles repel?

[@_ShaDynasty]

Miracles baby!!!! Miracles.. miracles.... Miracles

[@glasslinger]

An interesting video that beats around the bush but actually says nothing! We are missing the "field" part of the effect. Until we understand exactly what the field itself is we cannot understand exactly why a charge generates it.

[@cmpe43]

Your talking about dark energy and matter, duh

[@Carolus_64]

Great explanation Don!! Linear, logic and above all convincing 👍

[@Althebassist]

Quick, someone link this to Insane Clown Posse

[@nicku1]

For people who don't understand physics, the world is full of miracles.

[@jovalleau]

Yes, exactly. That's why saying "Freakin' magnets. How do they work?" is not as silly as it seems on the surface.

[@A_GoogIe_User]

But how do magnets 'know' other magnets are nesrby so they can pull on them ? How can magnets do work ? where does that energy come from and why does it never seem to run out ?

[@waelfadlallah8939]

Get this man a shield, sorry a nobel prize. Now that's a set pf questions that needs decent answers

[@donnierussellii4659]

We have a lot of math describing how fields work, but philosophically they are mysterious. Magnets don't directly do any work (moving an object by a force a certain distance). Instead the changing magnetic field generates an electric field, and a force carrying photon transfers the energy. The energy comes from the work of actually moving the magnets together (stored potential energy).

[@DiowE]

​@@waelfadlallah8939Nobel prize? Just for asking questions!!! That's way too much. [DiowE]

[@waelfadlallah8939]

@@DiowE [DiowE] to know to ask is higher than to know to answer!

[@A_GoogIe_User]

@@donnierussellii4659 Thanks su much that helps. but to be honest I struggle with the concept of potential energy. Is it not just a book keeping thing or has it actually been measured that an object gets heavier when ita potential energy increases ?

[@1024det]

You only explained the magnet itself not the force it has. When I was a kid I was fascinated on how the magnets knew the other was near by before touching, I could feel them trying to connect when opposite poles were aligned. This magnetic field was later explained in a college physics course but I still do not know how this force communicates with the atoms. As a kid I called it my spooking action at a distance. Perhaps the answer lies with gravity as it also has a similar force that has no particle. Maybe it’s a graviton? And maybe that something is involved in both electromagnetism and gravity? I feel like these are all related.

[@RoganGunn]

Fields are communicated by a messenger particles called gauge bosons. In the case of the electromagnetic field, the gauge boson is... (drum roll 🥁) _... the photon!_ So the magnets communicate each others' presence via exchange of photons - no spooky action required. 😁

[@Xenocore]

I’ve have 1 biopolymer coated neodymium implant in each hand, for quite a few years. They vibrate in response to EM fields allowing me to physically feel them. It’s pretty interesting to have another sensory input specifically for that.

[@olamarvin]

Read about these some years ago? Any issue in airports? And what about being unconscious after an accident and given an MRI?

[@nneeerrrd]

What's the goal for that in the first place anyway?

[@soberhippie]

Yeah, but how do they repel and attract each other?

[@humanidrome]

A great video with explanations easy to follow. Thank you 😊

[@nguttam1982]

Is it just me.. I am seeing a disconnect between explanation for permanent magnets through inherent magnetic property of charges, while for electro magnets we use special relavtivity and attribute it as just another manifestation of electric field.. Plz explain if there is something more underlying.

[@clint330]

Dr. Lincoln, I have a question regarding magnetic fields.... I've been told that charged particles moving through magnetic fields have no 'work' done on them, ie a charged particle moving through a magnetic field has it's velocity changed according to the right hand rule but the magnetic field does no work, ie puts no energy into, the ion. This still doesn't make sense to me since energy is force * distance and the Lorentz force is a force and it is created when a charged particle moves through a magnetic field. Can you explain? I've seen several videos that try to explain this and none are clear. THANKS! And as ALWAYS, you ROCK! Thanks for all you do!

[@drdon5205]

Force x distance x cos(angle between them). Since the angle is 90 degrees, cos(90) is zero.

[@tonywells6990]

It is difficult to understand, but a magnetic field can only change the direction of a charged particle, its energy and speed are not affected therefore the magnetic field does no work. Electromagnetism is a vector field (each point in space has a strength and a direction), changing a vector's direction does not change its energy or speed (its magnitude). The electric force can change the magnitude and direction of a charged particle however (its direction and magnitude). How does a magnet attract a paper clip if it can do no work? The paper clip, as well as the magnet, is made up of a lot of electrons that feel a different force, and overall the magnet actually DOES DO WORK by moving the paper clip.

[@whuzzzup]

Besides the other answers, there is also maybe an issue with the word "work" because in physics it can work (...) different than you'd use it in real life. Example: You lift a water bottle from the floor on a table. Then you put it back on the floor. How much work did you do? Zero. Because you first did work in the positive direction and then did work in the negative direction resulting in a net zero work.

[@clint330]

@@drdon5205 oh yeah duh!!! thanks for this clarification!

[@clint330]

@@whuzzzup got it! great point! thanks!

[@JG-zs8tr]

I think I’ll stick with ICP on this topic.

[@sapelesteve]

Now that's what I would call a very magnetic discussion about magnetism Dr. Don! 👍👍

[@omnomnom1410]

Has anyone told Insane Clown Posse about this?

[@mrtienphysics666]

Very good video. He is one of those people who make KZbin still worth viewing

[@212Warthog]

I enjoyed this. In my workshop I have cause screwdrivers to become magnetic by stroking them with a magnet before I use them. This causes the screws do stick to the screwdriver even if I fumble them. Great to know!

[@Jay77chang]

藍綠背後都是森然羅列的金主, 你要投誰呢 ?? 大金主美國不喜歡不受控的 柯P, 搞出這些事 ....

[@mrcat5508]

What’s KP?

[@supune]

How does that relate to the need to have a moving charge to create a magnetic field? When all the domains line up is there a stabilizing resonance to make the direction of the magnetic field more? Does that mean there are more regular motion of charges within each domain?

[@mytube001]

The electrons are constantly moving.

[@supune]

@@mytube001 yeah but didn't see that in the video that they all moved together or how the direction of spin macro sum was like a grouping of charge moving to the outside world. Thanks for the reply. Elections are always randomly whizzing around

[@The-Man-On-The-Mountain]

Ok but all the quantum sht is still magic to me.

[@RichardKCollins]

When two electrons or two protons are compressed together, the 1/r^3 magnetic energy (positive when magnetic dipoles attract) and the 1/r Coulomb energy (negative when the electric charges repel) can reach a minimum when they are at nuclear distances. Two electrons (Cooper pairs) or two protons (occurs inside neutron stars and perhaps near black holes) can also bind magnetically. The proton and neutron can bind stably by positive magnetic dipole energy (attractive) , positive electric energy (attractive) and negative rotation and vibrations (repulsive or tending to separate them) . It is simple to look up the neutron binding energy and solve for valid configurations and spectrum. Likewise it is simple to solve for proton pairing energy in the context of real nuclear isotopes and reactions. Deuteron, Triton, and many isotopes with magnetic moments. The alpha particle (helium) excited states have multiple configurations and those can be given precise dynamic magnetic interaction energies, orientations and field shapes. The experiments can check it and solved for configurations. It is also possible to bind particles and antiparticle with magnetic dipole (and higher magnetic moments) energy contributions. A proton and antiproton: positive magnetic dipole binding energy, positive Coulomb binding energy, negative rotational binding energy. I am fairly certain there is no singularity if there is not enough rotational energy to reach a bound state. The proton - antiproton (I think) can be massless because the binding energy is gravitationally invisible. Check. The binding energy in mass terms does not contribute to inertia or gravitational mass. A bound particle antiparticle pair can have zero mass with the right rotational and vibrational states. I think that is likely what the neutrinos might be. And the very very very specific orientation and timing required for resonant interactions, is why the cross-section is small. But cross section has a larger meaning of "probability or reaction" than just "probability of collision". It you want to bind two protons, they have narrow orientation (in 3d and time) constraints. If you take an electron and positron and bind them magnetically, they will have a spectrum that can be estimated by "magnetic dipole approximation" which is very close to the non-linear Schrodinger solutions (which can be thought of as solitons or particles). More like molecules than simple particles. The simplicity for screening reactions for economic value or "chemistry at atomic and nuclear energies" is that classical analytical models can be used for getting close enough for the more expensive exact models to converge. I learned that lesson when I was working with Steve Klosko on using measured satellite orbits to calibrate the earth gravitational potential field model. I would find a rough orbit, then he would run the full model and it would most often converge. But if he took the full model and guessed, it would be too expensive or simply not be a good staring point. I think the "full model for nuclear magnetic binding" will adjust for relativistic effects at high particle speeds and intense fields. So the "nonlinear" part of the nonlinear Schrodinger model is likely largely relativistic in nature, and very dependent on the experimental noise spectrum. I wrote to Emilio Segre (antiproton) back about the end of 1980 (his letter back to me is Jan 1981). I was seeking encouragement to spend more time on modeling the orbits and forces on electrons and positrons (positronium), using the precise measurements to test. He basically said, "go ahead and try to do a good job". My take was "you have not said anything stupid, it is possible, just keep at it." Here are some distances for different reactions when the magnetic contribution is 2 MeV. To give a sense of the scale. I am checking all the reaction energies at NUDAT 3 for all ~3500 isotopes. For a given distance PP is stronger then NP, is stronger than NN magnetic bonding energies. That has consequences for stable isotopic internal structure, and indirectly on electron and magnetic binding of partially and fully stripped (of electrons) reactions. I have been looking for "atomic fuels and materials" where the macroscopic bond energy density is KeV and MeV per pair rather than just eV 'chemical' bonds. A rocket fuel would be correspondingly smaller. A 10 KeV material would be about 1000 time smaller than chemical combustion fuels like StarShip. 100 meters of fuel down to 10 cm? Variable Radius Unit Note r_PP_2MeV 0.43585 fm PP Magnetic Binding Energy r_NN_2MeV 0.33868 fm NN Magnetic Binding Energy r_NP_2MeV 0.38420 fm NP Magnetic Binding Energy r_ee_2MeV 32.97970 fm ee Magnetic Binding Energy r_dd_2MeV 0.19835 fm dd Magnetic Binding Energy r_HeHe_2MeV 0.36355 fm HeHe Magnetic Binding Energy r_MuMu_2MeV 0.94318 fm MuMu Magnetic Binding Energy r_TT_2MeV 0.45500 fm TT Magnetic Binding Energy r_eP_2MeV 1.45500 fm eP Magnetic Binding Energy There is a lot of work to find the proper geometries. But the order of magnitudes and possible geometries are a good start. I am using single bonds, but many bonds and types are possible and likely contribute. First you get close, then use more and more precise models. Measure and calibrate to 32 digit accuracy or it won't converge. Boron 11 Neutron Separation Energy 11454221 eV r_B11->B10+N 0.185514604 fm Boron 12 Neutron Separation Energy 3369600 eV r_B12->B11+N 0.318816993 fm (There are end to end magnets, as well as side by side, and many dynamic interactions in 3D and time. End to end allows "strings of particles. And those seem to be operative at gluon energies too. But magnetic chains of a few particles (6 electrons binding?) or 6 neutrons binding in a ring. Those can be solved and likely tested. It is easy "chemistry with KeV and MeV bonds and energies". Then you do the details, measure and test and calibrate.) Richard Collins, The Internet Foundation

[@danbond1876]

Thank you! One thing I have never received an answer to (yet?) is about energy. Put something like paper clips on a table. Take a magnet, hold it above the table, approach it slowly bringing it towards the paper clips. At a certain distance the paper clips will jump to the magnet, UPWARDS. Where does the energy come from? I assume potential energy plays a role somewhere. But in any case I don't understand the energy balance.

[@John_Mack]

Is a hotdog a sandwich? That's also a good question.

[@waelfadlallah8939]

Stop reading my mind

[@geffreyjewell6546]

Magic. Just plain magic.

[@ashkebora7262]

I think the problem (read: benefit) of "Why?" is that it can ALWAYS be asked. I think we CAN explain exactly "why" the electron has a charge (I mean, _I_ cannot, so bear with me), from the way the fundamental forces emerge from the unifying force upon the universe cooling down. ... Though that doesn't explain why it curved _that specific way_ and why that matter had to be exactly there. Even if we get to an exact understanding of post-Big Bang time, there will still be the question of, "OK, but why did _this specific_ shape result?" Heck, they're already discussing ways to try and prove that the Big Bang must've had some directive input, although even if cyclic cosmology or anything else is true, it still kinda' just kicks the can down the road. We'll just be asking "why?" about what's next, and that's a good thing.

[@el_bur]

Whoever seeks the truth, seeks God, even if he is not aware of it.

[@rj66600]

I call BS.

[@twilightkids]

This video is great and I’m going to start to use it in my classroom. Thanks! If possible, you should do a video on the enigmatic statement “magnetic forces do no work” but explain then how magnets pick things up. Based on other videos published recently in the physics KZbin space, this would also be very helpful for students studying E&M.

[@rahvin4242]

"The short answer is nobody knows, just a fact for which we have no good explanation" thank you so much for saying that. Magnets work because electrons are magnetic. Why are electrons magnetic? Nobody knows! I always feel like an idiot Everytime I try to understand how magnets "actually" work and everyone around me is like, "oh, I get it now!" Do you though? NO! Nobody knows yet! I feel so much sane now thank you, genuinely thank you from the bottom of my heart!

[@paulcooper1753]

Dear Don pls can u explain the NATURE of the force itself. I understand bent spacetime causes gravity, but what is the MECHANISM here-I cannot find this anywhere lol.

[@marysbigpimp]

Wrong! Everyone knows they trap the souls of a keebler elf and rice crispies elf inside. The two fight and forms the push n pull of magnets. Momma said so

[@duran9664]

Question 🙋‍♀️ Can the gravity of other celestial objects affects humans & animals psyche/energy/magnetic fields? In other word, Do u believe in astrology?

[@wayneyadams]

INTERESTING FACT! If you don't know this, the poles of a magnet are actually called North Seeking Pole (the end that points towards the Earth's north pole) shortened to North Pole, and South seeking Pole, (the end that points towards the Earth's south pole) shortened to South Pole. Contrary to what you may have heard from people (even Science Teachers) the North Pole of a magnet points towards the North Pole of the Earth.

[@rondai4019]

Dr Lincoln, You still do not know what''s wrong with your theory about how relativity explains electromagnetism? I thought you should have realized your problem by now, but once again you are disappointing again.....where is dialect?

[@stephanbieker544]

Being entertaining, with that great measure of delightening elightenment... When I grow tired of understanding my tax returns, I watch your, I hesitate to call it a 'show', but then... it is, just a sophisticated one. And, other than the explanations of german tax-officials, yours make sense.

[@Foobar_The_Fat_Penguin]

Thanks. I remember asking that question to my physics teacher in school way back when. And not getting anything resembling a satisfying answer. 1 down, 9,887,111 left to go.

[@lucasg2851]

I've been watching all the videos possible about quantum mechanics, electroweak theory, etc You can understand the simplified explanation and get the idea of WHAT the universe is made of But even with all that, and even if you understand the maths behind all that, there is still zero explanation for WHY the universe is this way and not another way, Some say it's this way because it had to be one way or another, and since it happened this way, that's what we see So just random? From what I understand the standard model differenciates distinct particles based on precise values of the excitation of the higgs field, which gives precise mass to each particle For example an electron is 0.5 meV, you can't have 0.4 or 0.6, and 2 electrons is 1 meV, 13 electrons is 6.5 meV So was it engineered? Were all these values chosen to make the universe a certain way? Like you would categorize your tools in a shed on different shelves? But then if someone made this, who made them? 🧠💥

[@effingsix3825]

🤔 Magnets aren’t ‘settled science.’ A basic explanation suffices, but the science to magnets would look much further afield, and much more microscopically to obtain better answers. An inert object like a block of iron with magnetic fields would have to have a source of energy, instead of sheer momentum generated from electrons in motion. In the question why ppl put ketchup on hot dogs, ketchup would have to contain iron chelate. Not simply attempting to satisfy oral fixation. Why is Iron THE mineral in life?

[@NoelBarlau]

At 3:27, the answer is given. There is no good explanation for why electrons have magnetic properties, and we have to wait for future discoveries to learn how magnets actually work. The rest is just a very well-explained description of what we know for sure about the resulting phenomenon which is derived from the electron magnetism. The effort to make the video is much appreciated, but I still don't know how magnets actually work - and apparently no one does. Yet.

[@4pharaoh]

Know what the blackboard in the background says? "Look at me I'm smarter than you, so you better believe everything I say." The correct response is "Baaaa!"

[@KozmykJ]

Wow ! There was me expecting to see a smart cartoon aided explanation of permanent magnets and what caused them, and we (Humanity) still Don’t Know !! I’m amazed !!! Not a criticism by the way, I know things are rarely simple.

[@edweinb]

Why don't the valence electrons have opposing spins canceling the little magnets?

[@anonymes2884]

Ordinarily, opposed spins _would_ lead to a lower energy configuration BUT it turns out if the electrons are spread across separate subshells (rather than having opposite spin pairs in the same subshell) then because they're further apart the resulting lower electrostatic repulsion between electrons _combined_ with symmetries required by Pauli exclusion mean this "multiple subshell, spins aligned" configuration has an even lower energy.

[@edweinb]

So in this video are we talking about some sort of net effect of electrons in different shells. I would have thought that the effect would come mostly from the outer shell electrons. Guess I need another video.@@anonymes2884

[@LuckyFlesh]

@2:55 "Are electrons what cause a magnet to be a magnet? Well, yes, but it's more complicated than that. To begin without, what causes an electron to be a magnet? The short answer is...nobody knows." So the answer to "how do magnets work?" Is still.. nobody knows.

[@404nonexistent]

Why is the guy from PragerU on Fermilab? Srsly tho, missed opportunity for not getting ICP on for this vid. And I'm not even an ICP fan.