Skip to main content

View Diary: On the Nature of Matter - Part 3 (17 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Ok (0+ / 0-)

    So you (or those who know) don't think ferromagnetism is inherent in the nucleus, rather in the charactestics of the the energy that that nucleus exerts on its surroundings, which depend solely on the number of electrons that nucleus can attract. And which orbits they're in.

    That just doesn't seem complete to me. And it seems unlikely that if the 26-28 nuclei can generate this effect in their electron space so consistenly, that that effect would not reveal itself more often with other elements.

    So, you saw my pics? Like the 3d thing?

    •  It kinda does (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      Plenty of things are paramagnetic, like liquid oxygen.  Or dimagnetic, like water.  Some elements are magnetic, but only at low temperatures (two of the Lanthanides, not that I ever remember their names).

      Magnetism is most definitely produced by the electron distribution around the atom.  There's no way for protons to group up very easily on one side of the nucleus, and it wouldn't matter anyway--the nucleus is quite small, the electron cloud quite large (comparatively speaking).  Separation of the charge would be too small in the nucleus to do much.  

      Plus protons don't really like clustering up too much without neutrons around (the neutron is a bit like the family peacekeeper, they keep the protons from having fist fights).  Which is really an off the cuff way of saying that it's not energetically favorable to cluster protons without neutrons near them and they won't do that under any normal or even reasonably abnormal circumstance.

      (-6.38, -7.03) Moderate left, moderate libertarian

      by Lonely Liberal in PA on Sun Oct 27, 2013 at 11:04:18 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site