this post was submitted on 19 Dec 2024
267 points (98.9% liked)

science

15002 readers
698 users here now

A community to post scientific articles, news, and civil discussion.

rule #1: be kind

<--- rules currently under construction, see current pinned post.

2024-11-11

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Hugin 139 points 2 days ago (6 children)

This article is a mess and badly written.

Basicly magnetism comes from electron spin orientation. There are two well known spin configurations.

Ferromagnetism: there is at least one electron with a spin that isn't paired with an opposite spin electron. That atom then has a north and south magnetic pole. Like iron. Arrange all the atoms pointing the same way and you have a refrigerator magnet.

antiferromagnetism: all the electrons in the atom are paired with an opposite spin election. It's complicated but basically they couple together and there isn't a magnetic pole outside the atom. Like in copper.

Altermagnetism: what this article is about. You have a crystal of atoms with an unpaired electrons. The crystal would normally be ferromanetic. However they are arranged in a regular set of pairs that cause the electron spin to cancle out. Think of a checkerboard pattern where each white square cancels a black square next to it.

The antiferromagnetism and altermagnetism both have the spins cancelled out but the mechanism is different so there are different properties. Kramers degenerate vs wavevector.

In theory this gives you an extra state spin. So a magnetic drive uses a pattern of north and south to encode information. Ie NNSN becomes 0010.

With this you have north, south but also spin left, right. So you can encode more information.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 22 hours ago (1 children)

How do you control the spin of an electron?

[–] Hugin 2 points 21 hours ago

I know the usual way uses oscillating magnetic fields and it being very cold. There are other ways i'm not familiar with. I'm a classical computer engineer not a quantum computer engineer. I'm more used to energy bandgap then spin control.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 22 hours ago (1 children)

Interesting… so like, if one were to use it on magnetic storage, you’d theoretically be able to work in quaternary?

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 1 points 23 hours ago

While it is true Kramer outed himself as a degenerate at the smile factory in philadelphia I don't believe this is an appropriate place to bring it up.

[–] deltapi 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Sorta like linear vs. circular polarization in radio transmissions?

[–] Hugin 2 points 21 hours ago

In the sense that it's two different but similar states.

I'm pretty sure we can say it's not actually spin now. Electrons have a charge and a magnetic field. If they are charged and spinning that world generate a magnetic field. So spin was used to describe the orientation of the field. The name for the state stuck

[–] GreenKnight23 18 points 2 days ago (1 children)

you seem knowledgeable on this topic. Enough that I hope you could answer my questions.

with this new state, would it make it easier/possible to improve not just efficiency but throughput of permanent magnetic motors?

also, you mentioned the programmability of magnets. would this allow us to build more "task specific" electric motors? for example; a motor with high torque at low rpms and low torque at high rpms?

[–] Hugin 16 points 1 day ago

This is a bit outside my field. That said I don't think so.

The overall crystal should be very weakly magnetic. You want strong magnet with a high flux density so the electric field can push or pull against it.

I think this would be more useful in quantum computing as you get two bits polarity and spin. Or high density storage.

But who knows. There are clever physicists out there that know a lot more about this. They presumably see many more possibilities then I do. If the effect can be interrupted you could stitch between states. Like turning a magnet on and off. That would have uses like you described.

[–] [email protected] 15 points 2 days ago

Thank you. That was explained very well!

[–] IchNichtenLichten 21 points 2 days ago

Is it animal magnetism?

[–] [email protected] 59 points 2 days ago (2 children)
[–] SmoothOperator 33 points 2 days ago

I have no idea about the numbering, but I know of at least

  • Ferromagnetism (like a fridge magnet)
  • Antiferromagnetism (opposite of ferromagnetism at an atomic level)
  • Diamagnetism (makes superconductors float)
  • Paramagnetism (like that spinny frog)

These all indicate how a material reacts to a magnetic field. This article discusses "altermagnetism", which is somewhere between ferromagnetism and antiferromagnetism.

[–] [email protected] 18 points 2 days ago (4 children)
[–] [email protected] 38 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Is that the kind that jumps out of aeroplanes?

[–] [email protected] 29 points 2 days ago (2 children)

Nah, it's the one with the chair

[–] [email protected] 20 points 2 days ago

This thread is already too smart for me

[–] rtxn 14 points 2 days ago

Pretty sure it's the other non-brand name for acetaminophen.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] [email protected] 37 points 2 days ago (3 children)

Fucking magnets, how do they work?

[–] thebestaquaman 28 points 2 days ago (12 children)

Unironically, magnetism is similar to charge, which is similar to mass.

You (probably) wouldn't ask "But why does an atom weigh anything?" or "why do opposite charges attract?" All these things are just intrinsic properties of matter: they just have them.

So the answer to questions regarding why anything has mass/charge/magnetic moment really come down to "they just do."

Now, if you want to talk about how and why magnets work at a macroscopic scale, we can have a long and interesting chat about long range ordering and phase transitions, but I'll leave that for now :)

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (2 children)

In addition to "they just do", the answer is also "we don't know." In that sense, icp was right.

[–] geomela 2 points 1 day ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 1 points 5 hours ago

💯༼ つ ◕_◕ ༽つ 🤡

[–] sploosh 2 points 1 day ago

Well, we do know why they work, but we don't know why the way they work works.

[–] [email protected] 18 points 2 days ago (2 children)

There's a lot more to it than "they just do" we just don't know yet because there's actually a lot we don't understand about the fundamental properties of, well, fundamental particles.

See the higgs boson as for why matter has mass. We used to say "inertia is a property of matter" but some clever fucks figured out why and then proved it.

[–] thebestaquaman 7 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

I would argue that the Higgs mechanism is just that: A mechanism for explaining where mass comes from. You could explain charge in a similar way by saying "because the particles are made of a certain amount of up or down quarks".

Neither of these explanations answer the underlying question "but why does the Higgs mechanism give things mass?" or "but why do up/down quarks give things charge?".

My point is that, at some stage, you get to the point of "the Higgs boson has mass because it's an intrinsic property of the Higgs boson", which is tantamount to "they just do".

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] jnoliv 6 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)

This reminded me of Richard Feynman talking about this very topic. Always enjoy rewatching it.

https://youtu.be/MO0r930Sn_8

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (9 replies)
[–] NotMyOldRedditName 21 points 2 days ago (1 children)
[–] NateNate60 23 points 2 days ago (1 children)

It's funny because the actual physics explanation is "they just do".

[–] [email protected] 8 points 2 days ago (1 children)

It's the craziest part of quantum physics. "Why is this stuff having the observed behavior?"

Based on all evidence and theory, the answer is that it quite literally just does.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 22 hours ago

That is always the foundation. The axiomatic ground.

[–] ikidd 6 points 2 days ago

Water, fire, air and dirt

Fucking magnets, how do they work?

And I don't wanna talk to a scientist

Y'all motherfuckers lying, and getting me pissed.

[–] GrammarPolice 17 points 2 days ago (8 children)

I'm too stupid to understand what that article is talking about. Can someone translate to layman's terms?

[–] Securus777 29 points 2 days ago (1 children)

I could be wrong but as I understand it. You know magnetism based on positive and negative poles, now they can read and write SPIN, which is another property of electrons (that are in everything, even things nonmagnetic). If it's true, and scales, we could use non-ferrous better materials to achieve what we do currently with ferrous materials.

[–] [email protected] 10 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Sooo we can magnetize nonmagnetic materials?

Tractor beam when?

[–] Securus777 6 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Sadly still magnetic force that loses strength exponentially based on distance

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (7 replies)
[–] FunnyUsername 9 points 2 days ago

Can i make a ufo out of this?

[–] [email protected] 7 points 2 days ago

Worth a read, I feel like I read some hard sci-fi.

load more comments
view more: next ›