"Bill Miller" wrote in message
...

"FrediFizzx" wrote in message
...
"Bill Miller" wrote in message
...

"FrediFizzx" wrote in message
...

[...]
Well, I think we pretty much know that it comes from atomic
alignment of their electron's orbital angular momentum. So there
is "local" motion of charges all coordinated.
IOW, the atomic magnetic moments point in
the same direction and all add up. I don't think many physicists
would disagree with that.

Fred

OK

That answers the first part. Kinda

What is the second part that it doesn't answer?

You said that the effect is local.

How local is local? Atoms? Molecules? Magnetic domains? Blobs?

I do believe I said "atomic" above. However, keep in mind that
atomic "motion" of electrons is dealt with by quantum physics.

I'm perfectly happy to have someone use quantum physics to explain
this. Also, my question still stands.

To clarify. I can imagine a magnetic material in which every atom has
somehow gone into "lock step" with every other other one. I would
expect that would be a pretty powerful magnet. I can imagine a
magnetic material that contains just a pair. Pretty weak.

How are these alignments arrayed? What causes them to become arrayed?

Some permanent magnets appear to, indeed, be permanent. It is
hard-to-impossible to degauss them. Others, like soft steel, are
self-degaussing and their field (there's THAT word again) "decays"
with time. Presumably if we know what mechanisms cause the permanence,
we can understand and why they decay and vice-versa. Do we know why
they decay (or don't)?

How do we know that the theory that you are postulating is correct?
IOW what measurements have been done to validate the statement you
have made?

It's not my theory

I did not say it was your theory. I carefully tried to avoid that
situation by saying "the theory that you are postulating."

When you say "the theory that you are postulating" implies to me that
you think it is my theory. "The theory that you are stating" would be a
better way to put it. I am not really postulating anything.

and I would imagine

*imagine?!*

I'm sorry, Fred, but this is not an answer that is even close to
acceptable! Over the last year or two, I have made some kinda
outrageous claims about EM theory on this list. In every instance, I
believe I have backed up those claims with references to documentation
that is clear and readily available. (In fact, I hope you are reading
one of those references now!)

Sorry, this really isn't interesting enough for me to do your research
for you. ;-) I'm not really claiming anything special here. Just
repeating the very widely accepted explanation that can be easily found
in books and various websites.

you could find experimental references in a good solid state physics
book.

Which ones? Author's names? Page references?

A seach on Amazon for Solid State Physics books should do you well.
Just read the various customer reviews and look thru the contents to see
if a particular book might suit your research. Here is a link to make
it easier,

http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_ss_gw...+state+physics

And I would also imagine

THAT word again!

that hard drive companies especially IBM should have some
experimental evidence for you.

If they do, how likely is it that I could write them and they would
send it?

What about some_available_ references that show in a clear and
unambiguous way that the theory you postualted is valid?

Again, I am not really postulating anything new or unusual. And I fully
accept the atomic / quantum physics explanation so it really is not all
that interesting to know more about where the H field of a permanent
magnetic comes from. Sorry. Hope this might help anywise.

Best,

Fred Diether
Co-moderator sci.physics.foundations