1. Joined
    20 Apr '08
    Moves
    78
    18 May '08 18:11
    magnet attracts only iron and nikle between 109 natural elements. Why it is so, I mean why it does not attracts the other matels. Have any one of you any idea about it?
  2. Joined
    22 Dec '06
    Moves
    17961
    18 May '08 18:39
    Actually, many materials are magnetic. Ferromagnetic materials, such iron and nickel, are the materials most people associate with having magnetic properties. In addition, Cobalt is another fairly common ferromagnetic material. However, many rare-earth metals and their compounds are ferromagnetic.

    As well as ferromagnetism there are two other main kinds of magnetic behaviour: Diamagnetism and Paramagnetism.

    Many materials people dont usual think of as magnetic are diamagnetic or paramagnetic. For example, liquid oxygen is strongly diamagnetic and can be levitated in a magnetic field. Also, superconductors are "perfect diamagnets", in so far as they have a magnetic susecptibility of -1.
  3. Joined
    20 Apr '08
    Moves
    78
    18 May '08 18:47
    Originally posted by MattP
    Actually, many materials are magnetic. Ferromagnetic materials, such iron and nickel, are the materials most people associate with having magnetic properties. In addition, Cobalt is another fairly common ferromagnetic material. However, many rare-earth metals and their compounds are ferromagnetic.

    As well as ferromagnetism there are two other main kind ...[text shortened]... erconductors are "perfect diamagnets", in so far as they have a magnetic susecptibility of -1.
    would you plaes tell me some more details about it or tell me some link to have more information on it.

    Is there any type of magnet other than ferromagnet?
    And also why ferromagnet only attracts these three elements?
  4. Joined
    22 Dec '06
    Moves
    17961
    18 May '08 19:02
    Magnetism is a very large (and interesting) topic. The origin of the magnetic properties of a material lie in the magnetic moments of the electrons. In ferromagnetic materials there are regions where the magnetic moments of the electrons are all aligned in the same direction. This creates a noticeable magnetic field. By applying a magnetic field to a ferromagnetic object (eg: a bar magnet placed on a iron bar) the magnetic moments of the electrons in the iron are aligned in the direction of the applied field. This increases the overall strength of the magnetic field and is why using iron cores inside magnets increases their strength.

    When the iron is removed from the magnet some of the electron magnetic moments will remain aligned and so the iron can maintain a magnetic field of it's own.

    The factor by which a material increases the applied magnetic field by is proportional to its "magnetic susceptibility", this is one way to tell the different kinds of magnetism apart. Diamagnets have negative susceptibility so the field they create opposes the field being applied to them, this allows them to levitate in a magnetic field. Paramagnetic materials have very small positive susceptibilities.

    A good site to look at for more information is http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/hframe.html
  5. Joined
    20 Apr '08
    Moves
    78
    18 May '08 19:21
    Thanks!🙂
  6. weedhopper
    Joined
    25 Jul '07
    Moves
    8073
    19 May '08 01:34
    When I see "Why only iron?" I think of aries I've seen on the Science Channel. It seems that stars turn Hydrogen into Helium by fusion. Got that. Then when supply gets low, it can produce some of the other elements--Li, Be,... before it finally explodes. But there's something about iron--is it that a nova doesn't produce any element higher on the periodic chart than iron?
  7. SubscriberAThousandYoung
    West Coast Rioter
    tinyurl.com/y7loem9q
    Joined
    23 Aug '04
    Moves
    24791
    19 May '08 04:57
    Originally posted by PinkFloyd
    When I see "Why only iron?" I think of aries I've seen on the Science Channel. It seems that stars turn Hydrogen into Helium by fusion. Got that. Then when supply gets low, it can produce some of the other elements--Li, Be,... before it finally explodes. But there's something about iron--is it that a nova doesn't produce any element higher on the periodic chart than iron?
    Iron is approximately at the most stable atomic number. Atomic numbers higher than Iron's will tend to break apart; atomic numbers lower will tend to fuse. Why? I don't know.
  8. Joined
    11 Nov '05
    Moves
    43938
    19 May '08 07:11
    Originally posted by AThousandYoung
    Iron is approximately at the most stable atomic number. Atomic numbers higher than Iron's will tend to break apart; atomic numbers lower will tend to fuse. Why? I don't know.
    Because the energy per nucleon is lower than any other element.
    With a atomic number higher than iron, you can get energy out of the nucleus by splitting it. Most effective is uranium as we have in nuclear plants. (Fission.)
    With a atomic number lower than iron, you can get energy out of the nucleus by fusing them together. Most effective is hydrogen. Hydrogen bombs and the sun core are using this. (Fusion.)
    With iron you cannot get out any more energy, neither by splitting nor fusing it.
  9. Standard memberthyme
    Undutchable
    was here
    Joined
    23 Jul '07
    Moves
    83545
    19 May '08 12:53
    Originally posted by quick chaser
    magnet attracts only iron and nikle between 109 natural elements. Why it is so, I mean why it does not attracts the other matels. Have any one of you any idea about it?
    Wasn't it something to do with the number of electrons in the outer shell of the atom? The first shell has two, the second has 8, the third 18, fourth 32 etc. When the shells have their complete number of electrons they are stable. The outer shell of the iron atom has only two electrons (the same goes for nikkel and cobalt) which are loosely bound to the core so they run off and play if there's something of magnetic interest going on on the other side of the field.. or something. This is only what I remember. Please correct me if I am wrong.
  10. Subscribersonhouse
    Fast and Curious
    slatington, pa, usa
    Joined
    28 Dec '04
    Moves
    52619
    19 May '08 22:42
    Originally posted by FabianFnas
    Because the energy per nucleon is lower than any other element.
    With a atomic number higher than iron, you can get energy out of the nucleus by splitting it. Most effective is uranium as we have in nuclear plants. (Fission.)
    With a atomic number lower than iron, you can get energy out of the nucleus by fusing them together. Most effective is hydrogen. ...[text shortened]... is. (Fusion.)
    With iron you cannot get out any more energy, neither by splitting nor fusing it.
    In other words, it's star poop.
  11. weedhopper
    Joined
    25 Jul '07
    Moves
    8073
    23 May '08 03:17
    Originally posted by FabianFnas
    Because the energy per nucleon is lower than any other element.
    With a atomic number higher than iron, you can get energy out of the nucleus by splitting it. Most effective is uranium as we have in nuclear plants. (Fission.)
    With a atomic number lower than iron, you can get energy out of the nucleus by fusing them together. Most effective is hydrogen. ...[text shortened]... is. (Fusion.)
    With iron you cannot get out any more energy, neither by splitting nor fusing it.
    Thanks for the explanation.
  12. weedhopper
    Joined
    25 Jul '07
    Moves
    8073
    23 May '08 03:18
    Originally posted by thyme
    Wasn't it something to do with the number of electrons in the outer shell of the atom? The first shell has two, the second has 8, the third 18, fourth 32 etc. When the shells have their complete number of electrons they are stable. The outer shell of the iron atom has only two electrons (the same goes for nikkel and cobalt) which are loosely bound to the core ...[text shortened]... de of the field.. or something. This is only what I remember. Please correct me if I am wrong.
    That stuff about electrons in the outermost shell rings a bell. Thank you.
  13. SubscriberAThousandYoung
    West Coast Rioter
    tinyurl.com/y7loem9q
    Joined
    23 Aug '04
    Moves
    24791
    23 May '08 21:441 edit
    Originally posted by FabianFnas
    Because the energy per nucleon is lower than any other element.
    With a atomic number higher than iron, you can get energy out of the nucleus by splitting it. Most effective is uranium as we have in nuclear plants. (Fission.)
    With a atomic number lower than iron, you can get energy out of the nucleus by fusing them together. Most effective is hydrogen. ...[text shortened]... is. (Fusion.)
    With iron you cannot get out any more energy, neither by splitting nor fusing it.
    That's not really much of a "why". I already pointed out that Fe's more stable than higher and lower mass elements.

    I looked up the answer for bigger elements. The nuclear force is short ranged. If the nucleus gets bigger than iron, the nuclear force can't hold the pieces together well due to the distances involved.
  14. Joined
    11 Nov '05
    Moves
    43938
    24 May '08 05:33
    Originally posted by AThousandYoung
    That's not really much of a "why". I already pointed out that Fe's more stable than higher and lower mass elements.

    I looked up the answer for bigger elements. The nuclear force is short ranged. If the nucleus gets bigger than iron, the nuclear force can't hold the pieces together well due to the distances involved.
    Well, that's was the "why" answer, part 1.

    The part 2 involves the arrangements of the neutrons and protons inside the nuclei. How they interact with eachother with the aid of the strong and weak forses within the nucleus.

    It is easy understood by non scientific (but interested) people why the energy per nucleon differ from one atom from another, that the energy is not the same, because if it wasn't so, there would be al lot more atoms with high atomic number, even monster atoms. Now we have only 92 natural elements, but you can produce artificially atoms beyond this 92 border, by injecing protons into heavy atoms. However, they are not stable, and the heaviest is very unstable. So by this it is understandable that it should be a minimum somewhere between the largest natural (uranium) and the lightest (hydrogene). And the answer is, at the atomic number 26, iron.

    Would you like an answer, part three?
  15. weedhopper
    Joined
    25 Jul '07
    Moves
    8073
    24 May '08 14:26
    Originally posted by FabianFnas
    Well, that's was the "why" answer, part 1.

    The part 2 involves the arrangements of the neutrons and protons inside the nuclei. How they interact with eachother with the aid of the strong and weak forses within the nucleus.

    It is easy understood by non scientific (but interested) people why the energy per nucleon differ from one atom from another, th ...[text shortened]... . And the answer is, at the atomic number 26, iron.

    Would you like an answer, part three?
    I thought Part one was good. 🙂
Back to Top