Fun stuff This is a unique way to create a magnet http://researchnews.osu.edu/archive/magnetun.htm Interesting read. Wonder if anyone put this up against Einstein’s Photoelectric Affect? Seems these folk may be experimentalist.
It's cool stuff, and is especially interesting to me because I have worked with materials that have a magnetic response to light in the past. Although this plastic photo-magnet suffers from the same problem that plagues many photo-magnetic materials, which is that it only works at very low temperatures. This one has to be cooled to below 75K (liquid nitrogen temperatures) to work. Also, calling it a "plastic" is a bit misleading, since it's really an extended coordination polymer - a large molecule made up of metal atoms linked together by organic connectors. It doesn't have any of the properties that you would normally associated with a plastic like being able to easily mold it, bend it, etc. If you were given a piece of it and didn't know what it was, you would probably mistake it for a rock crystal. But like I said, very cool.
What i am looking at is the symmetry issue with the energy/mass associating? As if the poles are being adjusted by the energy captured. 'spontaneous symmetry breaking' ............... snowflake analogy (angle change to the molecule) the idea being the combining of electromagnetic and the structures 'state' change when the varied 'color' causes the magnetic field affect in basic analogy; the cold mass is hit by a wavlength; shares the energy; in which the poly maintains a portion (electric charge) and the 'metal' becomes biased (magnetically)..... That is what 'mechanically' seems to be occuring. Cool stuff Hence why i asked to see the researchers stuff and if anyone could find it.. p/s ... keep this quiet, this kind of stuff is not supposed to even exist in the accepted paradigm.... shush....
You can read the actual paper here http://prola.aps.org/pdf/PRL/v88/i5/e057202 (not sure if you need to pay for access to the database). They explain why it happens in the paper; basically one frequency of laser light causes an electron in the organic part of the material to be promoted from a bonding orbital to an anti-bonding orbital, which slightly changes the geometry of the bonds in the material. When the electrons relaxes back to the bonding orbital that it originally came from, there are two different "relaxed" bond geometries that are available to it. One is the original geometry, and the other is a new meta-stable geometry that increases the interaction between the unpaired electrons in the material. Since the unpaired electrons are now better positioned to interact, the magnitude of the magnetization increases. When they shine the other wavelength of light on the material it causes an electron to rapidly move from the organic part of the material to one of the metal atoms and back, which puts the material back into the original geometry and eliminates the increased magnetism (mostly). This is all well-understood by current theories.
I made a magnet out of Bubble Gum. It was monopole, so I tossed it out. Never one to be a lawbreaker!
So cold, controlled environment; this experiment shares 'which' phenomenon? The per se quantum leap, the photoelectric effect? Maybe a combination. Do you have the math? And do they share if when the structures relax; is there a release of a photon captured? that is what i mean. It shares how a specific wavelength can cause the ionization. So the combination of the structure and energy caused a magnetic bias via light. The mechanics behind that should have a 'transition' that i am interested in.
I'm not sure what you mean here. There are many phenomena involved in producing the effect. Light promotes an electron from a bonding orbital to an antibonding orbital, which changes the geometry of the material, and provides it with a pathway to an alternate relaxed geometry that improves the overlap of the electrons responsible for the magnetism. You couldn't say that just one phenomenon was responsible for it, there were a lot of things going on (as you might expect in a system that has magnetic response to light). There are almost certainly some photons released when the structure relaxes, but they won't all be of exactly the same energy as the absorbed photon because some of the energy is lost in the rearrangement. They don't really show a lot of math because most of the calculations involve well-known equations (well known to magnetism researchers anyway), so they just show the results. The "ionization" in this case was a brief transfer of an electron from the organic linker to the metal that it was attached to. But the metal and the ligand were bonded together into a single extended molecule, so it was more a matter of moving electrons around within a structure rather than removing electrons (which is what people usually think of when they think of ionization).
Nice common sense. You are on a roll to measure that release offers a few items and the amount of loss then can be measured Perhaps Maxwell and Lorentz..... but the publication; are you suggesting the math is not identified? Now you are talking.... My point being is to have a photon be captured by an electron and then cause the change, then be released shares purely a few points; that the 'energy' is the photon upon mass that a photon can be held in a state (upon mass) and that the energy (light) increases the potential of the mass (energy-mass held in time) all pretty basic sense Not only do those realities break about every rule of the so called 'postulates' of relativity but you also just shared an opinion of what energy truly is into words of purely common sense representing at the atomic level Now to use that in a class or a peer review setting; you may get beat up pretty bad but the reality is, the common sense is what to use before trying to put laws against what we observe in experimental evidence. So as you may state that the math is pretty basic, in reality it is 'not' to the physics community and 'they' are always smarter than anyone else. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! the thread was to share that light is the causation of the change; which is pretty basic to understand but the math to define them changes at the physics level is not as simple for many to comprehend but you shared the analogy that offeres a simply explanation; to observe the energy as light; then the steps are easy to share that is the foundation of the paradigm shift light is the energy between all mass which is perfected within a little mathematical statement..... what i wanted to see is if the folk of the above experiment had bumped into it too.
The explanation that I gave you does not, so far as I know, contradict any widely-accepted principles in chemistry, materials science, or solid-state physics and would not raise any eyebrows if you talked about it in an academic setting (like a meeting of magnetism researchers). I don't know much about relativity (I am trained as a chemist, not a physicist) and am not qualified to evaluate whether or not anything in this work or my explanation of it contradicts relativity. Fortunately relativity has little relevance to people who want to make and study magnetic materials, so I have never studied it in any sort of serious way. Although I must say that it seems unlikely to me that it contradicts relativity, since everything that I've explained here is widely-known and understood within chemistry, materials science, and solid-state physics, and I suspect that I would have heard about it by now if we had all been using theories that were supposed to be impossible under relativity. So if it seems that this research or anything that I have said contradicts relativity, I suspect that you are either misunderstanding this research or misunderstanding something about relativity (no offense).
My first comment is, you are fair and that is the best anyone can expect from another. Then 'if it is possible' that a cross disciplinary type of study was undertaken and these comments made are true; then perhaps an accounting can be performed to reveal whether what is said is true or not? That makes sense too. That if the material was contradictory that someone a long time ago would have said something. I agree..... you would think it would have been done, but that is what is on your lap. ie..... to hold a photon upon mass is purely 'against the law' based on relativity. The reason is the photons energy is bound to the speed of light; which is incorrect. None taken; been this way since identifying energy is incorrectly defined almost 3 decades back. Whereas many may have remained focused on a specific path of learning, i grew up in cross disciplines. Where physics, chemistry and mechanics were learned before really knowing the passion of sex. It was in electronics and transistors (PNP/NPN) and defining the chemical aspects in a physics contraint that shared the inconsistancies. it was not until observing metabolisms that shared the current laws of physics (chemistry) are a joke. Then to return back to the electronic format, that the true reality of how it works unfolded. The math at that point revealed itself based on observing life. ie.... in electronics the specimen to measure is the energy; and in chemistry is it the mass and the structures. these two conflict in such a way that it is hilarious to observe ie..... please share how the concept of the thread title could work chemically speaking and see for yourself as well, share a metabolism (even a real small reactive cycle) in a physics format; not chemically but as the energy as the specimen rather than the structures (chemistry cannot provide this) This may take time on your own accord but be certain.... these models were explored a long time ago and corrected as the differences between reality and the intellectual community is so far gone that it is actually funny like i had mentioned before; a paradigm shift is what it will take to fix the issue and it starts with addressing energy as light and whether it is the weak, strong or gravitation forces; all three are simply properties of electromagnetism (light) i call it 'stupid easy' but that is what the last chapter to mankind reveals; light is the life upon mass! p/s.... i am in the middle of writting another summary so i may be adding items to this sounding like a rant but be fair (as you have) and simply see with both eyes open and go from there. Forget me as a person just observe the ideas and how the questioning of 'laws' was pursued and do a little homework. I often suggest, that "IF" what is shared is pure, then each can see for themselves; the only real requisite is honesty. again; i am but an arrogant idiot; the rest is on each person exposed as it is their choice, not mine! i like to think 'enquiring minds'.............. 'want to know' the rest are a waste of resources
something to look at http://xxx.lanl.gov/PS_cache/quant-ph/pdf/0605/0605170v1.pdf Shares the same phenomenon of the opening post; but reversed. The structure changes the energy and can be used to record a chain of events imposing a bias
