Timeline for What would be the side effects of a massive, strong magnetic field?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
25 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 18, 2018 at 20:25 | vote | accept | rsandler | ||
| Apr 16, 2018 at 22:59 | comment | added | jamesqf | Everybody dies because that strong of a magnetic field distorts the electron orbitals of atoms, making organic chemistry impossible? See e.g. the Wikipedia page on magnetars: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnetar#Magnetic_field | |
| Apr 16, 2018 at 19:36 | answer | added | Acccumulation | timeline score: 0 | |
| Apr 16, 2018 at 18:50 | answer | added | user31336 | timeline score: 6 | |
| Apr 16, 2018 at 18:12 | history | edited | rsandler | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
Further addressing questions from the comments.
|
| Apr 16, 2018 at 18:11 | comment | added | rsandler | @Yurgen Fair point. Question updated to be more specific. Basically I'm trying to have iron tools/weapons/ornaments etc. have a noticeable pull toward the source at the edge of the 100 mile circle. Possibly the stated pull is too much for that purpose. Thanks to all for the comments btw--as is likely clear, my knowledge of magnetics is just good enough to know that I don't know very much... | |
| Apr 16, 2018 at 18:02 | comment | added | user31336 | A pull force on 1kg on how much ferromagnetic material? A field that can exert a "force" of 1kg (assuming you actually mean 10N) on a battleship is a lot weaker than one that can do so on a single iron filing. | |
| Apr 16, 2018 at 16:42 | answer | added | LSerni | timeline score: 39 | |
| Apr 16, 2018 at 16:15 | comment | added | rsandler | @L.Dutch Picky is fine. What would the right units be then? I thought I saw that pull force was measured in weight units. Or do you just mean that kg is mass not weight?) For the other, I just meant exponential in the sense of "uses exponenents", not the exponential function e^x... | |
| Apr 16, 2018 at 16:06 | comment | added | L.Dutch♦ | not to be picky, but a pull force is not measured in kg. And a cube law is not exponential. | |
| Apr 16, 2018 at 15:54 | comment | added | rsandler | @Jan Doggen, edited the question to specify permanence. | |
| Apr 16, 2018 at 15:54 | comment | added | rsandler | @Raditz_35 as noted above, added a pull force. As to how strong the field would would need to be in gauss or other measures of magnetism, I have no idea. | |
| Apr 16, 2018 at 15:53 | comment | added | rsandler | @L.Dutch edited the question to specify a pull force at 100 miles distance. I know there is an exponential factor involved; hence my concern that the forces involved would be (excessively) catastrophic towards the center in order to get a noticeable pull at the edges. | |
| Apr 16, 2018 at 15:49 | history | edited | rsandler | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
Addressing further comments
|
| Apr 16, 2018 at 15:48 | answer | added | flox | timeline score: 3 | |
| Apr 16, 2018 at 15:27 | comment | added | user3106 | And you mean the field is permanent? I don't see any time component in your question, please edit. | |
| Apr 16, 2018 at 15:24 | comment | added | Raditz_35 | I think you need to take one step first: Establish how strong the magnetic field actually is quantitatively. Then you can talk about what the effects are. Currently you might get a zoo of answers, all of them making other assumptions on how strong it actually is when it's a very simple parameter you could just specify to avoid this problem | |
| Apr 16, 2018 at 15:24 | comment | added | L.Dutch♦ | The attraction happens at any distance. It gets noticeable at shorter distances. Which of the two you mean? Also, are you aware that magnetic attraction scales with the cube of the distance? | |
| Apr 16, 2018 at 15:19 | comment | added | rsandler | @nzaman I had it in mind that people/objects would all get smashed by flying iron; added that to the question. | |
| Apr 16, 2018 at 15:18 | history | edited | rsandler | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
Adding details in response to comments
|
| Apr 16, 2018 at 15:16 | comment | added | rsandler | @Brythan, I meant a pull on non-magnetic ferrous objects at 100 miles distance. I'll edit the question to make that clearer. | |
| Apr 16, 2018 at 15:10 | comment | added | Brythan | Does "up to 100 miles" mean non-magnetic ferrous? Or is that the extreme range for something that is currently magnetic? An example of non-magnetic ferrous would be an iron nail. I'm assuming that these objects would be loose; i.e. the nail is not hammered into a board that is part of a structure that is joined to the ground. My point is that the range for magnetic objects is greater than for non-magnetic objects. So which are you trying to express as a hundred miles? | |
| Apr 16, 2018 at 14:42 | comment | added | nzaman | People getting hit by large masses of iron moving at high speed, disrupting the ionosphere,... | |
| Apr 16, 2018 at 14:41 | review | First posts | |||
| Apr 16, 2018 at 15:10 | |||||
| Apr 16, 2018 at 14:38 | history | asked | rsandler | CC BY-SA 3.0 |