Re: new standard Coker rim
“gerblefranklin” <gerblefranklin@NoEmail.Message.Poster.at.Unicyclist.com> writes:
> H[a]rper, I’m suprised that you … are so quick to use the
> adjective “magnetic,” which is inaccurate and imples that the stated
> material is inherently attractive of ferrous materials. I believe
> the word you want to use is “ferrous”.
The word is ferromagnetic, and it means that the material consists of
magnetic regions which tend to align in the presence of a magnetic
field, resulting in an attractive force. However, the word “magnetic”
is perfectly correct here. The applicable definition is: Capable of
being magnetized. Your presumed definition doesn’t make sense in this
context.
You might be interested in the variety of magnetic properties of
matter. For example, all familiar materials are paramagnetic: The
orbits of electrons form tiny current loops which align with magnetic
fields and create a small opposing force. Other materials are
diamagnetic, having some tiny magnetic moments within align with the
field to create an equal magnetic field within. The forces created by
diamagnetic and paramagnetic materials are far smaller than
ferromagnetism. The Meissner effect is responsible for a sort of
anti-magnetism in superconductors. Magnetic fields are excluded from
the interior of superconductors, and the resulting repulsive force is
strong enough to levitate materials. Which reminds me that
superconducting magnets have been used to generate extremely strong
magnetic fields capable of levitating diamagnetic objects, including
live frogs!
Ken