Diamagnetic Magnetization Strength as a Consequence of Electromagnetic Induction Law’s Effect

2013 ◽  
Vol 423-426 ◽  
pp. 2104-2107
Author(s):  
Tatyana N. Gnitetskaya ◽  
Elena V. Karnauhova
Keyword(s):  
Magnetic Moment ◽  
Electromagnetic Induction ◽  
Quantum Physics ◽  
Magnetization Process ◽  
Larmor Precession ◽  
Average Magnetic Moment ◽  
Classical Physics ◽  
Classical Statistics ◽  
Magnetic Phenomena

A qualitative proof of diamagnetic non-zero magnetization based on the electromagnetic induction law is presented in this paper. Modeling diamagnetic phenomena as a result of Larmor precession or effect of the electromagnetic induction’s law in scale of one hydrogen-like atom performed in classical physics contributes to formation of obviously incorrect idea of the diamagnetic magnetization process in students. It is well-known that the average magnetic moment of a diamagnetic calculated with the help of classical statistics laws is zero which can be explained by quantum character of magnetic phenomena. On the contrary, electromagnetic induction’s law is effective both in classical and quantum physics. Applying it to the diamagnetism problem will allow to solve it for the diamagnetic in whole and to avoid averaging which is proved in the present paper.

The Essence of Quantum Computing

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rajendra K. Bera
Keyword(s):  
Hilbert Space ◽  
Quantum Computing ◽  
Quantum Physics ◽  
Quantum Algorithms ◽  
Quantum Computers ◽  
Turing Machines ◽  
Classical Physics ◽  
Core Set ◽  
The World ◽  
Subordinate Role

It now appears that quantum computers are poised to enter the world of computing and establish its dominance, especially, in the cloud. Turing machines (classical computers) tied to the laws of classical physics will not vanish from our lives but begin to play a subordinate role to quantum computers tied to the enigmatic laws of quantum physics that deal with such non-intuitive phenomena as superposition, entanglement, collapse of the wave function, and teleportation, all occurring in Hilbert space. The aim of this 3-part paper is to introduce the readers to a core set of quantum algorithms based on the postulates of quantum mechanics, and reveal the amazing power of quantum computing.

scholarly journals A Magnetic Phenomena Analysis by Employing Particle Method and Magnetic Moment Method

2015 ◽  
Vol 23 (2) ◽  
pp. 282-287 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kenta Mitsufuji ◽  
Katsuhiro Hirata ◽  
Fumikazu Miyasaka ◽  
Shuhei Matsuzawa
Keyword(s):  
Magnetic Moment ◽  
Moment Method ◽  
Particle Method ◽  
Magnetic Phenomena

scholarly journals The magnitude of the gyromagnetic ratio

1923 ◽  
Vol 102 (718) ◽  
pp. 538-540 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Magnetic Field ◽  
Angular Momentum ◽  
Magnetic Moment ◽  
Important Influence ◽  
Gyromagnetic Ratio ◽  
Strong Tendency ◽  
Unit Change ◽  
Ferromagnetic Substance ◽  
Positively Charged ◽  
Magnetic Phenomena

The accurate experiments of Chattock and Bates prove that the angular momentum arising in a ferromagnetic substance from unit change in its magnetic moment is very nearly, if not exactly, one half the value 2 m/e = 1.13 X 10 -7 , which seemed to me the most likely when I first discussed this effect. This conclusion is supported by the fact that the improvements which have been introduced into this subject by successive experimenters in recent years have led to values showing a strong tendency to settle at the same limit m/e = 5.65 X 10 -8 . This value is also in general agreement with that deduced by Barnett from experiments on the converse effect. It seems desirable therefore to reconsider the interpretation of this ratio. The higher value 2 m/e is obtained by making rather definite assumptions, which evidently require modification, as to the nature of the phenomena. These assumptions are that the process of magnetization involves the turning of electron orbits, and that nothing else which may occur has any important influence on the phenomena. The inertia of the electrons is assumed to be entirely of the type which controls the deflection of a beam of cathode rays by a magnetic field, and any change in the motion of the positively charged part of the atom is disregarded. These assumptions are essentially the same as those of the theories of Langevin and Weiss which have been successful in dealing with purely magnetic phenomena.

Sein oder Nichtsein als Grundfrage der Quantenphysik / To he or not to be as basic question in quantum physics

1984 ◽  
Vol 39 (2) ◽  
pp. 113-131
Author(s):  
Fritz Bopp
Keyword(s):  
Hilbert Spaces ◽  
Quantum Physics ◽  
Basic Assumption ◽  
Finite Lattice ◽  
Basic Question ◽  
Classical Physics ◽  
Infinite Dimensional ◽  
Finite Dimensional ◽  
Basic Ideas ◽  
Finite Dimensional Hilbert Space

The question is often asked how to interprete quantum physics. That question does not arise in classical physics, since Newton's axioms are immediately connected with basic ideas and experiences. The same is possible in quantum physics, if we remember how elementary particle physicists describe their experiments. As Helmholtz has pointed out. the basic assumption of classical physics is that of geneidentity. That means: Bodies remain the same during their motion. Obviously, that is no longer true in quantum physics. Particles can be created and annihilated. Therefore creation and annihilation must be considered as basic processes. Motion only occurs, if a particle is annihilated in a certain point, if an equal one is created in an infinitesimally neighbouring point, and if this process is continuously going on during a certain time. Motions of that kind are compatible with the existence of some manifest creation and annihilation processes. If we accept this idea, quantum physics can be derived from first principles. As in classical physics, we know therefore what happens from the very beginning. Thus questions of interpretation become dispensable. A particular mathematical method is used to exhaust continua. The theory is formulated in a finite lattice, whose point density and extension equally go to infinity. All calculations are therefore performed in a finite dimensional Hilbert space. The results are however related to an infinite dimensional one. Earlier calculations may, therefore, be essentially correct, though they must be rejected in theories which are based on manifestly infinite dimensional Hilbert spaces. Here limiting processes do not occur in the state space. They are only admissible for numerical results.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document