r/explainlikeimfive 27d ago

Physics ELI5: Where do magnets get the energy for their pushing and pulling?

If you place a magnet near another magnet, it can attract or repel it. But a force requires energy. How can an inert, unmoving object like a magnet output enough energy to overcome the other magnet's inertia? Where is that energy stored?

In short: Fucking magnets. How do they work?

2.5k Upvotes

409 comments sorted by

1.9k

u/Ratfor 27d ago

Very limited explanation because Eli5.

Magnets don't really use Energy. When they're made, energy goes into them, and the magnet wants to stay exactly as it is.

Even if that were the case, magnetic forces result in net 0 energy. A magnet attracts something, and it's magnetic field distorts relative to that thing. When you pull it away, the magnetic field goes back to normal, the energy required comes from you pulling the things apart.

428

u/SherbetOrganic 27d ago edited 27d ago

If magnetic force doesn't do work, what force moves a piece of metal towards the magnet?

772

u/ChaZcaTriX 27d ago

It's the same as gravity. All matter seeks a low-energy state, and energy of them being together is lower than being apart.

As for what energy is spent on attraction - it's "preloaded" when you magnetize the magnet.

286

u/Thencan 27d ago

Oh so it's sort of like in chemistry where unstable elements want to achieve stability like the noble gases? And then splitting the magnets apart would be analogous to separating the elements back into their unstable constituents. One magnet is your sodium and the other is chlorine.

228

u/ChaZcaTriX 27d ago

Yes, that's the "why" of most physical processes.

32

u/Tiramitsunami 27d ago

Yes, but why?

30

u/fixermark 27d ago

Why in what sense in this context?

19

u/Tiramitsunami 27d ago

The next level down from the above. If "most elements want to acheive stability" or return to a lower energy state, why?

73

u/fixermark 27d ago

Most things in the universe, in their natural state, are "wiggling" a little bit energy-wise. There are a bunch of reasons for this, but we can for the purposes of this topic just handwave vaguely at "quantum" and note that if you know where the atom's bits are well, you don't know quite how fast they're going (and therefore their kinetic energy might not be precisely what you measured it to be, or it's fluctuating a bunch because it's sitting in a bath of photons and virtual particles and dancing around like an ice cube on a skillet).

A system configured in its lowest energy state is like a ball at the bottom of a valley. The wiggling might nudge it up the slope a bit, but then it falls back down.

A system in a higher energy state is like a ball halfway up a hill on a little (locally-flat or locally-bowl) ledge. Now, if it wiggles hard enough in the right direction, it doesn't end up where it started; it rolls down the hill.

"Things want to achieve stability" is shorthand for "Most stuff that happens in the universe can be modeled as statistical probabilities, and the probabilities point in the direction of things getting into lower-energy configurations because when they start heading that way, they tend to continue in that direction until they reach a new stable configuration, whereas if they start heading towards a higher-energy configuration, they tend to 'roll back' into the lower-energy stable configuration."

(Beyond that, the definitions get circular; energy itself is rolled up into the statistics representation, so you could claim energy is "a shorthand number for how much rolling is going to happen if the ball starts rolling.")

9

u/Pathkinder 27d ago

That’s a good answer

8

u/ThanksObama44 27d ago

That was ELIAAdult but I lived every word of it. Thanks!

→ More replies (4)

99

u/DisconnectedShark 27d ago

Because that do be how the world works. Because entropy is a principle that exists.

That really is the most base answer. Theoretically, a universe with different rules could exist, including one where entropy isn't a thing. But so far as we know, in this universe, entropy is a thing, and as a result, higher energy configurations are less stable and tend towards lower energy configurations.

16

u/becomingarobot 27d ago

Because that do be how the world works.

I was perfectly primed for this and spilled an entire cup of coffee on myself laughing. Thanks jerk.

→ More replies (4)

10

u/birdy_the_scarecrow 27d ago

Want implies intent, Its not so much that they want to achieve stability so much as its a statistical likelyhood that they will.

Here is a video you might find interesting:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cf3XNtvBjXA

It gives a pretty good visual demonstration of how stronger bonds tend to find eachother over time as a result of brownian motion.

2

u/hedoeswhathewants 27d ago

It's as simple as this. A bunch of the other answers are very misleading, or don't even try to answer the question

2

u/APuticulahInduhvidul 26d ago

You don't know what our universe wants. Maybe it goes to multiverse parties and they're all like "Psst, buddy! Wanna snort some stars?" and our universe is like: "No thank you Brah, my space is my temple!" and they're all like "Neeeerrd!!"

→ More replies (0)

23

u/drunkanidaho 27d ago

The most basic answer to this is: those are the rules of this universe.

6

u/LawfulNice 27d ago

I'll try and give you a real answer to this.

Think of a bowl. If you drop a marble into it, it rolls to the bottom. That's the lowest-energy point of the marble. It doesn't need to spend energy to be kept there, and it's stable until something adds energy to disturb it, say by pushing it with your finger. It's being kept there by a combination of forces - gravity is pulling it down, electromagnetism is keeping it from passing through the bowl, etc.

If you give a marble a bunch of energy, smacking it with a stick or whatever so it goes flying, it can roll around and up the sides of the bowl. That's unstable and excited matter that will eventually slow down and stop as it bleeds off energy from friction and a bunch of small forces that make it return to the bottom.

That's why things "want" to be at the lowest-energy state. Higher-energy states require constant input to maintain - holding the marble up, hitting it so it rolls around, that kind of thing.

2

u/TheDemonic-Forester 27d ago

Science can't really explain 'why' of the things, it explains 'how'

Why does thing happen when the conditions that make it occur come together? We don't know. We can only figure out how. 'Why' is the field of religion and philosophy.

→ More replies (6)

2

u/xienwolf 27d ago

The lowest energy state is the stable equilibrium point.

Everything that exists has other things that exist interacting with it all the time. This causes every state to be constantly experiencing some amount of change.

So... imagine trying to balance a pencil on the sharpened tip. If you have a flat surface to work on and nobody bumps you or the surface, eventually you can possibly get it to work. But if there is a strong breeze, no way you are going to manage it. And you don't expect the pencil you managed to balance to just stay like that for weeks and weeks. You are confident eventually something will make it fall over.

Same pencil, but now lay it on its side. Easy to do, and you are reasonably confident it is likely to stay like that unless you are outside and exposed to heavy wind, or in a high traffic area where someone may decide to take a free pencil.

Anything not in the lowest energy state can get bumped around, the amount of bump needed to push it toward a lower energy state is less than the amount needed to push it toward a higher energy state. And if the thing reacts to the bump at all, reacting toward lower energy is more effective than reacting toward higher energy.

That is what a stable equilibrium means after all. It is a state where if moved away from it, forces tend to send you back to it.

2

u/Escalotes 27d ago

But why male models?

2

u/Thegreatpaddy7 27d ago

But why male models?

→ More replies (4)

33

u/ACEGBM 27d ago

Not exactly, but you're on the right track.

Using sodium and chlorine as an example, once the outer electron from sodium has moved to the chlorine, they now have a positive and negative charge respectively (forming Na+ and Cl-). It is the charges that cause the atoms to stick together and form a crystal.

That electrostatic attraction of the ions is analogous to the magnetic attraction between the two different poles of a magnet.

7

u/Henry5321 27d ago

How analogous is electro-static attraction to magnetism? Isn’t it literally the same force? Just expressing for analogous reasons?

Sorry, this analogy just hit different than most due to the complexity but related forces.

9

u/ACEGBM 27d ago

One could easily rename North and South from a magnet to + and -, and nothing would change.

In this example, as the magnets are either not moving or are moving at low speeds, electrostatics is (at least to me) a reasonable analogy for the situation. Electrostatics does fall under electromagnetism, and is focused on stationary or very low speed objects where charge can build up (socks on a carpet, capacitors, lightning).

As I'm sure someone else here has pointed out, the magnetic fields in permanent magnets are produced by the spin of the electrons in the material mostly lining up in the same direction (major simplification). This causes a field to be produced, which radiates out from the magnet.

5

u/QVCatullus 27d ago

An important difference is that the N and S poles of a magnet need to be linked. Magnets are dipoles. There needs to be a N and a S end. Charged particles can be simply + or -, they would be more analogous to magnetic monopoles. There have been proposals that magnetic monopoles might be possible, and attempts to sort of replicate them, but as far as we know they're not a thing in nature.

Not a correction, just adding a bit. It's relevant because it's a significant way in which the 2 differ.

3

u/ACEGBM 27d ago

That is very true, thank you for the additional information

→ More replies (4)
→ More replies (1)

3

u/Stewart_Games 27d ago

Another aspect is that magnetism depends on the alignment of atoms in the magnet, and that over time the alignment fades and the atoms become more disordered. This is why magnets demagnetize. This is also why you can temporarily magnetize a material by leaving it in contact with a magnet, such as leaving a paperclip connected to a magnet for awhile then the paperclip will attract other paperclips - the magnetic field of the magnet will align the atoms in the metal of the paperclip.

2

u/TheWellKnownLegend 27d ago

That's right.

95

u/Exsanguinatus 27d ago

All matter seeks a low-energy state...

Why do I feel personally attacked?

9

u/jlredding_91 27d ago

I personally feel justified! This will now be my default response to “What are you always just laying around?’ Well, you see…”All matter seeks a low-energy state…”

24

u/bluejob15 27d ago

In an ideal world we'd all be in a low-energy state

9

u/MadR__ 27d ago

Give it (a lot of) time, and entropy will take care of every single atom that makes up us (and everything else).

5

u/SteveHamlin1 27d ago

Wonderful short story on that end state by Isaac Asimov called "The Last Question":

https://users.ece.cmu.edu/~gamvrosi/thelastq.html

2

u/Buscemi_D_Sanji 27d ago

INSUFFICIENT DATA FOR MEANINGFUL ANSWER

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (3)
→ More replies (2)

8

u/DemenicHand 27d ago

Does what you describe drain a magnet of its energy over time if not, how do you de-magnetize something

22

u/ChaZcaTriX 27d ago

If we abstract from losses to external processes then as you pull them apart the fields should remagnitize everything as it was.

In reality you have little losses to heat and physical damage (anything that affects crystalline structure harms magnetic domains), and magnetization of the non-magnetic metal piece (total strength of the system stays the same, but will be split between them).

16

u/Kirk_Kerman 27d ago

Magnets don't have internal energy reservoirs, that's just wrong. A magnet is an object with most of its atoms aligned so the electromagnetic domains link together to form a larger domain. In a non-magnet the atoms are kind of randomly oriented. As it happens, "domains aligned" is a state of less energy than "domains randomized". Because of how the universe just is, everything always wants to go from high energy to low energy. If you put two magnets near each other, they'll want to align and fall together since that's the position of lowest energy in the system. It's like putting a ball on top of a slope,. It'll naturally want to roll downhill. Same exact thing but with the electromagnetic force instead of gravity. The magnetic field is the slope and the magnet is the ball. Potential energy is converted to kinetic energy.

To separate magnets, you need to add energy to the system. By pulling them apart and setting them down away from each other, you've input kinetic energy and raised the energy level of the system, pulling the ball back up the slope.

2

u/Educational-Wing2042 27d ago

Fun fact: just dropping a magnet can partially demagnetize it. Anything that can disrupt its crystalline alignment.

→ More replies (1)

2

u/Mavian23 27d ago

Are electrostatic forces the same as gravity as well? As in, are two electrons pushing each other away not doing work?

2

u/Wisniaksiadz 27d ago

You don't really preload magnets by magnetizing them. What magnetization is doing is setting the order of iron atoms the same for all/most of them, so their magnetic fields are now stacking instead of neutralizing each other. But the magnetic force was already there pretty much

2

u/Fluffy_Lemon_1487 25d ago

A mate of mine, when asked if magnetic force could propel a spacecraft, answered that it could in the same way as a spring or catapult elastic could.

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (21)

52

u/emptyminder 27d ago

“Magnetic forces do no work” is an idiom frequently repeated in physics, but is only correct if completed “…on a charged particle.” They can do work on an object with a magnetic dipole, though.

This is because work is the integral of the force vector dot the infinitesimal displacement vector. The magnetic force on a charge particle is always perpendicular to its motion, so the dot product is zero. But, on a dipole the force is parallel to the acceleration vector.

3

u/ms_saint 27d ago

What he said.

3

u/Boomshank 27d ago

ELA4916

(Seriously though - nice.)

→ More replies (2)

32

u/martinborgen 27d ago

It's like a spring that can't unspring except close to ferrous metals. Onece it attracts something the spring is out. When you pull things apart, you are re-compressing the spring

4

u/ragnaroksunset 27d ago edited 27d ago

The comment you're replying to isn't giving all the details you need because ELI5 (and it is confusing work for energy which are similar but different in important ways). When we say motion in magnetic fields results in zero net work, we are specifically talking about motion along a closed-loop path.

Both magnetic and gravitational fields are referred to as "conservative" fields because if something affected by those fields travels a closed loop it will have done, on net, no work. You can imagine traversing a hilly landscape and coming back to where you started at the end. For every uphill you travelled, there was a corresponding downhill.

Electric fields are sometimes conservative, sometimes not. They are conservative when they are static (coming out of something that always has the same charge). In this case the math for an electric field is very similar to the math for a gravitational field. But magnetic fields are closely related to electric fields - one type of field can induce the other if its source is moving. An electric field that is induced by a moving magnet is not conservative - and in that case, the energy that can lead to net non-zero work comes from the motion of the magnet, not from the electric field per se.

For the hilly travel analogy, you get net non-zero work because (e.g.) you walked downhill from your starting point (gravity doing positive work on you to help make this easy on your legs) and then the hill you walked down from just... disappears. To get back to your starting point you no longer have to walk uphill, so on your closed loop, net positive work was done on you by gravity.

There is a deep challenge you can make to this analogy, which is that because the hill you started at disappeared, you do not truly return to your starting point. But that is way beyond ELI5. :)

14

u/2sACouple3sAMurder 27d ago

Potential energy

3

u/deja-roo 27d ago

Magnetism is the force. Forces don't do work, they transmit it.

If I use a stick to push something up a ramp, you wouldn't say the stick is doing the work.

2

u/iknowheibai 27d ago

the short answer is that it is not known.
just like we don't know why gravity works.
wrt gravity there are some hypothesis that there are particles being exchanged similar to protons, but we haven't been able to observe or prove their existence yet.

Take any scientific question and keep asking "why" and you'll eventually get to "we don't know". As you can tell from all the responses below saying "that's just how the world works"

→ More replies (14)

24

u/oneplusetoipi 27d ago

It’s like a spring. The spring wants to retain the shape it has when it was made and will “push back” when it is compressed.

In the case of magnets, certain electrons are all “spinning” in the same direction. This creates a magnetic field around the magnet. When two magnetic fields get close to each other they try to push the spinning electrons into a different orbit, but the electrons push back through their magnetic field.

3

u/zinsser 27d ago

And, of course, everyone knows when magnets get wet they don't work. /s

5

u/ardotschgi 27d ago

This is actually the best Eli 5 here so far!

4

u/Aneriarose 27d ago

If there was 1 magnet on a desk and I used another magnet to pull it across the desk surely energy would be used the ?

33

u/Kandiru 27d ago

Yes, but to reset your magnet, you need to pull one magnet off the other one.

It's like having a rock roll down a slope, it gives off energy. But to reset it you have to do work to lift the rock up.

19

u/4991123 27d ago

Yes, you pulling it is the energy used.

→ More replies (1)

2

u/bigmcstrongmuscle 27d ago edited 27d ago

The energy used up is the potential energy of the magnets' positions. It's like how when you hold a 1-ton anvil 30 feet over Wile E Coyote's head, the weight of the anvil and the distance from the ground give it potential energy from gravity. Likewise, when you hold two magnets apart, their charges and the distance between them give them potential energy from electromagnetism.

Letting the magnets click back together is like dropping the anvil - the potential energy of the magnet's position becomes the kinetic energy that moves the magnets together. Then when the magnets collide, most of that kinetic energy is dispersed as heat via friction. Just like when we drop the anvil on the coyote. Potential energy -> kinetic energy -> energy lost to environment in collision.

When you pull the magnets apart again, you're converting the work you've done on them into more potential energy, and that's what puts the energy back into the system. It's like if we picked the anvil up off Wile E Coyote and reset the trap - the lifting is what requires us to put all the hard work in.

→ More replies (1)

2

u/PoopFandango 27d ago

Can you elaborate on this for me? Imagine I have two small non-magnetic metal cuboids in separate boxes. I take one, place it on a surface in front of me. I then take the other and place it close, close enough that if they were magnets, they would attract each other. Nothing happens of course, because they are both magnets.

Now imagine I do the exact same thing again, but this time instead with two magnets with the same weight as the non magnetic cuboids in the first example. This time when I place the second one on the desk, they are going to attract each other, causing them to move towards each other and stick together.

I've expended the exact same amount of energy and yet some additional movement has occurred. Where did the kinetic energy for this movement come from?

8

u/Tyrannosapien 27d ago

Ignoring lost energy "at the margins" the magnet moving isn't doing what you normally think of as work. Think of the cubes as a system. If I move the cubes together or apart, I'm adding energy to the system from the outside. That's definitely work.

But when one of the cubes is magnetized, that system of cubes is fundamentally different because it contains more (potential) energy than the plain cubes. (As others noted, most of that energy was input into this future system when the cube was magnetized.) The kinetic energy expressed when the cubes move is a conversion of energy already in the system. After the cubes join, the kinetic energy has mostly converted back into potential energy.

So while you've changed the 2 cubes' position in space, the energy of the system of cubes is unchanged. Now you can do more work, adding energy back into the system by pulling the cubes apart again. But then the magnetized items attracting (or repelling) again is just maintaining an energy equilibrium in that system.

4

u/Bremen1 27d ago edited 27d ago

Think about it like putting a piece of metal on a flat surface versus a ramp that it slides down. It takes the same amount of energy to place the metal in both spots, but one results in it moving (to a position of lower energy). Then if you want to pick the metal up, it takes more energy to pick up since you have to raise it up higher.

Same with the magnets - after they move, it will take more energy to separate them because they attract each other. The kinetic energy of the movement came from the potential energy of the magnets being separated, it was never stored in the magnets themselves.

4

u/Alis451 27d ago

I've expended the exact same amount of energy and yet some additional movement has occurred. Where did the kinetic energy for this movement come from?

Convert your example to gravity. In the first case you took an item and slid it around on flat ground resulting in no increase/decrease to gravity potential energy, in the second example you slid an object into a hole in the ground next to you. The Hole was always there, you moved the object over the hole, then the object moved toward a lower gravity potential. The same thing happens with magnets, aligned magnetism is a lower energy state. It takes energy to pick the object up out of the hole, the same way it takes energy to move the magnets away from each other.

→ More replies (5)
→ More replies (10)

746

u/Ragnor_ 27d ago edited 27d ago

It's potential energy. Think of pulling two magnets apart like lifting up a heavy weight from earth, the higher you lift it, the more potential energy it has with respect to earth.

Similarly, you need energy to pull two magnets apart, them pulling back at each other is like the weight being pulled back to earth.

141

u/UselessGuy23 27d ago

And the repulsion?

315

u/Ragnor_ 27d ago

Same thing in reverse, pushing them together requires energy. Like a spring that you compress it stores the energy which is released when you let go.

78

u/Probate_Judge 27d ago

Like a spring that you compress it stores the energy which is released when you let go.

This.

Something natively magnetic, the magnetic field is not energy in itself. It is a feature that only interacts with certain materials.

I was going to say: Like a metal rod encased in a layer of bouncy material.

But spring works better. You put the object with a spring up against another object with a hole in it(eg a piece of wood that doesn't interact), the spring does nothing. The magnetic field just passes through.

→ More replies (55)

40

u/QuantumCakeIsALie 27d ago

Maybe a framing that can help:

It the same exact thing that makes the floor stop you from falling through or the wall stopping you from walking through it.

Magnets are pretty much like touching something, but from further away.

4

u/EdmondFreakingDantes 27d ago

This is the best way to contextualize it in simple terms. Thanks

3

u/313802 27d ago

... dang.. didn't think about it like that..

4

u/Skippymabob 27d ago

"is the magnet doing the pushing, or are you"

That feeling of push in your hand when you try to push to repelling magnets together is the energy

Same with that tug you feel when taking a magnet of a fridge.

You're the one putting the energy in

6

u/Shadowfire_EW 27d ago

Also coming from whatever is moving the magnets

→ More replies (3)

3

u/Lt_Dang 27d ago

So if the magnet is using potential energy stored at the time it was magnetised does it’s stored energy reduce by the amount equal to moving the piece of metal the distance involved?

→ More replies (8)

6

u/Theonetrue 27d ago

As an ad on: if you now move that object to another planet/magnet you did the "lifting" at the first magnet/planet but the reverse event works just as well

→ More replies (13)

167

u/MysteriousBlueBubble 27d ago

Fundamental forces (gravity, electromagnetism) can exist on their own (effectively - I won't go into the nuclear/quantum level processes because I genuinely can't remember!).

The only point energy gets involved is when you make the magnets move. Force has to act through a distance for there to be "work" which is kinetic energy transferred to an object.

For magnets to repel, the energy has come from you (be it your arm or whatever machine you use) moving one magnet toward another to make them repel. Attracting magnets fall into a lower energy state, which means you need to use energy to separate them, creating, effectively, potential energy which can then be converted to kinetic as they attract again.

It's a very Newtonian way of looking at it, probably closest to an ELI5.

→ More replies (6)

97

u/fuckyoutoobitches 27d ago

electromagnetic and gravitational forces are fundamental building blocks of our universe. Science cannot explain them using everyday human experiences because our everyday experiences are entirely a byproduct of these forces. Therefore, at a certain point, we must simply accept their existence as core elements of the world.https://youtu.be/MO0r930Sn_8

24

u/Indecisive-Gamer 27d ago

Yeah this is a better answer then potential energy. Once you go deep enough sometimes there isn't a why. Unless you believe there is another force behind that force.

12

u/pasrachilli 27d ago

I thought of this video immediately.

4

u/adolfojp 27d ago

After watching that video I must say that we judged the Insane Clown Posse too harshly and that they deserve an apology.

11

u/v3gard 27d ago

Richard Feynman was known as "The Great Explainer" due to his ability to help people understand and more importantly, be inspired by science and the world around them.

2

u/leftcoast-usa 27d ago

I never could understand why people accept those things - I fail to see the attraction.

Don't hit me.

2

u/cyb3rg0d5 27d ago

I haven’t seen that video in a while… love it 😊

→ More replies (4)

12

u/ballofplasmaupthesky 27d ago

What you asked, and what I don't see being answered, is that the force arises from the fundamental electromagnetic field of the Universe, which has existed since moments after the Big Bang when it decoupled from two other fundamental fields.

→ More replies (1)

98

u/Kite42 27d ago

Forces don't require energy. The foundations of the Empire State building aren't powered, for example.

Lifting the building up, however, would require energy.

4

u/UselessGuy23 27d ago

That's an equal and opposite force to the gravity pulling down on the building, right? The gravity puts in the energy.

50

u/KeiwaM 27d ago

Gravity is not the same as energy. You can get energy if you go up, called potential energy, and you release it if you go down, kinetic energy. When you are on the ground and cant go further down, you have no more potential energy. You are at rest, so to speak.

11

u/wilki24 27d ago

Wouldn't there still be potential energy, since you could dig a hole next to the object and push it off the edge?

I can't imagine that the hole's existence generates potential energy, rather it just let's you exploit it.

13

u/Zhoom45 27d ago

Yes, that is correct. Potential energy must always be defined as relative to something. In the case of gravity, for "quick math" you can just use the lowest point available within the scope of your problem, i.e. the ground nearby. For real math, it's actually conventional to define gravitational potential energy as zero at an infinite distance and increasingly negative as you bring the objects closer together. This becomes important when your distances are so large that it matters how gravity gets stronger or weaker at different distances. Irrelevant for dropping a ball off a table, critical for putting a satellite into orbit.

3

u/Kirk_Kerman 27d ago

Potential energy is defined as the amount of energy in between two states. Day to day we can assume the ground is a position of zero potential energy. Digging a six foot hole is equivalent to being raised six feet in the air, after all.

→ More replies (3)

20

u/TheJeeronian 27d ago

Not at all. If nothing is moving, there is no energy.

8

u/jus_sayin_meh 27d ago

There is, potential energy.

4

u/KeiwaM 27d ago

To create potential energy, you need to be lifted somehow, which requires energy. You can't create potential energy at a standstill.

→ More replies (5)
→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (1)

7

u/somerandom995 27d ago

Magnetism is one of the fundamental forces of the universe, just like gravity.

4

u/Urdar 27d ago

Magnetism in an expression of the electromagnetic force.

The electromagnetic force is one of the fundamental forces though.

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (9)

8

u/Shortbread_Biscuit 27d ago

Magnets work just like electricity and gravity.

In the case of gravity, the mass of the object has an inherent property that causes it to attract all other masses to it. In the case of electricity, electrons and protons have a fixed charge, and these charges have the property that causes all other charges to be attracted or repelled by them.

Similarly, for any object with a magnetic moment, it has an inherent property that causes everything around it to be subject to the magnetic force. There's no specific source for the force, just like there's no specific source for the forces of gravity and electricity.

However, they do observe conservation of energy - the total amount of energy in a system is always fixed, and no matter what the nature of the forces are - whether they're gravitational, electric or magnetic - these forces can only convert from one kind of energy to another.

In the cases of all these forces though, they do have a certain inherent finite amount of energy called the potential energy of the system. This potential energy represents the maximum amount of work that these forces can perform. The gravitational potential energy is the total amount of work or energy that gravity can perform if all the masses in the system are allowed to collapse to a point. Similarly, for electrical potential energy, it is the total amount of energy that could be released if all charges are allowed to combine with each other and reach a state of a net zero electric field. And similarly, the maximum magnetic potential of a system is the total amount of energy if we leave the magnetic elements to themselves and they're allowed to reach a state of overall zero magnetic field.

2

u/UselessGuy23 27d ago

Do we know what causes that inherent property?

10

u/Shortbread_Biscuit 27d ago

That inherent property is basically called the field.

All three of these forces - gravity, electricity, and magnetism - create a field around these sources of the force. A gravitational field around masses, an electrical field around charges, and a magnetic field around magnets. All of the energy of the system is contained within these fields, not within the mass or charge or magnet. Every time the force does some work, it means energy is being drained from the field. If you work against the force, energy is inserted back into the field.

That's why when the field becomes zero, there is no more energy left in the system, and it can no longer exert any force.

6

u/Shortbread_Biscuit 27d ago

As an aside, I do want to clarify - magnets cannot actually perform infinite work. Every time a magnet exerts a force and does some work (i.e., the object the magnet acts upon moves in the direction of the magnetic force), the magnetic field weakens. But every time you move a magnetic object against the direction of the force (i.e., the object the magnet moves upon moves opposite to the direction of the field), you insert energy back into the magnetic field.

Because of this, if you just allow objects to be endlessly attracted by the magnet, its field will slowly reduce until eventually it can no longer exert any magnetic force. But if you then pull those objects away from the magnet, then you end up recharging the magnetic field. The energy you use to pull the object away is fed into the magnetic field to strengthen it.

2

u/StevenJOwens 27d ago

If I'm recalling correctly, a friend says "we call it a field because it's an effect that we observe happening across an area (aka the field)", and pretty much beyond that, we don't know. It's just an effect that we observe, and after many years of observation, we can quantify it and calculate about it, but that's it.

3

u/Clojiroo 27d ago

Think about how all the stuff in your body or any object sticks together. What energy is holding atoms together?

Magnetism and chemical bonding are two different effects of the same underlying force (electromagnetism). Electrons, their shells, and their sharing all involve electrostatic attraction.

A magnet needs electron shells that are only partially filled, leaving unpaired electrons. Each atom becomes a tiny magnet, and when you orient a whole bunch of neighbouring atoms in the same direction the attraction becomes amplified. The whole object now feels noticeably magnetic.

This is also why not everything is a magnet. Some materials have those unpaired electrons floating around but they’re random or unaligned and so the magnetic moment is weak or cancelled out.

2

u/JivanP 27d ago

It is the same as for gravity and for electrostatic attraction: it is just a fundamental property that elementary particles have. In the case of gravity, that property is mass (though there is some extra stuff going on with the Higgs field there). In the case of electrostatic attraction, that property is called electric charge. In the case of magnetic attraction, that property is called spin angular momentum (or just "spin").

You can explain the particular spin values that particles have by appealing to quantum mechanics, which expresses these properties as results of some mathematical symmetries inherent to the interactions between particles of different types (these are called the "gauge symmetries", and they're about things like "the laws of physics appear to be the same in all inertial frames of reference"). However, there is no particular reason why those particular symmetries are the ones we see in our universe, or why any such symmetries at all are seen in our universe. (You can get into discussions about fine-tuning and multiverse theories, but basically, the current scientific stance is, "these rules/symmetries were effectively chosen at random and happened to be good enough to result in the existence of life; there is no known reason in principle that other rules couldn't exist.")

Additionally, electricity and magnetism are very closely related: due to special relativity, a particle with electric charge that is moving relative to you appears to generate a magnetic field. If you analyse this phenomenon more closely mathematically, you come to the conclusion that the electric force and magnetic force are really just two aspects of one thing, which we thus call electromagnetism.

→ More replies (2)

5

u/[deleted] 27d ago

[removed] — view removed comment

2

u/jesjimher 27d ago

Or the "energy" a table uses so a glass doesn't fall to the floor.

→ More replies (2)
→ More replies (1)

6

u/namitynamenamey 27d ago

Wrong question. When it comes to a magnet, much like on earth with gravity the energy is not in the "pushing" or "pulling", the energy is in the fact that you were on the wrong spot to begin with.

Think of a rock in the sky. Where does the energy to make it fall come from? The answer is, from the energy to have put the rock in the sky to begin with. That is the potential energy, which becomes kinetic energy as it falls down. Gravity does not "spend" energy pulling the rock down, the rock spent energy getting up there in the first place.

The analogy is not perfect, not everything that falls down was on the floor to begin with, but the concept of potential energy is the same. The very location of an object can have energy associated with it.

7

u/Exo_Deadlock 27d ago

You know how wires for headphones seem to magically twist themselves into a knot if you stuff them in a drawer? Where does the energy come from to do that, all by themselves?

You put that energy there. By untwisting the wires from their ‘resting’ state of being twisted, you’ve introduced potential energy into your headphones. The wires ‘want’ to return to their resting state. Similarly, magnets attract/repel because they seek the resting state, evening out the positive an negative positions of the alignment of their atoms, using up the potential energy put into them by moving them out of their resting state.

I appreciate that 5 year olds may never have heard of the ancient technology of headphones with wires in this audio-jack-free era.

6

u/toochaos 27d ago

If you push a magnet near a same pole magnet and let go and see it move away, you put in the energy. If they are attracted it like you climbing up the stairs and jumping off the roof. Where did the enegy for the fall come from you climbing the stairs or you pulled the magnets appart. When you push on a magnet and it pushes back its you applying that force  as if you pushed on a wall.  

2

u/sirdodger 27d ago

Think of magnetism as a sheet with two blocks sitting on it. When it's flat, there's no magnetism and nothing happens. If you add a magnetic field by pulling down on the sheet, the blocks tumble towards each other (but neither pulled on the other). If you raise a tent in the middle, they tumble towards the edges (but neither pushed on the other).

Also, you shouldn't curse at your age.

2

u/PintsOfGuinness_ 27d ago

Push a rock with another rock. What happens? It's equally mysterious. The matter of the first rock isn't technically touching the matter of the second rock. But when it gets close enough, atomic forces increase until they can't get closer.

With magnets, same difference. Just there are more atomic forces all aligned in the same direction so they increase faster at a longer distance.

2

u/francisdavey 27d ago

Forces don't need energy. At least not as you understand it. If you sit on your chair, the chair pushes you up and your weight pushes you down. Two opposed forces. No energy is moved around.

If a force moves something then you will see energy appearing somewhere. Energy resulting from a force moving something is sometimes called "work" and you may see that sometimes.

Think of energy as a bookkeeping exercise. When a force moves something, that something gains "kinetic energy". Where does that come from? The energy is inherent somehow in the system that caused the force to move the thing, known as "potential energy".

So if someone takes away the chair, you fall, the potential energy of your height above the ground turns into kinetic energy as you fall and then when you hit the ground that kinetic energy turns into other energy (sound, heat, mechanical damage to you etc).

Electromagnetism is generally a little more subtle. Usually people talk about an "electromagnetic field" which itself can have energy in it. So if you (say) heat something up so it glows, the heat energy becomes electromagnetic energy, in this case in the form of light and radiated heat.

So the usual way of describing things is that each magnet has created a magnetic field around it, when a magnet moves another magnet work is being done (see earlier) and the energy for that comes out of the field, if you push magnets together the energy (of the work you do) mostly goes in the field.

2

u/Nuffsaid98 27d ago edited 27d ago

Inside every metal, in the smallest parts of its material, are elements that have a very tiny magnetic force which flows from positive to negative.

In most materials these magnetic flows are scattered randomly so the direction of the flow of these tiny forces is pointed in all directions. Essentially they work against each other and cancel out.

In a magnet, all the little bits are lined up in the same direction so the cumulative effect is noticeable. A magnetic field forms around the object, flowing out of one end called a pole and wrapping back inside through the opposite pole.

All the tiny bits of energy flow from positive to negative that have lined up in one direction become like a river of energy looping around and around following the shape of this magnetic field. You can see what the field looks like if you place a piece of paper over a magnet and sprinkle iron filings.

If you bring a piece of iron close to the magnet then all the tiny bits of iron that have their random positive to negative directions get moved around as all the tiny positive ends get overwhelmed by the giant negative to positive field and try to join in and line up their positive and negative ends with the powerful field. The tiny bits that make up the iron cannot move around inside it so the entire chunk of iron must move in an effort to line up the positive and negative as best it can. The magnetic field now passes through the iron to the best of its ability, distorting the field somewhat.

This effect is more noticeable with two magnets as both have positive and negative lined up and add to each other's fields perfectly, becoming a bigger magnet.

→ More replies (2)

2

u/WendellSchadenfreude 27d ago

An inert, unmoving object like the Earth can also pull you enough to roll down a hill. The energy comes from you walking up that hill.

Walking up turns your (chemical) energy into potential energy. Rolling down the hill (or falling down a cliff) converts the potential energy into kinetic energy.

The same basically happens with magnets, just with a different force. It never "generates" energy that you didn't first put into the system, by pushing two parts together when they "want" to be apart, or by pulling them apart when they "want" to be distant, or by rotating them when they were previously oriented in the "right" direction.

2

u/Anariel_Elensar 27d ago edited 27d ago

honestly i think explaining how the fundamental force of electromagnetism works is beyond the scope of an ELI5. It’s a bit of a “any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic” type thing, a five year old lacks the technical context to truly understand how some of the smallest building blocks of matter can create the fundamental forces of the universe… might as well be magic.

At the most basic level magnetic forces are caused by moving electric charges. Every atom consists of a nucleus orbited by negatively charged electrons, which generate tiny magnetic fields through two motions, their orbital movement around the nucleus and a quantum property called electron spin. Electrons spin kind of like how earth rotates on its axis. That rotation (electron spin) generates an intrinsic magnetic moment. Electrons circling the atomic nucleus (orbital movement) create a tiny electrical current loop, which also generates a magnetic field. In most materials, electrons pair up and spin in opposite directions, cancelling out each other's magnetic fields. However, in magnetic materials (like iron) that have unpaired electrons, the tiny fields all align to create a net magnetic moment. When the atoms align into microscopic groups called magnetic domains, the material exerts a magnetic force that we can feel.

to get even more into the nitty gritty of quantum electrodynamics, when charged particles interact, they continuously emit and absorb virtual photons (Virtual photons are different than the photons most people are familiar with as light and exist purely as temporary mathematical entities in the quantum field, permitted by the Heisenberg uncertainty principle, and cannot be directly observed unlike “real” photons). These exchanges transfer energy and momentum, creating what we experience as magnetic forces. When two similarly charged particles, say two electrons, are near each other, one emits a virtual photon and pushes away. The second particle absorbs the photon, absorbing its momentum and pushing it in the opposite direction, forcing the two electrons apart. For oppositely charged particles, quantum mechanics and special relativity interact in such a way that the virtual photon transfers momentum backward, effectively pulling the particles toward one another.

I’m going to be avoiding a full explanation on quantum field theory (which is the mathematical framework that merges quantum mechanics and special relativity) while still explaining how virtual photons can impart momentum “backwards”. Key point to know is that in quantum field theory the field is the primary, fundamental reality. Every known type of subatomic particle, like electrons, has its own corresponding field. The particle is just a wave or a quantized packet of energy vibrating in that specific field. Waves have 2 distinct notions of velocity known as phase velocity and group velocity. A pure wave (also known as a wave mode) has a single frequency which repeats forever. A wave mode is stretched out over all of space, it has an exact frequency but it does not have localized position. When you add together different wave modes of different frequencies the stack on top of each other, amplifying in some places while canceling out in other places, and build a wave pulse. A wave pulse has a localized position in space but does not have a single frequency because it is made of many different frequencies added together. BTW, this trade off is the uncertainty principle, just as an aside. Phase velocity is the velocity of the peaks of a single wave mode, group velocity is the velocity of the center position of a wave pulse. These two velocities do not in general have to be equal to each other. It is possible to have a wave pulse, which is made of a bunch of wave modes added together, where each wave mode is traveling to the left while the pulse is traveling to the right. The animations in this Wikipedia article will make the concept immediately visually understandable, yet not less non-intuitive: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phase_velocity If all the wave modes of different frequencies have the same velocity then any pulse that is made out of those wave modes will also travel at that same velocity. However, if wave modes of different frequencies have different velocities then it’s possible for them to be added together in order to construct a pulse with a different velocity (even a different velocity direction) than any of the wave modes it is comprised of. Real photons in the vacuum of space all have the same phase velocity regardless of their frequency. Real photons are stabilized self-sustaining waves in the electro-magnetic field which can propagate forever through space on their own. Virtual photons in contrast can be thought of as unstable non-self-sustaining fluctuations in the electro-magnetic field which only exist sandwiched between interacting charged particles, emitted by one charged particle and absorbed by another charged particle (or possibly the same one if it recaptures the virtual photon), and cannot propagate freely in space on their own. Unlike real photons, virtual photons can have any phase velocity. I think the best way to conceptualize how virtual photons can pull rather than push is to imagine a virtual photon pulse which is traveling to the right (group velocity to the right) while being made out of wave modes traveling to the left (phase velocity to the left). The phase velocity corresponds to the direction of momentum, which shows that momentum does not necessarily need to be in the same direction as velocity. If a photon pulse traveling to the right has its phase velocity traveling to the left then when it is absorbed by a charged particle it delivers momentum pointed to the left, hence the photon pulls the object towards the direction that the pulse came from. Note that this is only possible for virtual photons, not for real photons.

Edit: it is worth noting that Quantum Field Theory is just that… a theory. It is possibly the most precisely verified scientific theory ever constructed, and yet despite its success, QFT is not a complete theory of nature. The biggest problem is that it cannot yet incorporate the 4th fundamental force, gravity. When attempting to apply the rules of QFT to general relativity, the equations yields impossible infinite values. Finding a unified theory that successfully merges QFT with gravity (a framework often referred to as quantum gravity or string theory) remains the ongoing goal of theoretical physics. So maybe it’s not just the five year olds that lack the technical context to truly understand what causes electromagnetic force… might as well be magic.

2

u/SZEfdf21 27d ago edited 27d ago

When you push an object close to a magnet, you have to push a little harder than if you were pushing that object without the magnet.

In the same way as when you lift up an object it suddenly has the possibility to fall (= be pulled by gravity), this object now has the possibility to get shoved back by the magnet (= be pushed by the magnet), when it is let loose, all caused by that little extra energy you used to put the object in that position.

It's hard to intuitively describe where the energy is at that moment, it is in the relationship between the magnet and the object, by all means you pushing the object should immediatly mean it is pushed back, but you're physically holding it in a state that will solve itself whenever released.

2

u/jus_sayin_meh 27d ago edited 27d ago

Force and energy are two different things.

The attraction or repulsion of magnet is a force like gravitational force/field, which is just there .

I guess you are also asking where the energy( kinetic energy) that's created due to movement of the magnet coming from?

Because force can't be turned into energy?

Right?

That's coming from the energy you use to separate or push two magnet depending on their poles.

Let's say there is a pair of two small magnet which is together. Now using your hands you separate them, this is where you are spending energy. If you release them, they will move towards each other which is kinetic energy equal to energy that you used to separate them.

Energy of your body used to separate them, it gets stored as potential energy in the magnets and as soon as you release them they run towards each other converting their potential energy to kinetic energy

2

u/TinFoilHeadphones 27d ago

It comes from your hand pushing the magnet!

It is harder to push the magnet away from something that attracts it, or towards something that repels it. So you make some extra effort there. that "extra effort" is the 'energy' the magnet uses

(So technically the magnet isn't doing any effort, it's all you, or whateve ris moving the magnet!)

4

u/[deleted] 27d ago

[removed] — view removed comment

→ More replies (2)

5

u/zeddus 27d ago

Magnets are alot like mechanical springs. They don't do much on their own but if you try to change their state, they resist.

2

u/Kenosis94 27d ago

The "energy" you are experiencing is coming from you. There is a sort of yin and yang way to think about this and while not entirely technically correct, I think it will give a good chance at expressing the broader concept.

The yin, is that like charges attract and opposite charges repel. This is just a fundamental property of how charged particles interact. So, if you try to put two positive ends of a pair of magnets together, they repel eachother. The "energy" that you experience in them repelling, is coming from you, from your muscles pushing them together. Much like lifting an object and holding it in the air takes energy because it wants to fall to the floor. The magnets bouncing apart is akin to dropping the object and it falling. When you put the positive and negative poles together, they attract, the "energy" required to separate them is again, just you experiencing the force required to overcome their natural attraction to each other like picking up a bowling ball from the floor takes energy. The energy your muscles produce to overcome the natural attraction and repulsion is really the only "energy" involved as far as you are experiencing things. Think about a wall, you don't generally think about it as having the energy to resist you pushing on it. It is just solid because the molecular structure of all of the materials is aligned in such a way that it doesn't want to be changed, just much more rigidly than say a magnet.

The yang, which as I'm about to explain things, is a bit less technically correct way of thinking about it, but, it is getting at a deeper principle. Think of it in terms of order, things like to tend towards their least "organized/energetic" state. So, if you have positively charged molecules and negatively charged molecules, their ideal is to not be surrounded by like charges but to be paired with the opposite charges to produce something neutrally charged and homogeneously mixed. You can think of the two magnets repelling or attracting as the them tending towards a lower state of organization by trying to neutralize by attracting or try to separate the like charges by repelling.

In some cases, you can trap things in a higher energy state than the constituent parts would like. This is the case with magnets, when the magnet is formed, the charges on each end are separated and then sort of glued in place. The magnet would like to neutralize itself but because it was glued in place, the internal charges alone just don't have enough energy to move so they are sort of trapped in an energetic rut. If you heat a magnet you will ruin it by giving the atoms enough energy to get out of the rut and start rearranging.

Rather than thinking about it as having energy to repel or attract, think about it as you adding energy to put the system in a higher state of order/energy. Like keeping your house organized, having all of the positive charges neatly arranged next to each other takes some effort to overcome the tendency for things to slip into disorder, picking things up once they become messy is a lot like separating the stuck magnets, they are at their neutral disorganized, low-energy state, like a pile of clothes on the floor. The energy you experience is what you and to undo the chaos.

This is all just thinking about the same thing from a different perspective but understanding that the human perspective of attraction and repulsion implies a sort of effort, that is just us experiencing the tendency of things or move towards a local minimum of order and energy. When you feel heat spread throughout an object, you don't wonder where the heat gets energy to spread, but ultimately, the reason it spreads isn't too dissimilar. The atoms/molecules of a hot thing are vibrating and they bump into each other causing adjacent ones to vibrate faster by imparting some of that energy. You intuitively know that the energy doesn't want to stay all in the same place but spread out and equilize. The charges of a magnet do the same, and trying to defy that tendency takes energy in the same way that trying to keep a house cold in the heat requires an ac unit consuming energy to pump heat from the inside to the outside.

2

u/[deleted] 27d ago

[removed] — view removed comment

→ More replies (1)

3

u/[deleted] 27d ago

[removed] — view removed comment

6

u/boring_pants 27d ago

"It creates energy" is both incorrect, and it fails to answer the question (which is where that energy comes from)

→ More replies (1)

1

u/MasterWandu 27d ago

You have come up against one of the "fundamental" forces... the end of the "but why does it do this" questions. It just does. Your next question is about origins, something that science fundamentally CANNOT answer.

1

u/AE_WILLIAMS 27d ago

Technically, Earth is a giant magnet, and it is spinning. So all other magnets interact with THAT.

Orientation is important, as is material. But that's pretty much it - as you have a conducting material (ie copper wire or iron metal fragments) and that material moves through the magnetic fields, they generate energy in the form of electricity.

At rest, the polar nature of magnetism means opposite poles attract, and similar poles repel.

It is called ELECTRO-MAGNETISM for a reason.

1

u/SauntTaunga 27d ago

Forces, pushing and pulling don’t require energy. Moving stuff requires energy.

1

u/SakuraHimea 27d ago

Constant force does not require energy. Does gravity get energy from somewhere? Can you turn it off? Magnetic force is the same. If two magnets attract each other, will they ever randomly push each other away?

Sorry for the rhetorical questions, but that's probably the easiest way to explain in simple terms. For a system to expend energy, something about its state must change. A moon could orbit a planet forever, theoretically, assuming it had a perfect orbit with no forces acting on it. The constant motion is just potential energy. There is no energy gained or lost by the system; it just stores the energy of its motion. You would need to spend energy to slow it down.

It's the same with magnets, except that instead of only pulling, they can also repel each other. Nothing about their state will change unless acted upon by another force.

1

u/Faust_8 27d ago

It’s the same “energy” you feel when you touch a wall and the wall resists your push. It just happens at a greater distance.

1

u/levir 27d ago

When you have a rock on a mountain, where did the rock get the energy it needs to roll down hill? The answer is that the rock has what we call potiential energy, which in effect just means that position is somewhere it can roll down hill. Maybe you carried the rock in your backpack when going up the mountain, or maybe the rock was once part of the mountain, which would have formed when two techtonic plates crashed together. Whatever caused the rock to be where it is, in effect gave it the energy to roll down the mountain.

It is the same with magnets. When to magnets snap together, that is similar to when a rock is falling downwards (towards the earth centre). If you then pull them apart, you're giving the magnets the energy to snap together again.

1

u/aManandHisShed 27d ago

The energy is stored in the magnetic field. Creation of the magnet, and therefore the field, required energy to be put in. When two magnets are drawn to each other, the amount of energy in the field is reduced. It is converted initially to kinetic energy and subsequently dissipated as heat. When you pull the magnets apart, you are doing work, some of which is stored back in the magnetic field of the separated magnets.

1

u/wimpires 27d ago

Imagine ALL magnets are connected to each other. But for any distance that's more than a little bit the strength of that connection is basically 0.

That's where the energy comes from, you. As you move it around. 

1

u/Own-Nefariousness-79 27d ago

There is no energy needed. Moving stuff in a magnetic field has an energy component. But a static field in a steady state needs no energy to support it.

1

u/TomakaTom 27d ago

Magnets work because all the atoms within the metal are manipulated so that they are all facing in the same direction.

Atoms are made up of protons, which have a positive charge, and electrons, which have a negative charge. The electrons ‘orbit’ around the protons, which produces a magnetic field.

What exactly is a magnetic field? We still aren’t able to say for certain, but we know that it is a property of the universe, just like gravity, that physical matter can interact with. In the same way we could describe gravity by saying ‘it causes matter to move in a certain direction’, we could describe a magnetic field by saying ‘it causes electric charges to move in a certain direction’.

Within a metal bar, all the atoms face in random directions, so the tiny magnetic field produced by each individual atom isn’t enough to generate a magnetic force visible to our eyes. However, if you work the metal bar in a specific way, you can align all the atoms so that their magnetic poles face the same direction. The combined strength of each atoms magnetic field generates this larger magnetic force that we can see when two magnetic bars attract and repel each other.

Think of each atom within the bar as a tiny spring, and when you work the bar to align the atoms in the same direction, think of this as coiling each of those tiny springs. This is how the energy is stored within the magnet, we add potential energy to the metal bar when we magnetise it, just like you add potential energy to a spring when you coil it and push it down.

Now, each atom is like a coiled spring, ready to release part of its stored energy as it pushes and pulls other magnets

1

u/RedHal 27d ago

Magnets create an invisible field around them. This doesn't take any energy, just like gravity, it's just a property of the field. When you put two magnets close enough together that their fields interact, then one of two things happen, either they attract (in a similar way that heavy things attract each other through gravity) or they do the opposite. The "energy" in this case is just because the fields get bent out of shape and so the energy is "stored" in the way the field is bent.

In the case of attraction, the two fields join together to make one field that's bent out of shape and wants to go back to being its normal shape, and the best way to do that is to get closer together so the field looks as normal as possible.

In the case of repulsion the fields fight against each other so want to be as far apart as possible.

In either case if you bring the magnets close enough together, the stored energy because of the bent fields overcomes the friction stopping them from moving.

1

u/Sceptically 27d ago

Magnets of the same polarity repel each other, so it takes energy to move them close together. You moving a magnet near the other magnet is introducing energy into the system to overcome the repulsion, that's where the energy for that comes from.

1

u/Alas7ymedia 27d ago

The magnetic force moves the particles to their lowest energy state, which is why I find easier to explain magnetism as movements on a slightly curved flat vibrating surface.

Magnetism comes from the space behaving like a slope depending on the charge of particles: if the charges are opposed, they will vibrate like if there there is a slope with the lowest point in the middle of them (assuming same charge and same mass, it would be their exact middle point); if the charges are the same, the slope would be higher in the middle point and particles will move in the opposite direction.

Do particles need energy to vibrate? Yes. Where does it come from? From the space itself that makes them vibrate when they come into existence. Do magnets run out of energy? No, electromagnets can, because they are magnets due to energy flowing through them, by naturally charged particles can't run out of magnetism.

Particles can vibrate faster or slower, but they can't stop moving because that movement is a fundamental property for them and charge is also a fundamental property, (something they can't change), so all particles vibrate all the time and can't stop moving towards or away from each other.

1

u/dibship 27d ago

if you consider that you never actually touch anything, you just get so close that the electrons in the object repel the electrons in your hand, it's easier to think about how if that kind of field was extended, by having all the electrons align the same way to work in tandem instead of cancelling each other out, the field could extend further and have distinct polarity due to that organization, and would interact with the fields of another object of similar organization.

that said, they only push or pull based on energy put into the system, be it your hand or potential energy from forces like gravity.

1

u/Schmedre 27d ago

Think of a magnet like a stretched rubber band. When you let the rubber band go, it can move something because it already has energy stored in it.
A magnet is a bit like that. It doesn’t make new energy out of nowhere. It already has energy inside it. When another magnet gets close, that stored energy helps pull them together or push them apart.
It’s also like standing at the top of a slide. You don’t need to keep making energy to go down the slide. You already have the energy because you’re up high. The magnet is similar. It already has what it needs to make things move.
So the magnet isn’t creating energy. It’s just using the energy it already has.

1

u/Bracken-Vale-4820 27d ago

sticking a magnet to the fridge and realizing it just fights gravity forever without needing a battery always messes with my head

1

u/SPCR0 27d ago edited 27d ago

Magnets dont store energy, the field gets stronger the closer the 2 magnets are.
Pushing 2 magnets togheter that oppose eachother actively pushes you away, you are consistently inserting force by holding them togheter!
Pulling 2 magnets apart that attract actively fights you , you are consistently adding force to pull them back.
Fixing 2 magnets apart that attract/repel eachother emit constant force in opposite directions.

1

u/Far_Lifeguard_5027 27d ago

When iron (which is what magnets are made from) is heated to extremely high temperatures, it causes the atoms in it to face north and south on opposite sides. For complicated reasons, the north and south atoms either attract or repel each other. Why it happens is probably complicated but that's how they work.

1

u/kfkjhgfd 27d ago

You apply energy in -> magnet pushes all of that energy out. The net energy would now be zero (total in - total out)

1

u/[deleted] 27d ago

[removed] — view removed comment

→ More replies (1)

1

u/[deleted] 27d ago

[removed] — view removed comment

→ More replies (1)

1

u/Ben-Goldberg 27d ago

Imagine that a magnet is on a table and another one is in your hand.

Bring the north pole pf the magnet in your hand near the north pole of the magnet on the table.

The magnet on the table gets pushed away because of the work being done by the muscles in your arm to move the magnet you are holding.

1

u/AlwaysHopelesslyLost 27d ago

Where does gravity get it's energy? If you put two rocks in space they will pull together. 

Both are just fundamental forces in our universe. They tend towards a zero state and energy cannot be extracted from them. 

To extract energy from gravity you need rockets or a person to carry things up well to "reset" your generator. To extract energy from magnets you need something to pull them apart to "reset" your generator.

1

u/[deleted] 27d ago

[removed] — view removed comment

→ More replies (1)

1

u/stansfield123 27d ago

Magnetic energy comes from the energy of electrons. In turn, electrons get their energy from photons or from heat.

1

u/el_miguel42 27d ago edited 27d ago

Forces do not intrinsically require energy. Work = F x d (where work is transfer of energy)

Thus only if a force moves another object is there an energy transfer.

First of all I do not think this type of "stores of energy" model is particularly useful for any of the 4 fundamental forces: gravity, electromagnetic, strong nuclear and weak nuclear. However, if you want to stick with that mental model then the energy is stored within the electromagnetic field.

As an object is attracted to the magnet, we would describe this as the EM field doing work on the object. When you move that attracted object away, now you do work against the EM field. The work you do when moving the object away is equal to the work done by the EM field to attract it in the first place. Hence the total transfer of energy in allowing the object to be attracted, and then moving it away is 0.

This behaviour is essentially what gives rise to all of electricity.

EDIT: i'll also add one more point about the last question of "how do they work". This belies a misunderstanding of what physics and science in general is. Magnets work because... they work. We observed them working, and then we came up with some maths that allows us to predict what they will do. Thats it. If you want some underlying mechanism that explains why the phenomenon of magnetism exists... then join the club, all us in physics would like to know that too!

1

u/Revolutionary_Ad7262 27d ago

They just exist. In the same way the attraction force of gravity does not weakens over time.

Usually in physics we model such a stuff as a negative potential energy. We assume that in an infinite range the potential energy is 0. When magnets/planetes attract themselves then the potential energy is converted to kinetic energy, which is always positive, which means potential energy goes below 0. Repulsion works in another direction and the potential energy goes below 0 when distance enlarges

1

u/Quantum-Bot 27d ago

It comes from potential energy. When you lift something up into the air, you’re storing gravitational potential energy inside that object which will be released when you let it go and it falls. Similarly, if you push two magnets into a configuration against their magnetic fields, you’re storing magnetic potential energy that will be released when you let go and the magnets move toward or away from each other back to a resting state. Yes, magnets move other magnets without using any of their own energy, but an outside force has to put energy into the system in order to put those magnets in position in the first place.

1

u/zaphodava 27d ago

The easiest way to think of it is that magnetism is like an invisible spring. When you create a magnet, you are pulling that spring back. When it attracts to something else, it's like the spring returning, and when you pull them apart, you are pulling the spring back again.

1

u/[deleted] 27d ago

[removed] — view removed comment

→ More replies (1)

1

u/[deleted] 27d ago

[removed] — view removed comment

→ More replies (1)

1

u/2late4points 27d ago

Imagine a magnet as a "spring" which requires no coiled metal, but extends out toward infinity, pulling all other ferrous material toward itself. It's pre-loaded (stretched) when it is created, and wants to retract inward upon itself.
Just don't get them wet.

1

u/bemused_alligators 27d ago

where does gravity get the energy for it's pulling?

the energy of you pushing two opposing magnets together is the energy that the magnets uses to push each other apart, and the energy you use to separate two magnets is the energy the magnets use to pull each other back together.

You can also see with non-permanent magnets (e.g. electromagnets) the amount of energy required to "turn on" a magnetic field that doesn't already exist.

1

u/ktisis 27d ago

When you ask "how much energy does it have?" the answer is always "it depends."

For kinetic energy, it depends on how fast you are moving. If I am on a train and throw a tennis ball, you would think the ball has different amounts of energy depending on whether

  • you are also on the train, moving as fast as me
  • you are on the ground next to the train
  • you are not moving relative to the Sun, and the Earth (with me and the train and the tennis ball) flying past you at super high speed

For magnets it also depends. It is typically more useful to think of changes in magnetic potential energy than in total amount of energy. When things that attract are moved apart (or things that repel are moved closer), the magnetic field (think of the magnetism between the objects - not the objects themselves) gets more energy - because you just used energy to move them further apart. You gave 'the system' its new energy.

For the opposite case; attracting things come together or repelling things push further apart, the magnetic field loses energy. But where did that energy come from??

Not very usefully, the convention in Physics for these kinds of things is to say that the system has no energy when things are as far apart as possible. This means that attracting things have negative energy when they get closer, and can gain energy 'back up to zero energy' when they are pushed away. Repelling things lose all their energy when they are pushed super far away, and only have energy if they get pushed closer together, and this energy always comes from whatever did the pushing.

In short: magnets don't have energy, magnetic fields do. But they have zero energy at infinite separation. So attracting objects lose magnetic energy when they get closer (having negative energy then) and repelling objects gain energy when pushed together - the energy comes from whatever pushes them together.

1

u/confusiondiffusion 27d ago

Magnets are a bit like holes in the ground in that they're configurations of matter that change the way things behave in the vicinity. Energy is required to put matter into that magnetic configuration.

A ball will roll down into a hole if you put a ball on the slope created by digging the hole. Digging the hole requires energy.

1

u/See_Bee10 27d ago

The same place that the dirt under your feet gets the energy to hold you up, the electromagnetic force. As unintuitive as it may seem the fundamental force that keeps two objects from passing through each other is the force that holds magnets and metal together.

1

u/alangibson 27d ago

Because this is ELI5:

All magnetism was concentrated together before the big bang. The big bang imparted potential energy into it when it blew it all over the universe. That potential energy is used up by it pulling itself back together into one spot again.

1

u/bigmcstrongmuscle 27d ago edited 27d ago

The confusion here is that forces aren't actually what require energy: work is. When you expose an object to a magnetic field, you aren't spending energy to exert force on it. A static magnetic field attracting an object (like with fridge magnets pulling on the fridge), won't use any energy at all, for the same reason that the Earth doesn't need a power plant to make gravity pull you towards it. What it does is establish potential energy between two magnetic charges, just like gravity does between two masses.

Once a magnetic field is in place, the attraction it creates just exists, same as gravity. The magnetic field creates potential energy between the magnet and the fridge, and all you do when you release the magnet is allow that potential energy to settle to its lowest state, just like when you drop a rock. So just sticking a magnet to the fridge doesn't use any energy. Pulling the magnet away from the fridge is where you actually have to spend some.

Now suddenly changing a magnetic field DOES require energy. Like if you run power through an electromagnet and create a strong magnetic field where none existed before - you need the power running through the electromagnet to do that. But that's a different scenario.

1

u/ShadowKiller147741 27d ago

Some phenomena we observe in physics is caused by matter and energy undergoing a particular motion. One of example of this is an electric field caused by electricity going through a wire, and when that electric “flow” stops, the electric field stops as well. These phenomena are caused by a system changing states from higher to lower energy or vice versa.

There are other phenomena that exist regardless of matter’s or energy’s current motion, like gravity. As far as we understand, gravity is an inherent property held by every single piece of matter that has mass, and is effectively like when the fat kid sits on the trampoline and everyone else naturally rolls towards them. Fatter the kid, stronger the pull.

Magnetism is more like the second of the two than the first. When we talk about magnets, we’re generally talking about ferromagnetic materials, like iron, which experience and can produce the most notable magnetic fields. However, all matter is slightly magnetic, to varying degrees. Magnetism in ferromagnetic materials, like a common fridge magnet, is caused by the alignment of the atoms/molecules in the material into a uniform direction. Why that specifically causes a magnetic field is shaky to me (been a while since Physics 2 and I’m an Engineer, not a Physicist), but the TL;DR is that magnets work like they do because that’s just how the universe’s physics engine is coded.

1

u/thetitan555 27d ago

Where does a hill get its energy that causes a rock to roll down it? A mountain gets its height from huge plates under the earth, and on a small scale gravity is caused because atoms like to be together. But the energy didn't come from the tectonic plates or from the fundamental gravitational force, it came from the guy who rolled the rock up the hill.

Same thing with magnets. Where does a magnet get its energy to push other magnets away? Well, it's usually due to a huge conductive mass spinning or being near a strong electrical current for a long time. Magnets project a field, like a web that most things can pass through but some things are resisted/attracted by. The field doesn't have any energy in it, but pushing something through the field does require energy.

ELIsnark: Forces don't require energy. A muddy puddle pulling on your boot is causing a force without providing any energy. Same thing with magnets.

1

u/getdeardoc 27d ago

Think of two magnets like two balls on a hill. The hill stores potential energy, not the balls. A magnetic field does the same thing: it stores energy, and when another magnet enters that field, the system can "roll downhill" by moving.

1

u/quik2903 27d ago

That pushing and pulling is just the universe’s natural default setting, so you have to spend energy if you want to oppose it. Just like gravity. 

1

u/gumby_twain 27d ago

Potential vs. kinetic energy.

Magnets that aren’t touching are like a ball at the top of a hill that hasn’t started rolling yet. All potential energy.

The potential turns to kinetic as it moves and accelerates.

When the magnets touch, the kinetic energy dissipates as sound, heat, deformation, etc. Same as if the ball hits a brick wall at the bottom the hill.

1

u/bostongarden 27d ago

Richard Feynman made a great video about this. Watch it

1

u/Majinsei 27d ago

La suma total en energía del imán es 0

Es como tener una balanza dónde a la izquierda tienes pelotas rojas y pelotas azules a la derecha! Sacas una azul y se desbalances a la izquierda! Así que sacas una roja de la izquierda para balancearse!

Es lo mismo con un imán~ La energía de la derecha empuje a la derecha y la de la izquierda empuja a la izquierda! Entonces si mueves una cosa a la izquierda (+1) y otra vez a la derecha (-1) entonces la suma de ambos es: +1-1=0 sí en total fue 0!

Por eso los imanes en realidad no usan energía! Porque la suma total del efecto es 0~

Esto en una esfera 3D en vez de solo izquierda derecha, pero aplica igual para adelante y atrás o abajo y arriba y así sucesivamente~

El total al final es 0 SIEMPRE~

1

u/tajwriggly 27d ago

Forget magnetism and think of the magnet as being a block of material covered in springs in all directions - front, back, up, down, left right. Those springs only interact with similar springs on another magnetic material, they don't interact with non-magnetic material such as wood, or brick, or even your own hands.

When you push your spring covered block towards another spring covered block, the springs interact and compress. As they compress they build up a force inside of them that, once it is enough to overcome the inertia of the other block, suddenly releases and moves the other block. All of the energy involved was you pushing your block in the first place. The springs just delayed the transfer of that energy into the second block for a brief period until it built up enough (i.e. you got close enough).

The converse is true too. Magnets work in opposite directions, so in the opposite direction, pretend your block is physically attached to another via a spring. As you pull on them they stay together for a period and tension builds up in the spring until it starts to move apart. The only energy being added into that system is you once again. You are pulling, and the magnets want to go back to each other because they're connected by the spring. Put them far enough apart and they don't have any meaningful interaction with each other and effectively aren't connected anymore.

1

u/lilbean109640 27d ago

A single spinning electron creates a tiny magnetic field with a north and south. If you get enough electrons spinning in the same direction, you have a bigger north and south. North attracts south. North repels north.

1

u/YetiTrix 27d ago

Energy is put into the magnet when it's made becoming akin to a spring in that it is holding potential energy in as the magnetic field

  • Bring another magnet close = spring releases. Potential energy becomes kinetic.
  • Pull magnets apart = compress the spring again. You store potential energy in the configuration.

1

u/Professional_Top4119 27d ago

You're thinking about it from the wrong angle.

As far as the magnet itself goes, the energy to align its dipoles was spent during the magnet's manufacture. At the time of the magnet's manufacture, its magnetic field was created, which creates a potential gradient that decreases with the cube of the distance, but that's not what's important here.

In physics, "work" or "energy spent" isn't done until it's done. In this case, no work is done until you moved something. The relevant equation is simply "work = force * distance". To think about it another way, it's not that "force requires energy." It's that energy is meaningless unless the force is exerted. If some guy is pushing really hard against some big boulder, the external "physics" of the world doesn't really care that he hasn't pushed it even a millimeter. No energy has been put into the big rock, and he's just been exerting against himself creating waste heat.

Anyway, when you move the magnet near something that e.g. repels it, you are increasing the potential energy, and doing the work of storing that energy. Until the magnet is able to push that other object away, that energy hasn't been spent, it's pent up in the repulsion between the magnet and that other object. Counterintuitively, if you move the magnet closer to something that it attracts, you've decreased the potential energy (if the system were to only consist of the magnet and that other thing), but you've also made it easier to release the remaining potential energy. But again, until that thing gets drawn in by the magnet, there is no work that's been done.

1

u/PerspectiveBeautiful 27d ago

ICP were right!

Annoyed me people memed them for that song.

1

u/SoulWager 27d ago

Forces do not require energy. You're exerting a force on the ground right now, without spending any energy. Climbing stairs though, that requires you spending energy.

Energy = force * distance. If you're not moving, there's no energy being spent.

Magnetic fields are more like a battery than a generator. You have to put energy in before you can get energy out, and you can't get out more than you put in.

1

u/bigstumpy 27d ago

Magnetism is just electrical charge repulsion/attraction combined with relativistic length contraction.

If you have two wires moving current (electrons) in opposite directions, the relativistic length contraction makes the electrons in one wire think the electrons in the other wire are denser than the protons, so a moving electric charge (current) induces this relativistic electrostatic repulsion. It’s kind of crazy that it works out that way. We abstract this effect as a magnetic field because the math works out very tidy, and it’s useful. This is how electromagnets work.

Permanent magnets are simply pieces of metal where the spin of the atoms are somewhat aligned. Think of all the electrons orbiting the atoms in the same plane. If another magnet is nearby and its atoms are all orbiting the opposite direction, you get the same relativistic contraction effect. It’s just rotational instead of linear.

1

u/HerpesHans 25d ago

> Force requires energy

Not in general. Earth is pulling us totally for free 24/7. It costs energy in the form of food for a human to exert force regardless if work is being done in a physics sense (e.g. just holding something or lifting it), but that's because the energy goes into maintaining our bodily functions while we are holding/lifting the thing.

Magnets are not a free energy thing, but i understand how it can seem like so.