4 ms·
"""this is the first time we’ve actually seen a __two-dimensional__ monopole in a naturally occurring magnet ... These monopoles are a collective state of many
by andy99 3y ago
"""this is the first time we’ve actually seen a __two-dimensional__ monopole in a naturally occurring magnet ...
These monopoles are a collective state of many spins that twirl around a singularity rather than a single fixed particle, so they emerge through many-body interactions. The result is a tiny, localised stable particle with diverging magnetic field coming out of it,"""
So do I take it that there is some kind of superposition of spins that locally, possibly just in a 2D cross section, appears to have a magnetic field with non-zero divergence? Is \nabla\cdot\vec{B} actually violated somewhere? The language seems pretty cagey.
Incidentally, I belive Dirac posited that they existence of magnetic monopoles would explain the quantization of charge.
- Anon84 3y agoYes, it’s a superposition of spins such that the resulting effect is the non-zero divergence
- andy99 3y agoFrom the other thread where this was discussed: In the "Emergent Magnetic Charge" section, second paragraph: "Finally, we emphasize that the observation of emergent monopoles is fully consistent with the modelling of AFM topological textures in Fig. 2 and does not violate Maxwell’s equation as they are, in fact, sinks and sources of the H^ field." So this is a collective effect of a bunch of magnetic dipoles, and they go on to describe how div B is indeed zero in the material. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38549099 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38549099 So this is not a Maxwell's Equations violation or anything, it's just some 'trick' to make a field that somehow locally looks divergent.
- kuchenbecker 3y ago(not a physicist) Dirac proposed a sufficiently long and narrow solenoid would behave as if each end was a magnetic monopole. If the math says it works, then it should be possible in nature. Please correct my understanding if you know better and I'm wrong.