sci.physics.electromag

"FrediFizzx" wrote in message
news:642osbF28tj9cU1@mid.individual.net...
> "Bill Miller" wrote in message
> news:aJVCj.24673$cQ1.6014@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
>> The title of the post pretty much says it all.
>>
>> The participants of this list seem to have fairly clear agreement that
>> the primary *cause* of magnetic fields is the motion of charges.
>>
>> With a few hold-outs, most folks seem to (finally) understand that an E
>> field does not *cause* an H field. (Those that disagree: p-l-e-a-s-e read
>> Jefimenko's "Causality" before jumping in to dispute this statement.)
>>
>> OK. So far, so good.
>>
>> A permanent magnet has associated with it a magnetic field whose
>> characteristics seem to be indistinguishable from those of a magnetic
>> field that is caused by the motion of charges.
>>
>> Where the H--- does the H come from? How do we know?
>
> Well, I think we pretty much know that it comes from atomic alignment of
> their electron's orbital angular momentum. So there is "local" motion of
> charges all coordinated.
IOW, the atomic magnetic moments point in
> the same direction and all add up. I don't think many physicists would
> disagree with that.
>
> Fred
OK

That answers the first part. Kinda

You said that the effect is local.

How local is local? Atoms? Molecules? Magnetic domains? Blobs?

How do we know that the theory that you are postulating is correct? IOW what
measurements have been done to validate the statement you have made?

Bill