Question about thermodynamics???

The zeroth law states that any 2 or more objects that come in contact must exchange energy to create a thermo equilibrium.  Would 2 magnets of the same polarity in a vacuum still abide by this law?  Can someone give me a formula to explain it?  Can magnetic fields even make heat by themselves or rather is there any friction between the two??  Thanks much!

sort by: active | newest | oldest
MOVING magnetic fields can cause an energy exchange, not static ones.
shawneegeek (author)  steveastrouk6 years ago
so even though the polar fields are not a physical object, but more like potential energy, they are still capable of creating entropy? Sorry, I need a deep understanding of this, it was one of those idead that kept me up until 0100 this morning
You said it, they are "potential energy", like a rock on a cliff. Does the rock warm up because it is sitting there ?
shawneegeek (author)  steveastrouk6 years ago
But there is a continum of potential energy when to alike poles interact... I understand the law stated that energy can neither be created nor destroyed, so why soes the energy from the magnets seem infinant?? It seems that even entropy would not be able to drain the energy that is formed in the two interacting fields... especially in a vacuum.

More or less im trying to understand why the earth seems to be a perpetual motion machine as it sits in its space and time, but why here on the surface we are bound by thermodynamics.
The Earth is not a "perpetual motion machine", seen on a geological scale. The earth IS slowing down.

shawneegeek (author)  steveastrouk6 years ago
Hmmm, I did not know that... I guess im going to have to look a little more into this... Thanks for all your help.
You are mixing far too many different concepts, and throwing out lots of words which you don't seem to understand. What exactly are you trying to ask?
+1 yes, work relies on some motion or exchange.
seandogue6 years ago
If one magnet is initially at temperature T2 and the other at T1, such that T1 and T2 are not equal, and sufficient force is applied to overcome the magnetic repulsion between the two so they come into physical contact?

Yes, of course. Otherwise, the best one can hope for is a convective transfer (which is also governed by the laws of thermodynamics), but that would require air, so forget that one.

Potentially, there would still be some transfer via photonic transfer, albeit quite small.

As for transfer via magnetic interaction, if the two magnets were place infinitesimally close to each other without touching and were of very high and disparate strength, yes, some energy would be transferred. At least that's my understanding.

But not what I believe you're getting at.

The flaw, as I see it, comes from your interpretation of "objects that come in contact "

Objects are physical, ie material, as opposed to light or magnetic flux, which are not. (except in that quasi photonic/wave state of light. In any case (Kelsey?) magnetic flux has no physical form of any sort. At least I don't recall learning about magnetotrons (a spontaneously manufactured term that's supposed to analogize photons for light) anywhere along the line of my degree, but I'm not current, so I'll defer if there are.
shawneegeek (author)  seandogue6 years ago
I do understand in your formula the effect that microscopic has on the macroscopic. What im not understanding is; if two alike and static magnetic poles are potential energy, why their resistance is not dissipated by being transformed in to some other type of energy.

You can place 2 magnets on a wooden dowel, and they will repel each other for... well longer then i care to experiment with. Even adding a vibration, they will continue to repel with seemingly the exact same force. On the macroscopic level they appear to have all the energy in the world, but on a microscopic level is there a degradation of energy???
I'm not sure but I would expect there to be some degradation over time, via the weight bearing down on the static magnet by the floater. If so, then energy is being dissipated.

Whether that's to heat or to a change in the atomic alignment I can't say, although if the magnetic field is dissipated, then I'd think it was due to an alteration in the lattice, since (aside from raw material properties) it's the repetition in alignment that results in the magnet being magnetic, right? So I'd think it would be randomization of the alignment.
shawneegeek (author)  seandogue6 years ago
Thanks for your input, friend... its been very helpful.