Talk:Magnetization

message: The comment on nanomagnetism contains neither information on what nanomagnetism is nor the significance of the findings. It seems to be crude commercial from University of the Basque Country. Could somebody either add information or delete it? --Frozenport (talk) 14:40, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Yea, I deleted it. I'm sure it's fine science, but not so important that it's on par with paramagnetism, etc. Scientific press releases are notorious for exaggerating importance, and (in a brief search) I couldn't find any third-party coverage of the topic, let alone large amounts of it. --Steve (talk) 15:27, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  nanomagnetism 

message: Magnetization of Radio waves is the process by which some magnets while expose to radio waves can convert those waves into electrical energy.
The process can best be understood by imagining to magnets set side by side and touching opposite poles, but fer enough so that radio waves can enter and bounce back and fort through their magnetic fields. The polarized fields of the poles will keep the waves bouncing back and forth and eventually these will accelerate until finally becoming statically charge. This process might be most commonly know as electromagnetism and was first observed by the scientist James Clerk Maxwell.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.87.73.114 (talk) 05:44, 6 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Magnetization of Radio waves 

message: I think the specific magnetic moment should be added.
I am having trouble sorting out the connections between M in the formula \mathbf{B} = \mu_0(\mathbf{H + M}) given and the Magnetization which is reported in Am^2/kg.
The magnetic field H is measured in A/m. Then, of course M should also be in A/m so that when multiplying the sum with mu0 (in T*m/A) the magnetic flux B is in Tesla.
However, I do not find how to get from the specific magnetization to M in A/m.
The specific magnetization is given in Gauss cm^3/g which is equal to 1*10^-7 Wb*m/kg.
So how does one use this specific magnetic moment of a material to compute the magnetization M and thus B?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 134.94.244.46 (talk) 11:27, 6 December 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Some people report the magnetization in Am^2/kg, but many report it in A/m, consistent with the formula. Just multiply the former by the density of the material to get the latter. RockMagnetist (talk) 17:14, 6 December 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Indeed. The Am^2/kg unit is the equivalent of older (but still widely used) emu/g. However, magnetisation is the total magnetic moment related to volume, NOT mass. Different substances have different mass per unitary volume, so conversion of Am^2/kg (per mass) to A/m (per volume) must include specific mass, i.e. density. --JPFen (talk) 14:08, 6 August 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Specific magnetic moment 

message: Are you sure that effect described here in sections "Demagnetization" and "Applications of Demagnetization" is not in fact Degaussing?
Demagnetization is often used for lowering of magnetic field inside open samples due to the presence of Demagnetizing field.
These two effects should not be confused. 147.231.26.31 (talk) 15:25, 19 May 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually, the way these terms are generally used, degaussing is a type of demagnetization that involves applying a steady field. There are other demagnetizing methods, for example applying an alternating magnetic field or heating the material, that are not usually called degaussing. Demagnetizing field is something else entirely - the field due to the magnetization in a material. It does tend to reduce the magnetization, but an external field must be applied to completely demagnetize it. RockMagnetist (talk) 15:51, 19 May 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: But look at Degaussing#Monitors (and the next section about storage media as well) - applying an AC magnetic field with decreasing amplitude is called degaussing there, contrary to your explanation. 147.231.26.31 (talk) 13:54, 20 May 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: I stand corrected. In my field, we use "demagnetization" for all of the above methods, and I can easily provide several sources to support that claim. We rarely use the term "degaussing", so my opinion was based on a quick web search. Maybe it is also used for thermal demagnetization. However, at most degaussing is a synonym for demagnetization. RockMagnetist (talk) 14:46, 20 May 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Demagnetization vs. Degaussing 

message: Define Magnetisation 27.34.47.188 (talk) 14:25, 19 May 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Physics