Thread: Monopole problem of Big Bang

So, you got Monopoles generated in the Big Bang Right? And noone can seem to find them.

Flight of fancy time: What if some of the mono poles stayed near the Big Bang Point and Others joined in the expanding cloud and the 2 sets are repeling each other so what we THINK is dark energy is simply the monopoles pushing on one another.

Originally Posted by Lynn Lively

So, you got Monopoles generated in the Big Bang Right? And noone can seem to find them.

Flight of fancy time: What if some of the mono poles stayed near the Big Bang Point and Others joined in the expanding cloud and the 2 sets are repeling each other so what we THINK is dark energy is simply the monopoles pushing on one another.

Magnetic Monopoles may be rare. But the more rare they are, the more massive they must be.
So going by Dirac's equations they may be as rare as 1/1,000 (1 monopole for every 1,000 protons), that means there would be maybe a hundred or so possibly available to be detected in the inner solar system.
And this guy may have (or may not have) detected one, once.

But at that rarity, They wouldn't be spotted very often. Keep in mind just how vast (As if our minds were capable of it) space is.
Then again, there may be only one monopole.

But at that distribution of rarity, they cannot account for the apparent force of Dark Energy or the expansion of the Universe.

Interestingly, they may be a part of what makes up Dark Matter (though I have no idea how solid that idea may be.) If so, that also may shed some light on why we have not detected any.

Originally Posted by Lynn Lively

So, you got Monopoles generated in the Big Bang Right? And noone can seem to find them.

Flight of fancy time: What if some of the mono poles stayed near the Big Bang Point and Others joined in the expanding cloud and the 2 sets are repeling each other so what we THINK is dark energy is simply the monopoles pushing on one another.

Can't comment on the monopole issue directly, but as I understand it, there is no particular place where the Big Bang occurred; it filled the entire universe, which was quite small at the time.

I'm guessing that I am missing something about just what a monopole is. Wouldn't a free standing proton or electron be considered a monopole?

Originally Posted by Pyraxus

I'm guessing that I am missing something about just what a monopole is. Wouldn't a free standing proton or electron be considered a monopole?

Nope, although a freestanding electron or proton would have a single electric charge, not a single magnetic charge.

Originally Posted by Pyraxus

I'm guessing that I am missing something about just what a monopole is. Wouldn't a free standing proton or electron be considered a monopole?

In this context, a monopole is a magnetic monopole. A magnetic monopole is an isolated magnetic charge in much the same way as a proton is an isolated positive electric charge and an electron is an isolated negative electric charge. Quarks are also have isolated charge as do ions, dust particles, and such like. Isolated magnetic charges would be "north" poles without an accompanying "south" pole or vice versa. Dirac deduced that magnetic monopoles necessitate quantized electric charges. Indeed, electric charge is quantized. However, quantized electric charge does not require the existence of monopoles.

Indeed, monopoles have never been shown to exist. Neither classical electrodynamics nor quantum electrodynamics require the existence of monopoles. I am aware of no problem in physics that monopoles will solve. The search for magnetic monopoles is driven by the naïve search for symmetry in Maxwell's equations. It is a trivial matter to add monopole charge density and magnetic current density to formulate a consistent version of Maxwell's equations plus the Lorentz force on magnetic monopoles and current. However, the relativistic formulation of the Maxwell's equations is in terms of tensor algebra and calculus.

This is where monopole formulations get hairy. An electric monopole or charge is known as a "scalar" particle. The mirror image of a scalar particle has the same sign as the original. A magnetic monopole must be a "pseudoscalar" particle. The mirror image of a monopole must have the opposite sign of the original. This means that the mirror image of a "north" monopole must be a "south" monopole and vise versa.

This creates a contradiction. My understanding of monopoles is that in their simplest form, they are symmetric. However, it is impossible for a magnetic monopole to be symmetric. This would appear to preclude the possibility of magnetic monopoles.

These are not exactly strong sources and are certainly not peer reviewed...

But some pop sciencebabble articles here for reading:

Magnetic Monopoles Detected In A Real Magnet For The First Time

Newly Discovered Magnetic Monopole Particles Flow Like Electric Currents | Popular Science

Magnetic monopoles spotted in spin ices - physicsworld.com

"Created in lab" is different from Primordial- but even so...

O.K., I'm trying to grasp it here so help me out guys. I'm going to create a sort of analogy from my current, albeit uncertain, understanding on the subject. If the concept I present is wrong, please tell me where the error lies in my understanding.

The Earth itself has a magnetic field, North and South poles. Like any magnet North can be thought of as positive, South as negative. Now I look at various diagrams of this effect and think to myself that it is not two different/opposing forces, rather two sides of the same overall quality. I look at the waves of magnetic force sort of like this. Take a long strip of paper or ribbon. I took a single sheet of 8 1/2 X 11, folded it longways in half, then in half again, cut the strips and taped them together to make one long strip. On one side of the strip I put plus marks, on the other side I put minus signs. Next I take one end, loop it without twisting it and bring it back to the center of the strip. I take the other end, loop it inversely to the center and end up with the infinity symbol. Now I can't fuse the two ends together at the center so I simply tape them into place and "pretend" that it is a closed system which crosses at the central intersection point.

So I look at this simplistic representation of magnetic force lines and see that one loop of the infinity symbol is positive outward/negative inward (north) and the other is negative outward/postive inward (south). It is the same strip or force wave, only inversed on opposite sides of the intersect. Further, I was thinking how the earth has many "layers" of structure within it, Core, Mantle, Crust, etc. and thought perhaps that these varying sized magnetic force lines might correlate to those different layers of mass, density, etc. Rotation too would seem to be a consideration somehow and I think of magnetic coils with electricity running through the coils to create a magnetic field.

It has something to do with perpetuating motion I think. I mean, so many of the forms of motion we see somehow include this basic pattern of the infinity symbol. Some are very easy to see, such as in the beating wings of a bumblebee or hummingbird. I also think of when I am out kayaking and move the two paddled single oar in that infinity pattern to create motion. An airplane propellor too can be seen to show a basic infinity pattern in it's design. Even when people walk, moving their legs and swinging their arms the pattern is there, although not as obvious.

So I wonder in the case of a monopole, would it be that somehow that strip, instead of curving and crossing over at an intersect point, curls into a circle, a closed single loop or standing wave pattern to create said monopole with either a positive or negative magnetic force all facing outward or inward? And what if we assigned different qualities to each side of the strip? Perhaps the 'positive' side relates and forms some basis for substantiability/mass/cohesion, attraction, affected more strongly by time factors and location in matter states. The negative side might lend itself more to the inverse of those properties such as emptiness/void, repulsion/entropy, non-temporal and nonlocal aspects. Sort of like two sides of a mirror.

What would happen if this force or some combination of several waves of these forces closed into a non-intersect loop and created a closed, three dimensional sphere with the positive side facing inward? Would we get a proton? And if it went the other way and closed with the negative aspect inward, an electron? But then how would a neutron be formed, and how would the wave properties of particles be explained in this line of thought? Well, I don't really know and that's why I'm asking if this makes any sort of sense. You know, I look at images of atom smashing experiments and see the spiral patterns of many of the particles they produce and wonder if this spiral pattern is feasible in this sense of those particles decaying (losing energy), trying to re-establish some stability by trying to reclose the loop.

As an afterthought, could it be that the smallest, uncombined lengths of these hypothetical 'ribbons' are akin to the strings of string theory? Seems to me they could twist or loop in several ways just as in string theory, even to combine and create the proposed calabi yau manifold, or the very fabric of spacetime itself.

Well, I hope that isn't too absurd or confusing. Much of the above are just simple musings and should be taken as such, not as any statement of definitiveness. And please let me know where any errors lie in these musings as I am sure there are some there.

You totally lost me at the cut up paper strips into infinity symbols and calling them positive or negative... I mean, I think of electricity as positive and negative and it kinda threw me off...

Plus, It's late and I'm still working over here so I'm just going to throw some links and bow out...

Magnetism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Magnetic field of the Moon - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Originally Posted by Pyraxus

...

The Earth itself has a magnetic field, North and South poles. ...

OK. The Earth is a magnetic dipole. It has two inseparable magnet poles--a North pole [located beneath the continent of Antarctica] and a South pole [located beneath the Arctic Ocean.] In this regard, the Earth behaves much like every bar magnet on the planet. There are two known ways to generate magnetic dipoles. A magnetic dipole be created by passing an electric current through a coil of wire. In SI units, the strength of a dipole is given by where is the dipole strength, number of loops in the coil, is the current in the wire, and is the area of each loop.

A spinning charged body produces an electric current over a finite area. Therefore, a spinning charged body has a magnetic dipole moment.

Electrons have magnetic moments as an artifact of Special Relativity. The Dirac Equation incorporates the Pauli spin matrices to linearize the relativistic wave equation. Pauli spin is called "intrinsic spin." It is not the kind of spin such as with a globe. "Intrinsic spin" is part of the relativistic hyperspace that affects fermions. However, it produces a magnetic moment for each electron.

Unpaired electrons in the outer shell generate the magnetic moments of atoms that possess permanent magnetic moments. [Paired electrons have zero (0) magnetic moments.] This is how the Earth's dipole magnetic moment is produced. The Earth has an iron core. Iron has unpaired electrons in its outer shell.

A magnetic monopole is an entirely different animal. It is either a single isolated magnetic north pole or a single isolated magnetic south pole. Unlike the poles of a bar magnet, monopoles are completely decoupled. Moving monopoles generate electric fields in much the same way that moving electric charges generate magnetic fields.

In my signature are the four Maxwell equations. They give a complete description of classical electromagnetism. Maxwell's equations assume no magnetic monopoles. However, no known physical phenomenon is unaccounted for by the absence of monopoles from Maxwell's equations. In the absence of monopoles, the magnetic field is a the relativistic manifestation of the electric field. Monopoles will bring symmetry and parity to electric and magnetic phenomenon. However, these are aesthetic considerations rather than scientific ones.