Why can't we photograph magnetic lines of force emitted by planetary and beyond objects (like we can for the Sun)?

[DenniSys]

TL;DR Summary

The question could involve many sciences. Why can't we photograph magnetic lines of force emitted by planetary and beyond objects, like the Sun.

First astrophotography was black and white. So then we colored it in. Then the light got filtered so people can see the universe better. When I ask why are there no photographs of magnetic field lines in space, or anywhere; I read that it's because our eyes cannot see them, but we can't see infrared or ultraviolet either, but the scopes can. Why are there no photographs of magnetic field lines? Those photographs would answer a lot of questions. ChatGPT said they are only abstract representations, and are not physical entities. To me, if I can see that representation, then they must be physical entities. What can be seen are the patterns in the two slit experiment, so why not magnetic field lines?

 

[anuttarasammyak]

Electric field lines and magnetic field lines are not things which emit or reflect light which could come into our eyes. EM field is not a thing but momentum energy entity. For an example charged condenser contains energy in space between the plates with density E^2.

 

[Vanadium 50]

Why can't we photograph lines of latitude and longitude?

 

[phyzguy]

You can't photograph magnetic field lines directly, but you can see their impact. On Earth, you will see photos of magnetic field lines imaged by using iron filings that align to the direction of the field lines, like the attached. In space, plasma clusters along magnetic filed lines and outlines where the field lines are , like these photos of the sun.

 

[weirdoguy]

Why are there no photographs of magnetic field lines?

Because they are a mathematical construct (integral curves of a vector field) not a physical thing.

 

[DenniSys]

The charge between two plates in a condenser can be measured but not photographed in any way. I get that. Lat and long are a human construct.
Even though the EM field does not emit or reflect light it is physically there. Eyes cannot see without light, but with light things are seen. I think the same thing can happen with EM fields. I'm not convinced that EM fields can't be seen (without the biological reference) directly by some method. Why, because they are physically real.

 

[DenniSys]

Why can't we photograph lines of latitude and longitude?

They are a human construct. They are not physical things.

 

[DenniSys]

Because they are a mathematical construct (integral curves of a vector field) not a physical thing.

Magnetic fields are real physical things. They are not imaginary.

 

[Ibix]

Magnetic fields are real physical things. They are not imaginary.

Fields are. Field lines are not.

Light is not reflected or deflected by magnetic fields, which is why they cannot be photographed.

 

[DenniSys]

You can't photograph magnetic field lines directly, but you can see their impact. On Earth, you will see photos of magnetic field lines imaged by using iron filings that align to the direction of the field lines, like the attached. In space, plasma clusters along magnetic filed lines and outlines where the field lines are , like these photos of the sun.

Thanks. Nice to have pictures of what I'm talking about.

 

[DenniSys]

Sorry about my reply format ignorance. I don't use this board very often.

 

[DenniSys]

Fields are. Field lines are not.

Light is not reflected or deflected by magnetic fields, which is why they cannot be photographed.

The lines represented by iron filings on a magnet look real enough.

 

[DenniSys]

Fields are. Field lines are not.

Light is not reflected or deflected by magnetic fields, which is why they cannot be photographed.

Thanks. No mass, no magnetic interaction. That caused a flicker of light in my brain. Magnetic fields can be deflected, but the fields themselves cannot be imaged, because imaging requires light. Well, it requires light, or sound, or some type of radiant energy, and a receiving medium to catch that energy.

 

[Ibix]

The lines represented by iron filings on a magnet look real enough.

They aren't really field lines, though. The iron filings affect the magnetic field go they tend to align. So you're seeing lines of iron filings aligned with the field.

Also, you will get a different set of lines every time you do the experiment. The general shape of the lines will be the same, but the exact pattern depends on the fall of the filings.

 

[Vanadium 50]

They are a human construct. They are not physical things.

As are field lines.

If I have a field of 1 gauss, how many field lines does that correspond to?

 

[DenniSys]

Obviously, it's 42. Thanks Vanadium 50, and everyone. I'm going to dig into my physics books to learn more about magnetism, and do some experiments to get the hands on understanding of what is really going on with fields and forces. Just when I thought I knew something I find that my ignorance is great. Such is life. 8)