Magnetism As Information

What is so useful about my theory of information, detailed in the compound posting on this blog, "The Theory Of Complexity", August 2017, is how it enables us to "see ahead" to things that haven't yet been discovered. An ideal example involves magnetism.

Magnetism is brought about by the lining up of unpaired electrons in atoms by use of an electric field. Electrons in atoms usually exist in pairs, one with an up and the other with a down spin. If unpaired electrons can be lined up, the material will exert an electromotive force, with a north and a south pole. This force is known as magnetism.

Although it is not the only material from which a strong magnet can be made, the material that we most associate with magnetism is iron. Steel is iron with carbon added to make it stronger. Other elements that can be alloyed to make strong magnets are nickel and cobalt.

Iron is a really interesting element. We tend to take it for granted because it is so common, it is the most common element on earth by mass. But the reason that it is so common is the same reason that makes it so interesting.

As we know the nucleus of an atom is held together by binding energy. This is necessary because the nucleus is composed of protons, which have a positive electric charge, and, since like charges repel each other, the nucleus would not be able to hold together unless it was held by binding energy. What happens is that some of the mass of the nucleus is converted into binding energy by the nuclear force, which is one of the fundamental forces of the universe.

Not all elements have the same amount of binding energy per nucleon in their nucleus. A nucleon means either a proton or a neutron. Beginning with the lightest element, hydrogen with one proton in the nucleus, the binding energy per nucleon reaches a peak, and then begins to decline. This is known as the Binding Energy Curve.

At the very top of that peak is iron. This means that iron has the most stable nucleus of all elements because it has the most binding energy per nucleon. 

The reason that iron is so common is because the ordinary fusion process in stars only goes as far as iron. This is because the iron nucleus is so stable that it requires more energy to break it apart, entering the plasma state so that it can fuse into heavier nuclei, than is released by breaking it. This means that fusing iron into heavier elements, by the tremendous heat and pressure in the centers of stars, requires an input of energy rather than giving off energy.

This is why the ordinary fusion process in stars only goes as far as iron. When a large star explodes in a supernova it scatters it's component matter across space. Some of that matter typically falls back together by gravity to form a second-generation star and, maybe, planets. That is how our Solar System formed and is why iron is so common. 

Elements heavier than iron require an input of energy to form. These elements only form when energy is being released by the explosion of the large star in the supernova, only the largest stars explode in a supernova. This is why elements up to iron are exponentially more common than those that are heavier than iron.

If you have ever wondered why carbon, oxygen, copper and, iron are so much more common than silver, gold and, uranium, this is why.

What I find to be so interesting, yet unexplained, is that iron is both the element most associated with magnetism and also the element with the most stable nucleus. The other two elements associated with magnetism, nickel and cobalt, are near iron at the top of the Binding Energy Curve.

This seems to make it very clear that there must be a link between magnetism and the stability of the nucleus. But, as of now, we cannot see what it is. 

Magnetism is a property of the electron orbitals in an atom, and have nothing to do with the nucleus. Nuclear stability, the Binding Energy Curve, has nothing to do with the electrons. The binding energy in a nucleus has no effect on the electric charges of the protons, which is what affects the electrons in their orbitals.

But yet there must be a connection between the two, even if we cannot see it now. This cannot be a coincidence that the elements at the top of the Binding Energy Curve are the same elements that are associated with magnetism.

My information theory explains the connection in terms of information, and it is simple.

Iron atoms, fused in stars from lighter elements, have the most stable nuclei. But stability represents a lower information state than instability. Indeed the very definition of stability is that it must be the lowest information state. We know that the universe both seeks the lowest information state and also prefers stability to instability.

Stability is some kind of equation, while instability is an inequation. An equation is a lower information state because it only contains one piece of information, while an inequation must contain more than one.

A equals A must be a lower information state than A does not equal B, because we would only have to define A, instead of both A and B.

But if iron atoms are fused together from lighter atoms, and has a nucleus with more stability than the nuclei from which they were fused, that must mean a loss of information somewhere. The trouble with that is that information cannot just be lost, it must go somewhere.

The electrons in the atoms have nothing to do with the stability of the nucleus, at least as far as we can see now. But the atom is an informational unit and information cannot just be lost.

Magnetism is actually information because a magnet has to have a north pole and a south pole. Magnetism is a higher information state than non-magnetism because it must be defined which is the north pole and which is the south pole, and where on the magnet the poles will be located.

This information theory thus enables us to "see ahead". Clearly magnetism must somehow be related to the stability of the nucleus of the atom, but we cannot see the physics of how this happens as of now.