Magnetic weapons

Rivkin · 13th February 2005, 06:26 PM

I believe that the case with Wasilevski is that his message have been probably perverted by "popular" explanation - probably what he meant is that extremely well magnetized samples have origins different from just being cooled in Earth magnetic field.

Concerning the knowledge that ancient iron (whether in pottery, iron deposits or special spherical boxes lying on the ocean's floor) is magnetized alongside the Earth magnetic field at the time of the iron sample's cooling period is a well known fact, avoiding "real" papers I would bring your attention to:
http://www.sciencetech.technomuses.c...fo_Magnets.cfm

"Magnetite is magnetic because its molecular structure has allowed it to retain the alignment of particles caused by the Earth's magnetic field during its formation millions of years ago. When heated to high temperatures magnetite loses its natural magnetism. "
http://www.tufts.edu/as/wright_cente...xt_plan_5.html
"Finally, a fourth bit of evidence also favors the idea of plate tectonics, although here the data aren’t as robust, their implications not as clear. This evidence is supplied by paleomagnetism—the study of ancient magnetism. Everyday experience tells us that iron is magnetic; in fact, any metal containing even small amounts of iron ore is usually magnetized. However, when iron is heated to temperatures ~1000 K, it loses its magnetic properties as individual atoms jostle freely (which is why magnetic thermometers often fall off the side of a roaring wood stove). Hot basalt—the dark, dense stuff of volcanoes—impregnated with traces of iron and upwelling from cracks in the oceanic ridges, is thus not magnetic. As the basalt cools, magnetism sets in as each iron atom effectively responds to Earth’s magnetic field like a compass needle. When the basalt solidifies to form hard rock shortly thereafter, it fixes the orientation of the embedded iron, since the iron atoms align themselves with the orientation of Earth’s field at the time of cooling. Accordingly, the ocean-floor matter has preserved within it a history of Earth’s magnetism."

Rivkin · 13th February 2005, 06:28 PM

And it would not make a bit of difference to make swords from lodestones - they would lose their magnetization, just as any other piece of iron, during the heating process.

capt.smash · 13th February 2005, 06:56 PM

HI i might be out of my depth here but im sure i heard that if you take 2 pieces of metal and stroke them together in the same direction continualy for a long ..long time they eventualy become slightly magnetic[a labour intensive version of strokeing a piece of metal in 1 direction with a magnet ]..i have noticed this in old drillbits that develop magnetism from spinning continualy in 1 direction against metal.[i asume this is why they become magnetic]?
Perhaps smiths who use metal files could inadvertantly cause magnetism in blades from useing a file in this method, gradualy magnetiseing the file and then whatever blade he works on [this is relying on him haveing a fileing technique where he files only on 1 direction and lifting the file on the return stroke ]i see this fileing technique in woodwork but not sure about metalwork.
Also mabe this could be the case for a stone sharpeing/grinding wheel[if it had a slight metal content]?Also this might explain why some blades have diffrent strength magnetism on diffrent parts of the blade that required more fileing.
This may sound silly but i thaught id mention it

.

Jens Nordlunde · 13th February 2005, 07:25 PM

Rivkin, you explanation sounds most interesting, as well as you links, which I will read - and hope I will understand

.

I must say, that I am overwhelmed by the inputs and the quality of the inputs, thank you very much.

capt.smash, no you are not out of your depth, on the contrary. You are dead on mark. Yes the fils must be used only in one direction, or it wont work. All the litte pieces of iron would be all confused otherwise

. Thank you for answering.

Jens

Mare Rosu · 13th February 2005, 08:03 PM

JENS and all others good forum folks.
A most interesting thread indeed. I find little to fault with all the input but I have a question: How can one have two or more magnetic poles on the same blade? If you use a file, hammering or other means to magnetize a blade on purpose or otherwise, would you not have just one pole a North and a South pole on the blade. It is hard for me to figure out a process that would magnetize a blade with more than one North,& South pole without doing so on purpose by someone along the way. Leaving it in one place even for hundreds of years would still give you just a North and a South pole.
So my take is that a blade with more than one North and one South pole must have been done so on purpose.
Gene
Sorry

Fearn got it right this time.

Jens Nordlunde · 13th February 2005, 08:15 PM

Gene, you got it absolutely right - the way you describe it, is the way it must have been done - on purpose

.
Now the big question is why, and I doubt veru much that anyone can answer this question, unless we find some hints in old books. Should I find them, be sure that I will let you know.

Jens

Rivkin · 13th February 2005, 08:43 PM

Most likely purpose have absolutely nothing to do with it. Anvil and hammer assuming they are magnetized (which is quite a logical assumption), they can create a very weird magnetic patterns in the forged blade. Not taking into account interactions in between of different parts of the blade, differential heat treatment, different chemical compositions.

13th February 2005, 06:56 PM	#3
capt.smash Member Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Devon ,England Posts: 80	HI i might be out of my depth here but im sure i heard that if you take 2 pieces of metal and stroke them together in the same direction continualy for a long ..long time they eventualy become slightly magnetic[a labour intensive version of strokeing a piece of metal in 1 direction with a magnet ]..i have noticed this in old drillbits that develop magnetism from spinning continualy in 1 direction against metal.[i asume this is why they become magnetic]? Perhaps smiths who use metal files could inadvertantly cause magnetism in blades from useing a file in this method, gradualy magnetiseing the file and then whatever blade he works on [this is relying on him haveing a fileing technique where he files only on 1 direction and lifting the file on the return stroke ]i see this fileing technique in woodwork but not sure about metalwork. Also mabe this could be the case for a stone sharpeing/grinding wheel[if it had a slight metal content]?Also this might explain why some blades have diffrent strength magnetism on diffrent parts of the blade that required more fileing. This may sound silly but i thaught id mention it . Last edited by capt.smash; 13th February 2005 at 07:57 PM.

13th February 2005, 08:03 PM	#5
Mare Rosu Deceased Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: USA, DEEP SOUTH, GEORGIA, Y'all hear? Posts: 121	Question? JENS and all others good forum folks. A most interesting thread indeed. I find little to fault with all the input but I have a question: How can one have two or more magnetic poles on the same blade? If you use a file, hammering or other means to magnetize a blade on purpose or otherwise, would you not have just one pole a North and a South pole on the blade. It is hard for me to figure out a process that would magnetize a blade with more than one North,& South pole without doing so on purpose by someone along the way. Leaving it in one place even for hundreds of years would still give you just a North and a South pole. So my take is that a blade with more than one North and one South pole must have been done so on purpose. Gene Sorry Fearn got it right this time.

13th February 2005, 06:26 PM	#1
Rivkin Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Posts: 655	I believe that the case with Wasilevski is that his message have been probably perverted by "popular" explanation - probably what he meant is that extremely well magnetized samples have origins different from just being cooled in Earth magnetic field. Concerning the knowledge that ancient iron (whether in pottery, iron deposits or special spherical boxes lying on the ocean's floor) is magnetized alongside the Earth magnetic field at the time of the iron sample's cooling period is a well known fact, avoiding "real" papers I would bring your attention to: http://www.sciencetech.technomuses.c...fo_Magnets.cfm "Magnetite is magnetic because its molecular structure has allowed it to retain the alignment of particles caused by the Earth's magnetic field during its formation millions of years ago. When heated to high temperatures magnetite loses its natural magnetism. " http://www.tufts.edu/as/wright_cente...xt_plan_5.html "Finally, a fourth bit of evidence also favors the idea of plate tectonics, although here the data aren’t as robust, their implications not as clear. This evidence is supplied by paleomagnetism—the study of ancient magnetism. Everyday experience tells us that iron is magnetic; in fact, any metal containing even small amounts of iron ore is usually magnetized. However, when iron is heated to temperatures ~1000 K, it loses its magnetic properties as individual atoms jostle freely (which is why magnetic thermometers often fall off the side of a roaring wood stove). Hot basalt—the dark, dense stuff of volcanoes—impregnated with traces of iron and upwelling from cracks in the oceanic ridges, is thus not magnetic. As the basalt cools, magnetism sets in as each iron atom effectively responds to Earth’s magnetic field like a compass needle. When the basalt solidifies to form hard rock shortly thereafter, it fixes the orientation of the embedded iron, since the iron atoms align themselves with the orientation of Earth’s field at the time of cooling. Accordingly, the ocean-floor matter has preserved within it a history of Earth’s magnetism."

13th February 2005, 06:28 PM	#2
Rivkin Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Posts: 655	And it would not make a bit of difference to make swords from lodestones - they would lose their magnetization, just as any other piece of iron, during the heating process.

13th February 2005, 07:25 PM	#4
Jens Nordlunde Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Europe Posts: 2,718	Rivkin, you explanation sounds most interesting, as well as you links, which I will read - and hope I will understand . I must say, that I am overwhelmed by the inputs and the quality of the inputs, thank you very much. capt.smash, no you are not out of your depth, on the contrary. You are dead on mark. Yes the fils must be used only in one direction, or it wont work. All the litte pieces of iron would be all confused otherwise . Thank you for answering. Jens

13th February 2005, 08:15 PM	#6
Jens Nordlunde Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Europe Posts: 2,718	Gene, you got it absolutely right - the way you describe it, is the way it must have been done - on purpose . Now the big question is why, and I doubt veru much that anyone can answer this question, unless we find some hints in old books. Should I find them, be sure that I will let you know. Jens

13th February 2005, 08:43 PM	#7
Rivkin Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Posts: 655	Most likely purpose have absolutely nothing to do with it. Anvil and hammer assuming they are magnetized (which is quite a logical assumption), they can create a very weird magnetic patterns in the forged blade. Not taking into account interactions in between of different parts of the blade, differential heat treatment, different chemical compositions.