Can science sensibly prove the existence of Magnetic Force?

Question

When experimenting with iron filings and magnets, we can observe the pattern of iron filings to assume magnetic force.

http://www.fi.edu/htlc/teachers/lettieri/magneticfields.jpg

"A magnetic field is a mathematical description of the magnetic influence of electric currents and magnetic materials."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnetic_field

Therefore, 'magnetic field' concept is a fictionally created story, used to explain the aforesaid observations. We can create many alternative fictional stories to justify observations.

Since 'magnetic field' cannot be observed by senses (not empirical evidence), how scientifically stable is 'magnetic field' concept?

Note:
Scientific evidence is expected to be empirical evidence (sense experience) and in accordance with scientific method.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_evidence

Answer 1

You have a misunderstanding of "empirical evidence." You're equating it to "sense experience," and it is not at all clear how you're defining that, but I suspect trying to equate them is faulty reasoning.



Empirical evidence is gathered through observation - sense experience (seeing, hearing, touching, etc.), AND measurements and other behaviors of the physical system



- Observing what the iron filings do is empirical evidence - sense experience, if you will.

- Same goes for observing the attraction and repulsion of magnets.

- Same goes for observing the deflection



Ant the "magnetic field" is not a "fictionally created story", it's a rigorous rational explanation with mathematical formulae that is sufficient to explain how magnetism works. While you say "we can create many alternative fictional stories to justify observations", the issue is that those actually do have to match the observations.



Creativity (NOT "creationism") is actually involved in science. It's where the hypotheses, the "guesses", as to what is happening come from. But then there's the rigor required in explaining how the hypothesis is supposed to work, and then the matching of the hypothesis against the observed behavior.



The scientific method works in this way: it usually starts with an observation of something that we don't understand yet, then hypotheses are created to try to explain the behavior that is observed, those are then rigorously developed so behavior can be predicted, then experiments are done to verify that the hypothesis and the predictions actually match the observations. The rationale of the scientific method is what allows us to use it as a valid method of acquiring knowledge.



You should check out "scientific method" and "theory of knowledge" to see why this is so.

Answer 2

what do magnetic fields have to do with CREATIONISM..



that is like the baker asking how to make croisants and you give him the answer to starting a car.



=======



for your information the way we experience the world and universe is through our senses.



sight

sound

touch

taste



we can only use those senses to gather information about hings around us.



if we cant see something with a naked eye we invent a tool to see it ... for example a telescope .. or microscope..



the question was can science prove the existance of magnetic fields..



as you stated you have yourself seen metal filings form arcs around a magnet.



and I also assume you have taken these same filings and put them around objects without a magnetic field and see a clump of metal.



that shows that some objects produce a field that arrange certain metals in a certain pattern



and that some objects produce NO FIELD at all



that field was CALLED by someone magnetic .... to distinguish it from other types of fields..



like a gravity field or a electric field..



we dont have to know the reason for the field to KNOW IT EXISTS.. we call it a certain name to just distinguish it from other things and allow us to study the thing.



========



this has NOTHING TO DO with creationism... we did not say we need a magnetic field and poof it was created..



======



you are WRONG .. A MAGNETIC FIELD is NOT JUST MATHEMATICAL.. as your experiment with iron filings shows..



just because you cant see the field doesnt make it not exist.. the iron filings allow us to see something that otherwise we could not see..



========





just like a burglar who is trying to find beams of light from photo detectors for movement will spray dust or a spray can of something in the air ... that allows some of the light to be reflected off the particles in the air and arrive at the burglars eyes so he can detect the light..



the amount of light that is diverted is low enough not to trigger the alarm too..



now if the burglar walked into the room and didnt look for things like that would they suddenly not be there.. of course not ... just because he didnt see them wouldnt stop them from being there and wouldnt stop them from triggering an alarm..



==========



there are many theoretical things you could have talked about but you chose the wrong topic ...



your conclusion that the field cant be observed its INCORRECT .. as I explained we often need tools to see something too small to see otherwise..



electric fields are seen by the interaction between two charged objects..



magnetic fields are seen similarly by the interaction between a magnetic substance such as iron filings and a magnetic field..



just because we have to use something to see them doesnt invalidate the fact they exist..



we cant see oxygen so it must not exist..



oxygen was found by its effect on flamable substances..

if we had no oxygen in the container then the substance could not be ignited..



if say the container held CO2 gas.. then a match put in the container that was lit would imediately go out..



this is evidence.. your simplistic thinking is that if you cant see something directly with our senses then we must NEVER call them something because we cant be sure they exist...



TRY AND expand your mind and learn that there are many things out there more complicated than magnetic fields and that people use SCIENCE TO make them do things that make our lives better or at least a bit easier..



I wonder if you would stop using your CELL PHONE because science says that semiconductors operate a certain way but we cant really see the holes moving or the electrons moving so we cant use that knowledge to build things..



thats a childish simplistic way of thinking..



Hope you go to school and learn some things more than what you know...

Answer 3

well, having inferred the existance of a magnetic field from its effects upon iron filings, we can go a step further and use that knowledge to build electric motors, and generators, which work exactly as they should if the magnetic field is real. That's the difference between science and creationism, science produces results, while creationism just produces idiots.



think of it this way, when you see a gas flame, you can infer that if you put your hand it it then your hand will get burnt, but you cannot actually see any hot, all you can see is yellow/orange/blue.

Answer 4

Perhaps you could address this question to your physics prof so he can amend how he is explaining this to y'all. Then again,, for me seeing(the effects of the field) is believing. Not to mention also that MRIs are used to save lives every day and were designed using classical mag field theory. It is wonderful for an old physicist like me to see how energized it makes students to study E/M theory. And you are right, it is theory but theory that works