>>9243894Go ahead, very really curious what kind of equations you would use to explain this. I'm not going to hold my breath though, seeing how little anyone has delivered so far.
>>9243916My issue with you guys isn't that you aren't taking it seriously. My issue is the hypocrisy of mocking OP while not giving a single good answer to something that is supposedly idiotic to even ask about. Seems by now in this thread that its not as simple as it was first implied. When I first entered the thread i was going to answer him, but after thinking it over I realized that its not an easy thing to answer.
>>9244209Its a really boring answer to just say they are too different to compare. I can see where you are coming from, but magnetic fields are attractive/repulsive, they just attract stuff too their poles rather than directly.
The most interesting answer to this would go into the theoretical limits of magnetism, as a static object can't just make a powerful field while its just sitting there. My intuition says that there could be some kind of limit to this. Google gave me this:
http://wtamu.edu/~cbaird/sq/2014/08/21/what-is-the-strongest-magnetic-field-possible-is-there-a-limit/Where he says:
>There is no firmly-established fundamental limit on magnetic field strengthBut he also says:
>At the most extreme end, a magnetic field that is strong enough could form a black hole.Which sounds like a limit to me.
>>9244937Finally someone mentions something interesting in this thread. Never knew such extreme fields exited(or is predicted at least from observations).
>The earth's magnetic feild is around: 0,00006 Tesla>Magnetar's field is predicted to be: 10 000 000 TeslaFucking incomprehensible right there.
Oh, and lets laugh at OP some more for asking a stupid question?
