Talk:Magnetic monopole

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Magnetic monopole article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the subject of the article.

Add new text under old text.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Start a new topic

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4: 12 months

Physics High‑importance

	Physics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Physics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Physics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PhysicsWikipedia:WikiProject PhysicsTemplate:WikiProject Physicsphysics
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Skepticism Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Skepticism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of science, pseudoscience, pseudohistory, conspiracy theories, and skepticism related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SkepticismWikipedia:WikiProject SkepticismTemplate:WikiProject SkepticismSkepticism
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Magnetic monopole created in 2014 with Bosen-Einstein condensate

Magnetic monopole was created in 2014 with Bosen-Einstein condensate. Could someone update the article. Sources: https://www.tekniikkatalous.fi/tiede/2014-01-30/Aalto-tutkija-l%C3%B6ysi-ensimm%C3%A4isen-synteettisen-hiukkasen-%E2%80%93-80-vuoden-etsinn%C3%A4n-j%C3%A4lkeen-3317491.html and https://www.nature.com/articles/nature12954 --HenriHa (talk) 18:21, 21 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

My english skill isn't good enought to update this article with this radical changes. --HenriHa (talk) 18:21, 21 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

dots

Why in the world would someone write \text{...} = \frac{1}{c^2} instead of \cdots = \frac{1}{c^2} ? That is absurd. ${\begin{aligned}{\text{...}}&={\frac {1}{c^{2}}}\\[12pt]{\text{versus }}\cdots &={\frac {1}{c^{2}}}\end{aligned}}$ 2601:447:CD80:E200:5960:6ACF:38E4:A8CC (talk) 03:07, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. Please fix. ~2025-43056-98 (talk) 13:41, 22 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Dirac's quantization section needs more references

As it stands this section is essentially unsourced. There are some personal remarks which have no ground in reality, like "The concept of local gauge invariance—see Gauge theory—provides a natural explanation of charge quantization, without invoking the need for magnetic monopoles; but only if the U(1) gauge group is compact, in which case we have magnetic monopoles anyway." That last remark is 1) unsourced 2)factually incorrect. A gauge group being compact does not automatically imply the existence of magnetic monopoles. 93.189.187.42 (talk) 09:02, 17 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

inconclusive

At the top, it says that there are no experiments showing magnetic monopoles, and later mentions inconclusive experiments. But okay, there are no conclusive experiments, but there are experiments. Gah4 (talk) 13:34, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Request for explanation

The article contains the pieces of text:
"The charge on magnetic monopoles predicted by GUTs is either 1 or 2 gD" and
"which at 34.4 fb−1 is the largest dataset analyzed to date."
Could someone explain (or provide links to explanations of) what "gD" and "fb" are. ~2026-10237-39 (talk) 00:49, 25 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]