All macroscopic objects we observe are emergent from the underlying particle/atomic/molecular nature, which by the way follows quantum mechanical equations.
a) The reason we see electric fields is fundamentally because electrons and protons have electric charge, which generates their electric field. There are many ways that electric fields can be macroscopically induced. Analogously, the reason we see magnetic fields is because particles/atoms/molecules have magnetic dipole moments inherent in their nature, which have elementary magnetic fields.
b) A second source of electric and magnetic fields comes from the behavior of elementary and fields under motion: they obey Maxwell's equations, which tell us that changing electric fields generate magnetic fields and changing magnetic fields generate electric fields.
Say I wrapped a piece of wire around an iron bar in a closed circuit connected to a DC power supply, the electrons starts flowing and moving charge produce magnetic field.
A magnetic field is generated from the moving charges due to the laws of b), and the small dipole ferromagnetic domains described in a) orient themselves according to the external field and magnetism is retained even when the current is off. The current enhances the total magnetic field after first orientations of the dipoles.
Yet a bar magnet can produce a magnetic field without any charged particles moving around, are the magnetic fields produced by the two objects different types?
In a permanent magnet the domains after being oriented in a direction retain it because they are in the lowest energy state of the solid when oriented.
The magnetic field is the same type of field for all cases.
This experiment is called Arago's Disc, and is essentially no different from the one in which you drop a magnet into a copper tube and - surprisingly - it take much longer than expected to fall.
In both cases the explanation is that the changing magnetic field induces eddy currents in the copper disc, in a manner which opposes the change in flux, according to Lenz' Law. These currents produce magnetic fields in directions which opposes the change in the magnetic field from the magnet. Induced currents ahead of the magnet push against the magnet, while induced current behind the magnet pull on it. (I find it difficult to explain exactly how the opposing magnetic fields create forces between the magnet and the copper disc. All the websites I've read skip over the issue as I am doing here. I shall try to rectify this later.) Like mechanical friction, this magnetic friction opposes relative motion between the magnet and disc.
Lenz' Law is related to le Chatelier's Principle in chemistry, which can be stated as a much broader principle :
When a system is in dynamic equilibrium, any change in the status quo prompts an opposing reaction from the system.
Your reasoning is mostly correct, except that the induced poles to not lag, and are the same - not opposite - in polarity.
At the points immediately under the magnet, the magnetic field is approximately constant and parallel to the magnet and the disc. There is no change in magnetic flux through the disc in this region as the magnet moves, hence no eddy currents are induced and no force arises. It is the regions ahead and behind the magnet in which the magnetic flux has a component perpendicular to the disc. This component is changing as the magnet moves. That change in flux is what induces the eddy currents.
So a magnetic N pole is induced in the disc ahead of the magnet by the magnet's advancing N pole, and another magnetic N pole is induced in the disc behind the magnet by the magnet's receding S pole. In both cases the force between the magnetic and induced poles opposes the relative motion between the magnet and the disc.
Note that a S pole is not induced behind the receding S pole of the magnet. If this were so, the repulsions from ahead and behind would cancel out. I guess that is why you introduced the idea of a "lag" to explain why the two repulsions could add up to a net force on the disc. If in your explanation the induced N and S poles were directly under the like magnetic poles, the only force (repulsion) would be perpendicular to the disc. There would be no force parallel to it, either forward or backward.
Best Answer
yeah it should do. as long as the material is conductive, it will induce a magnetic field. the problem is that you need exfoliated graphene which is hard to produce. once mass production of it starts, it will easily replace copper solenoids.