what is difference between magnetic atom and nonmagnetic atom?
The string of words after the question makes me guess you are from the Middle East, where a lot of historical revisionism is ongoing. Rightly or wrongly, western civilization is given credit for defining and then discovering the atom. That results because western civilization shared in the discoveries, while other cultures, who might have taken credit for the discoveries, chose to isolate themselves from foreigners. So be it. We all make decisions. But we have to live with the outcomes of those decisions. As to the real question, not the political statement below it, all atoms are magnetic. All atoms have electrons moving about outside their nuclides. And as we well know, where there are electrons on the move, there will be electro-magnetic fields. The difference between non magnetic material and magnetic material, is that the atoms in magnetic material are mostly all oriented in one direction; so that the individual magnetic fields of each atom add up to be the overall magnetic field of the magnetic material. In non magnetic material, the atoms are randomly oriented so that their individuals fields cancels each other out.
So apparently the fact that the Arabs had the numeral 0 first means that they also had a fully consistent quantum theory of the atom? Yeah, right, makes sense.
In a magnetic atom (iron, cobalt, nickel molecule alloys like steel) in the presence of an external magnetic field, the spin vectors of the individual electrons line up to form an effective Amperian current around the periphery of the material. This then becomes an electromagnet itself, capable of having a torque exerted upon itself, or a force, by the external field. To a lesser extent the rotation of the electrons about the nucleus also contribute to this current. In nonmagnetic atoms the electrons do not line up together that way. If you want an explanation of why or why not you'll have to get deeply embroiled in quantum mechanics.
