Divergence theorem on non compact sets of R3

  • Thread starter Lebesgue
  • Start date
  • #1
Lebesgue

Main Question or Discussion Point

So my question here is: the divergence theorem literally states that
Let [itex]\Omega[/itex] be a compact subset of [itex] \mathbb{R}^3 [/itex] with a piecewise smooth boundary surface [itex]S[/itex]. Let [itex]\vec{F}: D \mapsto \mathbb{R}^3[/itex] a continously differentiable vector field defined on a neighborhood D of [itex]\Omega[/itex].
Then:
[itex]\int_{\Omega} \nabla \cdot \vec{F} dxdydz = \oint_S \vec{F} \cdot \vec{n} dS [/itex]

My problem here is: why people (and with which argument) use this divergence or Gauss theorem to compute the electric field of some NOT bound set (for example, the typical infinte cylinder) of surface charge.
 

Answers and Replies

  • #2
Orodruin
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Homework Helper
Insights Author
Gold Member
16,817
6,630
Doing so is fine if you can show that the integral over any surface closing the area goes to zero when that closing surface is placed further and further away. This may put additional requirements on the integrand, such as vanishing sufficiently fast.

There are also cases where the volume is not infinite although you are studying an infinite setup, but, for example, the end caps of thr cylinder do not contribute. In other cases, symmetry may reduce the dimensionality of the problem and it is sufficient to consider it in one dimension less where the volume is bounded.
 

Related Threads on Divergence theorem on non compact sets of R3

Replies
3
Views
3K
  • Last Post
Replies
12
Views
1K
  • Last Post
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • Last Post
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • Last Post
Replies
13
Views
2K
Replies
6
Views
995
Replies
2
Views
871
Replies
7
Views
5K
Replies
14
Views
958
Replies
6
Views
3K
Top