Gauss' law for uniformly charged space

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the implications of Gauss' law in the context of a uniformly charged infinite space. Participants highlight that while the electric field (E field) at any point in such a space is zero due to symmetry, this contradicts the expected behavior of Gauss' law, which states that the electric flux through any Gaussian surface should equal the charge enclosed. The conversation explores the necessity of boundary conditions to maintain consistency with Gauss' law, suggesting that without them, uniformly charged space may not be physically realizable. The conclusion drawn is that Gauss' law does not inherently imply that uniformly charged space is impossible, but rather that it requires specific conditions to be valid.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of Gauss' law in electrostatics
  • Familiarity with electric fields and flux concepts
  • Knowledge of symmetry in physical systems
  • Basic calculus for integration techniques
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the implications of boundary conditions in electrostatics
  • Explore the derivation of electric fields for various charge distributions
  • Investigate the concept of translational and rotational invariance in physics
  • Review advanced applications of Gauss' law in different geometries
USEFUL FOR

Physicists, electrical engineers, and students studying electromagnetism, particularly those interested in the theoretical implications of charge distributions and electric fields.

Likith D
Messages
65
Reaction score
1
the problem:
Say we have the entire space uniformly charged. Then, the E field experienced by any point is zero, from symmetry.*
But, it means that for any Gaussian surface, the flux though it is zero even though the charge enclosed is clearly not. Gauss' law seems to disagree with symmetry, but it also cannot 'therefore state' that such a charge distribution is not possible.** (only theoretically, if it should exist)*It is not 'not defined' for the same reasons E field inside a sphere of uniform charge distribution is not 'not defined'... so to say that it is not zero is to go against symmetry of space for that point
**Why would we not have 3d infinite charge distribution while we have 2d infinite charge distribution

attempt at solution:
So, I tried to use the fact that we already computed E field inside a spherical uniformly charged object and let the R tend to infinity which gives ; https://i.stack.imgur.com/N8dwe.jpg independent of radius of sphere.
which may or maynot be zero depending on center of sphere and the point, which makes it weirder... but I have tried integration to find the E field of a uniformly charged wire segment and made it's length tend to infinity to get an answer that agrees with Gauss' law (the same for a planar disc tending to infinite plane, works)... and uniformly charged space seems to be not following that...
Gauss' law just seems to disagree with uniform charged space
what do we make of all this? that Gauss' law is flawed?
If it cannot possibly go against symmetry, does it really imply that uniformly charged space is not possible?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
You need boundary conditions, i.e., a behaviour at infinity, that breaks the symmetry in order for Gauss' law to be consistent. This was discussed relatively recently in a featured thread. Boundary conditions that satisfy either translational or rotational invariance will break the other.
 
Last edited:
oh, I didn't notice we already had a thread regarding the problem... sorry about that!
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
1K
  • · Replies 26 ·
Replies
26
Views
3K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
Replies
6
Views
1K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
1K
Replies
10
Views
4K
  • · Replies 22 ·
Replies
22
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
9
Views
866