Gauss' Law -- is there a general proof for all geometries?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the general proof of Gauss's law for various geometries and charge distributions. Participants explore whether a universal proof exists that applies to all shapes, including non-spherical geometries like cylinders and cubes, without relying on simplifications to spherical cases.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Technical explanation

Main Points Raised

  • One participant expresses familiarity with deriving Gauss's law for a point charge and a sphere but questions the existence of a general proof applicable to all geometries and charge distributions.
  • Another participant suggests that if the Gaussian surface is sufficiently large, any shape inside can be treated as a point source, implying a limitation on the necessity of a general proof.
  • A third participant provides a link to a resource that discusses generalizations of Gauss's law from spherical surfaces to arbitrary surfaces and from point charges to arbitrary charge distributions, noting the complexity involved with vector calculus and the Dirac delta function.
  • A later reply critiques the idea of using a spherical Gaussian surface for a charged long rod, highlighting that the electric field is not always parallel to the area differential on the surface, which complicates the calculations.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus on the existence of a general proof for Gauss's law applicable to all geometries. There are competing views regarding the necessity and feasibility of such a proof.

Contextual Notes

Some participants note the challenges in applying Gauss's law to non-spherical geometries and the complexities introduced by the electric field's direction relative to the Gaussian surface.

davidbenari
Messages
466
Reaction score
18
I know how to derive Gauss's law considering only one point charge and a sphere.

I've seen other derivations for other geometrical shapes and I would say this is way too tedious as a method to prove that Gauss's law always holds true.

I was wondering if there is a general proof that says this has to be the case for all charge distributions and all geometrical shapes? Namely,

Θ=Q/εo holds true always.

Also, I'm not looking for proofs that refer to the fact that the "irregular shape is equivalent or reducible to the spherical case". I'm considering cylinders, cubes, and other polygons which as far as I know are not reducible to the spherical case.

Thanks.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
If you draw your gaussian surface big enough, not matter what object/shape is inside, it will be comparatively small enough to be assumed a point source.

I don't think there is proof that anything always holds true.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: 1 person
http://farside.ph.utexas.edu/teaching/em/lectures/node30.html

This covers both the generalization from a spherical surface of integration to an arbitrary surface, and from point charges to arbitrary charge distributions. Warning: requires vector calculus, and you'll have to learn about the Dirac delta "function".
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: 1 person
Elegysix:

I liked what you said however:

suppose you're calculating flux out of a charged long rod and create a gaussian surface (sphere in this case) so big such that the rod can be consider a point charge. This makes the calculations not simple at all because the electric field is not always parallel to the differential of area on your spherical surface. This is because the electric field on a charged long rod is mostly radial and outwards.

It's important to consider just the sphere in this case because this is would be the basis for a general proof because of its simplicity. So I wouldn't be convinced by "consider a gaussian cylinder then".

Thanks by the way, I didn't think of what you said.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
4K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
3K