How to Prove Gauss' Law for a Cube with a Central Point Charge?

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter HelpMeh
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Gauss Gauss' law Law
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers on proving Gauss' Law for a cube with a central point charge. Participants explore the calculation of electric flux through the cube's surface, considering both symmetry arguments and mathematical integration techniques. The scope includes theoretical reasoning and mathematical proof related to electrostatics.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Mathematical reasoning
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant suggests that the flux through one side of the cube should be 1/6 of the total charge, based on intuition.
  • Another participant challenges the initial approach, noting that the electric field's magnitude and direction vary across the cube's surface, complicating the integration.
  • Some participants mention that the total flux through the cube is proportional to the total charge enclosed, leading to the conclusion that the flux through one side is Q/6ε0, based on symmetry.
  • One participant seeks clarification on how to express the angle θ in terms of Cartesian coordinates and its implications for the integration over the cube's surface.
  • Another participant emphasizes the complexity of a mathematical solution and suggests that a symmetry argument is more straightforward for this problem.
  • A later reply questions the sufficiency of the symmetry argument, indicating a need for a more rigorous mathematical approach to verify Gauss' Law.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the sufficiency of symmetry arguments versus mathematical integration for proving Gauss' Law in this context. There is no consensus on the best approach, and the discussion remains unresolved.

Contextual Notes

Participants note the dependence of the electric field on the position on the cube's surface and the challenges in integrating over the entire surface due to varying angles and distances from the charge. The discussion reflects limitations in assumptions about symmetry and the need for careful mathematical treatment.

HelpMeh
Messages
13
Reaction score
0
So I was doing some practice problems and one of them asked for the flux through one side of a cube that has a point charge(Q) at its center, it seems intuitive that it would be 1/6 of the charge but how would i show this?

if I do

∫E dA → E∫dA
the surface area of a cube is 6L2 so i would get

E*6L2=Q/ε0

then?

thanks.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
HelpMeh said:
∫E dA → E∫dA

You can't do that because (a) different points on the surface of the cube are at different distances from the center, so the magnitude of E isn't constant; (b) the direction of E is different at different points on the surface so you have to take that into account:

\vec E \cdot d \vec A = E dA \cos \theta
 
Ok so one of the problems says its Q/6e0

how did they arrive at this?
 
HelpMeh said:
Ok so one of the problems says its Q/6e0

how did they arrive at this?

By symmetry. The electric field from a point charge is spherically symmetric and being placed at the center of the box we deduce that each side of the cube must have the same amount of flux through it. Now we know from Gauss' Law that the total flux over the surface of the cube will be proportional to the total charge enclosed, so the flux through one side of the cube is 1/6th of this.
 
jtbell said:
\vec E \cdot d \vec A = E dA \cos \theta

What would the cosθ be in terms of x,y and/or z? I am trying to do a proof of this that shows the result of Q/ε for the whole cube. On my first run through I did not account for the spherical distribution of the e-field and I was on the way to get a value of 0. I figured cosθ need to be included but it seems that this will only account for one dimension on the face of the cube. For example if I said that

cosθ=\frac{x}{\sqrt{x^{2}+z^{2}}}

How would this correspond to the whole face of the cube or is that taken care of by dA. If so dose it even matter if I define cosθ with x,z or x,y?

Edit: Just to be clear I'm using the example of the face of the cube on the positive x-axis and that a charge q is located at the origin at the center of the cube. The cube is the Gaussian surface.
 
Last edited:
The \theta he is using is the angle between the electric field and the plane of the box's surface that it is intersecting. Its dependence on the Cartesian coordinates will differ for each of the 6 sides of the box.

But this is immaterial. This is a basic undergraduate problem that even I came across when I did my undergrad. You are supposed to solve it via the symmetry argument that I put forth earlier. Doing it explicitly mathematically would be very complicated. But perhaps it may be easier to figure out how to parameterize the integration so that you can do it in spherical coordinates.
 
Here is the question statement:
Construct a Gaussian surface S that consists of a cube of side 2, centered at the origin.
Calculate \oint E\bullet d\vec{a} for the point charge, using this surface, thus verifying (or not?) Gauss’ Law.

So I don't think that the symmetry argument will be sufficient. Do you agree?
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 83 ·
3
Replies
83
Views
5K
  • · Replies 29 ·
Replies
29
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K