Is there a converse of uniqueness theorem

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the existence of a converse to the uniqueness theorem in the context of circuit analysis and electrostatics, particularly concerning charged conductors and charge distributions. Participants explore the implications of knowing potential and electric fields in determining charge distributions.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Technical explanation
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants inquire whether a converse to the uniqueness theorem exists for circuits with charged conductors.
  • One participant suggests that knowing the potential and electric field allows for the determination of charge distribution, but questions whether the converse holds true.
  • Another participant argues that the converse is not true, citing the method of images as a counterexample.
  • Some participants clarify the statements of the uniqueness theorem and its converse, noting that the uniqueness theorem asserts that potential is uniquely determined by charge density and boundary conditions.
  • There is a discussion about the implications of the second uniqueness theorem and whether its converse is valid, with differing opinions on the uniqueness of charge distribution given known electric fields.
  • One participant expresses uncertainty about the uniqueness of charge distribution in the converse theorem, suggesting that knowing the electric field allows for determining total charge but not its distribution.
  • Another participant references Gauss's Law as a potential basis for supporting the converse's validity.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus on the existence or validity of the converse to the uniqueness theorem. Multiple competing views remain regarding the implications of known potentials and electric fields on charge distributions.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight the technical nuances of the uniqueness theorem and its converse, including the role of boundary conditions and charge distributions. There are unresolved assumptions regarding the implications of the method of images and the application of Gauss's Law.

pardesi
Messages
337
Reaction score
0
is there a converse of uniqueness theorem for circuits have for charged conductors.

or atleast is there such a thing in case of circuit analysis ..
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Could you state the theorem a bit more precisely for us?
 
if in a given volume u know the charge on each conductor(u may notknow the charge distribution) and if u know the charge distribution in space( \rho) then u know everything about that region potential,field...
 
So you want to know if the following is true:
If you know the potential, electric field, then you know the charge distribution.
I would say the converse is not true. Afterall, we use the method of images to calculate the potential based on a ficticious distribution of charge.
 
If you know the potential and where there are boundaries, then you can determine the charge distribution uniquely.
 
@LHarriger
well i don't want to know the charge distribution but the charges


@Parlyne
can u please explain that with an example
 
Parlyne said:
If you know the potential and where there are boundaries, then you can determine the charge distribution uniquely.

This is both true and a good point. However, technically this statement is not the converse of the uniqueness theorem (though the techincality is extremely trivial.)

There are actually two statements:

First Uniqueness Theorem: The potential in a volume V is uniquely determined if the charge density throughout the region and the value of the potential V on all boundaries are specified.
Converse: In a volume V, the charge density throughout the region and the value of the potential V on all boundaries are uniquely determined for a given potential V.

I said that this was not true for the reason stated earlier, namely for a given boundary and charge distribution we employ the method of images by defining a fictitious boundary and charge distribution that gives a potential satisfying both the actual and fictitious cases. This is in direct violation of the converse statement. However, I want to change my mind on this. The reason is that when we use the method of images, we are changing our volume of interest. (Infact we must always put our fictitious charge in the expanded volume, otherwise we would be changing our density and would solve Possoin's Equation for the wrong source charge.)
I now am of the mind that the converse should be true. First, if you know the entire potential, then of course you know it on the boundary (like I said, the technicality was trivial.) Second, using Possoin's Equation you can calculate the unique charge density for that potential.

Now that I think about it though, you were probably referring to the second theroem,

Second Uniqueness Theorem Given a volume V that conains conductors of known charge and also contains a known fixed charge density between the conductors, the electric field is uniquely determined. (The region as a whole can be unbounded or surrounded by a conductor).
Converse Given a volume V in which the electric field is known, the charge on conductors inside the volume as well as any charge density between the conductors is uniquely determined.

I would respond on this as well but I have to leave and I want to make sure my response is watertight (unlike last time)
 
Last edited:
so is the converse to the second unique theorem true.also i think 1 and it's converse holds for 1 though the theorem is stronger than the converse i think
 
i don't think the terme charge distribution in the converse theorem can be unique because clearly by the second uniqueness theorem once the charge is fixed no matter how it is distributed the field everywhere is fixed provided u know the charge density everywhere.
what i think is true is if u know the field evrywhere then u know the charge density in free space and total charge on each conductor but not how it is distributed
 
  • #10
LHarriger said:
Second Uniqueness Theorem Given a volume V that conains conductors of known charge and also contains a known fixed charge density between the conductors, the electric field is uniquely determined. (The region as a whole can be unbounded or surrounded by a conductor).
Converse Given a volume V in which the electric field is known, the charge on conductors inside the volume as well as any charge density between the conductors is uniquely determined.

I would respond on this as well but I have to leave and I want to make sure my response is watertight (unlike last time)

Gauss's Law in differential form should gaurentee that the converse is true.
 
  • #11
yes got that
gauss law in differential+gauss law in integral
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
1K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 27 ·
Replies
27
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
12K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 22 ·
Replies
22
Views
3K