Zero divergence in an enclosed point charge

In summary: I think I get what you're saying. The total flux at r is nonzero simply because the flux at r=0 is, which is because the divergence is nonzero at r=0. So the fact that the divergence is zero at r=5 meters does not contradict the total flux being nonzero. In summary, the divergence of a point charge is zero everywhere except at the point charge itself, where it is infinite. This is due to the use of a delta function to represent the charge density, and the total flux through a surface enclosing the point charge will be nonzero due to the nonzero divergence at the point charge.
  • #1
Headbanger
1
0
Why does an enclosed point charge have zero divergence/flux? Mathematically I can see that when the divergence operator is applied to E=q/r^2 (pointing in the r direction) I get zero, but what is the physical explanation for what is going on? I am confused because other enclosed electric fields yield non-zero values for divergence.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
I understand that your problem is not with mathematics but with the physical meaning of "divergence". Then let's forget the math and formulas.
You could ask why people christened the divergence with such name, instead calling it "convergence", "curl" or "bla-bla". Let's see why.
To "know" if a zone of space has a positive, zero or negative divergence, wrap the volume in a closed surface. Draw all (well, just a few) lines of field ("lines of force") and count the number of lines that cross the surface to enter the volume and the number of lines that cross the surface to exit the volume.
If there are more lines that exit than lines that enter, on average, the arrows of the field diverge from the volume. And vice-versa, if there are more lines that enter than lines that exit, en average the arrows converge to the volume; or said otherwise, the arrows have a negative divergence from the volume.
Does it help?

A word about math. What I asked to do was to "calculate" the flux exiting the surface [tex]\int E\cdot ds[/tex] and then to use the Gauss theorem which can be read as: "all things created within a volume must exit traversing the surface".
 
Last edited:
  • #3
Headbanger said:
I am confused because other enclosed electric fields yield non-zero values for divergence.

Divergence is only non-zero at points where there is a non-zero charge density. This is what Gauss' Law in differential form tells us. For a point charge, the divergence will be zero everywhere, except for the single point where the point charge is located.

The flux through any surface enclosing a non-zero net charge must be non-zero - this is what Gauss' law in integral form tells us.

There is a complication with using a point charge with Gauss Law as you can get inconsistent results if you do not properly account for the singularity. To account for the singularity, you need to represent the charge density as a delta function.

Claude.
 
  • #4
Headbanger said:
Why does an enclosed point charge have zero divergence/flux? Mathematically I can see that when the divergence operator is applied to E=q/r^2 (pointing in the r direction) I get zero, but what is the physical explanation for what is going on? I am confused because other enclosed electric fields yield non-zero values for divergence.

Actually, you don't get zero. Since the field depend only on radial distance, divergence is
[tex]\mathbf \nabla \cdot \mathbf E = \frac{1}{r^2} \frac{\partial (r^2 \mathbf E)}{\partial r}[/tex]
which should be handled carefully at [itex]r=0[/itex], because of the denominator. Using divergence theorem, it can be shown that it's [itex]4 \pi \delta(r)[/itex] there.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dirac_delta" [Broken] has an inifinely sharp peak at [itex]r=0[/itex], and zero everywhere else, such that it's integral all around is equal to 1.

Writing down the the Gauss' law,

[tex]\mathbf \nabla \cdot \mathbf E = \frac{\rho}{\epsilon_0} = 4 \pi \delta(r)[/tex]

which's not too much surprising since you've squeeze a finite charge to zero volume to yield infinite charge density at that point, and zero everywhere else.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #5
gulsen said:
Actually, you don't get zero. Since the field depend only on radial distance, divergence is
[tex]\mathbf \nabla \cdot \mathbf E = \frac{1}{r^2} \frac{\partial (r^2 \mathbf E)}{\partial r}[/tex]
which should be handled carefully at [itex]r=0[/itex], because of the denominator. Using divergence theorem, it can be shown that it's [itex]4 \pi \delta(r)[/itex] there.

Dirac delta has an inifinely sharp peak at [itex]r=0[/itex], and zero everywhere else, such that it's integral all around is equal to 1.

Writing down the the Gauss' law,

[tex]\mathbf \nabla \cdot \mathbf E = \frac{\rho}{\epsilon_0} = 4 \pi \delta(r)[/tex]

which's not too much surprising since you've squeeze a finite charge to zero volume to yield infinite charge density at that point, and zero everywhere else.

thats a good explanation to resolve the contradiction of the maxwell equation D.E = 0 and P/E, where D=del, .=dot product, P=density, E=epsilon.

However, according to that derivation, D.E is 0 for any r>0. But, if a point charge is at the origin, then the flux at, say r=5 meters, is not 0. But using, the divergence theorem, the flux is 0 since D.E is 0 at r=5 meters. This is a contradiction. I'm uncertain as to how to resolve this
 
  • #6
proton said:
However, according to that derivation, D.E is 0 for any r>0. But, if a point charge is at the origin, then the flux at, say r=5 meters, is not 0. But using, the divergence theorem, the flux is 0 since D.E is 0 at r=5 meters. This is a contradiction. I'm uncertain as to how to resolve this
What do you mean by "the flux at r"?
 
  • #7
Doc Al said:
What do you mean by "the flux at r"?

like I said, at say r=5 meters, where r is the distance of the charge from the guassian sphere, and the value of the flux at that distance
 
  • #8
proton said:
like I said, at say r=5 meters, where r is the distance of the charge from the guassian sphere, and the value of the flux at that distance
If you mean the flux through a gaussian sphere of radius r surrounding a point charge, why do you think that the divergence being zero at r implies that the flux through that surface is zero? You have to integrate the divergence over the complete volume enclosed by the surface, which includes the point charge.
 
  • #9
Doc Al said:
If you mean the flux through a gaussian sphere of radius r surrounding a point charge, why do you think that the divergence being zero at r implies that the flux through that surface is zero? You have to integrate the divergence over the complete volume enclosed by the surface, which includes the point charge.

I think I get what you're saying. The total flux at r is nonzero simply because the flux at r=0 is, which is because the divergence is nonzero at r=0.
 
  • #10
proton said:
The total flux at r is nonzero simply because the flux at r=0 is, which is because the divergence is nonzero at r=0.
Flux only has meaning through a surface, so I'd phrase it a bit differently: The total flux through any closed surface containing a point charge is nonzero because the integral of the divergence of the field over the entire enclosed volume is nonzero (which is due, as you point out, to the non-zero divergence at the point charge).
 

1. What is zero divergence in an enclosed point charge?

Zero divergence in an enclosed point charge refers to the principle that the net flow of an electric field through any closed surface surrounding a point charge is equal to zero. This means that the electric field lines are neither converging nor diverging at a particular point, but are instead circulating around it.

2. What does zero divergence tell us about the behavior of electric fields?

Zero divergence indicates that the electric field is not originating from or terminating at a point charge, but rather is circulating around it. This behavior is often seen in conservative vector fields, where the electric field is a conservative force that conserves energy.

3. How is zero divergence related to Gauss's law?

Gauss's law states that the flux of an electric field through a closed surface is equal to the charge enclosed by that surface divided by the permittivity of free space. In the case of a point charge, the flux through any closed surface is equal to the charge enclosed, resulting in a zero divergence.

4. Can a point charge have non-zero divergence?

No, a point charge cannot have non-zero divergence. This is because the electric field lines always originate from or terminate at a point charge, resulting in a net flow of zero through any closed surface surrounding it.

5. How does zero divergence apply to the behavior of electric fields in real-life situations?

Zero divergence is a fundamental principle that applies to all electric fields, including those in real-life situations. It helps us understand the behavior of electric fields and how they interact with charges in a given system, making it an important concept in the study of electromagnetism.

Similar threads

Replies
12
Views
986
Replies
6
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
983
  • Electromagnetism
3
Replies
83
Views
3K
Replies
14
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
683
  • Electromagnetism
Replies
18
Views
873
Replies
3
Views
748
Replies
25
Views
5K
  • Electromagnetism
Replies
2
Views
726
Back
Top