Gaussian surface without any charge inside it
Solution 1
No it is not necessarily 0. You can think about Gauss Law this way: It relates the total flux of the eletrical field to the net charge inside the surface, it is a direct relation between eletrical flux and charge inside. The flux is necessary 0, not the eletric field. Picture a point charge and a gaussian surface beside it ( but not with it inside ), the field is clearly not 0 at all points of the surface but the flux is.
Solution 2
Consider the field around a point charge $$ \mathbf{E} = \frac{q}{4\pi \epsilon_0} \frac{\hat{\mathbf{r}}}{r^2}\;. $$ This is not zero anywhere (except at infinity). Now consider any closed surface which does not enclose the charge. The total charge enclosed is therefore 0 but at no point on the surface is the field 0. However the net flux entering and leaving the surface is 0.
Solution 3
No, it doesn't --- it means that there's an equal flux of electric fields leaving the surface and entering the surface. For an example, try constructing some Gaussian surfaces around an electric dipole.
Related videos on Youtube
user164780
Updated on August 18, 2022Comments
-
user164780 about 1 year
Suppose a Gaussian surface has no net charge inside it. Does it mean that the electric field $E$ is necessarily zero at all points on the surface? And is the converse also true? Can this be shown mathematically?
-
user164780 over 6 yearsHow will I prove this mathematically?
-
user164780 over 6 yearsAnd it seems that you did not get my question.I want to know whether I can prove mathematically that the electric field intensity is not necessarily 0 on the Gaussian surface even if there is no charge enclosed by the surface.
-
rob over 6 yearsLook at any diagram of the electric field around a dipole. Draw a Gaussian surface someplace where the field isn't zero. Compute the flux integral --- you get zero if the surface encloses both charges and nonzero if you only enclose one charge.
-
user164780 over 6 yearsI am not trying to bring "electric dipole " into consideration.
-
user164780 over 6 yearsAnd in your case charge(s) is enclosed......but in my question I said that the Gaussian surface should not enclose any charge .
-
rob over 6 yearsYour question (v1) says "no net charge." I was suggesting taking equal-but-opposite charges and separating them by some nonzero distance, but I used a distracting technical name. But if you're integrating around a dipole field, you'll also get zero net flux if your Gaussian surface encloses neither charge.
-
user164780 over 6 yearsQuite true....my mistake.....yes we can consider an electric dipole
-
user164780 over 6 yearsAnd one more thing ...what about the electric field on the Gaussian surface as specified in the question.
-
user164780 over 6 yearsWhy is it not zero?
-
By Symmetry over 6 yearsWe have an explicit formula for the field at every point in space, and it is never 0.
-
user164780 over 6 yearsI mean why is the field intensity not zero at this Gaussian surface which is not enclosing any charge?
-
By Symmetry over 6 yearsBecause the field intensity is not zero anywhere... Gaussian surface included