Physics Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for active researchers, academics and students of physics. Join them; it only takes a minute:

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

On a similar note: when using Gauss' Law, do you even begin with Coulomb's law, or does one take it as given that flux is the surface integral of the Electric field in the direction of the normal to the surface at a point?

share|cite|improve this question
While it's healthy to know these derivations, you should keep in mind that Gauss's law is more general than Coulomb's law. Coulomb's law is only true if the charges are stationary, there are no changing magnetic fields, etc. But Gauss's law is true under all circumstances. So Gauss's law is more than just a consequence of Coulomb's law. – Steve B Nov 23 '12 at 13:31
up vote 5 down vote accepted

Let us for simplicity consider $n$ point charges $q_1$, $\ldots$, $q_n$, at positions $\vec{r}_1$, $\ldots$, $\vec{r}_n$, in the electrostatic limit, with vacuum permittivity $\epsilon_0$.

Now let us sketch one possible strategy to prove Gauss' law from Coulomb's law:

  1. Deduce from Coulomb's law that the electric field at position $\vec{r}$ is $$\tag{1} \vec{E}(\vec{r})~=~ \sum_{i=1}^n\frac{q_i }{4\pi\epsilon_0}\frac{\vec{r}-\vec{r}_i}{|\vec{r}-\vec{r}_i|^3} . $$

  2. Deduce the charge density $$\tag{2} \rho(\vec{r})~=~\sum_{i=1}^n q_i\delta^3(\vec{r}-\vec{r}_i). $$

  3. Recall the following mathematical identity $$\tag{3}\vec{\nabla}\cdot \frac{\vec{r}}{|\vec{r}|^3}~=~4\pi\delta^3(\vec{r}) .$$ (This Phys.SE answer may be useful in proving eq.(3), which may also be written as $\nabla^2\frac{1}{|\vec{r}|}=-4\pi\delta^3(\vec{r})$).

  4. Use eqs. (1)-(3) to prove Gauss' law in differential form $$\tag{4} \vec{\nabla}\cdot \vec{E}~=~\frac{\rho}{\epsilon_0} .$$

  5. Deduce Gauss' law in integral form via the divergence theorem.

share|cite|improve this answer
Is 3 Poisson's equation, a generalisation of it or a subdivision of it? And thanks for the answer- not too unfathomable. – Meow Sep 26 '12 at 19:17
I updated the answer. Eq.(3) is a mathematical identity, while Poisson's equation has physical content. – Qmechanic Sep 26 '12 at 19:35
Now I realize that the proof is also given near the bottom of this Wikipedia page. – Qmechanic Sep 30 '12 at 16:16
I intuit equation (2), but why cube $\delta(\mathbf{r}-\mathbf{r_i})$? – Meow Mar 12 '13 at 13:17
@Alyosha: It's standard notation for the 3-dimensional delta function $\delta^3(\vec{r})~:=~\delta(x)\delta(y)\delta(z)$. – Qmechanic Mar 12 '13 at 14:27

Your Answer


By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.