Codex @codex  0

The electric field of this point charge is a translated and scaled version of the radial field in part (ii). If $\mathbf{a}\notin V$ and $\mathbf{a}\notin \partial V$, its divergence vanishes throughout $V$, so the divergence theorem gives zero flux integral.

If $\mathbf{a}$ lies inside $V$, remove a small ball centered at $\mathbf{a}$. On the remaining volume the divergence is zero. Its boundary is $\partial V$ together with the small sphere, whose outward normal for the punctured volume points towards $\mathbf{a}$. That inner sphere contributes $-q/{ϵ}_0$, by the $4\pi$ sphere flux computed in part (ii). Thus the exterior flux must be $q/{ϵ}_0$:This is Gauss's law for a point charge. The assumption that the charge is not on the boundary is essential to these alternatives.

Rotational symmetry of the vector field means $\mathbf{F}(r\mathbf{n})=h(r)\mathbf{n}$: rotations fixing $\mathbf{n}$ force the field to be parallel to $\mathbf{n}$, and rotations between directions make its magnitude depend only on $r$. Its flux integral over the radius-$r$ sphere is $4\pi r^{2}h(r)$. Applying the flux identity from part (i) to the ball, with the spherically symmetric source, givesTherefore the origin-regular spherical Poisson flux law isOnly source values at $s\le |\mathbf{x}|$ occur. Changing the exterior source can change the scalar potential by an interior constant, but cannot change this radial gradient. Regularity on all of ${\mathbb{R}}^3$, inherited from the Poisson equation setting, matters: on a punctured domain alone an additional $C\mathbf{x}/r^3$ would have zero divergence away from the origin and would not be fixed by the local source. It is excluded here by the origin regularity needed for the ball flux identity.

At every regular point of the double circular cone, its normal is perpendicular to $\mathbf{F}$ by part (a). Therefore the integrand of the flux integral vanishes pointwise:The vertex, if included, is a single point of zero surface area and does not alter the surface integral. The answer is independent of both the subset and its orientation. Tangency, rather than a cancellation between different parts of the surface, explains the zero flux.

Close the truncated two-sheet double circular cone by the lateral circular cylinder $r=1$, $-1\le z\le 1$. Together these form the boundary of the solid in part (c); no planar caps are required because the cone meets the circular cylinder along both end circles. On the circular cylinder the outward unit normal is $(\cos \theta ,\sin \theta ,0)$, so $\mathbf{F}\cdot \mathbf{n}=1$, and $dS=d\theta dz$. Its flux integral isThe divergence theorem now gives ${\int }_S\mathbf{F}\cdot d\mathbf{S}+4\pi =4\pi$, using the volume integral from part (c). Henceagreeing with tangency. The isolated vertex can be handled by excising a ball of radius $\epsilon$ and passing to the limit: since $|\mathbf{F}|=O(\epsilon )$ there and the added area is $O({\epsilon }^2)$, its extra flux is $O({\epsilon }^3)$ and tends to zero.

The curl is constant:Orient the spanning planar disk by the unit normal $\mathbf{n}=(a,b,c)$ and orient its boundary by the right-hand rule, equivalently counterclockwise when viewed from the side towards which $\mathbf{n}$ points. Stokes theorem converts the line integral to a constant flux integral through a disk of area $\pi R^2$. With this orientationReversing the orientation changes the sign. The centre of the circle does not enter because the curl is constant.