The importance of having to recognize the bulk susceptibility contributions to the induced fields at a nuclear spin site as distinctly different from the Chemical shift changes arising from the local molecular/atomic electron charge cloud circulation changes is becoming prominent in the studies of biological samples by the NMR techniques [1]. It is also has to be taken into consideration that the sample shape dependence of the Bulk Susceptibility contribution dominates the induced field distribution patterns more than the actual differences in Bulk susceptibility values from one sample to another. This bulk susceptibility contribution if can be tracked well, this can be advantageously used for obtaining the required image-quality in the MRI studies to extract the information on the system critically.

In this context it becomes necessary to have a simple mathematical procedure, which appropriately takes into consideration, the required validity point-dipole approximation by inherently built in the mathematical criteria, which is the basis for the calculation procedure.

An alternative simple summing procedure [instead of the complicated procedures of integration] is possible for the calculation of shape dependent Demagnetization Factors as can be known from the considerations of having to account for the bulk susceptibility effects in HR PMR Solids [2].

A perspective of this above simple summation procedure is that if a suitable polar coordinate axis system can be defined in the sample with the specific nuclear site as origin, then given a radial distance from the nucleus with the polar angular coordinates {謶} it is a simple matter of a pocket calculator calculation to arrive at the induced field contribution at the nuclear site. This calculation inherently generates a conical volume element with the defined origin at the apex. The required dimensions for this cone described this way can be predetermined as per the situational convenient [3].

This simple procedure seems capable of providing induced-field distribution patterns for specified shapes. And, also, if there is any prior information about the possible induced field distributions using these procedures an effort can be possibly made to infer about the shapes, which might be contributing to such patterns. This latter aspect has to be given a better investigation than
what at present was possible. This back and forth procedure might help to iterate and improve the inferences. The discussions in interpreting such bulk susceptibility by workers till now indicate
that this could be worthwhile tool in these contexts.