Radioactive decay formula


by SReinhardt
Tags: decay, formula, radioactive
SReinhardt
SReinhardt is offline
#1
Jun5-08, 03:49 PM
P: 5
What lead them to use e and the natural log of 2 in the decay formula? A much simpler (to me at least) method would is:

N=No*.5^(time/half life)
Phys.Org News Partner Physics news on Phys.org
Physicists design quantum switches which can be activated by single photons
'Dressed' laser aimed at clouds may be key to inducing rain, lightning
Higher-order nonlinear optical processes observed using the SACLA X-ray free-electron laser
rock.freak667
rock.freak667 is offline
#2
Jun5-08, 07:26 PM
HW Helper
P: 6,213
Well since

[tex]N=N_0 e^{- \lambda t}[/tex]

when t=half-life(T); N=[itex]\frac{N_0}{2}[/itex]

[tex]\frac{N_0}{2}=N_0 e^{- \lambda T}[/tex]

simplify that by canceling the N_0 and then take logs and you'll eventually get

[tex]T=\frac{ln2}{\lambda}[/tex]
SReinhardt
SReinhardt is offline
#3
Jun5-08, 07:48 PM
P: 5
Quote Quote by rock.freak667 View Post
Well since

[tex]N=N_0 e^{- \lambda t}[/tex]

when t=half-life(T); N=[itex]\frac{N_0}{2}[/itex]

[tex]\frac{N_0}{2}=N_0 e^{- \lambda T}[/tex]

simplify that by canceling the N_0 and then take logs and you'll eventually get

[tex]T=\frac{ln2}{\lambda}[/tex]
I'm curious on why they chose to use [tex]N=N_0 e^{- \lambda t}[/tex] instead of [tex]N = N_O .5^{\frac{t}{half-life}}[/tex] The 2nd one is one that I figured out, and it makes more sense to me; it is based off the idea of half-lives. (I'm not saying it's original or hasn't been done before, just was never shown to me)

Vanadium 50
Vanadium 50 is offline
#4
Jun5-08, 09:40 PM
Mentor
Vanadium 50's Avatar
P: 15,601

Radioactive decay formula


It's the same question as "why log base e and not log base 2"? It happens to make some calculations easier. (Note that your calculator has a ln(x) button but probably not a log2(x) button)
SReinhardt
SReinhardt is offline
#5
Jun5-08, 09:51 PM
P: 5
Quote Quote by Vanadium 50 View Post
It's the same question as "why log base e and not log base 2"? It happens to make some calculations easier. (Note that your calculator has a ln(x) button but probably not a log2(x) button)
I've never had any issues using it...I can see where you're coming from though. Your point is for when you're solving for the time or half-life. But then all you have to do is take the log10 and divide.

It could also be I use it just to make my teacher grade things two ways xD
malawi_glenn
malawi_glenn is offline
#6
Jun6-08, 02:51 AM
Sci Advisor
HW Helper
malawi_glenn's Avatar
P: 4,739
the differential equation is:

[tex] \frac{dN}{dt} = \lambda N [/tex]

Solve it.
SReinhardt
SReinhardt is offline
#7
Jun6-08, 07:36 AM
P: 5
Quote Quote by malawi_glenn View Post
the differential equation is:

[tex] \frac{dN}{dt} = \lambda N [/tex]

Solve it.
Wouldn't there have to be a negative sign in there somewhere >_>

I believe you have to use integrals to solve that, which I haven't done yet.
malawi_glenn
malawi_glenn is offline
#8
Jun6-08, 07:58 AM
Sci Advisor
HW Helper
malawi_glenn's Avatar
P: 4,739
Quote Quote by SReinhardt View Post
Wouldn't there have to be a negative sign in there somewhere >_>

I believe you have to use integrals to solve that, which I haven't done yet.
yeah it should have a minus sign, good! :-)

Solving this:

[tex] \int N ^{-1}dN = - \int \lambda dt [/tex]

[tex] \ln(N(t)) - \ln(N(0)) = -\lambda t [/tex]

[tex] \ln(N(t)/N(0)) = -\lambda t [/tex]

[tex] N(t)/N(0) = e^{-\lambda t } [/tex]

[tex] N(t) = N(0) e^{-\lambda t } [/tex]

Lambda is the number of decays per unit time, is related to half life by:
[tex] \lambda = \frac{\ln 2}{T_{1/2}} [/tex]
SReinhardt
SReinhardt is offline
#9
Jun6-08, 08:07 AM
P: 5
Quote Quote by malawi_glenn View Post
yeah it should have a minus sign, good! :-)

Solving this:

[tex] \int N ^{-1}dN = - \int \lambda dt [/tex]

[tex] \ln(N(t)) - \ln(N(0)) = -\lambda t [/tex]

[tex] \ln(N(t)/N(0)) = -\lambda t [/tex]

[tex] N(t)/N(0) = e^{-\lambda t } [/tex]

[tex] N(t) = N(0) e^{-\lambda t } [/tex]

Lambda is the number of decays per unit time, is related to half life by:
[tex] \lambda = \frac{\ln 2}{T_{1/2}} [/tex]
So if you used based base .5 instead of base e, you'd get what I worked out on my own. The main thing that would change then would be the [tex]\lambda[/tex]
malawi_glenn
malawi_glenn is offline
#10
Jun6-08, 08:11 AM
Sci Advisor
HW Helper
malawi_glenn's Avatar
P: 4,739
it is easier working with base e when solving the differential eq.

Then if you think it is easier to work in basis 0.5 when you calculate, then it is up to you.
malawi_glenn
malawi_glenn is offline
#11
Jun6-08, 03:12 PM
Sci Advisor
HW Helper
malawi_glenn's Avatar
P: 4,739
and practically, it is easier to measure the decay constant lambda then the half life.


Register to reply

Related Discussions
radioactive decay Introductory Physics Homework 1
What is the proper use and meaning of "Radioactive decay"? How much decay HAS occured General Physics 2
radioactive decay equilibrium when decay constants are equal Biology, Chemistry & Other Homework 2
Radioactive Decay Introductory Physics Homework 3
Radioactive Decay Calculus 2