Age of Ax Handle from Dig: Calculating Half-Life of Carbon-14

  • Thread starter Thread starter Soaring Crane
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Half-life
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around determining the age of a piece of wood, specifically an ax handle, using the principles of carbon-14 dating. The context involves understanding the concept of half-life and its application to the decay of beta emissions from the wood sample.

Discussion Character

  • Conceptual clarification, Mathematical reasoning, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants explore how to calculate the age of the wood based on its beta emission rates compared to a fresh sample. Questions arise regarding the correct interpretation of half-life and the relationship between beta emissions and time elapsed.

Discussion Status

The discussion is active, with participants offering different interpretations of how to apply the concept of half-life to the problem. Some guidance has been provided regarding the correct reasoning behind the calculations, though there is no explicit consensus on the final answer.

Contextual Notes

There is some confusion regarding the terminology of half-life and how it relates to the decay process, with participants questioning assumptions about the calculations and the implications of the beta emission rates.

Soaring Crane
Messages
461
Reaction score
0
An archaeologist digs up a piece of wood believed to be an ax handle from a dig. The wood is from an ash tree. The beta emission from the old piece of wood is 4 beta/min. A similar piece of wood that is freshly cut registers beta emission at 16 beta/min. The half-life of carbon-14 is 5,370 yrs. How old is the piece of wood from the dig?

Is it 5370yrs./2?

Thanks. :smile:
 
Physics news on Phys.org
You need to look up half-life([itex]\lambda[/itex]). How many half lives are required to reduce 16 to 4 (there's an elegant exponential function for doing these problems BTW)?
 
5370*4, b/c the halflife is cut in half twice
 
Soaring Crane said:
Is it 5370yrs./2?
No it isn't. That's not the way to think of half-life. Don't let the word 'half' confuse you.

greenman100 said:
5370*4, b/c the halflife is cut in half twice

Both your answer and reasoning are wrong. The halflife is never cut in half twice. The beta emission is cut in half twice.

It takes 5370 years for the beta emission to decrease from 16 to 8. Another 5370 years to decrease from 8 to 4. Soaring Crane, you should now be able to determine the total amount of time it takes for the beta emission to decrease from 16 to 4.
 
greenman100 said:
5370*4, b/c the halflife is cut in half twice

Your calculation is correct but, as recon said, your answer and your reasoning (as well as your wording!) are wrong.

"Halflife" is a constant- it doesn't get cut in half. You are correct that the beta emission has been cut in half twice. Each time it is cut in half is one half-life. Okay, "cut in half twice" requires how many half-lives?
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
5K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
5K
Replies
30
Views
14K
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
4K