Predicting which atoms radiate first in radioavtive materials

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter niggasnopec
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Atoms Materials
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the predictability of atomic decay in radioactive materials, questioning whether it is possible to determine which atoms will decay first. Participants explore the implications of quantum theory on this topic, considering randomness and the potential for undiscovered laws governing decay processes.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Exploratory

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants assert that quantum theory indicates it is impossible to predict which atom will decay next, supporting the idea of randomness in decay processes.
  • Others argue that while current understanding suggests randomness, there may be undiscovered laws that could explain the decay process, expressing skepticism about the notion of true randomness.
  • One participant mentions the historical context of the debate around determinism in physics, referencing Einstein's famous quote about randomness.
  • Concerns are raised about the adequacy of current mathematical descriptions and whether hidden parameters could exist that might allow for predictions.
  • A participant expresses a lack of knowledge in physics, suggesting that high school physics does not capture the complexity of these discussions.
  • There is a suggestion that previous attempts to find hidden parameters have not succeeded, but this does not rule out their existence.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally disagree on the nature of atomic decay, with some firmly supporting the idea of randomness and others proposing the possibility of underlying laws. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the existence of hidden parameters or deterministic laws.

Contextual Notes

Limitations include the dependence on current interpretations of quantum mechanics and the lack of consensus on the existence of hidden parameters that could influence decay predictions.

Who May Find This Useful

Readers interested in quantum mechanics, the philosophy of science, and the nature of randomness in physical processes may find this discussion relevant.

niggasnopec
Messages
5
Reaction score
0
I wonder if there is any theoretical knowledge how to predict which atoms will decay first in given radioactive substance? I was asking about this in school and teacher said it is not possible to predict this...i doubt this process is random...
Thanks
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Your teacher is right. Quantum theory underlies what happens, so there is no way of knowing in advance which atom will decay next.
 
This is as random as random random can be.
 
Yeah, but nothing in nature is random...there must be some laws behind that...they are just waiting to be discovered. It wonders me no one tried predicting this in theory.
 
niggasnopec said:
Yeah, but nothing in nature is random...there must be some laws behind that...they are just waiting to be discovered. It wonders me no one tried predicting this in theory.

Actually a lot of things in nature are random. Sure, one day we may find there is some hidden, deeper structure responsible for non-randomness af the randomness that we see, but so far there is no reason to assume such thing exists. We have about 100 years of tests confirming randomness of the quantum world.

And you are not the first one to think this can't be true. This is an old discussion, google "God does not play dice".
 
I know, but if you can describe it with mathematics and have all parameters you can predict it...maybe just parameters are so "weird". Kinda like it was with motion of planets until they simplified it...
Anyway thanks for replying
 
Ah, the quest for hidden parameters. We've been there, we tried it, we failed.
 
Maybe someday...I must say I don't have much knowledge of physics, just in last grade of high school, although I am taking final exams in physics. Highscool physics is just not interessing as it may be...
 
niggasnopec said:
Maybe someday...I must say I don't have much knowledge of physics, just in last grade of high school, although I am taking final exams in physics. Highscool physics is just not interessing as it may be...

you have the same prejudice as Einstein: "God does not play dice"

maybe it would be useful for you to study the birth of Quantum physics?
 
  • #10
I said maybe...maybe not.
 
  • #11
Borek said:
Ah, the quest for hidden parameters. We've been there, we tried it, we failed.

How exactly have we failed?
How can scientists disprove hidden parameters?
 
  • #12
We failed to find them. Doesn't mean they don't exist, I have stated it earlier - but so far there is no reason to believe they do exist.
 

Similar threads

High School Can alpha radiation make other materials radioactive?
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
4K
Undergrad Nuclear decay of a small number of atoms calculation
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
Atomic displacements, replacements, and radiation damage of structural materials
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
High School Thinking about a calendar epoch based on the field of physics
  • · Replies 49 ·
2
Replies
49
Views
6K
Undergrad Help me understand indeterminism in standard quantum mechanics
  • · Replies 31 ·
2
Replies
31
Views
3K
Undergrad Fissionable elements for Fission
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Undergrad Glueballs Observed For The First Time
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
5K
Undergrad Algorithmic model for primary decay chains
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Undergrad Beta and gamma rays from radium
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
High School Why does the nucleus become unstable as the number of nucleons increases?
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
5K