Particle Physics: Unstable Nuclides, Beta & Positron Decays Explained

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the processes of beta decay and positron decay in unstable nuclides, exploring the implications of these decays and the concept of perpetual motion machines. Participants examine the stability of protons and neutrons in different contexts, particularly within atomic nuclei.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant suggests that beta decay and positron decay could lead to the creation of an electron-positron pair from nothing, questioning if this implies a perpetual motion machine.
  • Another participant counters that free protons do not decay into neutrons and positrons, emphasizing the need to consider the energy states of nucleons within a nucleus.
  • A third participant explains that a proton in a large nucleus is less stable due to electromagnetic energy, which can lead to its decay into a neutron, positron, and neutrino, but not back to a proton without additional energy.
  • Some participants note that beta and positron emitters are typically artificially created, requiring energy input that exceeds any energy recovered from annihilation events.
  • Discussion includes the stability of free neutrons versus neutrons within a nucleus, highlighting that free neutrons have a half-life of about 10.3 minutes but are more stable when bound in a nucleus.
  • A later post inquires about the half-life of a deuterium nucleus, indicating interest in specific isotopes and their decay characteristics.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the feasibility of the proposed perpetual motion machine concept, with some asserting that the processes described cannot occur as suggested. There is no consensus on the implications of beta and positron decay in relation to energy states and stability.

Contextual Notes

Participants discuss the stability of nucleons in various contexts, the energy requirements for decay processes, and the nature of artificially created nuclides. The discussion does not resolve the complexities of these decay processes or their implications for perpetual motion.

vinter
Messages
77
Reaction score
0
Did I say Particle Physics? I shouldn't have said that. I don't know much about it.
But still, what I came upto recently was this :-


I read somewhere that unstable nuclides can disintegrate in several ways, beta decay and positron decay being two of them. In beta decay, a neutron gets converted into a proton and an electron and in positron decay, a proton gets converted to a neutron and a positron. Now, also, an electron and a positron annihilate each other giving lots of energy. So... If I carry a beta decay with a neutron, I will have a proton and an electron. Then if I carry a positron decay with this proton, I will get my original neutron back, plus a positron. So basically, the situation amounts to getting a pair of an electron and a positron from nothing. Now if I make them react, I will get energy for free! Isn't it a perpetual motion machine then? If not, what's the flaw?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
From what I understand about these processes, you can't undergo the reaction you're describing. If you're talking about free protons and neutrons (that is, outside of a nucleus), then you can get a neutron decay, just as you described, but free protons don't decay into a neutron and positron (though GUTs think they might decay into other things).

Now, if we look at a whole nucleus (with its protons and neutrons), then there are circumstances in which each of the processes you described will occur. However, they will not occur in succession. That is, a nucleus will not undergo beta decay, followed only by positron emission. This is because you need to think of the nucleus as a composite state with a certain energy. A beta or positron decay can occur when there exists a lower energy state for the nucleus in which one of the nucleons is switched (proton to neutron or the other way around), but you can't decay back to the original state because it has a higher energy.

There may, however, be circumstances in which you can undergo a beta decay, some series of other decays, and then a positron decay, but I'm not familiar enough with the various reactions to know for sure.
 
Last edited:
The answer, I believe, is in your question vinter. The key word here is 'unstable'. A neutron requires more energy and so is less stable than a proton, hence beta decay in free neutrons. It would make no sense for the proton to decay into a neutron again as it is already in its most stable state. However, a proton in a large nucleus packed with other protons is not in its most stable state thanks to the additional EM energy doing its best to overcome the strong interactions between the nucleons. To get to a more stable state, the proton decays into a neutron, positron, neutrino and released energy. With neutral charge and this hapless EM energy gone, the nucleon is in its most stable state. To decay into a proton again would require MORE energy to overcome the EM interactions, so no help with perpetual motion there, though if you do solve the problem I want royalties for helping you avoid the wrong route, you hear?
 
hih... and I thought I was going to become rich with this money making formula.
 
Vinter - a nucleus which undergoes beta decay (electron emission) has an excess of neutrons, while a nucleus which undergoes positron emission has a relative excess of protons (although it will have still more neutrons than protons in general). They are two different nuclides.

Most beta and positron emitters are artifically made, so it take energy to make them, more than one will recover from the annihilation from a positron-electron pair.

The 'spontaneous' decay of a proton is unlikely. As El Hombre Invisible pointed out, the proton is extremely stable, otherwise we would be without a lot of hydrogen.

A free neutron is unstable with a half-life of about 10.3 minutes, but in a nucleus it is much more stable. Nuclei with an excess of neutrons may be unstable - see Chart of the Nuclides - http://wwwndc.tokai.jaeri.go.jp/CN04/index.html

Notice the position of the positron and electron emitters with respect to the stable nuclides.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Astronuc nucleus...

Astronuc said:
...a nucleus which undergoes beta decay (electron emission) has an excess of neutrons, while a nucleus which undergoes positron emission has a relative excess of protons (although it will have still more neutrons than protons in general). They are two different nuclides.

A free neutron is unstable with a half-life of about 10.3 minutes, but in a nucleus it is much more stable.

Astronuc, what is the Half-Life of a 'Deutronium' nucleus?
[/color]
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
5K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 32 ·
2
Replies
32
Views
5K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
5K