Atoms decay via alpha emission have a half-life of 150 min

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around a problem in radioactive decay, specifically focusing on alpha emission and the calculation of emitted alpha particles over a specified time interval based on a given half-life of 150 minutes.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Conceptual clarification, Mathematical reasoning

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants explore the calculation of remaining atoms after specific time intervals and question the accuracy of initial calculations. There is a discussion about the potential use of integral calculus to approach the problem.

Discussion Status

Some participants have identified discrepancies in the calculations and have provided corrections. There is ongoing exploration of whether integral calculus can be applied to the problem, with some expressing uncertainty about its necessity given the existing decay formula.

Contextual Notes

Participants are working under the constraints of a homework problem, which may limit the information available for discussion and the methods they can employ.

IKonquer
Messages
47
Reaction score
0
2.3 \cdot 10^{10} atoms decay via alpha emission have a half-life of 150 min.

How many alpha particles are emitted between t=30 min and t=160 min?

<br /> \begin{flalign*}<br /> 150 &amp;= \frac{\ln 2}{\lambda}\\<br /> \lambda &amp;= 0.046 <br /> \\<br /> \\<br /> K &amp;= K_{0}e^{(-\lambda)(t)}\\<br /> &amp;= (2.3 \cdot 10^{10})e^{(-0.046)(30)}\\<br /> K_{30} &amp;= 5.79 \cdot 10^{9}<br /> \\<br /> \\<br /> K &amp;= K_{0}e^{(-\lambda)(t)}\\<br /> &amp;= (2.3 \cdot 10^{10})e^{(-0.046)(160)}\\<br /> K_{160} &amp;= 1.46 \cdot 10^{7}<br /> \\<br /> \\<br /> K_{30} - K_{160} = 5.77 \cdot 10^{9} \text{ emitted}<br /> \end{flalign*}<br />

Did I do this correctly? And is there a way to use calculus to do this?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
λ = ln(2)/150 ≈ 0.004621

You're off by a factor of 10.

K30 represents the number of atoms which remain undecayed after 30 minutes. The number you have for K30 is way under half of the initial sample, in a time that's 1/5 of the half-life.
 
Nice catch! Does it look right now? Also is there a way of using integral calculus to solve this?

<br /> <br /> \begin{flalign*}<br /> 150 &amp;= \frac{\ln 2}{\lambda}\\<br /> \lambda &amp;= 0.0046 <br /> \\<br /> \\<br /> K &amp;= K_{0}e^{(-\lambda)(t)}\\<br /> &amp;= (2.3 \cdot 10^{10})e^{(-0.0046)(30)}\\<br /> K_{30} &amp;= 2.00 \cdot 10^{10}<br /> \\<br /> \\<br /> K &amp;= K_{0}e^{(-\lambda)(t)}\\<br /> &amp;= (2.3 \cdot 10^{10})e^{(-0.0046)(160)}\\<br /> K_{160} &amp;= 1.10 \cdot 10^{10}<br /> \\<br /> \\<br /> K_{30} - K_{160} = 8.98 \cdot 10^{9} \text{ emitted}<br /> \end{flalign*}<br /> <br />
 
Yes, that seems better. I don't know why you want to use integral calculus, since the formula for radioactive decay was derived using integral calculus in the first place.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
3K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
5K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
4K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K