A Beta/gamma decay probabilities

CloudNine
Messages
15
Reaction score
3
Hi all,

I have received this following question which I can't really figure out all the way to the end:

Consider the beta decay of 212Pb:
צילום מסך 2021-10-31 ב-23.15.52.png

* What is the probability that the decay leads to the second excited state of 212Bi at 238.6 keV?
This is straight forward - from nndc NuDat, it seems that the answer is simply 81.5%:

*What is the probability that the beta decay is accompanied by the emission of a 238.6 keV gamma ray? Explain (qualitatively) the difference between this value and your answer to (a).
Here, the answer is, if I'm not mistaken (but here's my difficulty) is like so:
Lets define:
A - beta decay to the second excited state of Bi-212
B - gamma decay with 238.6 KeV
Since decaying with 238.6 KeV can only happen from the 2nd excited state of Bi-212, the events are dependent. Thus:
P(B∩A)=P(B|A)P(A)=0.436*0.815=0.35534
I don't understand "what is the difference" between this value and the answer to (a). These are different questions, depicting different situations..

*Google the binding energies of the bismuth K, L, M and N shells. Use this information and the Nudat database to identify the main emissions which solve the mystery of (b).
Totally lost it! What mystery? :( Is this the correct table to use? What does it give?

צילום מסך 2021-10-31 ב-23.25.11.png
 

Attachments

  • צילום מסך 2021-10-31 ב-23.06.15.png
    צילום מסך 2021-10-31 ב-23.06.15.png
    12 KB · Views: 163
Physics news on Phys.org
I think the problem asks indirectly how the other 56% of the nuclei go to the ground state if they don't emit a gamma photon.
 
mfb said:
I think the problem asks indirectly how the other 56% of the nuclei go to the ground state if they don't emit a gamma photon.
Yes I think you are right. I've dived into the theoretical explanations again and things make more sense now, and so I'm able to compile a coherent answer (hopefully).
Thanks!
 
Toponium is a hadron which is the bound state of a valance top quark and a valance antitop quark. Oversimplified presentations often state that top quarks don't form hadrons, because they decay to bottom quarks extremely rapidly after they are created, leaving no time to form a hadron. And, the vast majority of the time, this is true. But, the lifetime of a top quark is only an average lifetime. Sometimes it decays faster and sometimes it decays slower. In the highly improbable case that...
I'm following this paper by Kitaev on SL(2,R) representations and I'm having a problem in the normalization of the continuous eigenfunctions (eqs. (67)-(70)), which satisfy \langle f_s | f_{s'} \rangle = \int_{0}^{1} \frac{2}{(1-u)^2} f_s(u)^* f_{s'}(u) \, du. \tag{67} The singular contribution of the integral arises at the endpoint u=1 of the integral, and in the limit u \to 1, the function f_s(u) takes on the form f_s(u) \approx a_s (1-u)^{1/2 + i s} + a_s^* (1-u)^{1/2 - i s}. \tag{70}...
Back
Top