Beta minus decay

  • Thread starter gxc9800
  • Start date
  • #1
18
0

Homework Statement


in the first photo of my note , it says that the product nucleus has Z electrons (not Z+1) electrons ,
whereas for the 2nd part of my note , it says that the atomic masses of the product nucleus( which has A nucelon mumber and Z+1 proton number) , it has one extra orbitting electrons

why the 2nd part of the note is different from the first one? the product nucleus has Z+1 electrons or Z electrons?
2. Homework Equations



The Attempt at a Solution

 

Attachments

  • IMG_20141011_082202[1].jpg
    IMG_20141011_082202[1].jpg
    44.3 KB · Views: 333
  • IMG_20141011_082113[1].jpg
    IMG_20141011_082113[1].jpg
    45.6 KB · Views: 324

Answers and Replies

  • #2
haruspex
Science Advisor
Homework Helper
Insights Author
Gold Member
2020 Award
36,422
6,951
I think they're trying to say the same thing, but the second is very poorly worded. The notation contributes to the problem.
##^A_{Z+1}Y## in the equation they both quote represents an ion, i.e. It is missing an electron. How are you supposed to know this from the notation? Shouldn't it be something like ##^A_{Z+1}Y^+##?
The first text treats it as representing an ion throughout. The second text seems to recognise the ambiguity; the references after the equation interpret it as the un-ionised atom, so needs to subtract off the mass of the electron when calculating the mass loss. I.e., ##m_y## is the mass of the un-ionised atom.
 
  • #3
18
0
I think they're trying to say the same thing, but the second is very poorly worded. The notation contributes to the problem.
##^A_{Z+1}Y## in the equation they both quote represents an ion, i.e. It is missing an electron. How are you supposed to know this from the notation? Shouldn't it be something like ##^A_{Z+1}Y^+##?
The first text treats it as representing an ion throughout. The second text seems to recognise the ambiguity; the references after the equation interpret it as the un-ionised atom, so needs to subtract off the mass of the electron when calculating the mass loss. I.e., ##m_y## is the mass of the un-ionised atom.

##^A_{Z+1}Y## represent positive ion am i right? but not ##^A_{Z+1}Y^+## ... the product nuclei has Z+1 proton but the number of electrons remained the same.... so for ##^A_{Z+1}Y## , it's a positive ion... am i right?

i knew this from the first photo.
 
  • #4
haruspex
Science Advisor
Homework Helper
Insights Author
Gold Member
2020 Award
36,422
6,951
##^A_{Z+1}Y## represent positive ion am i right? but not ##^A_{Z+1}Y^+## ... the product nuclei has Z+1 proton but the number of electrons remained the same.... so for ##^A_{Z+1}Y## , it's a positive ion... am i right?

i knew this from the first photo.
Forget about the beta decay for the moment. Y represents some element. The notation ##^A_{Z+1}Y## should represent an atom of element Y, having atomic mass A and Z+1 protons. In the absence of any indication as to whether it is ionised, one would assume it therefore has Z+1 electrons. The right hand side of the equation should therefore read ##^A_{Z+1}Y^++e^-##.
Anyway, do you now understand that the two texts are trying to say the same thing?
 
  • #5
18
0
Forget about the beta decay for the moment. Y represents some element. The notation ##^A_{Z+1}Y## should represent an atom of element Y, having atomic mass A and Z+1 protons. In the absence of any indication as to whether it is ionised, one would assume it therefore has Z+1 electrons. The right hand side of the equation should therefore read ##^A_{Z+1}Y^++e^-##.
Anyway, do you now understand that the two texts are trying to say the same thing?
alright, can you please look at the 2nd photo?
i can understand why the mass defect (for atomic mass) is mx -( my-me) -me , why not mx -( my+me) -me ?

before subtracting the mass of the 'extra orbitting electron' , why the mass defect is calculated by mx-my-me (just like nuclear mass at the top part ) ??
 
  • #6
haruspex
Science Advisor
Homework Helper
Insights Author
Gold Member
2020 Award
36,422
6,951
alright, can you please look at the 2nd photo?
i can understand why the mass defect (for atomic mass) is mx -( my-me) -me , why not mx -( my+me) -me ?

before subtracting the mass of the 'extra orbitting electron' , why the mass defect is calculated by mx-my-me (just like nuclear mass at the top part ) ??
As I wrote, that text is taking my to be the mass of a 'complete' (un-ionised) atom of Y. Since it is ionised (+), its mass is my-me. The wording in the text is atrocious, and I'm not surprised you are confused. Is it a translation?
 
  • #7
18
0
As I wrote, that text is taking my to be the mass of a 'complete' (un-ionised) atom of Y. Since it is ionised (+), its mass is my-me. The wording in the text is atrocious, and I'm not surprised you are confused. Is it a translation?
i will try my best to understand . i am not sure whether it's the translation or not. but i english is not my first languange...
 

Related Threads on Beta minus decay

Replies
2
Views
256
  • Last Post
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • Last Post
Replies
1
Views
7K
  • Last Post
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • Last Post
Replies
5
Views
937
  • Last Post
Replies
1
Views
928
  • Last Post
Replies
11
Views
5K
  • Last Post
Replies
11
Views
797
Replies
4
Views
3K
Top