Calculating the Isotope Ratio of Uranium 235 and 238 4.5 Billion Years Ago

  • Thread starter Thread starter skrat
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Isotopes Uranium
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around calculating the isotope ratio of Uranium-235 and Uranium-238 as it existed 4.5 billion years ago, based on current isotope percentages and their half-lives.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Assumption checking, Mathematical reasoning

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • The original poster attempts to apply exponential decay formulas to determine the past ratio of isotopes, but expresses confusion regarding their results and calculations.
  • Some participants question the validity of the results, particularly the conclusion that the less abundant isotope was less prevalent in the past.
  • Others suggest verifying the independence of the isotopes' decay and emphasize the need to correctly apply the decay equations with the given values.
  • There is a request for clarification on the next steps after reaching a specific equation involving A and B.

Discussion Status

The discussion is ongoing, with participants providing constructive feedback and questioning assumptions. Some guidance has been offered regarding the application of decay equations, but there is no explicit consensus on the correct approach or outcome yet.

Contextual Notes

Participants note the importance of understanding the independence of the isotopes' decay and the implications of the current ratios on past abundances. There is a recognition of potential confusion stemming from the calculations presented.

skrat
Messages
740
Reaction score
8

Homework Statement


Current share of Uranium isotope on Earth is 99.28% (##^{238}U##) and 0.72% (##^{235}U##), half-life times are ##7.04\cdot 10^8 years## (##^{235}U##) and ##4.468\cdot 10^9 years## (##^{238}U##). Calculate the ratio between the isotopes ##4.5\cdot 10^9 years## ago.


Homework Equations





The Attempt at a Solution



If hope it is ok to say that ##N(t)=N_0e^{-\frac{t}{\tau }}##.

Let's now say that ##N_{238}(t)=Ae^{-\frac{t}{\lambda }}## where ##\lambda =\frac{t_{1/2}^{238}}{ln2}## and
##N_{235}(t)=Be^{-\frac{t}{\mu }}## where ##\mu =\frac{t_{1/2}^{235}}{ln2}##.

Now we know that ##\frac{N_{238}(t)}{N_{238}(t)+N_{235}(t)}=0.9928## and also ##\frac{N_{235}(t)}{N_{238}(t)+N_{235}(t)}=0.0072##

Knowing this, I can write:

##\frac{N_{238}(t)}{N_{238}(t)+N_{235}(t)}=\frac{Ae^{-\frac{t}{\lambda }}}{Ae^{-\frac{t}{\lambda }}+Be^{-\frac{t}{\mu }}}=0.9928## and

##\frac{Be^{-\frac{t}{\mu }}}{Ae^{-\frac{t}{\lambda }}+Be^{-\frac{t}{\mu }}}=0.0072##

Dividing last two gives me:

##\frac{Ae^{-\frac{t}{\lambda }}}{Be^{-\frac{t}{\mu }}}=\frac{0.9928}{0.0072}## and

##A=Be^{-t/\mu +t/\lambda }\frac{0.9928}{0.0072}##

Inserting this into ##\frac{Be^{-\frac{t}{\mu }}}{Ae^{-\frac{t}{\lambda }}+Be^{-\frac{t}{\mu }}}=0.0072## leaves me with the result that ##B=1##.

Knowing this also gives me a result for ##A##, therefore ##A=459.8##.

So... If I am not mistaken, than following ratios should be the result I am searching:

##\frac{B}{B+A}=0.9978## for Uranium 235 and ##\frac{A}{B+A}=0.0022## for Uranium 238.

Which to me is a bit confusing, so I would kindly ask somebody to tell me where I got it all wrong?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Inserting this into ##\frac{Be^{-\frac{t}{\mu }}}{Ae^{-\frac{t}{\lambda }}+Be^{-\frac{t}{\mu }}}=0.0072## leaves me with the result that ##B=1##
Is not correct. It leaves you with the result that 0.0072 = 0.0072, which is not extremely useful.

B = 1 is a strange answer anyway, right ?
And: you should become suspicious when your answer stipulates that the fastest decaying isotope was less abundant in the past than the other one!

And now for some more constructive stuff:
First you want to check that 238U doesn't decay into 235U, which it doesn't.
So both can be considered independent.

You have expressions for the current ratio N238 / N235.
With ##N(t)=N_0e^{-\frac{t}{\tau }}## you also have expressions for ##N(t)/N_0## for both.
All you have to do is fill in the numbers !
 
BvU said:
You have expressions for the current ratio N238 / N235.
With ##N(t)=N_0e^{-\frac{t}{\tau }}## you also have expressions for ##N(t)/N_0## for both.
All you have to do is fill in the numbers !

Fill in the numbers into what? O.o

All I have is ##\frac{N_{238}(t)}{N_{238}(t)+N_{235}(t)}=0.9928## and ##\frac{N_{235}(t)}{N_{238}(t)+N_{235}(t)}=0.0072##, of course dividing those two brings me to current ratio, just like you said but... ?

I don't get it what the next step is supposed to be..
 
You reached the equation
##A=Be^{-t/\mu +t/\lambda }\frac{0.9928}{0.0072}##
which is correct. You should now plug in the known values for t, λ, and μ. and solve for A/B.
 
Ok...

##A=3.30B##.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
6K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
8K
Replies
7
Views
6K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K