Derivation for this equation: N = N0(1/2)^t/t1/2?

  • Thread starter Thread starter nothing123
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Derivation
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the derivation of the equation N = N0(1/2)^(t/T1/2), which relates to radioactive decay and half-life. Participants explore the mathematical relationships and principles underlying this equation, including the exponential decay model and the concept of half-life.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Mathematical reasoning
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant seeks clarification on the derivation of the equation N = N0(1/2)^(t/T1/2) and expresses understanding of its application but not its origin.
  • Another participant states that the rate of radioactive decay is proportional to the number of particles, leading to the differential equation -dN/dt = λN.
  • Some participants derive the equation N = N0e^(-kt) but note that it does not include the decay constant in the form they are discussing.
  • There is a discussion about the half-life occurring when N(t) = N0/2, and the time taken for this decay is referred to as T1/2.
  • Participants express confusion regarding the manipulation of exponential terms and the application of logarithmic identities in their derivations.
  • One participant questions the validity of an earlier statement regarding exponent rules, leading to further clarification attempts.
  • Another participant suggests that they have reached a conclusion but expresses uncertainty about the correctness of their final equation.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus on the derivation process and the manipulation of exponential terms. Multiple viewpoints and interpretations of the mathematical relationships remain present throughout the discussion.

Contextual Notes

There are unresolved questions regarding the application of exponent rules and the derivation steps, with participants expressing uncertainty about their understanding of logarithmic and exponential relationships.

nothing123
Messages
97
Reaction score
0
Anyone know the derivation for this equation: N = N0(1/2)^t/t1/2? I can understand it plugging numbers in but I don't really know how it was derived in the first place.

Thanks!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Well, we know that the rate of radioactive decay is proportional to the Number of particles at a time t.
So:

[tex]-\frac{dN_{(t)}}{dt}=\lambda N_{(t)}[/tex]

Now can you derive it?
 
Using what you gave, I am able to derive N = N0e^-kt but the equation I provided is without the decay constant...
 
nothing123 said:
Using what you gave, I am able to derive N = N0e^-kt but the equation I provided is without the decay constant...

Well the half life will be when [tex]N_{(t)}=\frac{N_0}{2}[/tex]. and when [tex]t=T_{\frac{1}{2}}}[/tex].

/Not sure how the decay constant disappears tbh.

/No wait I see now.
 
Last edited:
Can you explain it a bit more clearly? Thanks.
 
nothing123 said:
Can you explain it a bit more clearly? Thanks.

Sure no problem.

Half life is the when the number of particles is reduced by half.
Hence this occurs when [tex]N_{(t)}=\frac{N_o}{2})[/tex] No is the original number of particles.
The time which this occurs will be the half life and we call it [tex]T_{\frac{1}{2}}[/tex]

So we have:
[tex]\frac{N_o}{2}=N_o e^{-\lambda T_{\frac{1}{2}}}[/tex]
[tex]\frac{1}{2}=e^{-\lambda T_{\frac{1}{2}} }[/tex]

We already had:
[tex]N_{(t)}=\frac{N_o}{2})[/tex]
but
[tex]e^{-\lambda T_{\frac{1}{2}}}=\frac{1}{2}[/tex]

so [tex]-\lambda T_{\frac{1}{2}}= L_n(\frac{1}{2}})[/tex]

[tex]e^{-\lambda}=\frac{e^{L_n(\frac{1}{2})}}{e^{T_{\frac{1}{2}}}}= \frac{1}{2}e^{-T_{\frac{1}{2}}}[/tex]

Sub that into the equation [tex]N = N_0e^{-\lambda t}[/tex]
and you got it :D

*Phew that took some time to type*

:)
 
Last edited:
malty said:
Sure no problem.

[tex]e^{-\lambda}=\frac{e^{L_n(\frac{1}{2})}}{e^{T_{\frac{1}{2}}}}= \frac{1}{2}e^{-T_{\frac{1}{2}}}[/tex]

Sub that into the equation [tex]N = N_0e^{-\lambda t}[/tex]
and you got it :D

:)

Thanks for the reply but I'm not entirely sure how you got the above lines. My exponent rules might be a big hazy but I don't think e^a/b is the same as e^a/e^b if you know what I'm saying.
 
nothing123 said:
Thanks for the reply but I'm not entirely sure how you got the above lines. My exponent rules might be a big hazy but I don't think e^a/b is the same as e^a/e^b if you know what I'm saying.

Not 100% sure what you are referring to.

Here's how I got that line:

[tex]-\lambda T_{\frac{1}{2}}= L_n(\frac{1}{2}})[/tex]
and
[tex]{-\lambda}=\frac{L_n(\frac{1}{2})}{{T_{\frac{1}{2}}}}[/tex]
 
Right, so does e^(ln(1/2)/T1/2) = e^ln(1/2)/e^T1/2?
 
  • #10
nothing123 said:
Right, so does e^(ln(1/2)/T1/2) = e^ln(1/2)/e^T1/2?

Well yes, if

[tex]e^{ab}=e^a*e^b[/tex]

then [tex]e^{-ab}=e^a*e^{-b}=\frac{e^a}{e^b}[/tex]
 
  • #11
Wait, doesn't e^a*e^b = e^(a+b) not e^ab? e^ab would be (e^a)^b, right?
 
  • #12
nothing123 said:
Wait, doesn't e^a*e^b = e^(a+b) not e^ab? e^ab would be (e^a)^b, right?

Lol yeah your right is does, I have absolutely no idea what made me think it was well that...

:redface:
 
Last edited:
  • #13
Ahh now I remember the equation I used was

[tex]{-\lambda}=\frac{L_n(\frac{1}{2})}{{T_{\frac{1}{2}}} }[/tex]

I took the exponent of this:




[tex]e^{-\lambda}=\frac{e^{L_n(\frac{1}{2})}}{e^{T_{\frac{1 }{2}}}}= \frac{1}{2}e^{-T_{\frac{1}{2}}}[/tex]

And that is still correct, I believe, my whole escapade with the awful exponent rules was well becasue...I'm tired (and dreaming) :p

:smile:
 
  • #14
Hmm I don't know if I'm just tired too or what but we seem to be back at square one. Didn't we conclude that e^(ln(1/2)/T1/2) does not equal e^ln(1/2)/e^T1/2?
 
  • #15
nothing123 said:
Hmm I don't know if I'm just tired too or what but we seem to be back at square one. Didn't we conclude that e^(ln(1/2)/T1/2) does not equal e^ln(1/2)/e^T1/2?

No this is actually true because

[tex]=e^{-\lambda}=e^{- \frac{ ln\frac{1}{2}}{T_{\frac{1}{2}}}}=e^{(ln\frac{1}{2})^{-T_{\frac{1}{2}}}}=\frac{1}{2}e^{-T_{\frac{1}{2}}}}[/tex]

Least I think it, *is brain dead*
 
  • #16
Ok, I think I figured it out but I don't think the equation you just wrote is correct. e^(ln1/2)/T1/2 = 1/2^(T1/2^-1). Now, subbing this into our original equation, we get N = N0(1/2)^t/t1/2. Thanks so much for your help anyways, it got my brain going.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
5K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
5
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
14K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K