Estimating Time Since Formation of U 235 and U 238

  • Thread starter Thread starter kel
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Formation Time
kel
Messages
62
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


Hi, I've worked this out (I think) but would appreciate someone xhecking over my method.

U 235 and U 238 found in ratio of 7.3E-3 to 1, but thought to have been produced equally (ie equal quantities)

half lives are 1.03E9 and 6.49E9 respectively.

Estimate time since formation


Homework Equations



Decay equation: N(t) = No e^(-wt) (used w for lambda here)


The Attempt at a Solution



As No is the same for both

Ln (N(t) / e^(-w1.t)) = Ln No

Ln N(t) + w1.t = Ln N(t) + w2.t

w1 = ln2 / 1.03E-9 = 6.729E-10
w2 = ln2 / 6.49E9 = 1.068E-10

Put these into above equ and re-arranging

ln (7.3E-3) - ln(1) = (t (6.729E-10)-(1.068E-10))

giving

t = (ln (7.3E-3) - ln(1)) / ((6.729E-10)-(1.068E-10))

which I work out to be 8.69E9 years.

I'm not quite sure if this is correct, but any advice would be appreciated.

Thanks
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Hi, your method is correct except a missed symbol in equation:
ln (7.3E-3) - ln(1) = t((6.729E-10)-(1.068E-10))
but it doesn't matter. If no calculation mistake, the answer is a correct one.
 
If you mean that I have missed 't' out, then that is because both w1 and w2 are being multipled by t, so I factored it out
 
kel said:

Homework Statement


Hi, I've worked this out (I think) but would appreciate someone xhecking over my method.

U 235 and U 238 found in ratio of 7.3E-3 to 1, but thought to have been produced equally (ie equal quantities)

half lives are 1.03E9 and 6.49E9 respectively.

Estimate time since formation


Homework Equations



Decay equation: N(t) = No e^(-wt) (used w for lambda here)


The Attempt at a Solution



As No is the same for both

Ln (N(t) / e^(-w1.t)) = Ln No

Ln N(t) + w1.t = Ln N(t) + w2.t

w1 = ln2 / 1.03E-9 = 6.729E-10
w2 = ln2 / 6.49E9 = 1.068E-10

Put these into above equ and re-arranging

ln (7.3E-3) - ln(1) = (t (6.729E-10)-(1.068E-10))

giving

t = (ln (7.3E-3) - ln(1)) / ((6.729E-10)-(1.068E-10))

which I work out to be 8.69E9 years.

I'm not quite sure if this is correct, but any advice would be appreciated.

Thanks

Yes, it's right.

Notice you can always double check by plugging in the initial equation!
 
I am not clear on your units. The half life of U238 is 4.51x10^9 years. The half life of U235 is 7.04x10^8 years.

N/N0 = 1/2 =e^{\omega_{238}(4.51 x 10^9)} so

\omega_{238} = \ln{.5}/(4.51 x 10^9) = -1.5x10^{-10}

Similarly:

\omega_{235} = \ln{.5}/(7.04 x 10^8) = -9.8x10^{-10}

So if they started out in the same proportion after a SuperNova, the SuperNova occurred about:

.0073 = e^{-\omega_{235}t}/e^{-\omega_{238}t} = e^{(\omega_{238}-\omega_{235})t}

t = \ln{.0073}/(\omega_{238}-\omega_{235}) = 4.92/(7.3x10^{-10}) = 6.74 x 10^9 \text{years}

AM
 
Andrew Mason said:
I am not clear on your units. The half life of U238 is 4.51x10^9 years. The half life of U235 is 7.04x10^8 years.

N/N0 = 1/2 =e^{\omega_{238}(4.51 x 10^9)} so

\omega_{238} = \ln{.5}/(4.51 x 10^9) = -1.5x10^{-10}

Similarly:

\omega_{235} = \ln{.5}/(7.04 x 10^8) = -9.8x10^{-10}

So if they started out in the same proportion after a SuperNova, the SuperNova occurred about:

.0073 = e^{-\omega_{235}t}/e^{-\omega_{238}t} = e^{(\omega_{238}-\omega_{235})t}

t = \ln{.0073}/(\omega_{238}-\omega_{235}) = 4.92/(7.3x10^{-10}) = 6.74 x 10^9 \text{years}

AM

Good observation. It looks like the OP is being given inverse decay rates rather than half-lives. kel would be advised to carefully check the wording of the question.
 
##|\Psi|^2=\frac{1}{\sqrt{\pi b^2}}\exp(\frac{-(x-x_0)^2}{b^2}).## ##\braket{x}=\frac{1}{\sqrt{\pi b^2}}\int_{-\infty}^{\infty}dx\,x\exp(-\frac{(x-x_0)^2}{b^2}).## ##y=x-x_0 \quad x=y+x_0 \quad dy=dx.## The boundaries remain infinite, I believe. ##\frac{1}{\sqrt{\pi b^2}}\int_{-\infty}^{\infty}dy(y+x_0)\exp(\frac{-y^2}{b^2}).## ##\frac{2}{\sqrt{\pi b^2}}\int_0^{\infty}dy\,y\exp(\frac{-y^2}{b^2})+\frac{2x_0}{\sqrt{\pi b^2}}\int_0^{\infty}dy\,\exp(-\frac{y^2}{b^2}).## I then resolved the two...
Hello everyone, I’m considering a point charge q that oscillates harmonically about the origin along the z-axis, e.g. $$z_{q}(t)= A\sin(wt)$$ In a strongly simplified / quasi-instantaneous approximation I ignore retardation and take the electric field at the position ##r=(x,y,z)## simply to be the “Coulomb field at the charge’s instantaneous position”: $$E(r,t)=\frac{q}{4\pi\varepsilon_{0}}\frac{r-r_{q}(t)}{||r-r_{q}(t)||^{3}}$$ with $$r_{q}(t)=(0,0,z_{q}(t))$$ (I’m aware this isn’t...
Hi, I had an exam and I completely messed up a problem. Especially one part which was necessary for the rest of the problem. Basically, I have a wormhole metric: $$(ds)^2 = -(dt)^2 + (dr)^2 + (r^2 + b^2)( (d\theta)^2 + sin^2 \theta (d\phi)^2 )$$ Where ##b=1## with an orbit only in the equatorial plane. We also know from the question that the orbit must satisfy this relationship: $$\varepsilon = \frac{1}{2} (\frac{dr}{d\tau})^2 + V_{eff}(r)$$ Ultimately, I was tasked to find the initial...
Back
Top