Finding Q values of decays and finding distance where Coulomb Barrier = Q value

bmarson123
Messages
24
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


224Ra --> 220Rn + \alpha
224Ra --> 212Pb + 12C
224Ra --> 210Pb + 14C

Calculate the Q-Values (in MeV) for these decays given their atomic mass excesses (in MeV) are

88225Ra = 18.818 86220Rn = 10.604
82212Pb = -7.557 \alpha = 2.425
82210Pb = -14.743 614C = 3.020

For these 3 decays estimate the distance from the centre of the nucleus at which the Coulomb Barrier is equal to the calculated Q value (assuming e2/4\pi\epsilon=1.44MeV.fm)

Homework Equations



Q = (Mintial-Mresultants)

VC = Z1Z2e2/ 4\pi\epsilonr


The Attempt at a Solution



For values of Q

224Ra --> 220Rn + \alpha

Q = 18.818-10.604-2.425 = 5.8MeV

224Ra --> 212Pb + 12C

Q = 18.818+7.557-0 = 26.4MeV

224Ra --> 210Pb + 14C

Q = 18.818+14.743-3.020 = 30.5MeV

And for the second part:

VC = Z1Z2e2/ 4\pi\epsilonr

224Ra --> 220Rn + \alpha

5.8 = (88 x 82 x 1.44) /r
r = 1791.5 fm

I thought that this seemed quite a large value. Also, for the second 2 reactions I wasn't sure if this was the correct equation to be using because I thought it was specificaly just for alpha decay, and I didn't think the last 2 reactions were alpha.

Any pointers would be fantastic!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
It looks fine, and yes, that equation for Q-value should work for all nuclear decays.

There is one problem though: you seemed to have added the product masses instead of subtracting them in the calculation of the Q-values for the second and third decays.
 
Thread 'Need help understanding this figure on energy levels'
This figure is from "Introduction to Quantum Mechanics" by Griffiths (3rd edition). It is available to download. It is from page 142. I am hoping the usual people on this site will give me a hand understanding what is going on in the figure. After the equation (4.50) it says "It is customary to introduce the principal quantum number, ##n##, which simply orders the allowed energies, starting with 1 for the ground state. (see the figure)" I still don't understand the figure :( Here is...
Thread 'Understanding how to "tack on" the time wiggle factor'
The last problem I posted on QM made it into advanced homework help, that is why I am putting it here. I am sorry for any hassle imposed on the moderators by myself. Part (a) is quite easy. We get $$\sigma_1 = 2\lambda, \mathbf{v}_1 = \begin{pmatrix} 0 \\ 0 \\ 1 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_2 = \lambda, \mathbf{v}_2 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_3 = -\lambda, \mathbf{v}_3 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ -1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} $$ There are two ways...

Similar threads

Back
Top