Half Life - Calculate Fraction Remaining

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion focuses on calculating the fraction of Carbon-14 that has decayed over 2300 years, given its half-life of 5730 years. Two methods were employed: the exponential decay formula, Nf/No = e^(-kt), and the half-life formula, Nf = No(1/2)^(t/T). The correct fraction decayed was determined to be approximately 0.242930334, derived from the exponential decay calculation after addressing rounding issues with the decay constant. The community emphasized the importance of significant figures in reporting results.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of exponential decay formulas
  • Knowledge of half-life concepts
  • Familiarity with significant figures in scientific calculations
  • Basic algebra skills for manipulating equations
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the derivation and application of the exponential decay formula
  • Learn about the significance of significant figures in scientific reporting
  • Explore the concept of half-lives in different isotopes beyond Carbon-14
  • Investigate common errors in decay calculations and how to avoid them
USEFUL FOR

This discussion is beneficial for students in chemistry or physics, educators teaching radioactive decay concepts, and anyone interested in precise calculations involving half-lives and decay constants.

jendrix
Messages
120
Reaction score
4

Homework Statement



Carbon 14 has a half-life of 5730 years, what fraction will have decayed in 2300 years?

Homework Equations




Nf/No =e^-kt

The Attempt at a Solution



Nf/No =e^-1.21 x 10^-4 x 2300

=0.068585374

However if I use Nf =No(1/2)^2300/5730

I get 0.757125224

I appreciate that I'm looking for the fraction that has decayed but I'm unsure as to why this has produced 2 different answers, I thought either could be used for this problem.

Thanks
 
Physics news on Phys.org
jendrix said:
Nf/No =e^-1.21 x 10^-4 x 2300

=0.068585374
Redo this.
 
Recheck your math for the first formula.

EDIT: Doc Al beat me to it again.
 
I agree with them guys. You got it right using the second method jendrix. But maybe just a mistake while calculating using the first method.
 
Hi, I think I was using a wrong value for the decay constant but somehow wrote it down correct here.

My new answer is 0.77130147

I was wondering why there is a discrepancy albeit a small one depending on which formula I use, is it to do with the rounding of the constant?
 
jendrix said:
Hi, I think I was using a wrong value for the decay constant but somehow wrote it down correct here.

My new answer is 0.77130147

I was wondering why there is a discrepancy albeit a small one depending on which formula I use, is it to do with the rounding of the constant?
You're still making an error somewhere. Just evaluate the formula you gave in your first post:
jendrix said:
Nf/No =e^-1.21 x 10^-4 x 2300
That should give you the right answer.
 
Thanks Doc Al, I now get 0.757069666 as opposed to 0.757125224 from the other formula.
Is this where rounding the constant has had an effect?

Now I have to find the fraction that was lost to decay, if i do 1 - 0.757069666 to give 0.242930334 would you consider this sufficient or should I call it 6/25?
 
jendrix said:
Thanks Doc Al, I now get 0.757069666 as opposed to 0.757125224 from the other formula.
Is this where rounding the constant has had an effect?
Yes. (But round off your answers to a reasonable number of significant figures.)
Now I have to find the fraction that was lost to decay, if i do 1 - 0.757069666 to give 0.242930334 would you consider this sufficient or should I call it 6/25?
That decimal should be fine (rounded off, of course). (When they say 'fraction' they probably don't literally mean fraction, as in numerator/denominator.)
 
Excellent, thanks for all your help guys :smile:
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
4K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
3K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
3K
  • · Replies 23 ·
Replies
23
Views
2K