Half-Life of Tritium: 11.7 mg After 24.6 Yrs

  • Thread starter Thread starter CaptainZappo
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Half-life Tritium
AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on calculating the remaining mass of tritium after 24.6 years, given its half-life of 12.3 years. The initial mass of tritium released is 46.9 mg, and after two half-lives, it is expected that 11.7 mg would remain. The calculation involves dividing the original mass by four, resulting in 11.725 mg, which is rounded to three significant figures as 11.7 mg. Despite this calculation being correct, it was suggested to also consider 11.65 mg in case of discrepancies in significant figure handling. The thread emphasizes the importance of significant figures in scientific calculations.
CaptainZappo
Messages
92
Reaction score
0
Question: The half-life of tritium (hydrogen-3) is 12.3 yr. If 46.9 mg of tritium is released from a nuclear power plant during the course of an accident, what mass of this nuclide will remain after 24.6 yr? (Significant figures are important)

My answer: 11.7 mg. I came to this answer by recognizing that 24.6 yr is the duration of 2 half lives. Thus, 1/4 of the original amount will be present. Dividing 46.9 by 4 yields 11.725; however, I must use the correct number of significant figures (3, I believe), so my final answer is 11.7 mg.

Please tell me what I am doing wrong, because my answer has been marked wrong and I cannot figure out why.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Your answer is correct. I would also try 11.65mg - just in case they weren't being careful with sig figs.
 
Moved to homework forum.
 
Thread 'Confusion regarding a chemical kinetics problem'
TL;DR Summary: cannot find out error in solution proposed. [![question with rate laws][1]][1] Now the rate law for the reaction (i.e reaction rate) can be written as: $$ R= k[N_2O_5] $$ my main question is, WHAT is this reaction equal to? what I mean here is, whether $$k[N_2O_5]= -d[N_2O_5]/dt$$ or is it $$k[N_2O_5]= -1/2 \frac{d}{dt} [N_2O_5] $$ ? The latter seems to be more apt, as the reaction rate must be -1/2 (disappearance rate of N2O5), which adheres to the stoichiometry of the...
I don't get how to argue it. i can prove: evolution is the ability to adapt, whether it's progression or regression from some point of view, so if evolution is not constant then animal generations couldn`t stay alive for a big amount of time because when climate is changing this generations die. but they dont. so evolution is constant. but its not an argument, right? how to fing arguments when i only prove it.. analytically, i guess it called that (this is indirectly related to biology, im...
Back
Top