How Do Geologists Determine the Age of Rock Samples Using Isotopic Ratios?

AI Thread Summary
Geologists determine the age of rock samples by measuring isotopic ratios and applying known radioactive decay rates, adhering to first-order kinetic rate laws. Key isotopic decay processes include 87Rb to 87Sr and 238U to 206Pb, with respective half-lives of 4.90x10^10 years and 4.51x10^9 years. The discussion highlights a calculation error in determining the age of a rock sample based on the isotopic ratios provided. The correct approach involves deriving equations for the decay products over time, focusing on the correct isotopes to find the elapsed time. Ultimately, the participant resolved their confusion regarding the isotopic ratios and calculation methods.
molly16
Messages
16
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


Geologists are able to calculate ages of rock samples through measurements of certain isotopic rations combined with known radioactive decay rates (all such decays being considered to adhere to 1st order kinetic rate laws). Two such processes leading to stable isotopes are:

87Rb --> 87Sr
238Ur --> 206Pb

Half life of 87Rb is 4.90x10^10 years while half life of 238Ur is 4.51x10^9 years.The isotopic ratios are:

87Sr/87Rb = 0.051
206Pb/238Ur = 0.71

Assuming the time the rock was formed it contained no 87Sr or 206Pb Calculate the age of the rock indicated by the isotopic ratios.

Homework Equations



dA/dt = -k[A]

ln(A/Ao) = -kt

t1/2 = ln(2)/k

The Attempt at a Solution



I tried solving for the rate constant using t1/2 = ln(2)/k
and rearranging it to k = ln(2)/t1/2 = 1.41 x 10^-11

Then to solve for the time for the decay of 87Rb I plugged the value into the equation ln(A/Ao) = -kt

ln (A/Ao) = ln (87Sr/87Rb) = ln (0.051) = -(1.41x10^-11)t

then I solved for t which is t = 2.1x10^11 years for the decay of the 87Rb
but the answer is supposed to be t = 3.517x10^9 years

Can someone please explain this question to me and tell me what I'm doing wrong?
Thanks!
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
I tried solving for the rate constant using t1/2 = ln(2)/k
... converting half-lives to mean lives, good.

Can someone please explain this question to me and tell me what I'm doing wrong?
If you have isotope X' and Y' and they decay to X and Y respecively, but at different rates, then, from the decay equations of X' and Y' you can get equations for how the amounts of X and Y change over time ... and thus how the ratio of X:Y changes with time.

You are given the ratio X:Y, and initial quantities of X and Y, and you have to find the time that has elapsed to turn the initial quantities into the final ratio.

I suspect you have been concentrating on the wrong isotope - on X':Y' instead of X:Y ... start by deriving the equation for the quantity of each decay product as a function of time.
 
Simon Bridge said:
... converting half-lives to mean lives, good.

I suspect you have been concentrating on the wrong isotope - on X':Y' instead of X:Y ... start by deriving the equation for the quantity of each decay product as a function of time.

so then
Ao = A (1-e^-kt)
Ao/A = 1-e^-kt
ln (Ao/A) = +kt

but I still get the same answer??
 
Please show all your working with your reasoning at each stage.
 
Simon Bridge said:
Please show all your working with your reasoning at each stage.

Ahh never mind I figured it out. Thanks.
 
Well done :)

For others googling here later:
I made a slight mistake earlier - you are given X:X' rather than X:Y.
I think your repeated mistake was that you were putting the ration as A/Ao or Ao/A... which was similar to my misreading.
 
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