How Long Until Only 10% of a Radioisotope Remains?

  • Thread starter Thread starter sin_city_stunner
  • Start date Start date
AI Thread Summary
To determine how long it takes for only 10% of a radioisotope with a half-life of 24 years to remain, the initial mass of 0.084g is reduced to 0.0084g. The equation used for this calculation is m = original mass * (1/2)^t, where t represents the number of half-lives. The individual struggles with equating the exponents in the decay equation and seeks clarification on the exponential decay formula. The discussion also highlights the relationship between the decay constant and half-life, emphasizing the importance of understanding both equations for solving such problems. The conversation ultimately focuses on the correct application of decay formulas in calculating the time until a specific remaining mass is reached.
sin_city_stunner
Messages
8
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



1. A radioisotope has a half-life of 24 a and an initial mass of 0.084g. Approximately how many years will have passed if only 10% of the isotope remains?


Homework Equations



m= original mass * (1/2)^t t = # of half lives

The Attempt at a Solution



10% of the isotope = (.084 g)(0.1)
= 0.084 g

.0084g = .084g * (1/2)^t
0.1 g = (1/2)^t

It is there where i get stuck. I try to make bases the same so the exponents are equal to each other, but can't get it for some reason.

Thanks
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Have you seen this before:

M=M_oe^{-\lambda t}

where \lambda= \frac{\ln(2)}{ T_{\frac{1}{2}}}
 
we've just learned the second equation, but have never seen the first one one before
 
sin_city_stunner said:
we've just learned the second equation, but have never seen the first one one before
Do you have that backwards?
 
The first equation, M=M_oe^{-\lambda t}
is the usual equation for exponential decay.
 
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