Model for series radioactive decay

Join the discussion
Registration is free. Ask a follow-up in this thread, or start your own.
2 replies · 3K views
KFC
Messages
477
Reaction score
4
If nucleus A decays to nucleus B in rate a, and B decays to C in rate b, and C is decaying at the rate c. To setup a model for that process, we start from A

[tex] \frac{dA}{dt} = - a A(t)[/tex]

and for B, part for B is dying out from it's own decaying process but some amount of A will decay into B, so

[tex] \frac{dB}{dt} = a A(t) - bB(t)[/tex]

But for C, it is quite confusing, the total number of C is proportional to the number of B directly but also to that of A indirectly, of course it will dying out due to it's own decaying process. My question is should I include a term for A(t) in the different equation for C? That is, should I write

[tex] \frac{dC}{dt} = a A(t) + bB(t) - cC(t)[/tex]

or

[tex] \frac{dC}{dt} = bB(t) - cC(t)[/tex]
 
Physics news on Phys.org
The reason you are having trouble is because you are trying to do too many steps at once. Write each variable's differential equation first, e.g.

[tex]\frac{dB}{dt} = - \frac{dA}{dt} - bB(t)[/tex]

i.e. the amount added minus the amount lost. Then and only then start plugging in known quantities.

I know it's tempting to take short cuts, but you are really much better off being methodical.
 
Vanadium 50 said:
The reason you are having trouble is because you are trying to do too many steps at once. Write each variable's differential equation first, e.g.

[tex]\frac{dB}{dt} = - \frac{dA}{dt} - bB(t)[/tex]

i.e. the amount added minus the amount lost. Then and only then start plugging in known quantities.

I know it's tempting to take short cuts, but you are really much better off being methodical.

Got it. Thanks