Nuclear Physics: Yearly Time Measurement

Join the discussion
Ask a follow-up here, or get your own question answered by working scientists, mathematicians and engineers — people, not an autocomplete.
Real named experts · corrections over time · the nuance an AI answer skips
2 replies · 2K views
Bertin
Messages
12
Reaction score
6
Halves-lives and average lifetimes, when studying nuclear decay, are often expressed in years even though years are not standarized, at least in SI (as far as I know). Borrowing the convention from astronomy and astrophysics, I usually take 1 [itex]\mathrm{yr}[/itex] to be equal to 365.25 days of 86400 [itex]\mathrm{s}[/itex], so a Julian year. I'd like to know, however, if there is a convention in nuclear physics concerning the equivalent in seconds of a year. Thank you in advance for your time!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Bertin said:
Halves-lives and average lifetimes, when studying nuclear decay, are often expressed in years even though years are not standarized, at least in SI (as far as I know). Borrowing the convention from astronomy and astrophysics, I usually take 1 [itex]\mathrm{yr}[/itex] to be equal to 365.25 days of 86400 [itex]\mathrm{s}[/itex], so a Julian year. I'd like to know, however, if there is a convention in nuclear physics concerning the equivalent in seconds of a year. Thank you in advance for your time!
The most voted answer to this same question in stackexchange says that there is no generally accepted convetion and that, most often, the error in the numerical values expressed in yearsis greater than the differences in the numerical values introduced by using one or another usual definition of a year.
 
Reply
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: ohwilleke
Reply
  • Like
  • Informative
Likes   Reactions: ohwilleke, dextercioby, malawi_glenn and 3 others