Unbelievable Half-Life of Zn-64: Investigating Cu-64 Beta Decay

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers around the half-life of Zn-64 and its decay processes, particularly focusing on the beta decay of Cu-64 to Zn-64 and the proposed positron decay of Zn-64 back to Cu-64. Participants explore the implications of these decay processes, the stability of Zn-64, and the methods used to determine such long half-lives.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Debate/contested
  • Technical explanation

Main Points Raised

  • One participant questions how the half-life of Zn-64 could be determined given its low specific activity of approximately 19 Becquerels per 1000 kg, suggesting challenges in distinguishing it from background radiation.
  • Another participant points out that many sources, including a referenced chart of nuclides, list Zn-64 as stable, raising concerns about the accuracy of the information in the 16th edition of the chart.
  • There is speculation about the possibility of Zn-64 decaying back to Cu-64, with one participant suggesting that this could only occur if the first nucleus is in an excited state, referencing nuclear isomers.
  • A later reply discusses the energy states of Cu-64 and suggests that if Zn-64 were to decay by positron emission, the resulting Cu-64 would also likely decay by positron emission to form Ni-64.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the stability of Zn-64 and the validity of the decay processes described in the chart of nuclides. There is no consensus on the accuracy of the half-life measurements or the mechanisms behind the proposed decay processes.

Contextual Notes

Participants note the potential for misprints in the chart of nuclides and the discrepancies between different sources regarding the half-life of Zn-64. The discussion highlights the challenges in measuring low activity levels and the assumptions involved in decay processes.

daveb
Messages
547
Reaction score
2
In the 16th edition of the chart of nuclides, it lists Cu-64 as decaying to Zn-64 by beta minus decay. OK, no problem here. Then it lists Zn-64 decaying back to Cu-64 by positron decay with a half life of 1.1 x 10^19 years. Assuming this isn't some typo, I have 2 questions.
1) How in blazes did they manage to figure this half life out?! The specific activity for Zn-64 is (very) roughly 19 Becquerels per 1000 kg of Zn-64, meaning how did they get a large enough sample to analyze it so that it could be distinguished from background? and
2) How in blazes is it possible for nuclide #1 to decay to #2 then #2 decay back to #1?! Is this some quantum mechanical tunneling effect?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Yes, I'm familiar that just about every web source out there says it's stable. However, unless it's just a misprint, the 16th edition of the CON is the most updated (that I've seen) collection of data. It's possible that the web sites that do get updated didn't incorporate this into the site. I'm just wondering if anyone out there has heard anything about this, and if so, how this can be.
 
daveb said:
2) How in blazes is it possible for nuclide #1 to decay to #2 then #2 decay back to #1?! Is this some quantum mechanical tunneling effect?

This is not possible unless the first nucleus is initially in an excited state. (See also nuclear isomer). In this case it could be theoretically possible, but I am not aware of any such case which is actually known to occur.
Jim Graber
 
daveb said:
In the 16th edition of the chart of nuclides, it lists Cu-64 as decaying to Zn-64 by beta minus decay. OK, no problem here. Then it lists Zn-64 decaying back to Cu-64 by positron decay with a half life of 1.1 x 10^19 years. Assuming this isn't some typo, I have 2 questions.
1) How in blazes did they manage to figure this half life out?! The specific activity for Zn-64 is (very) roughly 19 Becquerels per 1000 kg of Zn-64, meaning how did they get a large enough sample to analyze it so that it could be distinguished from background? and
2) How in blazes is it possible for nuclide #1 to decay to #2 then #2 decay back to #1?! Is this some quantum mechanical tunneling effect?
That CON seems in disagreement with BNL's on-line CON, which reports the half-life of Zn-64 as > 2.8E+16 y. Even so, the activity is so low I wonder how they measured the activity change.

http://www.nndc.bnl.gov/chart/reCenter.jsp?z=30&n=34 (Select 1 under Zoom on righthand side).

http://www.nndc.bnl.gov/chart/

The Cu-64 which decays by beta emission would be at a different energy state than one which decays by positron emission. I would imagine that if Zn-64, which for all intents and purposes is stable, decays by positron emission, then I would imagine that the resulting Cu-64 nuclide would decay by positron emission also to form Ni-64.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
15K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K