1. Limited time only! Sign up for a free 30min personal tutor trial with Chegg Tutors
    Dismiss Notice
Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

Uranium Dating

  1. Jan 4, 2015 #1
    1. The problem statement, all variables and given/known data
    The isostopc abundances of a sample is U-235 and U-238 are 0.72 and 99.27 respectively; what is the age of the sample? (assume isotope abundance was equal when sample was formed)

    2. Relevant equations
    [itex]\lambda=\frac{ln2}{ t_{\frac{1}{2}}}[/itex]

    3. The attempt at a solution
    for U-238 [itex]N_{238}(T)=N_{238}(t)e^{\lambda _{238}t}[/itex]
    U-235 [itex]N_{235}(T)=N_{235}(t)e^{\lambda _{235}t}[/itex]
    T is time at present and t is time of sample formation.

    diving the two equations gives
    [itex] \frac{N_{238}(T)}{N_{235}(T)}=\frac{N_{238}(t)}{N_{235}(t)}e^{(\lambda _{238}- \lambda _{235})t}[/itex]

    From the assumption, one can say [itex]\frac{N_{238}(t)}{N_{235}(t)}=1[/itex]
    It's here where i'm not sure; do i just say that [itex]\frac{N_{238}(T)}{N_{235}(T)}=\frac{99.27}{0.72}[/itex] and solve for t or am I missing something? Thanks

    EDIT: Sorry, I can't get my latex to work, I can't seem to fix it
    Last edited: Jan 4, 2015
  2. jcsd
  3. Jan 4, 2015 #2


    User Avatar
    2017 Award

    Staff: Mentor

    I fixed the two broken equations, but the first one looks odd.
    Yes, just do that and solve for t.
  4. Jan 4, 2015 #3
    Thanks for that, I fixed the first equation.
Know someone interested in this topic? Share this thread via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook

Have something to add?
Draft saved Draft deleted

Similar Threads - Uranium Dating Date
Carbon-14 dating? Jan 30, 2018
How many kg Uranium is needed for 5kW produced? Jan 24, 2018
Radioactive decay of Uranium 238 Sep 7, 2017
Kinetic Energy of uranium particles Sep 16, 2015
Sievert Calculations? Jun 3, 2015