What is the Q-Value for Electron Capture in Kr-81?

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around calculating the Q-value for the electron capture process in Krypton-81 (Kr-81). Participants are examining the differences between using atomic masses and nuclear masses in their calculations, as well as the implications of including or excluding the mass of electrons in the Q-value computation.

Discussion Character

  • Mathematical reasoning, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants are attempting to calculate the Q-value using both atomic and nuclear masses, questioning the necessity of including the mass of electrons in their calculations. Some express confusion over discrepancies in their results compared to online sources.

Discussion Status

There is an ongoing exploration of the correct method for calculating the Q-value, with participants providing different interpretations and calculations. Some guidance has been offered regarding the treatment of electron mass, but no consensus has been reached on the final approach or value.

Contextual Notes

Participants note the requirement for a six significant figure answer, which adds complexity to the calculations. There is also mention of the potential impact of binding energies on the accuracy of the mass calculations.

says
Messages
585
Reaction score
12

Homework Statement


Calculate the Q-value for the electron capture beta decay of Kr-81
(Answer in MeV, correct to 6 significant figures)

Atomic Masses (amu)
Kr-81 = 80.916592(3)
Br-81 = 80.916291(3)

proton 1.00727647
neutron 1.00866501
electron 0.0005485803

Homework Equations


Q = ∑mic2-∑mfc2

Electron Capture = ZX +e_ ---> Y+ neutrino

The Attempt at a Solution


Q = (80.916592 + 0.0005485803) - 80.916291
= 0.00084958029 * 931.5020
= 0.7913857 MeV

I found a Q value of .280801 Mev online. Not sure why I'm off by so much...

Q = 80.916592 - 80.916291 = 0.00030099999

Q = 0.00030099999 * 931.5020cMeV
= 0.28038209268
= 0.2803821 Mev (correct to 6 sig figs)

Seems better, but I've calculated this using the atomic masses and not the nuclear masses...
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
one me off. Sets you thinking !
The electron is already in the atomic mass, so you don't add it: that's double counting !
See here (again !)
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: says
I've calculated this using the atomic masses and not the nuclear masses though. The answer below looks correct. Do I not have to worry about getting rid of electrons when calculating the Q-value in K-capture?

Q = 80.916592 - 80.916291 = 0.00030099999

Q = 0.00030099999 * 931.5020cMeV
= 0.28038209268
= 0.2803821 Mev (correct to 6 sig figs)
 
Ok, I tried to calculate Q with the nuclear masses ( atomic mass - mass of electrons)

Q = (( 80.916592 - 0.0192003105* ) - ( 80.916291-0.0192003105 )) * 931.5020

* Initial mass = atomic mass - mass of electrons + mass of one electron that moves into the nucleus.

Q = 0.00030099999 * 931.5020
= 0.28038210199 MeV
 
Yes.
Q = 80.916592 - 80.916291 = 0.00030099999 ? No it's not: it's 0.000301 and now you only have 3 digit accuracy, 280 MeV oops, keV :smile: !
(280.8 +- 0.5 here on p. 1624) No way you can find that with 6 digit accuracy anywhere (but again, that's the exercise composers' problem).
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: says
I suppose that, since the composer of the exercise specified this accuracy it is wisest to stay with the 280.383 keV that you found, so that it is clear from your answer that you did the correct counting. As long as you realize that in fact there are only 3 significant digits.

Is it all a bit clear to you now ?
Mind you, explicitly putting nuclear mass = atomic mass - Z * electrons mass is not right because you ignore the binding energies of all the electrons. That you do it on both sides is what saves the numerical value of answer, but ignoring all of them instead of only the one that is involved in the process is too coarse to claim ##m_N = m - Zm_e##.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: says

Similar threads

  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
9K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
27
Views
6K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
6K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
5K
Replies
1
Views
7K