Exponential DecayDate: 06/09/2005 at 22:30:14 From: Adam Subject: Exponential Decay Curve of a Radioactive Substance In science we recently had a problem where we had to extend an exponential decay curve of a net counting rate of a radioactive substance by 1 day. We were given the information: Time (minutes) Net counting rate (counts / minute) 0 (start) 171 20 110 40 70 60 49 80 31 When I extended the curve by one day I recieved 1.61 * 10^(-11) (which is an estimate because the numbers that we were given would not always turn out the same.) My teacher insists that it would be zero. I am wondering who is correct. I believe that I did my calculation correctly, but I am not sure if the matter could reach that low a rate or not. I don't think it can reach 0 at all because there is always something left after each decay cycle. Could you please inform me whether my thinking is correct on this and whether or not my answer is close to what the real one would be? Date: 06/10/2005 at 23:22:33 From: Doctor Greenie Subject: Re: Exponential Decay Curve of a Radioactive Substance Hi, Adam -- I didn't check your calculations, but who is "right" depends on your interpretation. In your last sentence, you ask whether or not your answer is close to what the real one would be. The answer is that it is close. And your teacher's answer is also close. After all, there is not a lot of difference between "0" and "1.61 * 10^(-11)". One thing that must be kept in mind in all of this is that rates of radioactive decay are statistical measurements. If you start with 4*10^10 atoms of a radioactive material with a half-life of 1 year, then after a year you can be pretty confident that the number of atoms remaining after a year is very close to 2*10^10. But if you start with 40 atoms of the material, then after 1 year you can't have much confidence at all in the number of atoms remaining. Since your measurements are "counts per minute", an answer of 1.61*10^(-11) means the radioactivity is probably not measurable, so an answer of "0" is just as good. I am reminded of an experience I had 30 years ago when I (as a math student mildly interested in nuclear physics) took a nuclear engineering course with a group of students specifically studying to be engineers. We had a problem on a test with a radioactive source and an absorptive shield and were supposed to determine the strength of the radiation on the other side of the shield. Radiation strength on the other side of a shield, as a function of the thickness of the shield, is an exponential decay function just like radioactive decay. When I put the numbers into the equation and did some quick mental approximate calculations, I got a mathematical result of something like e^(-60). So without any further effort, I wrote down the answer "0". Several of the engineering students I talked to after the test said they couldn't answer the question because, whenever they put the equation into their calculators, instead of getting an answer, their calculators kept showing "0"....!!! I hope some of this helps. Please write back if you have any further questions about any of this. - Doctor Greenie, The Math Forum http://mathforum.org/dr.math/ |
Search the Dr. Math Library: |
[Privacy Policy] [Terms of Use]
Ask Dr. Math^{TM}
© 1994- The Math Forum at NCTM. All rights reserved.
http://mathforum.org/dr.math/