Abundancy of Uranium 235 when the earth was formed.

  • Thread starter Thread starter SuperPokenerd
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Earth Uranium
AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around calculating the initial abundance of Uranium-235 (235U) when the Earth formed, given its current abundance of 0.65%. Participants explore the relevant equations, including the decay formula and the concept of N/N0, which represents the probability of decay over time. There is confusion regarding the calculations, particularly in applying the decay constants for Uranium-238 and Uranium-235. One user expresses frustration after receiving a low grade on their homework due to incorrect calculations. The conversation highlights the challenges of understanding radioactive decay and its implications for estimating the historical abundance of isotopes.
SuperPokenerd
Messages
6
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


The Earth is about 4.5 billion years old. If 235U is 0.65% abundant today, how abundant was it when the Earth formed? Note, in this case abundancy is defined as the ratio of Uranium 235 to Uranium 238

Homework Equations


R=N(lambda)
N=N0e^-lambda(t)
Half Life = ln(2)/lambda

The Attempt at a Solution


I am really unsure how to do this problem. I tried reworking the above equations but I was not able to get the correct answer. I need a little help getting started.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
In your second equation, you can divied by N0 to give N/N0. What would this quantity represent? Think about the total range of values this quantity could take on. Can N be negative? Can N>No?
 
Well, N/N0 would be the probability that a nucleus has decayed in the given period of time which in this case would be -4.5billion years if we take t=0 to be the present. And can't N be larger than N0 if we are going back in time?
 
ok, so I've worked it up to the point where I have the new abundancy = .0065e^(lambda238-lambda235)*4.5billion years but it's wrong. How can i fix this?
 
Got it wrong so now I got an 80 on my HW. Thanks for nothing.
 
Thread 'Help with Time-Independent Perturbation Theory "Good" States Proof'
(Disclaimer: this is not a HW question. I am self-studying, and this felt like the type of question I've seen in this forum. If there is somewhere better for me to share this doubt, please let me know and I'll transfer it right away.) I am currently reviewing Chapter 7 of Introduction to QM by Griffiths. I have been stuck for an hour or so trying to understand the last paragraph of this proof (pls check the attached file). It claims that we can express Ψ_{γ}(0) as a linear combination of...
Back
Top