So, I was told that, while radioactive elements have half lives that have been estimated (i.e. the time it takes for a material to decay to half it’s mass), kt’s not entirely predictable how often particles will decay in a given moment. If all that is true (which it might not be, feel free to correct in replies), is there a chance, if microscopically small, that a uranium rod could just fizzle out of existence in a matter of nanoseconds?
In: 6
Yes and that’s exactly what happens – each radionuclide will decay spontaneously on its own with no regard to anything around it.
Half-life is the time taken for half of the sample to decay and is based on the average time that a nucleus will take to decay. Because atoms are so small and light we have huge numbers even in a very small sample which is why they average out to the half-life. If you could isolate a single atom then it would either decay or not at any given time so at some point it will decay. For something like carbon-14 which has a half-life of over 5000 years it either will or it won’t decay every second.
Yes and that’s exactly what happens – each radionuclide will decay spontaneously on its own with no regard to anything around it.
Half-life is the time taken for half of the sample to decay and is based on the average time that a nucleus will take to decay. Because atoms are so small and light we have huge numbers even in a very small sample which is why they average out to the half-life. If you could isolate a single atom then it would either decay or not at any given time so at some point it will decay. For something like carbon-14 which has a half-life of over 5000 years it either will or it won’t decay every second.
> have half lives that have been estimated
Well, in many cases this has been measured very precisely. There is nothing particularly special about the “half” life, by the way – it’s just a convenient unit of measurement. It’s straightforward to convert it to/from the amount of time needed for any other given fraction to decay.
> that a uranium rod could just fizzle out of existence in a matter of nanoseconds
It’s difficult to get your head around just how many particles are in everyday quantities of stuff. There are about 10,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 water molecules in a glass of water, for example. I don’t know how big nuclear fuel rods are, but we’re talking that kind of quantity. Imagine rolling 10,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 dice and every single one lands on a 1. It’s technically possible, but you’re never going to see it happen.
This consideration comes up very often in physics and chemistry. You might have some kind of model of how a system made up of N particles behaves, but you might only be interested in cases where N is extremely, extremely large. In such cases, you can treat N as if it’s essentially infinite. This often allows you to turn a complicated model with random elements into a much simpler one that is purely deterministic. It’s called the “thermodynamic limit”. It’s technically just an approximation, but in many cases it’s essentially perfect. And that’s the case with reasonably large samples of radioactive isotopes. There is a random process underlying it, but if you wait 1 half-life, half of the sample *will* have decayed.
> have half lives that have been estimated
Well, in many cases this has been measured very precisely. There is nothing particularly special about the “half” life, by the way – it’s just a convenient unit of measurement. It’s straightforward to convert it to/from the amount of time needed for any other given fraction to decay.
> that a uranium rod could just fizzle out of existence in a matter of nanoseconds
It’s difficult to get your head around just how many particles are in everyday quantities of stuff. There are about 10,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 water molecules in a glass of water, for example. I don’t know how big nuclear fuel rods are, but we’re talking that kind of quantity. Imagine rolling 10,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 dice and every single one lands on a 1. It’s technically possible, but you’re never going to see it happen.
This consideration comes up very often in physics and chemistry. You might have some kind of model of how a system made up of N particles behaves, but you might only be interested in cases where N is extremely, extremely large. In such cases, you can treat N as if it’s essentially infinite. This often allows you to turn a complicated model with random elements into a much simpler one that is purely deterministic. It’s called the “thermodynamic limit”. It’s technically just an approximation, but in many cases it’s essentially perfect. And that’s the case with reasonably large samples of radioactive isotopes. There is a random process underlying it, but if you wait 1 half-life, half of the sample *will* have decayed.
> have half lives that have been estimated
Well, in many cases this has been measured very precisely. There is nothing particularly special about the “half” life, by the way – it’s just a convenient unit of measurement. It’s straightforward to convert it to/from the amount of time needed for any other given fraction to decay.
> that a uranium rod could just fizzle out of existence in a matter of nanoseconds
It’s difficult to get your head around just how many particles are in everyday quantities of stuff. There are about 10,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 water molecules in a glass of water, for example. I don’t know how big nuclear fuel rods are, but we’re talking that kind of quantity. Imagine rolling 10,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 dice and every single one lands on a 1. It’s technically possible, but you’re never going to see it happen.
This consideration comes up very often in physics and chemistry. You might have some kind of model of how a system made up of N particles behaves, but you might only be interested in cases where N is extremely, extremely large. In such cases, you can treat N as if it’s essentially infinite. This often allows you to turn a complicated model with random elements into a much simpler one that is purely deterministic. It’s called the “thermodynamic limit”. It’s technically just an approximation, but in many cases it’s essentially perfect. And that’s the case with reasonably large samples of radioactive isotopes. There is a random process underlying it, but if you wait 1 half-life, half of the sample *will* have decayed.
Would detonating a nuclear-bomb qualify? I’m being serious. I don’t know, but it just popped into my head as I read your question.
Would detonating a nuclear-bomb qualify? I’m being serious. I don’t know, but it just popped into my head as I read your question.
Would detonating a nuclear-bomb qualify? I’m being serious. I don’t know, but it just popped into my head as I read your question.
Latest Answers