Dude, what? [This is my final math project. I probably will fail]

Avatar image for jayross
Jayross

2647

Forum Posts

1791

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 11

User Lists: 6

#1  Edited By Jayross

Dude, what?

A first-hand look at exponentially decaying thought processes


The most common isotope of uranium, uranium 238, has a half-life of 1.41x10 17  second, or 4.468 billion years. This means that half of the atoms in a sample will decay in that amount of time.

1 : Write the equation for the decay of U238.

y = a(.5) x
Where X is 4.468 billion years.

2: An unrealistic experiment involves 500 grams of newly-formed uranium 238. The researchers would like to know when the 500g sample will decay to 99.9999% of its value. The experiment starts in January 2010.

500g x .999999 = 499.9995

Inputting that value as y and intersecting it with the original equation gives us 1.4427e-6, or .0000014427.

.0000014427 * 4,468,000,000 = 6,445.9836.

6,445.9836 + 2010 = 8455.9836.

By the end of the year 8445, the sample would have decayed to 99.9999% of its original value.

3: The researchers would also like to know at what year it will be reduced to 400 grams.

y = 400 intersects with 500(.5) x at x=.32192809.

.32192809 * 4,468,000,000 = 1,438,374,706

1,438,374,706 + 2010 = 1,438,376,716 years.

4: The scientists soon realize that, despite predicted advancements in cloning technology, they will be unable able to see the experiment through. This is because, they calculate, in roughly 1 billion years the sun will have grown in intensity that water will evaporate from the earth and soon after that, the atmosphere will burn out. At that point, 1 billion years from now, what will be remaining of the 500g u238 sample?

1 billion years is 22.38137869% of 4.468 billion years. Inputting the decimal version of that percentage, .2238137869, into our graph as the x value gives us 428.1494. By the time the world ends (at least by the time it theoretically ends because of the sun becoming too powerful) the sample will be 428.1494 grams, or 85.62988% of its original value.

5: While out drinking, the scientist suggest that in a billion years or so, time travel would have had to be invented, because, that seems like quite enough time to figure that out. Then, logic would dictate that their clones would be able to utilize time travel to reverse-decay the U238 into its previous isotope, protactinium 238. This would require the U238 to go back to 2010 when it was formed, and then travel even further than that to the point where it was a newly-formed p238 isotope sample. p238 has a half-life of 2.27 minutes. p238 has an isotope mass of 238.054506. u238 has a mass of 238.050783.

How many years would the clones and the uranium sample have to travel in order to reach that point? How much p238 would you have once you have reached the point when p238 was newly-formed?

Okay, let me just figure out this timeline... time travel always complicates things.

2010: experiment starts with newly formed isotope.
~1,000,002,010: u238 sample enters time travel device accompanied by the scientist clones who I am imagining look like Muppets or something. They travel back in time one billion years to when the u238 was first formed.

They then continue on a bit more and realize that they don’t really understand how these isotopes are formed. If these things have half-lives, it’s not like they simply turn into a different isotope after a period of time, right? Okay, well I am going to assume that as an isotope decays, the mass it loses gets converted into the next isotope in the decay daisy-chain. This is probably not the case, but whatever, it is 6:26am and I am very tired.

So... they travel 1 billion years and 4.54 minutes and they reach their final destination: the u238 has reverted back to new p238. I am not sure how much p238 they have, but I am pretty sure it should be around 500g, as that seems pretty reasonable.

6: The clones then travel back in the time machine to the year 2010 in order to alert their former selves what a pointless experiment it all is, and how they should probably stop as it is a huge waste of their time and energy. One of the scientists asks his clone for the lottery numbers, the clone reads off some kind of time travel protocol about how that would altar the fabric time and space, and how the universe could possibly implode on itself. The scientist then says “Whatever, just give me the numbers.”

And that’s how the universe ended.

uh... 42?
Avatar image for shadowofintent
ShadowofIntent

285

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#2  Edited By ShadowofIntent

Sorry bud, but  the correct equation for half life is
y=a(.5)^(t/h)
 y is final amount
a is starting amount
t is time
h is half life 

Avatar image for aas
Aas

634

Forum Posts

48

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#3  Edited By Aas

Actually, the correct equation for Half Life is Crowbar+Crates=Fun. You're welcome.

Avatar image for captaincody
CaptainCody

1551

Forum Posts

56

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#4  Edited By CaptainCody

TWO TRAINS LEFT 4 HOURS AGO 200 MILES APART, WHEN PUDDING?
Avatar image for dedodido
Dedodido

239

Forum Posts

86

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#5  Edited By Dedodido
@Jayross
Radioative decay follows a negative exponential relationship. The correct equation is:
 
N=N0 * exp[-(lambda)t]
 
where:
N = current mass
N0 = initial mass
exp = natural exponential function
t = time
lambda = decay constant
 
You can calculate the decay constant from the half life as follows:
lambda = ln(2) / half-life
 
Where ln(2) is the natural logarithm of 2.
 
 
 
For the other questions, you can use logarithms to re-arange the original equation for t, and work out what it is for different values of N.
Avatar image for n7
N7

4159

Forum Posts

23

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 4

User Lists: 2

#6  Edited By N7
@CaptainCody: WTF! LOL
 
I don't know why I laughed as hard as I did.
Avatar image for example1013
Example1013

4854

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#7  Edited By Example1013
@Jayross: Your math doesn't add up at all. If it takes billions of years for newly-formed U-238 to decay to 50%, then how does it decay to 99.9999% in a little over 8000 years? 
 
No Caption Provided
Avatar image for example1013
Example1013

4854

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#8  Edited By Example1013

Also, after reading the rest, shenanigans. I just really wanted to post the fail whale.

Avatar image for ryanwho
ryanwho

12011

Forum Posts

-1

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#9  Edited By ryanwho

Yes yes indeed, shallow and pedantic.

Avatar image for example1013
Example1013

4854

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#10  Edited By Example1013

I like how it'd only take 8000 years to decay completely, but it'd take 1.5 billion years to decay to 400g, according to the OP's math. 
 
Also, I may do this for funsies later, but I'm not acing a test for the OP.

Avatar image for virtuaxav
VirtuaXav

474

Forum Posts

28

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#11  Edited By VirtuaXav

Yo, I don't get maths. Maths is hard.

Avatar image for seraphim
Seraphim

116

Forum Posts

1247

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

#12  Edited By Seraphim
@example1013: I apologize if you were joking, but the question says how long will it take to decay to 99.9999% of its original value, not how long will it take for 99.9999% of it to decay.  Thus the result makes sense, since we're only asking how long it will take for a very small portion to disappear (namely .0001% of it).
Avatar image for jayross
Jayross

2647

Forum Posts

1791

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 11

User Lists: 6

#13  Edited By Jayross
@Seraphim
@example1013: I apologize if you were joking, but the question says how long will it take to decay to 99.9999% of its original value, not how long will it take for 99.9999% of it to decay.  Thus the result makes sense, since we're only asking how long it will take for a very small portion to disappear (namely .0001% of it).
Ahah! You guys scared me for a second.

@Dedodido I'm also pretty sure my formula works, too. I have starting mass, time, intervals, etc. The decay constant is based off the variable.
Avatar image for seraphim
Seraphim

116

Forum Posts

1247

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

#14  Edited By Seraphim
@Jayross: Uh, well if I understand your notation correctly, you're trying to model exponential decay with a linear model...bad idea.  Methinks Dedodido has the right idea.
Avatar image for notsosneakyguy
NotSoSneakyGuy

273

Forum Posts

38

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#16  Edited By NotSoSneakyGuy

I got 6,445,954,997 years, my r for the form Ae^(rt) is ~1.551 * 10^(-10) or 1.551E-10.

This is for decay of 0.0001%

Could be wrong, failed calc.

Edit: Scratch that, algebra.

~6446 years

Avatar image for example1013
Example1013

4854

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#17  Edited By Example1013
@Jayross: Okay, I was wrong on that because I skimmed it. I'm not going to answer your question, but I'll give you some advice that should make this easier: 
 
This is a classic example of a complex-looking problem meant to make the final look really difficult, when in fact the question is really easy. Your professor has thrown in a ton of extra, superfluous data to purposefully confuse you and your classmates, make you overthink it, and do poorly. I notice that many people do fine in the theoretical portions of math and science courses, but when they get real-world numbers with units on them, their brains melt and they go crazy for no reason. If you just extract the numbers from what's being said, you'll notice that this probem is actually ridiculously easy, and should take about 5 minutes to solve with a scientific calculator. 
 
You're panicking because of the time-travel and everything, but none of that stuff is relevant to the actual math your teacher is asking you to do. They tried this on me in high school, but since I have an easier time seeing through the bullshit, I had no trouble acing it, while other people all ran into difficulty because they were like you, and if they'd seen this they'd go "OMGWTF TIME TRAVEL! THIS IS IMPOSSIBLE!" when it's actually not. 
 
My physics professor last year (I took a college physics course in high school with a former college professor from the local univ.) required us on all tests to write out certain preliminary steps that actually were worth about half of the value of each question, with the correct answer being worth the other half. Those things were: 
 
List what you know (every single variable and equation relevant to the problem). 
 
List what you're looking for (this is everything you're trying to solve). 
 
This will extract what you need to do from all that superfluous junk that's confusing you.
Avatar image for kiemoe
Kiemoe

1097

Forum Posts

213

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 5

#18  Edited By Kiemoe

what an awesome final. Never seen one that involved scientists travelling through time to get lottery tickets from their clones

Avatar image for dedodido
Dedodido

239

Forum Posts

86

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#19  Edited By Dedodido
@Jayross said:
@Seraphim
@example1013: I apologize if you were joking, but the question says how long will it take to decay to 99.9999% of its original value, not how long will it take for 99.9999% of it to decay.  Thus the result makes sense, since we're only asking how long it will take for a very small portion to disappear (namely .0001% of it).
Ahah! You guys scared me for a second.

@Dedodido I'm also pretty sure my formula works, too. I have starting mass, time, intervals, etc. The decay constant is based off the variable.
As seraphim said, you're using a linear relationship to model an exponential one. The natural exponential is the only way to do it, it's just one of those things that pops up all over nature, that's why it's called the "natural" exponential.
 
Source: Just finished my 4 year physics degree :P
Avatar image for armaan8014
armaan8014

6325

Forum Posts

2847

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 11

User Lists: 17

#20  Edited By armaan8014

smart people

Avatar image for everyones_a_critic
Everyones_A_Critic

6500

Forum Posts

834

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 4

User Lists: 1

The answer is 2. Duh.

Avatar image for jayross
Jayross

2647

Forum Posts

1791

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 11

User Lists: 6

#22  Edited By Jayross

Aaaaw man :(

Avatar image for preacher5571
preacher5571

16

Forum Posts

5

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 3

#23  Edited By preacher5571
Avatar image for example1013
Example1013

4854

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#24  Edited By Example1013
@Jayross: You finish it yet?
Avatar image for jayross
Jayross

2647

Forum Posts

1791

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 11

User Lists: 6

#25  Edited By Jayross
@example1013 haha, nope. I stayed up until 7am working on it, then went to bed. Now I have to go to school to take the math final and hand this project in.

Although I still feel the equation I used is fine: it produces a line that looks like exponential decay, and forms a horizontal asyntope.

Oh well, at this point, all I care about is handing it in. I'll let you know what he makes of it.
Avatar image for wolf_blitzer85
wolf_blitzer85

5460

Forum Posts

2

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 6

#26  Edited By wolf_blitzer85
@CaptainCody said:
TWO TRAINS LEFT 4 HOURS AGO 200 MILES APART, WHEN PUDDING?
ALWAYS
Avatar image for example1013
Example1013

4854

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#27  Edited By Example1013
@Jayross: Your answer is pretty much correct up until #4. How many sig figs are you supposed to have for the P-238?
Avatar image for example1013
Example1013

4854

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#28  Edited By Example1013

Wait, nvm. I'm going to probably spend some time writing a quick program to work this out, but I need to use the right equations and figure out if I can use E or just have to approximate it.

Avatar image for thehexeditor
thehexeditor

1436

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#29  Edited By thehexeditor

E-mail Aperture Science; I'm sure they'll have a solution for ya.

Avatar image for galiant
galiant

2239

Forum Posts

117

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: -1

User Lists: 0

#30  Edited By galiant
@CaptainCody said:
TWO TRAINS LEFT 4 HOURS AGO 200 MILES APART, WHEN PUDDING?
This tickled my funny bone in a way I did not expect! Good day to you, sir!
Avatar image for lilburtonboy7489
lilburtonboy7489

1992

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 2

#31  Edited By lilburtonboy7489

use differential equation

Avatar image for example1013
Example1013

4854

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#32  Edited By Example1013
@Jayross: Yeah, there's no way you got the right answer. Half-life is exponential. So let's say you start with a 2 mole sample of that P-238. After 2.27 minutes, you have one mole left. However, because half-life is how long it takes to reduce by half, in another 2.27 minutes you still have half a mole. Sorry, but you screwed it up. 
 
I wrote up a quick program that can take input to calculate initial amount, final amount, or the time it takes to decay. You're off by an order of magnitude on the answer for question 5, just going by the largest digit.
Avatar image for iam3green
iam3green

14368

Forum Posts

350

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#33  Edited By iam3green

i hate math a lot. basic math is good, it's just algebra stuff that i can't do. it's just annoying to have to find X, find Y, and other things.

Avatar image for jayross
Jayross

2647

Forum Posts

1791

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 11

User Lists: 6

#34  Edited By Jayross
@example1013 yup, I now realize how much I messed up on that one.

I handed it in and my teacher skimmed it over and said the initial formula was fine. He didn't check any of the numbers or anything.

Anyways, I'm glad that's all over. I will never do math again.
Avatar image for valrog
valrog

3741

Forum Posts

1973

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#35  Edited By valrog

Time travel couldn't change anything. What's done is done.

Avatar image for jesus
Jesus

1190

Forum Posts

104

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 2

#36  Edited By Jesus

I'm looking into the future.. and you will indeed fail.

Avatar image for neoepoch
neoepoch

1317

Forum Posts

13

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 2

#37  Edited By neoepoch

...What is the problem now? More problems to solve? Wait, wait, wait, wait, wait. After reading that first post...You remember how I solved that equation for you in the previous post? How I found the k and A0 values for you? That was basically the only equation you needed for the entirety of the problem.
 
And basically A0 was just the initial amount that you used.
 
You only needed to plug and chug for the exponential decay formula. You weren't supposed to linearize it, because there was already a set function.

Avatar image for pplus0440
pplus0440

282

Forum Posts

275

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 2

#38  Edited By pplus0440

wow that is really easy stuff actually. Sounds like your professor has a personality atleast. Its like 2 buttons my calculator. Also, the sun wont reach temperatures where water evaporates off the earth in a billion years. Thats stupid. Why use bad logic and a math class? Stupid. Also calculus ftw.