Information on Radioactive Decay.?

Question

I started to put this in Physics, but the process seems to involved more with chemistry, as it pertains to the changing of materials.

What I would like to know is how exactly radioactive decay results in different, more stable elements. I understand the alpha and beta decay properties, that it is emitting energy, that the element undergoes several changes into other elements becoming more and more stable, etc. What I am wondering is how exactly does that result in a wholly different kind of atom.

What I mean is, I thought elements were made up of a specific kind of atom, i.e. carbon is made up of uniquely alike carbon atoms, aluminum made of all aluminum atoms, etc. So then, how does the entire sample of atoms convert into an entirely different element? I mean, is uranium not made up of uniquely alike uranium atoms?

Or is it that all atoms are inherently alike, and that their specific combination of subatomic particles (proton, neutron, and electron combinations) results in producing atoms that are similar and thus compose together to produce a certain element? If this is the case, then I can understand how ionization and decay strips electrons over time, eventually changing that unique combination of subatomic particles until it eventually becomes stable lead.

 However, I was under the assumption that all atoms are unique to one of the many elements and always remained that kind of atom (for example, a hydrogen atom always remaining a hydrogen atom), which would mean that a uranium atom could never become a lead atom, regardless of radioactive decay. It doesn't really make sense to me that the atoms that compose an element could just entirely change into atoms that combine another element. For example, you don't see mercury becoming boron, or neon turning into gold. For instance, I thought this is the reason the fictional process of alchemy (turning another metal into gold) was impossible.

? · Accepted Answer

Atoms are made up of protons, neutrons, and electrons.  The number of protons determines what element the atom is.  The number of neutrons determines which isotope of that element.  Gaining or losing electrons doesn't change an atom from one element to another.

In radioactive decay, atoms lose neutrons (thus changing into another isotope) and protons (thus changing into another element).  Or sometimes a neutron changes into a proton plus an electron.

Uranium-238 loses 2 protons and 2 neutrons (an "alpha" particle), to become thorium-234.

Thorium-234:  one of the neutrons changes into a proton and an electron; the electron escapes (beta decay).  This changes the th-234 into protactinium-234.

Pa-234: another neutron changes into a proton and an electron.  This changes the Pa-234 into U-234.

... the chain continues, until we finally get to lead-206, which does not decay any more.

Also, natural mercury, boron, neon, and gold are stable, meaning that they do not decay.  But some of their isotopes are radioactive.

steve_geo1 · Answer

Let's take your first paragraph, first sentence.

There are certain radioactive elements like Th and U-238 and U-235 that have been in this part of the galaxy since they were formed in a supernova nearby several billion years ago. Some of that matter formed the sun and the earth and other planets. Our world's supply of these elements have been decaying since then. Radioactive decay of these elements is like a pinball machine. This decays to that, that decays to the other... Eventually, the product is a stable isotope of lead. It's like the ball in a pinball game that eventually drops into a hole and stays there.

Next, your second paragraph.

For example, uranium-238 decays by alpha emission.

92 U 238 ===> 90 Th 234 + 2He4

So uranium-238 is made up of uniquely alike uranium-238 atoms. Then they decay by alpha emission and become uniquely alike thorium-234 atoms. So radioactive elements indeed change one into another according to certain rules.

legat · Answer

isn't the technology of radiometric decay area of physics, no longer evolution? it is in no way a watch interior the experience you recommend, because of the fact the decay is a organic technique, no longer a effect of a particularly designed mechanism. it is likewise distinctive in that a watch is designed to recommend the passage of time, at the same time as utilising radiometric dating establishes a time between a start up element and the present. To properly mark the passage of time like a watch, the appropriate approaches contain excitation stages of electrons, emitting microwaves. it is an somewhat distinctive technique from radioactivity, and requites planned human intervention to enable the approach. So no, radiometric dating won't be able to be recognised as a watch or timepiece, basically a dating approach. the two at the instant are not an identical.

Trending News

Information on Radioactive Decay.?

3 Answers