Back
to top
Physics graphs
Watch this thread
Announcements
Page 1 of 1
Go to first unread
Skip to page:
papie
Badges:
16
Rep:
?
You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#1
papie
Badges:
16
Rep:
?
You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#2
Callicious
Badges:
22
Rep:
?
You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#3
Report
#3
For the de Broglie, remember that 
. Come up with a proportionality for that and see how it changes when you say, half 
or double 
. Use a proportionality to get your solution.
For the radioactive isotope decay, you know that
, where is some decay constant. 
describes the number of decays per second of the radioactive isotope to the stable product, in other words,
where I've thrown 
in self-explanatorily. The negative sign should be obvious- you're losing radioactive isotope. Anyhow, you know that for every radioactive decay, you gain one stable product- can you think of a way to relate 
to 
? Try to put that into the equation above and get an integral going to get 
.
. Come up with a proportionality for that and see how it changes when you say, half or double . Use a proportionality to get your solution. For the radioactive isotope decay, you know that
, where is some decay constant. describes the number of decays per second of the radioactive isotope to the stable product, in other words, in self-explanatorily. The negative sign should be obvious- you're losing radioactive isotope. Anyhow, you know that for every radioactive decay, you gain one stable product- can you think of a way to relate to ? Try to put that into the equation above and get an integral going to get .
0
reply
X
Page 1 of 1
Go to first unread
Skip to page:
Quick Reply
