An Egyptian mummy is carbon-dated and compared with a scroll found in the Dead Sea, which is known to be 2000 years old. The X 1 4 X 2 2 1 4 C : X 1 2 X 2 2 1 2 C ratio of the mummy is found to be 3 2 that of the scroll. How old is the mummy (rounded to an integer number of years)?
Details and Assumptions:
X 1 4 X 2 2 1 4 C is radioactive with a half-life of 6000 years (it decays into nitrogen). X 1 2 X 2 2 1 2 C is a stable isotope, so the amount of X 1 2 X 2 2 1 2 C in a sample remains constant over time.
The ratio X 1 4 X 2 2 1 4 C : X 1 2 X 2 2 1 2 C in an organism (plant or animal) at the time of its death is equal to the ratio of the isotopes in the air it breathed in. This ratio can be assumed to be constant over time.
This section requires Javascript.
You are seeing this because something didn't load right. We suggest you, (a) try
refreshing the page, (b) enabling javascript if it is disabled on your browser and,
finally, (c)
loading the
non-javascript version of this page
. We're sorry about the hassle.
The % is superfluous.
Sir,is there a way to prove the above mentioned formula??
Log in to reply
A half-life means that an object loses half of that element in that period of time. So if an object starts with A 0 of an element, then after 1 half-life there is 2 1 A 0 of that element remaining, after 2 half-lifes there is 2 1 2 1 A 0 of that element remaining, and so on, so that in general after n half-lifes there is ( 2 1 ) n A 0 of that element remaining. The total time t would have n half-lifes, so n = h t . Substituting this n value gives A = A 0 ( 2 1 ) h t .
Had, the same approach. ‘This ratio can be assumed to be constant over time.’ is a useless, misleading piece of information.
I might be missing something, but I think that the C14:C12 ratio being 2/3 that of the scroll is different from the percentage of C14 being 2/3 that of the scroll. In the latter case, you're comparing the quantity of C12 to the total quantity of carbon.
@erica phillips There is no half life in nature: that would involve atoms co-ordinating with each other and saying: okay you 50% must now decay. Doesn’t happen. The standard model views each atom as an independent automata with two states—non-yet-decayed (1) or decayed (0)—and behaving completely independently, but governed by identical rules. The rule for each atom is also simple and clever: each atom decays (changes state from 1 to 0) according to a stochastic process governed by a memoryless distribution, namely the exponential distribution .
Let’s mathematise this. Let X i ( t ) be the { 0 , 1 } -valued state saying whether or not Atom i at time t has decayed. By model assumption, the X i ( t ) are iid rv (independent identically distributed random variables). That is X i ( t ) ∼ X ( t ) for all i and the rv's are pairwise independent. The distribution is given by P [ X ( t ) = 1 ] = e − λ t and P [ X ( t ) = 0 ] = 1 − e − λ t . This arises from the exponential distribution (for the corresponding decay-time rv), where λ is a constant dependent on the type of atom. It holds that λ 1 = expected time of decay. In particular E [ X ( t ) ] = 1 ⋅ e − λ t + 0 ⋅ ( 1 − e − λ t ) = e − λ t is the expected value.
Under this setup, the criteria for the strong law of large numbers are satisfied (look up what this is). The strong law says
N 1 i = 1 ∑ N X i ( t ) ⟶ E [ X ( t ) ] = e − λ t
almost surely for N ⟶ ∞ . Thus for N : = A 0 a large total number of atoms being viewed, it holds that N 1 ∑ i = 1 N X i ( t ) ≈ e − λ t . Note that
i = 1 ∑ N X i ( t ) = ∣ { i ∣ 1 ≤ i ≤ N , X i ( t ) = 1 } ∣ = A ( t )
is the number of atoms not-yet decayed at time t . Hence A ( t ) / A 0 ≈ e − λ t . Hence A ( t ) ≈ A 0 e − λ t . Setting h : = λ lo g ( 2 ) , one has A ( t ) ≈ A 0 ( 2 1 ) t / h as simplification. The ≈ means, that this equation holds with arbitrary levels of accuracy for increasing A 0 -values.
And it really is so, that equality almost surely never holds: A ( t ) does not have an deterministic value at any time (except t = 0 ). It is a rv with distribution A ( t ) ∼ Bin ( A 0 , e − λ t ) . It has variance Var ( A ( t ) ) = A 0 e − λ t ( 1 − e − λ t ) and expectation
E [ A ( t ) ] = A 0 e − λ t = A 0 ( 2 1 ) t / h .
If one scales, then Var ( A ( t ) / A 0 ) = e − λ t ( 1 − e − λ t ) / A 0 ⟶ 0 for A 0 ⟶ ∞ , so that the distribution of A ( t ) / A 0 gets evermore concentrated around the expected value E [ A ( t ) / A 0 ] = e − λ t = ( 2 1 ) t / h . Since in many cases working with the scaled value (the %) is more useful, this justifies replacing the non-deterministic value A ( t ) by its expected value, which is a deterministic function of t .
Fazit: There is no halving-process in reality itself. It’s a stochastic process , which however can be approximated by a halving process, and can only be exactly described by a halving-process if one replaces A ( t ) by the expected value E [ A ( t ) ] , which, as discussed in the last paragraph, is under natural circumstances justified.
Log in to reply
Thank u so much for taking the trouble to explain the idea vividly!!!Thanks again:)
Just very old
The half-life formula is given by A = A 0 ( 2 1 ) h t , where A is the final amount, A 0 is the initial amount, t is the time that has passed, and h is the half-life of the item being measured.
Using subscripts to denote different samples,
A 1 = A 0 ( 2 1 ) h t 1 and A 2 = A 0 ( 2 1 ) h t 2
Let k be the proportion of X 1 2 X 2 2 1 2 C between the samples. Hence, A 1 = k A 2
Equating and simplifying, we end with the relationship t 1 = t 2 − ln 2 h ln k . We can now compare any 2 samples.
Plugging in the values t 2 = 2 0 0 0 , h = 6 0 0 0 and k = 3 2 ,
t 1 = 2 0 0 0 − ln 2 6 0 0 0 ln 3 2 ≈ 5 5 0 9 . 8
All the answers are good. I tend to use exponential functions to work with decay, which is basically just a notation preference. You can model exponential decay with the formula N ( t ) = N 0 e − t / τ where N ( t ) is the number of 1 4 C atoms at time t , N 0 is the number at t = 0 , and τ is the exponential time constant. We are given that 2 N 0 = N 0 e − 6 0 0 0 / τ ⇒ l n ( 2 1 ) = − τ 6 0 0 0 ⇒ τ = − l n ( 2 1 ) 6 0 0 0 . We are then given that 3 2 e − 2 0 0 0 / τ = e − x / τ ⇒ − τ x = l n ( 3 2 e − 2 0 0 0 / τ ) = − τ 2 0 0 0 + l n ( 3 2 ) ⇒ x = 2 0 0 0 − l n ( 3 2 ) τ = 2 0 0 0 + 6 0 0 0 l n ( 2 1 ) l n ( 3 2 ) ≈ 5 5 1 0 .
log 2 1 ( 3 2 ) * 6000 + 2000 = 5510 years
I've been out of school for a while so here's how I did it:
1) Let A be the exponential decay constant, such that after one half-life exactly one-half of the 14C remains.
2) Let B be the number of years necessary for exactly two-thirds of the original amount of 14C to remain.
Therefore from the problem we can state:
A 6 0 0 0 = 2 1 , and
A B = 3 2
We can take the log of both sides to get
6 0 0 0 l o g A = l o g 2 1 , and
B l o g A = l o g 3 2
We solve the system for B to get:
B = l o g 2 1 6 0 0 0 ⋅ l o g 3 2 ≈ 3 5 1 0 years.
This is how much older the mummy is than the scroll. The scroll is already known to be 2000 years old and so this makes the mummy 5510 years old.
Just solve 2^(-x/6000)=2/3*2^(-y/6000), for y=2000
Let us define S C and M C as the scroll's and mummy's respective X 1 4 X 2 2 1 4 C : X 1 2 X 2 2 1 2 C ratios.
The function for the radioactive decay of X 1 4 X 2 2 1 4 C , which is at the same time the function for the ratio of X 1 4 X 2 2 1 4 C : X 1 2 X 2 2 1 2 C , is N ( t ) = N 0 ∗ x t , where t is the time given in years. The starting value N 0 is unimportant as the problem concerns ratios, and x is unknown.
We know that x 6 0 0 0 = 2 1 and can from there reason that:
x = 6 0 0 0 2 1
x = 6 0 0 0 2 1
x = 2 − 6 0 0 0 1
This makes the formula for radioactive decay N ( t ) = 2 − 6 0 0 0 t
S C = N ( 2 0 0 0 ) = 2 − 6 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 = 3 2 1
For the age a of the mummy, we can take the equation:
M C = 2 − 6 0 0 0 a = 3 2 ∗ 3 2 1
a ∗ ln ( 2 − 6 0 0 0 1 ) = ln ( 3 3 2 2 )
a = ln ( 2 − 6 0 0 0 1 ) ln ( 3 3 2 2 ) = 5 5 0 9 . 7 7 5 … ≈ 5 5 1 0
log(1/2)/log(2/3)=3510
3510+2000=5510 years.
Problem Loading...
Note Loading...
Set Loading...
The half-life formula is A = A 0 ( 2 1 ) h t , where A is the final amount, A 0 is the starting amount, t is the time, and h is the half-life.
After 2 0 0 0 years, the scroll will only have ( 2 1 ) 6 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 of its original X 1 4 X 2 2 1 4 C remaining.
Since the mummy has 3 2 of that, we have 3 2 ( 2 1 ) 6 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 = ( 2 1 ) 6 0 0 0 x .
Solving for x gives x = ln ( 2 1 ) 6 0 0 0 ln ( 3 2 ( 2 1 ) 3 1 ) ≈ 5 5 0 9 . 8 .