Re: Physics Question

From	Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com>
Newsgroups	sci.physics
Subject	Re: Physics Question
Date	2016-07-11 07:50 -0500
Organization	Aioe.org NNTP Server
Message-ID	<nm04lo$1kl3$4@gioia.aioe.org> (permalink)
References	(5 earlier) <nlp64h$isi$1@gioia.aioe.org> <nltsa6$hfl$3@gioia.aioe.org> <nlu7fv02i4h@news4.newsguy.com> <nluc26$1a1e$1@gioia.aioe.org> <nlug3n02ovj@news4.newsguy.com>

Show all headers | View raw

On 7/10/2016 4:52 PM, Fabian Russell wrote:
> On Sun, 10 Jul 2016 15:43:55 -0500, Odd Bodkin wrote:
>
>> I believe Rutherford was the one to classify the three different
>> radiations from nuclei as alpha, beta, and gamma,
>>
>
> There are more than these three (actually two).
>
> There are also positron emission and electron capture.
>
> But gamma emission is NOT a decay.

According to whom?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radioactive_decay
"Radioactive decay, also known as nuclear decay or radioactivity, is the 
process by which the nucleus of an unstable atom loses energy by 
emitting radiation, including alpha particles, beta particles, gamma 
rays and conversion electrons. A material that spontaneously emits such 
radiation is considered radioactive."

>
> A better example would have been the alternative decay modes of
> Potassium-40:
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Potassium-40
>
> One mode is beta emission and the other mode is electron capture,
> with each mode producing different decay products.  That is what this
> problem, based on the answer, is actually asking.
>
> Gamma emission is not involved with alternative decay modes but only
> with consecutive decay.
>
> Again, IMO, the problem is poorly designed.
>
>
>


-- 
Odd Bodkin --- maker of fine toys, tools, tables

Thread

Physics Question Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-07-07 08:28 -0500
  Re: Physics Question Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2016-07-08 09:02 +0200
    Re: Physics Question Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-07-08 09:19 -0500
    Re: Physics Question moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-07-08 15:06 +0000
      Re: Physics Question Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-07-08 10:11 -0500
        Re: Physics Question benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2016-07-08 17:12 -0400
          Re: Physics Question Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-07-08 16:32 -0500
            Re: Physics Question Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-07-10 11:15 -0500
              Re: Physics Question Fabian Russell <fb@zen.info> - 2016-07-10 19:25 +0000
                Re: Physics Question Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-07-10 15:43 -0500
                Re: Physics Question Fabian Russell <fb@zen.info> - 2016-07-10 21:52 +0000
                Re: Physics Question Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-07-11 07:50 -0500
                Re: Physics Question Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2016-07-11 17:04 +0200
                Re: Physics Question moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-07-11 01:20 +0000
      Re: Physics Question Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2016-07-08 19:01 +0200
        Re: Physics Question Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2016-07-09 21:28 +0200
          Re: Physics Question moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-07-10 02:18 +0000
    Re: Physics Question Fabian Russell <fb@zen.info> - 2016-07-09 17:11 +0000

csiph-web