Re: Physics Question

From	Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de>
Newsgroups	sci.physics
Subject	Re: Physics Question
Date	2016-07-09 21:28 +0200
Organization	PointedEars Software (PES)
Message-ID	<11567387.uLZWGnKmhe@PointedEars.de> (permalink)
References	<nllle2$1q3n$1@gioia.aioe.org> <nlnj6p$4h7$1@dont-email.me> <nlofhc$lat$2@pcls7.std.com> <nlom99$unc$1@dont-email.me>

Show all headers | View raw

Poutnik wrote:

> On 07/08/2016 05:06 PM, Michael Moroney wrote:
>> The half-lives give the probabilities.
> 
> If they are real alternatives, and not subsequent processes.

Half-life is the _time_ in which 50 % of the original specimen has decayed.

<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Half-life>

>>> Aside of that, gamma emission itself is not radioactive decay,

True, because an emission is not a decay.  However, gamma decay is a type of 
radioactive decay.

<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gamma_ray#Sources_of_gamma_rays>

>>> it is releasing energy of excited kernel.
>>
>> Some isotopes have "meta" (excited) states that can give off
>> a gamma to become the ground state.  Some of these isomers
>> can also decay radioactively to something else by giving off an
>> alpha or beta.  And sometimes the ground state can't decay
>> the same way the isomer can.
> 
> Yes, that is correct.

No, the proper description of a nuclear isomer is “a _metastable_ state of 
an atomic nucleus (of an isotope of a chemical element)”.

<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_isomer>

-- 
PointedEars

Twitter: @PointedEars2
Please do not cc me. / Bitte keine Kopien per E-Mail.

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