2
$\begingroup$

In this specific question, I'm talking about why there is such a large difference in the time taken to emit a carbon nucleus, than an alpha nucleus.

In a recent lecture, my professor discussed the fact that heavy elements can emit a carbon nucleus as well as an alpha nucleus, but I missed out on the part when he discussed the reasons why we don't see carbon decay very often/it takes such a long time.

Any clarification on this would be appreciated.

$\endgroup$
3
  • $\begingroup$ The Wikipedia article on 'Cluster Decay' would be a good place to start... $\endgroup$
    – Jon Custer
    Commented May 5, 2017 at 13:46
  • $\begingroup$ @JonCuster The wiki page explains that it has a very small branching ratio, but it doesn't explain the reason. $\endgroup$
    – peterh
    Commented May 5, 2017 at 14:27
  • $\begingroup$ @peterh - sure, but the 27 references provided in the Wiki article cover it pretty well... $\endgroup$
    – Jon Custer
    Commented May 5, 2017 at 15:39

3 Answers 3

1
$\begingroup$

The decay rate for alpha emission can be approximated by modelling the process as due to the particle quantum-tunneling out of a potential. The logarithm of the half-life is an additive constant (dependent on how we nondimensionalise time) plus $2c\pi\alpha Z_1 (Z-Z_1)\sqrt{2m/E}$, where the emitted particle has mass $m$, kinetic energy $E$ and nucleon number $Z_1$, and $Z$ is the nucleon number of the parent nucleus. While $Z-Z_1$ switches from $Z-4$ for alpha decay to $Z-12$ for carbon-12 decay, which is a little smaller than $Z-4$ for the kind of large nuclei susceptible to carbon-12 decay, the $Z_1\sqrt{m}$ factor is proportional to $Z_1^{3/2}$ so is $5.2$ times larger in the carbon-12 decay. The log half-life is thus somewhat larger in this case, making the half-life itself much longer than for alpha emission.

$\endgroup$
0
$\begingroup$

In https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cluster_decay - pointed out by @JonCuster one finds

$\lambda = \ln 2 /T_c = \nu S P$

Comparing with $\alpha$ decay, $S$ - formation probability for heavier fragments can be much lower than $\alpha$, because they have more complicated structure, while $\alpha$ is a very good cluster in nucleus in many cases (in Li, C, ...).

Another term is $P$ - penetrability, which translates to possibility to overcome a Coulomb barrier. What is the "penetrability factor"? - but from elsewhere you find this equation:

$P \sim \exp(-2\pi z_1 z_2 e^2/\hbar v)$

From this one can see that (if you consider Z=92 nucleus) $z_1z_2$ is 180 for $\alpha$ (2*90) and 516 for carbon (6*86). Then you must have higher velocity $v$ for a similar $P$, which means a lower fraction of the the wavefunction can participate. And exponential makes it even more important.

One is used to a fact, that the Coulomb barrier plays a role when particle is approaching the nucleus from outside, but it is actually similar when the particle resides inside, because it is low in a potential well created by some field of all particles.

$\endgroup$
0
$\begingroup$

A simple (if hand-wavy) answer is that one part of the wavefunction for a carbon nucleus is a cluster of three alpha particles. Therefore, while you're waiting around for your carbon nucleus to form so that it can possibly tunnel out to cause a cluster decay, you're necessarily forming alpha particles that are more likely to tunnel out themselves than to cluster together inside the nucleus.

$\endgroup$
1
  • $\begingroup$ It's not really true that a carbon nucleus is even partly a cluster of three alphas (such literal clustering violates the exclusion principle), and in any case this answer misses the huge factor of the lower penetrability of the Coulomb barrier. $\endgroup$
    – user4552
    Commented May 13, 2019 at 18:10

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.