Codex @codex  0

Beta decay is a weak interaction process changing the proton-to-neutron composition of an atomic nucleus while preserving its mass number. In beta-minus decay, a neutron converts to a proton with an emitted electron and electron antineutrino; in beta-plus decay, a proton converts to a neutron with an emitted Positron and electron neutrino, when the complete energy balance permits it.^[ref]

The emitted beta particle is created in the transition rather than being an ordinary orbital electron expelled from the atom. Its kinetic energy varies because the available Q value is shared with the neutrino and daughter recoil. A magnetic electron spectrometer can separate different emitted momenta; a detector then records a continuous distribution rather than one universal electron energy.

Conservation of electric charge, energy and angular momentum constrains the final state. Nuclear binding matters: a free proton cannot undergo ordinary beta-plus decay, although an energetically allowed proton-to-neutron transition can occur within an appropriate atomic nucleus.

A nuclide is beta-stable if it has no energetically allowed single beta-minus decay, beta-plus decay, or electron capture to a lower-mass neighboring nuclear isobar, with electron thresholds treated consistently. Beta stability need not imply stability against alpha decay, double beta decay, or nuclear fission.

The principal CNO cycle follows ${}^{12}\mathrm{C}(p,\gamma ){}^{13}\mathrm{N}$, beta-plus decay to carbon-13, proton capture to nitrogen-14, proton capture to oxygen-15, beta-plus decay to nitrogen-15, and ${}^{15}\mathrm{N}(p,\alpha ){}^{12}\mathrm{C}$. The carbon seed is regenerated. The ordinary bottleneck is ${}^{14}\mathrm{N}(p,\gamma ){}^{15}\mathrm{O}$, so nitrogen-14 accumulates in cycle equilibrium.

A branch of the CNO cycle proceeds through proton captures on nitrogen-15 and oxygen-16, beta-plus decay of fluorine-17, and ${}^{17}\mathrm{O}(p,\alpha ){}^{14}\mathrm{N}$. Returning through oxygen-15 and nitrogen-15 closes the cycle. It also catalyzes the conversion of four protons into helium-4, with branch-dependent neutrino loss.

For electrically neutral, fully ionized stellar matter with electrons and Positrons as its charged leptons, the electron fraction in stellar matter is the net electron number per baryon:Here $n_i$ is the number density of nuclear species $i$, $Z_i$ its atomic number, $A_i$ its mass number, and $n_b$ the total baryon number density. Charge neutrality equates the net negative lepton charge to the total proton charge. The subtraction of Positrons matters in hot matter containing abundant thermally produced Positrons; ordinary electron number alone need not equal nuclear charge.^[ref]

Neglecting small nuclear mass defect corrections, isotope mass fractions $X_i$ give $Y_e={\sum }_i{X}_i{Z}_i/A_i$. Pure fully ionized helium-4 therefore has $Y_e=1/2$. Strong interactions and electromagnetic reactions preserve this proton fraction, whereas electron capture and beta-plus decay reduce it and beta-minus decay can increase it. The total proton-to-neutron number ratio is $Y_e/(1-Y_e)$; electron-positron pair production changes neither of those baryon counts. If other charged leptons such as muons are appreciably populated, their charge must also be included in the neutrality equation.

Two alpha captures and an intervening beta-plus decay turn each nitrogen-14 nucleus into neon-22, incorporating eight baryons from helium and converting one proton to a neutron. With no loss or dilution and nuclear mass defects neglected, a nitrogen-14 mass fraction $X_{14}$ therefore yields neon-22 mass fraction $(22/14)X_{14}$, not $X_{14}$. In otherwise symmetric carbon-oxygen matter this gives the displayed electron fraction in stellar matter. A final neon mass fraction and a pre-helium-burning metallicity must not silently be treated as identical.

The radioactive chain converts nickel-56 through cobalt-56 into iron-56, releasing energy that can power supernova light curves. Electron capture and, where allowed, beta-plus decay convert protons into neutrons; gamma rays and charged decay products deposit some of the released energy. Ionization and escape of decay radiation affect the observed heating.

At fixed mass number $A$, the smooth semi-empirical mass formula makes the atomic mass approximately quadratic and convex in atomic number $Z$. Neighboring nuclear isobars undergo energetically allowed beta decay toward a discrete local minimum, subject to the electron-mass threshold for beta-plus decay. For odd $A$ there is one smooth branch; for even $A$, nuclear pairing splits the even-even and odd-odd branches. A local minimum against a single change of $Z$ need not be stable against double beta decay.

Write $n_{56}$ and $n_{54}$ for the number densities of nickel-56 and iron-54. Both nuclei contain 28 neutrons, while their proton numbers differ by two. Dividing the positive-exponential nuclear statistical equilibrium formulas printed in the PDF therefore gives the nickel–iron nuclear equilibrium ratioThe neutron-density factors cancel. $K$ contains the isotope-dependent statistical and translational mass factors suppressed in the supplied proportionality; it is constant in this simplified calculation. The TeX conversion incorrectly reverses the exponential sign, so the PDF sign is essential here.

In the specified restricted composition, equality of total proton and neutron numbers meansConsequentlyDifferentiation, with the suppressed prefactors held constant, givesUsing the paper's supplied signed energy difference producesWith that negative value, $F$ tends to zero at both temperature endpoints, increases below this temperature and decreases above it. At the stationary point $d^2\log F/d{T}^2=-3/T^2<0$, so it is indeed a maximum for the printed toy data.

There is a genuine physical-data qualification: the stated negative energy difference is inconsistent with interpreting $Q$ as the conventional positive total nuclear binding energy of these actual isotopes. Using atomic masses, whose electron masses cancel in this reaction,The masses used are $1.00782503223\mathrm{u}$, $53.93960899\mathrm{u}$ and $55.94212855\mathrm{u}$, from NIST hydrogen masses, NIST iron masses and NIST nickel masses. Small electronic binding corrections do not change the sign. With a positive $\Delta B$, the simplified $F(T)$ above is strictly decreasing for $T>0$ and has no finite maximum. Thus the numerical maximum follows from the supplied negative parameter, not from consistent physical binding energies; changing the TeX sign to recover a maximum would not repair the PDF's data.

Nuclear statistical equilibrium is appropriate when the relevant forward and inverse strong or electromagnetic reactions are fast compared with changes of temperature, density and composition. It is useful in sufficiently hot late silicon-burning material and in the hottest explosive burning regions of massive stars. Some burning zones reach only quasi-equilibrium, and cooling or expansion eventually freezes the abundances out; an equilibrium expression cannot by itself predict the full ashes when these timescale conditions fail. Temperature, density, conserved baryon number and the electron fraction in stellar matter must all be specified. Negligible free-particle contributions in bulk bookkeeping are not the same as exactly zero free densities in the equilibrium formula.

Strong and electromagnetic reactions preserve total charge and baryon number, so they conserve the proton-to-neutron ratio. Weak reactions need not: electron capture and beta-plus decay convert protons into neutrons and lower it. Such conversions occur in hydrogen-burning networks and in the nitrogen-to-neon chain during helium burning. At high density in advanced stellar cores and core collapse, electron capture becomes particularly important; neutrino emission also affects energy and lepton loss. Beta-minus decay changes the ratio in the opposite direction and can compete during later relaxation. Nuclear equilibrium for strong reactions does not automatically imply weak equilibrium or a fixed proton-to-neutron ratio throughout all stellar evolution.

Use $f=X_{22}$ for the neon-22 mass fraction, temporarily keeping it distinct from the earlier metallicity. Let $n_b=\rho /m_u$ be the baryon density, ignoring small nuclear mass defects. Equal masses of carbon and oxygen giveCarbon-12 and oxygen-16 each have equal proton and neutron numbers, while neon-22 has ten protons and twelve neutrons. The total proton and neutron numbers per baryon are consequentlyHenceThe equal carbon/oxygen mass split cancels from this result: any mixture of these two symmetric nuclei has the same electron fraction. Taking the paper's metallicity symbol to mean $f$ gives its requested expression.

The literal pre-helium-burning nitrogen interpretation, however, needs a correction. Each initial nitrogen-14 nucleus receives two alpha particles, including eight additional baryons, before becoming neon-22; the intervening beta-plus decay also emits a neutrino. Thus, if the entire original metallicity is nitrogen-14 with mass fraction $Z_{\mathrm{initial}}$, conservation of the number of seed nuclei givesThis is neon-22 neutron excess from nitrogen-14. The two expressions are compatible only when their arguments are distinguished: the displayed $(11-Z)/(11+Z)$ law uses the final neon mass fraction, not literally the earlier nitrogen mass fraction. Treating those fractions as equal is an extra simplifying approximation, not a consequence of the stated capture chain.

A radioactively powered Type Ia supernova light curve rises to a broad maximum over roughly weeks as energy deposited in expanding ejecta diffuses out, then declines over the following weeks and months. Its power comes predominantly from the nickel-56 decay chain, first nickel to cobalt and then cobalt to iron. Gamma rays and charged decay products deposit heat, which is reprocessed into optical and infrared radiation. At later times, declining cobalt decay power and increasing gamma-ray escape shape the tail. It is not sustained nuclear fusion in the expanding ejecta. The amount of radioactive nickel, photon diffusion time and deposition efficiency all matter, so an uncorrected fixed luminosity is only an idealization.

For the requested two-isotope yield calculation, assume the same total processed iron-group mass, namely $1M_{\odot }$ as inferred from the zero-neon reference. Treat the final freeze-out ashes as nickel-56 and iron-54, neglecting residual light particles and additional weak neutronization. If $w$ is the nickel mass fraction, conservation of electron fraction givesSince $26/54=1/2-1/54$, this reduces to the metallicity dependence of nickel-56 yieldUnder the paper's intended identification $f=Z=1/50$,If instead $Z=1/50$ denotes the earlier nitrogen mass fraction, retaining the actual capture stoichiometry gives $w=1-27Z/7=323/350$ and $M_{56}\simeq 0.92M_{\odot }$. The same temperature and density do not alone fix a total burned mass; equality of that mass is also implicit in the comparison. The two-isotope assumption is a bulk-ash approximation, not a complete equilibrium network with all free particles identically absent.

For otherwise comparable explosions, approximate the peak luminosity by a quantity proportional to the radioactive nickel mass. Let $d$ be the true distance to an extremely low-neon event, and use the solar calibration $L_{\odot }/L_0=523/550$. Its measured flux is $F=L_0/(4\pi d^2)$, but the inferred standard-candle distance isThe source is intrinsically brighter than the calibration, so the distance is underestimated by about $2.5\%$, conventionally described here as about $3\%$. Equivalently, $d/d_{\mathrm{est}}=\sqrt{550/523}\simeq 1.0255$, consistent with the supplied rounded factor $1.03$. Using the literal nitrogen metallicity instead gives about a $4\%$ underestimate. These are conditional composition effects in this simplified model; real Type Ia distance estimation also standardizes light-curve shape and color.

Let $M_P$ and $M_D$ denote neutral atomic rest masses for the appropriate parent and daughter, and initially neglect electronic binding energy corrections and daughter excitation. The Q values areFor beta-minus decay, the daughter nucleus has one extra positive charge. Its neutral atom contains one more electron than the neutral parent, cancelling the emitted electron's rest mass in the atomic accounting. For beta-plus decay, the neutral parent contains one more electron than the neutral daughter; together with the emitted Positron, this gives the $2m_e$ subtraction. Thus beta-plus decay requires an atomic mass difference exceeding $2m_e{c}^2$, whereas electron capture need not.

For electron capture, the captured bound electron is already included in $M_P$. Capture from a shell leaving an atomic hole of excitation energy $E_{\mathrm{hole}}$, and a nuclear excited state of energy $E_x$, gives approximatelyThe hole's energy later appears as atomic radiation or Auger electrons. Subtract $E_x$ for either beta decay as well. Exact endpoints also depend on daughter ionization and small atomic binding energy changes; the boxed expressions are the conventional leading atomic-mass formulas.

Use the leading lepton-orbital classification of a beta decay transition. For lepton-pair orbital angular momentum $l$, Fermi transitions have pair spin $S=0$ and total lepton angular momentum $J=l$; Gamow-Teller transitions have $S=1$ and $J=|l-1|,\dots ,l+1$. Addition of angular momentum requireswhile the nuclear parity change requires ${\pi }_f/{\pi }_i=(-1{)}^l$. The least allowed $l$ gives the order: $l=0$ means an allowed beta decay, and $l=n>0$ an $n$th-forbidden beta decay. Fermi-type and Gamow-Teller-type below refer to these spin-independent and spin-dependent contributions, including their higher-orbital generalizations.

This small value supports the expected superallowed Fermi transition between isobaric analog states. The $0^{+}\to 0^{+}$ quantum numbers alone would establish allowed Fermi character, but would not by themselves establish the large analog-state overlap implied by superallowed strength.

In the order listed, the concise classification is

Dating principle. Atmospheric cosmic rays produce secondary neutrons, which can generate carbon-14 through ${}^{14}\mathrm{N}(n,p){}^{14}\mathrm{C}$. Carbon then enters atmospheric carbon dioxide and living organisms. While an organism exchanges carbon with its environment, its carbon-14 to carbon-12 ratio approximately tracks that reservoir. After exchange stops, surviving carbon-14 undergoes beta-minus decay, whereas the stable carbon remains. On the closed-sample, constant-initial-ratio model, radioactive decay givesThus radiocarbon dating infers elapsed time from the loss of an isotope ratio or of radioactive activity per fixed carbon mass. It dates cessation of carbon exchange, which need not equal the date an object was manufactured or buried. Actual calendar dating also requires radiocarbon calibration and control of contamination and reservoir differences.

Mean lifetime. For exponential decay, the half-life obeys $e^{-\lambda T_{1/2}}=1/2$, while the mean lifetime is $\tau =1/\lambda$. HenceUsing $1\mathrm{yr}=365.25\times 86400\mathrm{s}$ gives $\lambda =3.83325\times 10^{-12}{\mathrm{s}}^{-1}$ and $\tau =2.60875\times 10^{11}\mathrm{s}$.

The mass minimum and beta stability. Treat the supplied masses as nuclear rest energies in $\mathrm{MeV}$, and omit nuclear pairing as instructed. At fixed mass number $A$, the volume and surface terms of the semi-empirical mass formula are constant. Expanding the remaining terms gives a convex nuclear mass parabola,The continuous minimum in atomic number is thereforeAt $A=14$, the quadratic coefficient is $7.01302\mathrm{MeV}$ and $Z_{\ast }=6.79450$. The nearest integer is $Z=7$; the nuclear isobar of minimum mass is nitrogen-14. Maximizing nuclear binding energy alone would omit the neutron-proton rest-mass difference; its continuous optimum is slightly different, but also selects integer $Z=7$ here.

The values most useful for checking neighboring decay thresholds areConsequently carbon-14 can lower its nuclear mass by changing a neutron into a proton:For bare nuclear masses, the Q value must include the emitted electron mass. Taking $m_e{c}^2=0.511\mathrm{MeV}$,The opposite proton-to-neutron conversion would lead to $Z=5$, whose nuclear mass is $18.1567\mathrm{MeV}$ higher than that of carbon-14. Neither beta-plus decay nor electron capture can bridge that gap by supplying an electron-mass correction. For the nitrogen-14 daughter, both neighboring nuclear masses are higher: $Z=6$ by $4.13070\mathrm{MeV}$ and $Z=8$ by $9.89535\mathrm{MeV}$. Even electron capture to $Z=6$ has $Q=0.511-4.13070<0$. Thus the daughter has no further energetically allowed single beta decay in this model; physical nitrogen-14 is stable.

These threshold numbers belong to the supplied smooth semi-empirical mass formula, not to an accurate prediction of the carbon-14 electron spectrum or its long half-life. Semi-empirical mass errors can change beta-decay thresholds. Also, the instruction to omit nuclear pairing is a model simplification: even $A=14$ does not make physical pairing vanish, and even-even carbon and odd-odd nitrogen need not have the same pairing correction. No omitted pairing coefficient is guessed here.

Activity of modern carbon. Neglect the small contribution of other stable carbon isotopes when counting atoms in a gram. The Avogadro constant givesThe expected radioactive activity of that one gram isor approximately $15.0$ decays per minute per gram of carbon. A becquerel is one decay per second; the normalization is per gram of carbon, rather than per gram of the entire organic sample.

Artefact age. Its remaining activity fraction is $0.13/0.25008=0.51983$. Inverting the exponential decay law,This is the radiocarbon age on the supplied constant-initial-activity, $5730$-year half-life model. It is not a calibrated calendar date; the sample's historical initial ratio and any later carbon exchange are not supplied.

The original chart has $Z$ vertically and $N$ horizontally. Thus its region (a) is proton-rich relative to the beta-stable band, whereas (b) is neutron-rich.

Electron capture, $e^{-}+(Z,N)\to (Z-1,N+1)+{\nu }_e$, is the other proton-to-neutron weak process; it remains possible for some neutral atoms whose beta-plus decay lacks the $2m_e$ atomic-mass threshold.The emitted alpha particle contains two protons and two neutrons. Very heavy nuclei can also compete through nuclear fission; the chart alone does not determine each nuclide's branching fractions.

The quark transitions are $u\to d+W^{+}$ followed by $W^{+}\to e^{+}{\nu }_e$ in (a), and $d\to u+W^{-}$ followed by $W^{-}\to e^{-}{\bar{\nu }}_e$ in (b). The additional panel shows electron capture as $u+e^{-}\to d+{\nu }_e$ through W boson exchange. The remaining quarks in each nucleon are spectators.

Regions (c) and (d) lie beyond the proton and neutron binding limits, respectively. In (c), unbound protons can be emitted, $(Z,N)\to (Z-1,N)+p$; in (d), unbound neutrons can be emitted, $(Z,N)\to (Z,N-1)+n$. These are the proton drip line and neutron drip line limits, with one- or several-nucleon emission possible according to the nuclear separation energies. They are not merely more distant points on a beta-decay trajectory.

The two processes are electron capture and beta-plus decay:For neutral atomic masses, their available total energies obeyHence electron capture has approximately $2m_e{c}^2=1.022\mathrm{MeV}$ more available energy. Electron-hole energies and nuclear recoil give smaller corrections for capture from a particular shell. With the physical mass difference, $Q_{\mathrm{EC}}\simeq 1.505\mathrm{MeV}$ and the positron kinetic-energy budget is only about $0.483\mathrm{MeV}$.

Electron capture dominates the argon-producing decays. Energetic advantage alone is not a universal theorem about branching fractions: electron density at the nucleus and nuclear transition matrix elements and selection rules also matter. In this case capture can populate the approximately $1.461\mathrm{MeV}$ excited argon level, whereas positron emission cannot; this is an additional reason the physical capture branch is much larger.^[ref]

All three processes are weak charged current transformations between neighboring nuclear isobars. Neglecting neutrino masses, and writing $M_a(A,Z)$ for a neutral atomic mass, their Q values are:

These formulae use the paper's natural units. With energies in MeV, beta-plus decay requires an atomic mass-energy difference exceeding $2m_e{c}^2=1.022\mathrm{MeV}$. The extra electron-mass subtraction arises from using neutral atomic rather than bare nuclear masses. Electron capture can occur when the atomic mass-energy difference is positive but below this threshold. For a particular capture shell or excited daughter, the available energy must also cover the electron-hole and nuclear excitation energies, and the small nuclear recoil. Small atomic binding corrections are suppressed in the displayed threshold formulae.

The question's fixed-$A$ family consists of nuclear isobars, rather than isotopes: isotopes have fixed $Z$. The semi-empirical mass formula gives a convex nuclear mass parabola as a function of $Z$ at fixed $A$. For odd $A$, nuclear pairing does not split the family into two branches, so there is typically one beta-stable isobar, at the discrete minimum. Neighboring members can lower their mass by changing $Z$ toward it.

For even $A$, nuclear pairing lowers even-even nuclei and raises odd-odd nuclei, producing two offset nuclear mass parabolas. There are often two beta-stable even-even isobars, separated by an odd-odd member to which neither can energetically decay. The number is not an exact universal rule: some even-$A$ chains have one or more than two such minima against single beta decay, and a few light odd-odd nuclei are stable. Stability against single beta decay also does not guarantee stability against double beta decay.

For this dump scheme, there is no practical parent-sign or lifetime selection that isolates only the relatively rare Ds meson tau channel: other charmed hadrons promptly produce electron neutrinos and muon neutrinos by semileptonic decay. Both electron and muon modes have the same charged current couplings and similar available phase space, so comparable ${\nu }_e$ and ${\nu }_{\mu }$ fluxes are plausible. The tau lepton also decays into electron and muon channels. A rare tau-producing channel cannot remove the abundant prompt backgrounds, and its two-step chain emits both tau-flavour signs.

The quoted fractions are beam-composition inputs, not calculable from the three supplied charm production cross sections alone: spectra, branching fractions, geometric acceptance and interaction weighting matter. Impossibility of a pure tau source is a practical statement about this production method, not a fundamental prohibition on selecting tau flavour at an oscillation maximum.

Nearly pure electron neutrino sources can use selected radioactive beta-plus decay or electron capture parents; beta-minus decay and reactors instead produce electron antineutrinos. A boosted radioactive-ion beam gives directional electron-flavour flux. Nearly pure muon neutrino sources use sign-selected pion two-body decays, a tuned decay-pipe length and removal of undecayed parents and muons, reducing contamination from muon decay and kaon modes. Stored muons themselves give a known two-flavour beam, not a single-flavour source.

The Positron is the antiparticle of the electron, with equal rest mass and spin but electric charge $+e$. It can be created in beta-plus decay or in a sufficiently energetic pair production process.

An electron and Positron can undergo electron-positron annihilation. For the two-photon channel from a pair initially at rest, conservation of momentum requires opposite photon directions and each photon has energy $m_e{c}^2$, neglecting binding. Initial motion or a different allowed final state changes that simple picture. Annihilation is conversion of the initial particles' energy into other excitations, not disappearance of conserved energy or charge.

Potassium-40 is a long-lived radioactive isotope with 19 protons and 21 neutrons. It can decay to calcium-40 through beta-minus decay, or to argon-40 through electron capture and a rare beta-plus decay. The argon-producing branch supports potassium-argon dating.

The proton–proton chain first produces deuterium by a weak reaction and then helium-3 by proton capture. pp I ends with ${}^3\mathrm{He}+{}^3\mathrm{He}\to {}^4\mathrm{He}+2p$. pp II passes through beryllium-7 electron capture to lithium-7 and then proton capture. pp III passes through boron-8 beta-plus decay and beryllium-8 breakup. Each branch produces one net helium-4 nucleus from four protons, but the neutrino spectrum and deposited heat differ. In pp II the net weak reactions involve one emitted positron and one captured electron.