During the experiment, the number of radioactive atoms never increased because a radioactive nucleus likely, but not definitelypossibly, but not likely✔ neverdefinitely becomes radioactive again after it decays.
y-axis is Half-Life Cycles✔ Radioactive AtomsDecayed Atoms.
Your simulation involved 100 atoms and eight half-life cycles. For half-life cycles 9 and later, how many radioactive nuclei would you expect to be present? ✔ 01234510It depends on the cycle.
For the graph shown right, a good title for the x-axis is . A good title for the y-axis is .
Why is the regression equation not exactly y = 100 • 0.5n? ✔ Radioactive decay is a random event.Some atoms became radioactive again.Simulation cannot really model half-life.Half-life is not a real thing.
You could also graph decay time (in seconds or minutes) vs. number of radioactive nuclei. How would this graph differ from the graph of cycle number vs. number of radioactive nuclei? Check all that apply.
Suppose you could watch radioactive atoms decay. It would probably get quite boring as time went by. Why? Check all that apply.
50%25%12.5%✔ 6.25%
[image 1] [image 2] [image 3] [image 4]




6.750 x 10113.375 x 10111.687 x 1011
The half-life of Carbon-14 is 5730 years. When did the animal die? Approximately 5730 11,46017,190✔ 28,650 years ago.
What is the relationship between the number of half-life cycles and the elapsed time in seconds or minutes?
Did you find these answers helpful?