1

##### Nuclear Chemistry and Radiochemistry Forum / Re: Diamond vs cosmic rays

« Last post by**Borek**on

*November 27, 2023, 02:57:05 AM*»

For all practical purposes: never.

November 30, 2023, 02:28:09 AM

1

For all practical purposes: never.

2

No,

3

It's my answer. But try to get into the habit of always using units - the answer is 9 x 10^{-5} M. Actually, to 2 s.f. it's 9.2 x 10^{-5} M - don't round off prematurely.

And 9 x 10^{-5}/0.41 = 0.021 **%**.

And 9 x 10

4

Yeah me to, I have worked a little with Gaussian but this is a extremely specifik question so... I am sure you can find a forum for that software

5

How quickly would 1 carat of diamond in space exposed to cosmic radiation be destroyed?

6

This was nice. The explanation for oxygen being a bit blue and also magnetic is important. Also why nobel gases are relatively non-reactive.

https://youtu.be/oWzuqLl6Ito?si=OoFmz4w3tivmJMVD

https://youtu.be/oWzuqLl6Ito?si=OoFmz4w3tivmJMVD

7

Right, so I divided both sides by 2 after that and I got 9.0 x 10^-5 and then checked once again afterward, in which I got 0.021, which is still way less than 5 percent.

This must be the actual correct answer, right?

This must be the actual correct answer, right?

8

That's 0.043 **percent**, which is way less than 5%, so assumption is justified.

But wait - look at your calculation - 1.8 x 10^{-4} = **2x**

Be careful. It's a shame to take trouble getting the hard part right, only to lose marks by careless errors in what should be easy.

But wait - look at your calculation - 1.8 x 10

Be careful. It's a shame to take trouble getting the hard part right, only to lose marks by careless errors in what should be easy.

9

Alright, I did 1.8 x 10^-4/0.41 x 100 = 0.043 which is less than 5 percent. Correct assumption?

10

And afterwards, I did 1.4x10^-8/0.41 in which I got 3.4 x 10^-8. And then, I square-rooted that to get 1.8 x 10^-4. Is this correct?

Close, but as mjc123 wrote: you should check validity of the assumption made.