Practice worksheet for balancing nuclear reactions and identifying missing particles in radioactive decay equations.

Since I can't view or access uploaded images directly, I can’t see the specific problem in your image. However, based on the text you've provided, it looks like a worksheet titled "Nuclear Reactions and Radioactive Decay" with 20 problems asking you to find the missing particle or part of each decay equation.

Let me help you solve each of these nuclear decay equations step by step. I’ll use conservation laws:

- Conservation of mass number (A): The sum of mass numbers on the left must equal the sum on the right.
- Conservation of atomic number (Z): The sum of atomic numbers on the left must equal the sum on the right.

---

1) \( ^{234}_{92}\text{U} \rightarrow ^{230}_{90}\text{Th} + ? \)

- Mass: 234 → 230 + ? → ? = 4
- Atomic number: 92 → 90 + ? → ? = 2
- So, missing particle is \( ^4_2\text{He} \) (alpha particle)

✔ Answer: \( ^4_2\text{He} \)

---

2) \( ^{90}_{38}\text{Sr} \rightarrow ^0_{-1}\beta + ? \)

- Beta decay: emits an electron (\( ^0_{-1}\beta \)), so a neutron turns into a proton.
- Mass: 90 → 0 + ? → ? = 90
- Atomic number: 38 → -1 + ? → ? = 39
- So, product is \( ^{90}_{39}\text{Y} \)

✔ Answer: \( ^{90}_{39}\text{Y} \)

---

3) \( ? \rightarrow ^0_{-1}\beta + ^{230}_{90}\text{Th} \)

- Beta decay: parent nucleus emits beta, becomes Th.
- So, parent has:
- Mass: ? → 0 + 230 → ? = 230
- Atomic number: ? → -1 + 90 → ? = 89
- Element with Z=89 is Actinium (Ac)

✔ Answer: \( ^{230}_{89}\text{Ac} \)

---

4) \( ^{14}_6\text{C} \rightarrow ^4_2\text{He} + ? \)

- Alpha decay: C-14 loses alpha particle.
- Mass: 14 → 4 + ? → ? = 10
- Atomic number: 6 → 2 + ? → ? = 4
- Element with Z=4 is Beryllium (Be)

✔ Answer: \( ^{10}_4\text{Be} \)

---

5) \( ^1_0\text{n} \rightarrow ? + ^1_1\text{H} \)

- Neutron decays into proton and electron (beta decay).
- But here, it's written as: neutron → ? + proton
- So, missing particle is \( ^0_{-1}\beta \) (electron) and antineutrino, but only considering particles shown.
- Mass: 1 → ? + 1 → ? = 0
- Atomic number: 0 → ? + 1 → ? = -1
- So, missing is \( ^0_{-1}\beta \)

✔ Answer: \( ^0_{-1}\beta \)

---

6) \( ^{243}_{94}\text{Am} \rightarrow ^4_2\text{He} + ? \)

- Alpha decay of Americium-243
- Mass: 243 → 4 + ? → ? = 239
- Atomic number: 94 → 2 + ? → ? = 92 → Uranium (U)

✔ Answer: \( ^{239}_{92}\text{U} \)

---

7) \( ? \rightarrow ^0_{-1}\beta + ^{214}_{82}\text{Pb} \)

- Beta decay → parent has:
- Mass: ? → 0 + 214 → ? = 214
- Atomic number: ? → -1 + 82 → ? = 81 → Thallium (Tl)

✔ Answer: \( ^{214}_{81}\text{Tl} \)

---

8) \( ^{115}_{49}\text{In} \rightarrow ? + ^0_{-1}\beta \)

- In-115 undergoes beta decay → becomes element with Z = 50 (Sn)
- Mass: 115 → ? + 0 → ? = 115
- Atomic number: 49 → ? + (-1) → ? = 50
- So, product is \( ^{115}_{50}\text{Sn} \)

✔ Answer: \( ^{115}_{50}\text{Sn} \)

---

9) \( ^{222}_{86}\text{Rn} \rightarrow ? + ^{218}_{84}\text{Po} \)

- Rn-222 → Po-218 → alpha decay
- Mass: 222 → ? + 218 → ? = 4
- Atomic number: 86 → ? + 84 → ? = 2
- So, \( ^4_2\text{He} \)

✔ Answer: \( ^4_2\text{He} \)

---

10) \( ^{186}_{74}\text{Os} \rightarrow ? + ^{186}_{76}\text{Re} \)

Wait — this seems wrong. Os has Z=76, Re has Z=43? No!

Actually:
- Osmium (Os) is Z=76
- Rhenium (Re) is Z=43 → That doesn't make sense.

But here: \( ^{186}_{74}\text{Os} \)? Wait — Os is Z=76, not 74.

Wait — maybe typo?

Check: \( ^{186}_{74}\text{Os} \) — but Os is Z=76. So probably a typo.

But if we go by what's written:
Parent: \( ^{186}_{74}\text{X} \), emits something to give \( ^{186}_{76}\text{Re} \)?

But Re is Z=43. So inconsistency.

Wait — perhaps it’s \( ^{186}_{74}\text{W} \) (Tungsten)? But labeled Os.

Alternatively, maybe it's \( ^{186}_{76}\text{Os} \rightarrow ? + ^{186}_{76}\text{Re} \)? Still wrong.

Wait — actually, Re is Z=43, not 76.

So likely, the daughter is \( ^{186}_{76}\text{Os} \), but that would be same element.

Wait — let's recheck:

The equation says:
\( ^{186}_{74}\text{Os} \rightarrow ? + ^{186}_{76}\text{Re} \)

This is impossible because:
- Re is Z=43, not 76
- Os is Z=76, not 74

So either:
- It's a typo: should be \( ^{186}_{76}\text{Os} \rightarrow ? + ^{186}_{74}\text{W} \)? Or
- Maybe it's \( ^{186}_{74}\text{W} \rightarrow ? + ^{186}_{76}\text{Os} \)? But W to Os? Not possible.

Wait — actually, Re is Z=43, so \( ^{186}_{76}\text{Re} \) is invalid.

So likely, the correct version is:
\( ^{186}_{74}\text{W} \rightarrow ? + ^{186}_{76}\text{Os} \)? But W to Os is impossible.

Alternatively, perhaps it's:
\( ^{186}_{76}\text{Os} \rightarrow ? + ^{186}_{74}\text{W} \)? That would be emission of a positron or electron capture.

But the question says: \( ^{186}_{74}\text{Os} \rightarrow ? + ^{186}_{76}\text{Re} \)

This appears to have errors.

Wait — Re is rhenium, Z=43, so \( ^{186}_{76}\text{Re} \) is invalid.

Perhaps it's meant to be \( ^{186}_{76}\text{Os} \rightarrow ? + ^{186}_{74}\text{W} \)? Then it would be beta-plus decay.

But let's assume it's a typo, and the daughter is \( ^{186}_{76}\text{Os} \), but that makes no sense.

Wait — look at the original:

> 10) \( ^{186}_{74}\text{Os} \rightarrow ? + ^{186}_{76}\text{Re} \)

This cannot be correct. Let's check periodic table:
- Os: Z=76
- Re: Z=43

So neither is correct.

Possibility: it's supposed to be:
\( ^{186}_{76}\text{Os} \rightarrow ? + ^{186}_{74}\text{W} \) — then it would be beta+ decay or electron capture.

But mass number stays same, atomic number decreases by 2 → not possible.

Wait — mass number same, atomic number changes by 2? Impossible for beta decay.

Only way atomic number increases by 2 is via double beta decay, rare.

But more likely: typo.

Alternatively, perhaps it's:
\( ^{186}_{76}\text{Os} \rightarrow ^4_2\text{He} + ^{182}_{74}\text{W} \)? But not matching.

Wait — maybe it's electron capture or beta-minus?

But the daughter is written as \( ^{186}_{76}\text{Re} \), which is impossible.

So I suspect a typo. Perhaps it's:
\( ^{186}_{74}\text{W} \rightarrow ? + ^{186}_{76}\text{Os} \)? Again, impossible.

Wait — another possibility: it's beta-minus decay, so:
\( ^{186}_{74}\text{X} \rightarrow ^0_{-1}\beta + ^{186}_{75}\text{Y} \)

But here, daughter is \( ^{186}_{76}\text{Re} \), which is not Re.

I think there's a mistake in the problem.

But let's suppose it's:
\( ^{186}_{74}\text{W} \rightarrow ^0_{-1}\beta + ^{186}_{75}\text{Re} \)? But Re is Z=43, not 75.

No.

Alternatively, perhaps it's:
\( ^{186}_{76}\text{Os} \rightarrow ^0_{-1}\beta + ^{186}_{77}\text{Ir} \)

But in the problem, it says:
\( ^{186}_{74}\text{Os} \rightarrow ? + ^{186}_{76}\text{Re} \)

This is inconsistent.

Given the confusion, likely typo. But since the mass number is same, and atomic number increases from 74 to 76, it would require emission of two electrons, which is double beta decay, very rare.

But not typical.

Alternatively, perhaps it's:
\( ^{186}_{74}\text{W} \rightarrow ^4_2\text{He} + ^{182}_{72}\text{Hf} \)? Not matching.

Wait — maybe the daughter is \( ^{186}_{74}\text{W} \), and parent is \( ^{186}_{76}\text{Os} \), and missing is \( ^0_{-1}\beta \)? But that would be beta minus.

But in the problem: \( ^{186}_{74}\text{Os} \rightarrow ? + ^{186}_{76}\text{Re} \)

I think it's best to skip and move on — possibly a typo.

But let's assume it's:
\( ^{186}_{76}\text{Os} \rightarrow ? + ^{186}_{74}\text{W} \)

Then:
- Mass: 186 → ? + 186 → ? = 0
- Atomic number: 76 → ? + 74 → ? = 2
- So, \( ^0_2\text{He} \)? No, not possible.

Only way atomic number decreases by 2 is alpha decay, but mass also decreases by 4.

Here mass is same → impossible.

So this equation is invalid.

But perhaps it's:
\( ^{186}_{74}\text{W} \rightarrow ^0_{-1}\beta + ^{186}_{75}\text{Re} \)? But Re is Z=43, not 75.

No.

Wait — Re is Z=43, so \( ^{186}_{76}\text{Re} \) is impossible.

So likely, the daughter is \( ^{186}_{74}\text{W} \), and parent is \( ^{186}_{76}\text{Os} \), and missing is \( ^0_{-1}\beta \)? But that would increase Z.

But Os → Ir → Pt → etc.

So I think the intended equation might be:
\( ^{186}_{76}\text{Os} \rightarrow ^0_{-1}\beta + ^{186}_{77}\text{Ir} \)

But in the problem, it's written as:
\( ^{186}_{74}\text{Os} \rightarrow ? + ^{186}_{76}\text{Re} \)

This is clearly incorrect.

So skip or report error.

But let's assume it's a typo and proceed.

Alternatively, perhaps it's:
\( ^{186}_{74}\text{W} \rightarrow ^0_{-1}\beta + ^{186}_{75}\text{Re} \)? But Re is Z=43, not 75.

No.

Wait — maybe it's:
\( ^{186}_{74}\text{W} \rightarrow ^0_{-1}\beta + ^{186}_{75}\text{Re} \) — still no.

I think the only possibility is that the daughter is \( ^{186}_{76}\text{Os} \), and parent is \( ^{186}_{74}\text{W} \), and missing is \( ^0_{-1}\beta \)? But that would require Z increase from 74 to 76, which is two beta decays.

But not standard.

Alternatively, maybe it's:
\( ^{186}_{76}\text{Os} \rightarrow ^4_2\text{He} + ^{182}_{74}\text{W} \)

Then:
- Mass: 186 → 4 + 182 → yes
- Z: 76 → 2 + 74 → yes

So missing is \( ^4_2\text{He} \)

But in the problem, it says \( ^{186}_{74}\text{Os} \rightarrow ? + ^{186}_{76}\text{Re} \)

Still wrong.

So I think there's a typo in the problem.

But if we ignore labels and just balance:

Suppose: \( ^{186}_{74}\text{X} \rightarrow ? + ^{186}_{76}\text{Y} \)

Then:
- Mass: 186 → ? + 186 → ? = 0
- Z: 74 → ? + 76 → ? = -2 → \( ^0_{-2}\text{?} \) — not possible.

So invalid.

Skip for now.

---

11) \( ? \rightarrow ^0_{-1}\beta + ^{234}_{90}\text{Pa} \)

- Beta decay → parent has:
- Mass: ? → 0 + 234 → ? = 234
- Atomic number: ? → -1 + 90 → ? = 89 → Actinium (Ac)

✔ Answer: \( ^{234}_{89}\text{Ac} \)

---

12) \( ? \rightarrow ^{133}_{55}\text{Cs} + ^0_{-1}\beta \)

- Beta decay → daughter is Cs-133, so parent is:
- Mass: ? → 133 + 0 → ? = 133
- Atomic number: ? → 55 + (-1) → ? = 54 → Xenon (Xe)

✔ Answer: \( ^{133}_{54}\text{Xe} \)

---

13) \( ? \rightarrow ^0_{-1}\beta + ^{146}_{58}\text{Pr} \)

- Parent:
- Mass: ? → 0 + 146 → ? = 146
- Z: ? → -1 + 58 → ? = 57 → Lanthanum (La)

✔ Answer: \( ^{146}_{57}\text{La} \)

---

14) \( ^{32}_{15}\text{P} \rightarrow ? + ^0_{-1}\beta \)

- P-32 undergoes beta decay → becomes Sulfur (S)
- Mass: 32 → ? + 0 → ? = 32
- Z: 15 → ? + (-1) → ? = 16 → Sulfur

✔ Answer: \( ^{32}_{16}\text{S} \)

---

15) \( ? \rightarrow ^0_{-1}\beta + ^{116}_{51}\text{Sb} \)

- Parent:
- Mass: ? → 0 + 116 → ? = 116
- Z: ? → -1 + 51 → ? = 50 → Tin (Sn)

✔ Answer: \( ^{116}_{50}\text{Sn} \)

---

16) \( ^{30}_{13}\text{Al} \rightarrow ? + ^0_{-1}\beta \)

- Al-30 → beta decay → becomes Silicon (Si)
- Mass: 30 → ? + 0 → ? = 30
- Z: 13 → ? + (-1) → ? = 14 → Si

✔ Answer: \( ^{30}_{14}\text{Si} \)

---

17) \( ^{87}_{37}\text{Rb} \rightarrow ? + ^0_{-1}\beta \)

- Rb-87 → beta decay → Sr-87
- Mass: 87 → ? + 0 → ? = 87
- Z: 37 → ? + (-1) → ? = 38 → Strontium (Sr)

✔ Answer: \( ^{87}_{38}\text{Sr} \)

---

18) \( ? \rightarrow ^4_2\text{He} + ^{206}_{81}\text{Bi} \)

- Alpha decay → parent has:
- Mass: ? → 4 + 206 → ? = 210
- Z: ? → 2 + 81 → ? = 83 → Bismuth (Bi)

But Bi-210 is common.

Wait — Bi-210 → Pb-206 + He? No.

Wait: \( ^{210}_{83}\text{Bi} \rightarrow ^4_2\text{He} + ^{206}_{81}\text{Bi} \)? But Bi-206 is not stable.

Wait — Bi-210 decays to Po-210 by beta.

But here: daughter is Bi-206, Z=81? No — Bi is Z=83.

Wait — \( ^{206}_{81}\text{Bi} \) — but Bi is Z=83, not 81.

So again, typo.

\( ^{206}_{81}\text{Bi} \) is invalid.

Should be \( ^{206}_{82}\text{Pb} \) or \( ^{206}_{83}\text{Bi} \)

But Bi-206 is not common.

Wait — actually, \( ^{210}_{83}\text{Bi} \rightarrow ^4_2\text{He} + ^{206}_{81}\text{Bi} \)? Z=81 is Tl.

Yes! Thallium (Tl) is Z=81.

So:
- Parent: mass = 4 + 206 = 210
- Z = 2 + 81 = 83 → Bi

So \( ^{210}_{83}\text{Bi} \rightarrow ^4_2\text{He} + ^{206}_{81}\text{Tl} \)

But in the problem, it's written as \( ^{206}_{81}\text{Bi} \), which is wrong.

But assuming it's \( ^{206}_{81}\text{Tl} \), then:

✔ Answer: \( ^{210}_{83}\text{Bi} \)

But since it says "Bi", it's likely a typo.

But based on math:
- Missing: mass = 4 + 206 = 210
- Z = 2 + 81 = 83 → Bi

So parent is \( ^{210}_{83}\text{Bi} \)

✔ Answer: \( ^{210}_{83}\text{Bi} \)

---

19) \( ^{226}_{88}\text{Ra} \rightarrow ? + ^0_{-1}\beta \)

- Ra-226 undergoes alpha decay, not beta.
- But here it shows beta decay.

Wait — Ra-226 → Rn-222 + He

But here: \( ^{226}_{88}\text{Ra} \rightarrow ? + ^0_{-1}\beta \)

So daughter has:
- Mass: 226 → ? + 0 → ? = 226
- Z: 88 → ? + (-1) → ? = 89 → Actinium (Ac)

So Ra-226 → Ac-226 + beta? But Ra-226 does not do that.

It's alpha decay.

But if we follow the equation:
- Missing particle is \( ^{226}_{89}\text{Ac} \)

But this is not realistic, but mathematically:

✔ Answer: \( ^{226}_{89}\text{Ac} \)

---

20) \( ? \rightarrow ^0_{-1}\beta + ^{176}_{70}\text{Yb} \)

- Daughter is Yb-176, Z=70
- Beta decay → parent has:
- Mass: ? → 0 + 176 → ? = 176
- Z: ? → -1 + 70 → ? = 69 → Holmium (Ho)

✔ Answer: \( ^{176}_{69}\text{Ho} \)

---

## ✔ Final Answers Summary:

| # | Answer |
|---|--------|
| 1 | \( ^4_2\text{He} \) |
| 2 | \( ^{90}_{39}\text{Y} \) |
| 3 | \( ^{230}_{89}\text{Ac} \) |
| 4 | \( ^{10}_4\text{Be} \) |
| 5 | \( ^0_{-1}\beta \) |
| 6 | \( ^{239}_{92}\text{U} \) |
| 7 | \( ^{214}_{81}\text{Tl} \) |
| 8 | \( ^{115}_{50}\text{Sn} \) |
| 9 | \( ^4_2\text{He} \) |
| 10 | Invalid/Typo (possibly \( ^{186}_{76}\text{Os} \rightarrow ^4_2\text{He} + ^{182}_{74}\text{W} \)) |
| 11 | \( ^{234}_{89}\text{Ac} \) |
| 12 | \( ^{133}_{54}\text{Xe} \) |
| 13 | \( ^{146}_{57}\text{La} \) |
| 14 | \( ^{32}_{16}\text{S} \) |
| 15 | \( ^{116}_{50}\text{Sn} \) |
| 16 | \( ^{30}_{14}\text{Si} \) |
| 17 | \( ^{87}_{38}\text{Sr} \) |
| 18 | \( ^{210}_{83}\text{Bi} \) |
| 19 | \( ^{226}_{89}\text{Ac} \) |
| 20 | \( ^{176}_{69}\text{Ho} \) |

---

⚠️ Note: Problems 10 and 18 have likely typos in element symbols. Please verify the original worksheet for corrections.

If you can clarify any of the problematic ones (especially #10), I can refine the answer.

Let me know if you'd like this formatted as a printable answer sheet!