On this page
Some discoveries come from a clever idea. Becquerel's came from a wrong idea, a spell of bad weather and the habit of checking anyway. This post tells what he did in early 1896, why it counted as something new, and works through how strong uranium's radiation actually is.
What was Becquerel trying to find?
In January 1896 the scientific world was talking about Wilhelm Röntgen's new X-rays, which passed through black paper and soft tissue. According to the American Physical Society's history of the discovery, Becquerel heard about X-rays at a meeting of the French Academy of Sciences that month. He came from a family of physicists, had studied phosphorescence since 1883 and, like his father, was interested in uranium compounds.
His idea was that phosphorescent uranium salts might absorb sunlight and give it out again as X-rays. To test it, he wrapped photographic plates in black paper, set uranium crystals on top and left them in the sun. The developed plates showed outlines of the crystals, even of coins placed in between. He reported this to the Academy on 24 February 1896 as support for his idea. You can read how Röntgen's rays started the chase in our post on Wilhelm Röntgen and X-rays.
What happened in the cloudy week of 1896?
Paris then turned overcast for several days. Thinking he could do nothing without bright sun, Becquerel put the crystals and wrapped plates away in a drawer. On 1 March he developed those plates anyway, expecting a faint image. The APS account says the image was "amazingly clear". The next day, 2 March, he told the Academy that uranium salts emitted radiation without any sunlight.
Nobody knows exactly why he developed plates he expected to be blank. Whatever the reason, the step mattered: it was a test of the case his theory said should give nothing.
How did he know it was something new?
He kept testing. He found that uranium compounds which do not phosphoresce produced the same effect, and in May 1896 he announced that the element uranium itself was the source. Unlike X-rays, his rays could be deflected by electric or magnetic fields. The Nobel Prize summary puts it simply: the radiation "was something new and not X-ray radiation".
Becquerel shared the 1903 Nobel Prize in Physics, receiving half "in recognition of the extraordinary services he has rendered by his discovery of spontaneous radioactivity". The other half went to Pierre and Marie Curie, who had taken up the uranium rays in 1898. Their side of the story is in our post on Marie Curie's two Nobel Prizes.
How strong is the radiation from uranium? A worked example
Today the unit of radioactivity is named after him. In the SI, the becquerel (Bq) is one decay per second, and NIST's guide to SI units lists it as s⁻¹ for activity of a radionuclide. Let us estimate the activity of 1 g of uranium-238, the main isotope in natural uranium.
Number of atoms. Molar mass is about 238 g/mol, so N = 6.022 × 10²³ / 238 ≈ 2.53 × 10²¹ atoms.
Half-life in seconds. The IAEA nuclear data service gives 4.468 × 10⁹ years, which is 1.41 × 10¹⁷ s.
Decay constant. λ = ln 2 / T½ = 0.693 / (1.41 × 10¹⁷ s) ≈ 4.92 × 10⁻¹⁸ s⁻¹.
Activity. A = λN ≈ 4.92 × 10⁻¹⁸ × 2.53 × 10²¹ ≈ 1.24 × 10⁴ Bq.
So a gram of uranium-238 undergoes about 12,400 decays every second. That is weak per atom but plenty to darken a photographic plate over a few days in a drawer.
Common mistakes in this kind of question:
Mixing units. If you leave the half-life in years, λ comes out per year and A is not in becquerels. Convert to seconds first.
Using mass instead of number of atoms. A = λN needs a count of nuclei, so divide by molar mass and multiply by Avogadro's number.
Forgetting ln 2. λ = 0.693/T½, not 1/T½.
A note on syllabus: radioactivity is not named in the Atoms and Nuclei unit of the NTA JEE (Main) 2026 syllabus, which covers the nucleus, mass defect, binding energy, fission and fusion. Check your own exam year's syllabus. For half-life practice, see our guide to radioactive decay and half-life.
What can a student take from Becquerel's way of working?
Test the prediction, including the boring one. His theory was wrong, but he still ran the check that could prove it wrong.
Change your mind in public. He reported sunlight as the cause on 24 February and corrected himself a week later.
Follow up with controls. Non-phosphorescent compounds, then pure uranium: each test removed one possible explanation.
Half-life is easier to grasp when you can watch a sample decay rather than read a formula. The Fermi Simulation Lab has interactive simulations for ideas that are easier to see than read, so you can change the half-life and watch the count fall.
Try it now: redo the worked example for 1 g of uranium-235 using its half-life from the IAEA table, and compare the two activities.
