|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 65 (9164 total) |
| |
ChatGPT | |
Total: 916,909 Year: 4,166/9,624 Month: 1,037/974 Week: 364/286 Day: 7/13 Hour: 2/2 |
Thread ▼ Details |
Member (Idle past 1435 days) Posts: 20714 From: the other end of the sidewalk Joined: |
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Age Correlations and An Old Earth, Version 2 No 1 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Coragyps Member (Idle past 764 days) Posts: 5553 From: Snyder, Texas, USA Joined: |
The proof is that liquid rock is a very poor solvent for gases like argon. If an atom of potassium-40 decays to argon in soup, the argon escapes. If it decays in a crystal in a rock, it has a difficult time breaking out.
If the rock gets melted (or near-melted) with trapped argon in it, the argon can escape and the clock gets reset to zero.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
OS Member (Idle past 3300 days) Posts: 67 Joined: |
No, I believe he said with that statement, Argon formation in magma doesn't happen. I believe the statement such, is totally false.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Percy Member Posts: 22505 From: New Hampshire Joined: Member Rating: 4.9 |
Hi OS,
You're correct, sorry about that. I misread "magmatic" as "magnetic" and thought he was making a different argument. But Pressie is still just providing simple factual information. Gas escapes easily from molten rock, resetting the K/Ar and Ar/Ar clocks. It works like this. Say there's a buried rock layer containing K, some of which has decayed to Ar. If we had access to this rock layer, maybe by obtaining a core sample, we could date its age. But now let's say the layer becomes heated and molten, so all the Ar escapes. The K/Ar and Ar/Ar clocks are now reset since there is no accumulation of Ar left. When the layer cools and solidifies then Ar will again begin to accumulate and these clocks will begin again. --Percy
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
OS Member (Idle past 3300 days) Posts: 67 Joined: |
What if the argon is being made in the molten state?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Coragyps Member (Idle past 764 days) Posts: 5553 From: Snyder, Texas, USA Joined: |
Argon itself has to be colder than 302 below zero Fahrenheit to be molten.
If you mean "in molten rock" i told you up above - it escapes from the soup. Unless, I suppose, you find a rock that can be molten at -302F. Then it could stay. Edited by Coragyps, : Fix tpyos
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
edge Member (Idle past 1736 days) Posts: 4696 From: Colorado, USA Joined: |
What if the argon is being made in the molten state?
Actually, there is probably some argon dissolved in all magma. The question is, where does it go when minerals form. Some minerals, such as pyroxene will admit argon into its lattice, while others such as biotite and orthoclase do not. This is know empirically. So, it doesn't really matter when the argon is generated, or where.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
OS Member (Idle past 3300 days) Posts: 67 Joined: |
So, it doesn't really matter when the argon is generated, or where. While I don't agree, I understand your point.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
OS Member (Idle past 3300 days) Posts: 67 Joined: |
Yet it is produced in the magma state. And looking at Zircon crystals, it looks as though the noble gases are formed very fast. I just wonder if the noble gas is in there bouncing, and not wanting to react to crystal rock.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
edge Member (Idle past 1736 days) Posts: 4696 From: Colorado, USA Joined: |
Yet it is produced in the magma state.
Yes, 40K probably decays to 40Ar within the magma. But that doesn't matter because we don't date the magma.
And looking at Zircon crystals, it looks as though the noble gases are formed very fast.
I'm not sure you you 'see' this.
I just wonder if the noble gas is in there bouncing, and not wanting to react to crystal rock.
It doesn't react. I can either be incorporated as a contaminant or not.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
OS Member (Idle past 3300 days) Posts: 67 Joined: |
"not wanting to react"? I wasn't clear. Is it unstable in its containment? Does it bounce around in the rock?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Coragyps Member (Idle past 764 days) Posts: 5553 From: Snyder, Texas, USA Joined: |
Argon is a "noble gas" or an "inert gas". It has a full shell of valence electrons. It reacts chemically with pretty much nothing at all, even under pretty extreme conditions. It may well be very stable "in its containment" but only if it is trapped in a cage of atoms that are bonded to each other. It will not form bonds of its own in any plausible geological setting.
It won't bounce far.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Pressie Member Posts: 2103 From: Pretoria, SA Joined: |
OS writes: Ar is a noble gas; therefore it can't partcipiate in the chemical reactions resulting in the formation of the crystal lattices. Thus; Ar won't be present in the crystal lattices directly after formation of crystals. Basic chemistry.
Not wanting to react OS writes: I wasn't clear. Is it unstable in its containment? Does it bounce around in the rock? Obviously not. What does "unstable in their containment" and "bounce around the rock"even mean? Edited by Pressie, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
JonF Member (Idle past 198 days) Posts: 6174 Joined: |
"not wanting to react"? I wasn't clear. Is it unstable in its containment? Does it bounce around in the rock? It is somewhat to very mobile, depending very strongly on temperature. That's why dating using helium (produced as part of the decay or uranium and thorium) is very difficult and very rarely used. The very first radiometric date, in 1904 by Lord Rutherford, was based on helium. He wrote that almost certainly some helium had escaped and therefore his age was a lower bound. If you are referring to Humphreys' work with zircons as part of the RATE group, again you need to learn a lot before you can discuss it. Standard U-Pb dating of zircons does not use helium, how much helium there is or is not in the zircon doesn't matter.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
RAZD Member (Idle past 1435 days) Posts: 20714 From: the other end of the sidewalk Joined: |
This post is in answer to the post (mid=740956) by zaius137 on Question About the Universe.
RAZD is great, but the assumption is that one ring equals one year (not certain) and dendrochronology also needs a accurate count of ring somewhat debatable. And I'll be happy to debate it on Age Correlations and An Old Earth, Version 2 No 1 (ie -- here)
Curiously, I don't think that site supports what you think it does ...
quote: Bold added. So thanks, I'll be happy to add them to my list of references. AND I have other evidence that shows how accurate tree-ring counting is. See also the evidence that Lake Suigetsu varves accurately record annual layer events and that gets back to the limits of 14C dating. Then there are ice layers ... Such fun. Enjoyby our ability to understand Rebel☮American☆Zen☯Deist ... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ... to share. Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
JonF Member (Idle past 198 days) Posts: 6174 Joined:
|
That's Aardsma. He's mostly honest and knows his stuff on 14C. Used to be with the ICR some time ago but left.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024