|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Question About the Universe | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
zaius137 Member (Idle past 3438 days) Posts: 407 Joined: |
quote: Do you have a citation, decay flux is usually inside the error figure. I know there is evidence for radioactive decay variability (let us talk).
quote: That is the accepted date but as I have shown there are problems. Other issues follow from the reliability of CMB as a gage. For instance CMB is not casting the predicted shadow
quote: It is a 5d model by Carmeli: CARMELI’S COSMOLOGY: THE UNIVERSE IS SPATIALLY FLAT WITHOUT DARK MATTER | SpringerLink
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
NoNukes Inactive Member |
"HD 140283 is older than the universe. Any earlier estimates for star formation are based on dark matter. Dark matter is a ad-hoc concoction to balance the equation of state for BB."
Your statement is not correct. I could understand if you made a similar comment about dark energy, but dark matter has nothing to do with the addition of a cosmological constant. Dark energy is used to explain why the expansion of the universe seems to be accelerating. Dark matter explains other phenomena. Why don't you check these things? Are you trusting your memory? How many completely bogus things have you stated as fact? It is true that no one has every detected a population III star and it seems likely that we might have found one by now. I think your best argument so far relates to the fact that we have not found any population III stars. However, I think you have overblown the conclusion to state that there is no evidence that the heavy elements were created in stars. That just is not true. There is still a progression of metalicity with age, and the distributions of heavy metals is highly suggestive that the metals were created in stars. Even without metal free stars, those things are indirect evidence of the source of metals. And of course we've actually observed the creation of heavy metals in supernova. And we can calculate the energies required to form them. None of which is proof of course, but we never get that from science.Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846) I have never met a man so ignorant that I couldn't learn something from him. Galileo Galilei If there is no struggle, there is no progress. Those who profess to favor freedom, and deprecate agitation, are men who want crops without plowing up the ground, they want rain without thunder and lightning. Frederick Douglass
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
zaius137 Member (Idle past 3438 days) Posts: 407 Joined: |
quote: Yes metals are created in stars, I am not unfamiliar with thermonuclear fusion. The real issue is empirical evidence. God could have created the universe by the BB, that proposition is in doubt. I reject the BB on the merits of science alone. I am not looking for verification from science to enforce my worldview. On the contrary, my worldview enforces my view of science. I do not have enough faith to take speculation as a tautology. Edited by zaius137, : No reason given. Edited by Adminnemooseus, : Fix quote box. Was no "/" in the closer.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
edge Member (Idle past 1735 days) Posts: 4696 From: Colorado, USA Joined:
|
Do you have a citation, decay flux is usually inside the error figure. I know there is evidence for radioactive decay variability (let us talk) And exactly where does this variability occur? Edited by edge, : No reason given. Edited by Adminnemooseus, : Fix quote box. Someone got a bit spastic with the space key.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
RAZD Member (Idle past 1433 days) Posts: 20714 From: the other end of the sidewalk Joined: |
quote: Do you have a citation, decay flux is usually inside the error figure. One or two ... X-rays expected from supernova 1987A compared with the source discovered by the Ginga satellite | NatureGamma-ray line emission from SN1987A | Nature http://adsabs.harvard.edu/full/1989ApJ...345..412K http://adsabs.harvard.edu/full/1990ApJ...360..242S http://adsabs.harvard.edu/full/1990ApJ...357..638L http://articles.adsabs.harvard.edu/full/1993ApJ...419..824L ... from <5 minutes from google scholar ... It is a 5d model by Carmeli: CARMELI’S COSMOLOGY: THE UNIVERSE IS SPATIALLY FLAT WITHOUT DARK MATTER | SpringerLink quote: That's one version. Other articles on it I have read are http://www.nbcnews.com/id/3077357/#.VGNdlI--45A'Brane-Storm' Challenges Part of Big Bang Theory Also see Did a 5-D black hole brane event horizon make the universe? Message 269: HD 140283 is older than the universe. Any earlier estimates for star formation are based on dark matter. Dark matter is a ad-hoc concoction to balance the equation of state for BB. Curiously the 'brane models don't need the dark stuffs but still give you the old universe ... in an even older hyper-universe ... And I agree with edge in Message 274 Do you have a citation, decay flux is usually inside the error figure. I know there is evidence for radioactive decay variability (let us talk) And exactly where does this variability occur? You need to provide citations for this. Enjoy Edited by RAZD, : fixed Edited by RAZD, : twice had "minutes from google scholar" removed when posted ... veddy odd Edited by RAZD, : again ...by 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)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Theodoric Member Posts: 9199 From: Northwest, WI, USA Joined: Member Rating: 3.2 |
I am not looking for verification from science to enforce my worldview.
In other words your mantra is
Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts "God did it" is not an argument. It is an excuse for intellectual laziness.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
zaius137 Member (Idle past 3438 days) Posts: 407 Joined: |
quote: I believe that measured decay error variance may be because some elements decay rate changes with times of the year (maybe rotation of the sun’s core). Here are some links The Sun Alters Radioactive Decay Rates | The Institute for Creation Research http://dinosaurc14ages.com/changedecay.htm The Sun is changing the rate of radioactive decay, and breaking the rules of chemistry Do nuclear decay rates depend on our distance from the sun? « the physics arXiv blog Republikslot: Daftar 10 Situs Judi Slot Dan Casino Online Terbaik
Decay Rate of Radon-222 as a function of date and time of day. The color-bar gives the power of the observed signal and represents ~4% seasonal decay rate variation. Republikslot: Daftar 10 Situs Judi Slot Dan Casino Online Terbaikhttp://phys.org/news202456660.html Big question in my mind If Carbon 14 has not varied in the past how come there is measurable amounts in diamonds, fossils and coal seams? Edited by zaius137, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
zaius137 Member (Idle past 3438 days) Posts: 407 Joined: |
Facts are facts, it is the interpretation of facts that is important.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
zaius137 Member (Idle past 3438 days) Posts: 407 Joined: |
quote: CARMELI’S COSMOLOGY also gives us a galactrocentric universe, yes old, but still conforms to a creationist cosmology. Big Bang has no more predictive power, the 5d does. Edited by zaius137, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
JonF Member (Idle past 196 days) Posts: 6174 Joined: |
There is no measurable 14C in those items. The RATE Group screwed it up. As explained by Dr. Bertshe, who is an expert in the field. But you don't care.
RATE's Radiocarbon - Intrinsic or Contamination?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
edge Member (Idle past 1735 days) Posts: 4696 From: Colorado, USA Joined: |
I believe that measured decay error variance may be because some elements decay rate changes with times of the year (maybe rotation of the sun’s core). Here are some links From your reference, Republikslot: Daftar 10 Situs Judi Slot Dan Casino Online Terbaik
Recent results suggest the possibility that decay rates might have a weak dependence on environmental factors. It has been suggested that measurements of decay rates of silicon-32, manganese-54, and radium-226 exhibit small seasonal variations (of the order of 0.1%),[21][22][23] ...(bold added)
So, in the case of 14C, if the rate varies by 0.1%, that would mean that the half-life would vary by 5.7 years in 5700 years. And that, of course, would be if the variation from the accepted half-life was continuous, which does not appear to be the case. Now, as I look up the C14 half life, I get this value: 5730+/-40 years. (Carbon-14 - Wikipedia) Note the error bounds, which, if I understand correctly, would include more than the 0.1% variability that we are talking about here. So, what is the significance of this effect, in the context of a 6ky old earth? Weird, eh? I will defer to any physicists here who can correct me on this. Edited by edge, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
JonF Member (Idle past 196 days) Posts: 6174 Joined: |
No significance at all, assuming for the sake of argument that the effect is real. Which is still questioned.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
RAZD Member (Idle past 1433 days) Posts: 20714 From: the other end of the sidewalk Joined: |
I believe that measured decay error variance may be because some elements decay rate changes with times of the year (maybe rotation of the sun’s core). Here are some links As expected. Note (A) that the measured variation is extremely small and (B) this variation is within the measurable uncertainty\error so it (B) doesn't affect the SN1987A observed decay results, (D) it is not a steady decline but an oscillating value on a yearly basis and thus (E) does not affect average annual values for decay rates, thus (F) doesn't change rates with half-lives longer than one year. LIke 14C. These rates are now confirmed by the observed 56Ni → 56Co → 56Fe decay over time matching the rates measured on earth 168,000 years later.
Big question in my mind If Carbon 14 has not varied in the past ... A book could be written on how Creationists get 14C dating wrong ... ... we know that the levels of 14C in the atmosphere vary from year to year due to the way it is produced. That is why such an effort has been put into correlating 14C levels with actual age known by annual counting systems. See Age Correlations and An Old Earth, Version 2 No 1 for details ... .
... how come there is measurable amounts in diamonds, fossils and coal seams? Because 14C can be created from these materials when they are subject to radiation, as occurs with carbons rods used in fission generators to control the rate of reactions. See also CD011.6: C14 date of old oiland Page Not Found | ORNL (1977) Note how old this information is, and that knowing it would mean that creationists that wanted to discredit 14C dating to gullible people could go looking for coal etc deposits next to radioactive materials ... Also read Radiometric Dating
quote: He has information on the various dating methods, how they work and why they are accurate. Enjoy Edited by RAZD, : ..by 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)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
RAZD Member (Idle past 1433 days) Posts: 20714 From: the other end of the sidewalk Joined: |
CARMELI’S COSMOLOGY also gives us a galactrocentric universe, yes old, but still conforms to a creationist cosmology. ... Seeing as the bible makes no reference to galaxies this is an absurd statement, nor does the 5d universe have a "center" any more than the BB theory.
... Big Bang has no more predictive power, the 5d does. What does the 5d theory predict that is different from the BB theory ... ... and has it been tested yet? It seems to me (layman in this field) that both have the same basic explanatory power for existing observations but that no definitive test that differentiates between them has been observed. As an open-minded skeptic I wait for more information. 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)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
zaius137 Member (Idle past 3438 days) Posts: 407 Joined: |
quote: You mean Dr. Bertshe the MD? Sorry he is a physicist (Kirk) The person he criticizes is John R. Baumgardner a geophysicist. You have to be kidding.. Went threw that citation of yours but did not find a significant argument against 14C in diamonds. I am willing to review your proof of that statement. Otherwise I will view your opinion as just an opinion. 14C was detected, does that stament hurt that much? Edited by zaius137, : No reason given.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024