|
Author
|
Topic: Age Correlations and An Old Earth, Version 2 No 1
|
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1425 days) Posts: 20714 From: the other end of the sidewalk Joined: 03-14-2004
|
|
Message 301 of 1498 (728437)
05-28-2014 6:16 PM
|
|
|
Summary Mode
Looks like we are now in summary mode, so you may want to take any further discussion of Snelling and his age of the earth data to a new thread. Currently I am working on a new version of this thread with updated information and emphasis on consilience as well as correlations. The format will be slightly different with shorter and simpler posts that provide the essential information, and references for further study. And I plan to include Snelling in the new version. And I am also making more of a booklet version to see if I can publish on wiki or amazon for wider use. In summary of this thread, I simply refer to Message 1:
We see many creationists saying that dating methods are not accurate and are prone to errors. The problem is that these methods all correlate with each other in many rather astounding ways, given that they are based on very different mechanisms. To address this issue of correlations, and to bring this issue to the fore, this topic starts with ones that have direct methods of counting ages due to annual layers, how those annual layers validate each other and how several radiometric methods enter into the mix -- correlations not just with age but with climate and certain known instances that occurred in the past and which show up in these records just where they should be. The challenge for the creationist is not just to describe how a single method can be wrong, but how they can all be wrong at the same time and yet produce identical results - when the errors in different systems should produce different random results. Note that to date no creationist has been able to address this issue: the previous version has run to 779 posts on the previous threads (Version 1, numbers 1, 2 and 3) closed due to the length of the threads or to terminal off topic rants. Very few of the responses actually address the issue of correlations, and none have been able to explain even two correlations being validations for the dating methods. We can now add over 300 posts on this version without any serious challenge to the correlations and the consilience between the various methods as they overlap and extend our knowledge of the evidence behind position that the earth is old, very very old. I would also like to thank those creationists that have attempted to understand the information, criticizing it from their perspective, and making the thread stronger in providing answers to their questions. Enjoy Edited by RAZD, : on
|
edge
Member (Idle past 1726 days) Posts: 4696 From: Colorado, USA Joined: 01-09-2002
(1)
| |
| |
| |
|
|
Message 302 of 1498 (728448)
05-28-2014 9:53 PM
|
|
|
For the questions about uranium, here is a pretty good website that I just stumbled on to. Technical data for the element Uranium in the Periodic Table The main point is that 238U is the most abundant isotope at over 99% of all uranium, whereas 235U is at about 0.72%, so the other isotopes are unimportant except possibly as some kind of calibration parameter. The other point is that 238U decays to 100% 206Pb, and 235U decays to about 100% 207Pb, so in a mineral that has no place for Pb in its lattice, but measurable U, we can be pretty sure that all of the 206Pb present in the mineral came from 238U. The relative abundance of 238U makes it more precise for measuring very old ages. By the way. the tiniest percentage of all uranium outside of the two main isotopes is made up of the other 23 known isotopes of uranium. Hope this helps. Edited by edge, : No reason given.
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 304 by JonF, posted 05-29-2014 9:29 AM | | edge has not replied |
|
JonF
Member (Idle past 188 days) Posts: 6174 Joined: 06-23-2003
|
|
|
Message 303 of 1498 (728465)
05-29-2014 9:29 AM
|
Reply to: Message 300 by NoNukes
05-28-2014 3:04 PM
|
|
Re: Snelling Concedes Old Age for Earth
Yes, I meant 235U.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 300 by NoNukes, posted 05-28-2014 3:04 PM | | NoNukes has seen this message but not replied |
|
JonF
Member (Idle past 188 days) Posts: 6174 Joined: 06-23-2003
|
(1)
| |
| |
| |
|
|
Message 304 of 1498 (728466)
05-29-2014 9:29 AM
|
Reply to: Message 302 by edge
05-28-2014 9:53 PM
|
|
Expanding a bit: IMHO the main reason why 235U and 238U are so useful for precise age determinations is that their half-lives are known to significantly greater precision than any other isotope (bombs & reactors, ya know). With modern equipment (e.g. SHRIMP) analyzing samples on the order of 75 μm 3 and accurately measuring the amount of 235U in thos samples I don't see a great advantage in the relative abundance of 238U. One seldom sees just a 238U age published because it's almost free to do 235U as well and plot a concordia diagram, even for very old material. E.g. from the Acasta gneiss:
(that's the Tera-Wasserberg vesion of a concordia diagram, so it may be unfamiliar). Or from Wilde et. al., the oldest chunk of stuff found on Earth:
In order to get sub-1% errors in ages it is routine to correct for the presence of some Pb that is "primordial" or "common"; i.e. present when the sample became closed. One common method is to measure 204Pb, which is not radiogenic and is therefore primordial, and use the known ratios of isotopes of U (appropriately projected backwards in time) to calculate the primordial amounts of 235U and 2238U.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 302 by edge, posted 05-28-2014 9:53 PM | | edge has not replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 305 by NoNukes, posted 05-30-2014 5:09 PM | | JonF has not replied |
|
NoNukes
Inactive Member
|
|
|
Message 305 of 1498 (728582)
05-30-2014 5:09 PM
|
Reply to: Message 304 by JonF
05-29-2014 9:29 AM
|
|
Did the summation mode get cancelled?
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
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 304 by JonF, posted 05-29-2014 9:29 AM | | JonF has not replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 306 by RAZD, posted 05-30-2014 5:30 PM | | NoNukes has not replied |
|
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1425 days) Posts: 20714 From: the other end of the sidewalk Joined: 03-14-2004
|
|
|
Message 306 of 1498 (728585)
05-30-2014 5:30 PM
|
Reply to: Message 305 by NoNukes
05-30-2014 5:09 PM
|
|
yes
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 305 by NoNukes, posted 05-30-2014 5:09 PM | | NoNukes has not replied |
|
OS
Member (Idle past 3291 days) Posts: 67 Joined: 06-22-2014
|
|
|
Message 307 of 1498 (730226)
06-25-2014 4:06 PM
|
|
|
Ar-40 to K-40
I was wondering if there was a way to convert Argon-40 into Potassium-40, in a lab.
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 322 by ringo, posted 06-28-2014 3:05 PM | | OS has replied |
|
OS
Member (Idle past 3291 days) Posts: 67 Joined: 06-22-2014
|
|
|
Message 308 of 1498 (730394)
06-27-2014 10:53 PM
|
|
|
Anyone care to answer my enquery even slightly? Edited by OS, : No reason given.
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 309 by jar, posted 06-27-2014 11:29 PM | | OS has not replied | | | Message 314 by NoNukes, posted 06-28-2014 12:27 PM | | OS has not replied |
|
jar
Member (Idle past 414 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: 04-20-2004
|
|
|
Message 309 of 1498 (730397)
06-27-2014 11:29 PM
|
Reply to: Message 308 by OS
06-27-2014 10:53 PM
|
|
maybe you can explain your question better
I'm not at all sure what question you are asking, Argon-40 is one of the decay products of potassium-40. To reverse the process would require nuclear fusion, not the kind of thing often done in a lab.
Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 308 by OS, posted 06-27-2014 10:53 PM | | OS has not replied |
|
OS
Member (Idle past 3291 days) Posts: 67 Joined: 06-22-2014
|
|
|
Message 310 of 1498 (730398)
06-27-2014 11:37 PM
|
|
|
Argon-40 seems to take more energy to make from Pottasium-40. Decays of Argon-40 to Potassium-40 could be made by supercooling. I don't know if rapid protons would be necessary. Edited by OS, : No reason given.
|
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1425 days) Posts: 20714 From: the other end of the sidewalk Joined: 03-14-2004
|
|
|
Message 311 of 1498 (730447)
06-28-2014 6:52 AM
|
Reply to: Message 310 by OS
06-27-2014 11:37 PM
|
|
thread not about radiometrics
Welcome to the fray OS Your inquiry is not strictly in line with this topic -- perhaps you would like to start a new thread or find an existing topic involving radiometric dating? Enjoy
... as you are new here, some posting tips: type [qs]quotes are easy[/qs] and it becomes:
quotes are easy and you can type [qs=RAZD]quotes are easy[/qs] and it becomes:
RAZD writes: quotes are easy or type [quote]quotes are easy[/quote] and it becomes:
quote:
quotes are easy
also check out (help) links on any formatting questions when in the reply window. For other formatting tips see Posting TipsFor a quick overview see EvC Forum PrimerIf you have problems with replies see Report Discussion Problems Here 3.0
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 310 by OS, posted 06-27-2014 11:37 PM | | OS has not replied |
|
JonF
Member (Idle past 188 days) Posts: 6174 Joined: 06-23-2003
|
(1)
| |
| |
| |
|
|
Message 312 of 1498 (730464)
06-28-2014 11:06 AM
|
Reply to: Message 310 by OS
06-27-2014 11:37 PM
|
|
Argon-40 seems to take more energy to make from Pottasium-40 Nope. Essentially all of the K->Ar decays emit a 1.460 MeV gamma ray and a neutrino. Therefore process emits energy.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 310 by OS, posted 06-27-2014 11:37 PM | | OS has not replied |
|
NoNukes
Inactive Member
|
(1)
| |
| |
| |
|
|
Message 313 of 1498 (730470)
06-28-2014 11:53 AM
|
Reply to: Message 310 by OS
06-27-2014 11:37 PM
|
|
Argon-40 seems to take more energy to make from Pottasium-40. Decays of Argon-40 to Potassium-40 could be made by supercooling. Assuming that you are correct about the energy requirements, that's not a logic conclusion. Paper makes energy by burning. Do you think we could reverse the process of combustion by super cooling? People have exposed decay processes to extremes of heat, magnetic fields, and pressure. Other than some specific examples involving electron capture type decay, those kinds of provocations have essentially no effect on decay rates. But you still think you can reverse the process?
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
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 310 by OS, posted 06-27-2014 11:37 PM | | OS has replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 315 by OS, posted 06-28-2014 1:12 PM | | NoNukes has replied |
|
NoNukes
Inactive Member
|
(2)
| |
| |
| |
|
|
Message 314 of 1498 (730474)
06-28-2014 12:27 PM
|
Reply to: Message 308 by OS
06-27-2014 10:53 PM
|
|
Anyone care to answer my enquery even slightly? To be honest, I thought it was kinder to ignore it.
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
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 308 by OS, posted 06-27-2014 10:53 PM | | OS has not replied |
|
OS
Member (Idle past 3291 days) Posts: 67 Joined: 06-22-2014
|
|
|
Message 315 of 1498 (730481)
06-28-2014 1:12 PM
|
Reply to: Message 313 by NoNukes
06-28-2014 11:53 AM
|
|
quote:
Assuming that you are correct about the energy requirements, that's not a logic conclusion. Paper makes energy by burning. Do you think we could reverse the process of combustion by super cooling?
It is a logical conclusion. Supercooling has been known to do the reverse of "electron" capture. The Wikipedia chart has some example of Argon "decaying" into Potassium. I also doubt heat and pressure together will ever be tried. It would ruin the lab equipment.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 313 by NoNukes, posted 06-28-2014 11:53 AM | | NoNukes has replied |
|
™ Version 4.2
