Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 64 (9071 total)
68 online now:
AZPaul3, kjsimons (2 members, 66 visitors)
Newest Member: FossilDiscovery
Upcoming Birthdays: Percy
Post Volume: Total: 893,040 Year: 4,152/6,534 Month: 366/900 Week: 72/150 Day: 3/42 Hour: 0/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Age Correlations and An Old Earth, Version 2 No 1
OS
Member (Idle past 2499 days)
Posts: 67
Joined: 06-22-2014


Message 316 of 1486 (730483)
06-28-2014 1:15 PM


quote:
Nope. Essentially all of the K->Ar decays emit a 1.460 MeV gamma ray and a neutrino. Therefore process emits energy.
While I don't agree, that would be a very useful statement.

Edited by OS, : No reason given.


Replies to this message:
 Message 318 by JonF, posted 06-28-2014 1:52 PM OS has replied

  
JonF
Member
Posts: 6174
Joined: 06-23-2003


(1)
Message 317 of 1486 (730488)
06-28-2014 1:51 PM
Reply to: Message 315 by OS
06-28-2014 1:12 PM


Supercooling has been known to do the reverse of "electron" capture.

You're sounding pretty wacky. Reference, please.

The Wikipedia chart has some example of Argon "decaying" into Potassium

A quick look at Wikipedia and I can't see any such chart. Link to the chart, please.

I also doubt heat and pressure together will ever be tried. It would ruin the lab equipment.

Ah, you're going full-bore ignorant nutjob now. Heat and pressure together have been tried many times. Once you've got a suitable pressure vessel, dab on a little insulation and you've got a heat and pressure vessel.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 315 by OS, posted 06-28-2014 1:12 PM OS has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 319 by OS, posted 06-28-2014 2:33 PM JonF has replied

  
JonF
Member
Posts: 6174
Joined: 06-23-2003


Message 318 of 1486 (730489)
06-28-2014 1:52 PM
Reply to: Message 316 by OS
06-28-2014 1:15 PM


Nope. Essentially all of the K->Ar decays emit a 1.460 MeV gamma ray and a neutrino. Therefore [the] process emits energy.

While I don't agree, that would be a very useful statement.

Yup, nutjob.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 316 by OS, posted 06-28-2014 1:15 PM OS has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 320 by OS, posted 06-28-2014 2:36 PM JonF has taken no action

  
OS
Member (Idle past 2499 days)
Posts: 67
Joined: 06-22-2014


Message 319 of 1486 (730492)
06-28-2014 2:33 PM
Reply to: Message 317 by JonF
06-28-2014 1:51 PM


You're sounding pretty wacky. Reference, please.
I am not your peer. Look it up yourself.

A quick look at Wikipedia and I can't see any such chart. Link to the chart, please.
It's under Argon.

.. Heat and pressure together have been tried many times. Once you've got a suitable pressure vessel, dab on a little insulation and you've got a heat and pressure vessel.
Yeah, in other words, you think ceramic rock is enough. That's a load of crap.

Edited by OS, : No reason given.

Edited by OS, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 317 by JonF, posted 06-28-2014 1:51 PM JonF has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 321 by Coragyps, posted 06-28-2014 3:02 PM OS has replied
 Message 326 by JonF, posted 06-28-2014 4:15 PM OS has taken no action

  
OS
Member (Idle past 2499 days)
Posts: 67
Joined: 06-22-2014


Message 320 of 1486 (730493)
06-28-2014 2:36 PM
Reply to: Message 318 by JonF
06-28-2014 1:52 PM


Nope. Essentially all of the K->Ar decays emit a 1.460 MeV gamma ray and a neutrino. Therefore [the] process emits energy.
Takes energy or releases energy. I would have to see it, but hiting something with a rapid neutron doesn't give a lot of energy. I suspect it is something else.

Yup, nutjob.

Edited by OS, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 318 by JonF, posted 06-28-2014 1:52 PM JonF has taken no action

  
Coragyps
Member
Posts: 5553
From: Snyder, Texas, USA
Joined: 11-12-2002


Message 321 of 1486 (730495)
06-28-2014 3:02 PM
Reply to: Message 319 by OS
06-28-2014 2:33 PM


It's under Argon.

Where under "argon?" I think you're making things up.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 319 by OS, posted 06-28-2014 2:33 PM OS has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 323 by OS, posted 06-28-2014 3:17 PM Coragyps has taken no action
 Message 327 by JonF, posted 06-28-2014 4:18 PM Coragyps has taken no action

  
ringo
Member
Posts: 19516
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005
Member Rating: 2.9


Message 322 of 1486 (730496)
06-28-2014 3:05 PM
Reply to: Message 307 by OS
06-25-2014 4:06 PM


Re: Ar-40 to K-40
OS writes:

I was wondering if there was a way to convert Argon-40 into Potassium-40, in a lab.


Are you suggesting that the decay of Potassium-40 is reversible? And that that would call into question the validity of Potassium-Argon dating? If so, pertaining to the topic, how do you explain the correlations with all of the other dating methods? Wouldn't they all have to be reversible at an exactly coincidental rate?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 307 by OS, posted 06-25-2014 4:06 PM OS has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 324 by OS, posted 06-28-2014 3:22 PM ringo has replied

  
OS
Member (Idle past 2499 days)
Posts: 67
Joined: 06-22-2014


Message 323 of 1486 (730498)
06-28-2014 3:17 PM
Reply to: Message 321 by Coragyps
06-28-2014 3:02 PM


Where under "argon?" I think you're making things up.
While not atomic number 40, there are Argon isotopes which turn into Potassium. There's an isotope chart for Argon.

Edited by OS, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 321 by Coragyps, posted 06-28-2014 3:02 PM Coragyps has taken no action

  
OS
Member (Idle past 2499 days)
Posts: 67
Joined: 06-22-2014


Message 324 of 1486 (730499)
06-28-2014 3:22 PM
Reply to: Message 322 by ringo
06-28-2014 3:05 PM


Re: Ar-40 to K-40
Are you suggesting that the decay of Potassium-40 is reversible?
It seems only implied, so far. And reversibility at the same rate sounds to me, atomically unlikely. But if you want to get into tree rings and ice core samples as proof; you should be disappointed by it. Tree rings are the training ground of radiocarbon daters, and ice core samples is impossibly stupid; I mean total nutjob, as in worse than making a wacky assumption.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 322 by ringo, posted 06-28-2014 3:05 PM ringo has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 325 by ringo, posted 06-28-2014 3:38 PM OS has taken no action
 Message 330 by NoNukes, posted 06-28-2014 5:23 PM OS has replied
 Message 334 by RAZD, posted 06-28-2014 5:58 PM OS has replied

  
ringo
Member
Posts: 19516
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005
Member Rating: 2.9


Message 325 of 1486 (730501)
06-28-2014 3:38 PM
Reply to: Message 324 by OS
06-28-2014 3:22 PM


Re: Ar-40 to K-40
OS writes:

Tree rings are the training ground of radiocarbon daters, and ice core samples is impossibly stupid;


You don't seem to know what you're talking about. The gist of this thread (and its several companions) is that different dating methods, based on entirely different processes, produce the same dates. To show that one method is invalid, you'd have to show that they are all invalid.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 324 by OS, posted 06-28-2014 3:22 PM OS has taken no action

  
JonF
Member
Posts: 6174
Joined: 06-23-2003


Message 326 of 1486 (730502)
06-28-2014 4:15 PM
Reply to: Message 319 by OS
06-28-2014 2:33 PM


You're sounding pretty wacky. Reference, please.

I am not your peer.

That's obvious.

Look it up yourself.

When you make a claim, you support it.

A quick look at Wikipedia and I can't see any such chart. Link to the chart, please.

It's under Argon.

I looked. They do note that 39Ar doecaays to 3K. Nothing to do with 40Ar and 40K. Remember you wroe:

Decays of Argon-40 to Potassium-40 could be made by supercooling.

The subject is 40Ar and 40K.

Heat and pressure together have been tried many times. Once you've got a suitable pressure vessel, dab on a little insulation and you've got a heat and pressure vessel.

Yeah, in other words, you think ceramic rock is enough. That's a load of crap.

Edited by JonF, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 319 by OS, posted 06-28-2014 2:33 PM OS has taken no action

  
JonF
Member
Posts: 6174
Joined: 06-23-2003


Message 327 of 1486 (730503)
06-28-2014 4:18 PM
Reply to: Message 321 by Coragyps
06-28-2014 3:02 PM


It's under Argon.

Where under "argon?" I think you're making things up.

The Wikipedia article with a chart showing 39Ar decaying to 39K. Whic has nothing to do with his claim that supercooling would turn 40Ar into 40K.

Remember Simple? This guy reminds me of him without the clarity of exposition.

Edited by JonF, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 321 by Coragyps, posted 06-28-2014 3:02 PM Coragyps has taken no action

Replies to this message:
 Message 328 by OS, posted 06-28-2014 4:45 PM JonF has replied

  
OS
Member (Idle past 2499 days)
Posts: 67
Joined: 06-22-2014


Message 328 of 1486 (730505)
06-28-2014 4:45 PM
Reply to: Message 327 by JonF
06-28-2014 4:18 PM


Whic has nothing to do with his claim that supercooling would turn 40Ar into 40K.
Try again, I didn't make that claim. I was investigating possibilities. Did you notice Ar-41 and Ar-42 also?

Edited by OS, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 327 by JonF, posted 06-28-2014 4:18 PM JonF has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 375 by JonF, posted 06-29-2014 9:59 AM OS has replied

  
NoNukes
Inactive Member


Message 329 of 1486 (730509)
06-28-2014 5:19 PM
Reply to: Message 315 by OS
06-28-2014 1:12 PM


t is a logical conclusion. Supercooling has been known to do the reverse of "electron" capture.

The Argon article shows Ar40 as being stable. I note that you claim below that the reaction is described in the Wikipedia article on Argon.

I took a look at the wikipedia entry on argon. I don't see any description of the reverse decay you say is there. Could you either provide a pointer or acknowledge your error? There is also that pesky energy problem that works in the opposite direction as your post suggested.

From the article

quote:
Naturally occurring 40K, with a half-life of 1.25×109 years, decays to stable 40Ar (11.2%) by electron capture or positron emission, and also to stable 40Ca (88.8%) via beta decay. These properties and ratios are used to determine the age of rocks by the method of K-Ar dating

In the Earth's atmosphere, 39Ar is made by cosmic ray activity, primarily with 40Ar. In the subsurface environment, it is also produced through neutron capture by 39K or alpha emission by calcium. 37Ar is created from the neutron spallation of 40
Ca as a result of subsurface nuclear explosions. It has a half-life of 35 days.



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 315 by OS, posted 06-28-2014 1:12 PM OS has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 331 by OS, posted 06-28-2014 5:31 PM NoNukes has replied

  
NoNukes
Inactive Member


Message 330 of 1486 (730510)
06-28-2014 5:23 PM
Reply to: Message 324 by OS
06-28-2014 3:22 PM


Re: Ar-40 to K-40
Are you suggesting that the decay of Potassium-40 is reversible?

It seems only implied, so far

Implied by what?

Tree rings are the training ground of radiocarbon daters, and ice core samples is impossibly stupid; I mean total nutjob, as in worse than making a wacky assumption.

Cool. Let's hear about why those things are nutjobs.


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 324 by OS, posted 06-28-2014 3:22 PM OS has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 332 by OS, posted 06-28-2014 5:36 PM NoNukes has replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.1
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2022