Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 62 (9041 total)
554 online now:
AZPaul3, Minnemooseus (Adminnemooseus) (2 members, 552 visitors)
Newest Member: maria
Post Volume: Total: 885,918 Year: 3,564/14,102 Month: 184/321 Week: 44/59 Day: 5/4 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 2203 days)
Posts: 67
Joined: 06-22-2014


Message 307 of 1486 (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 responded

  
OS
Member (Idle past 2203 days)
Posts: 67
Joined: 06-22-2014


Message 308 of 1486 (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 yet responded
 Message 314 by NoNukes, posted 06-28-2014 12:27 PM OS has not yet responded

  
OS
Member (Idle past 2203 days)
Posts: 67
Joined: 06-22-2014


Message 310 of 1486 (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.


Replies to this message:
 Message 311 by RAZD, posted 06-28-2014 6:52 AM OS has not yet responded
 Message 312 by JonF, posted 06-28-2014 11:06 AM OS has not yet responded
 Message 313 by NoNukes, posted 06-28-2014 11:53 AM OS has responded

  
OS
Member (Idle past 2203 days)
Posts: 67
Joined: 06-22-2014


Message 315 of 1486 (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 responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 317 by JonF, posted 06-28-2014 1:51 PM OS has responded
 Message 329 by NoNukes, posted 06-28-2014 5:19 PM OS has responded

  
OS
Member (Idle past 2203 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 responded

  
OS
Member (Idle past 2203 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 responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 321 by Coragyps, posted 06-28-2014 3:02 PM OS has responded
 Message 326 by JonF, posted 06-28-2014 4:15 PM OS has not yet responded

  
OS
Member (Idle past 2203 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 not yet responded

  
OS
Member (Idle past 2203 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 not yet responded

  
OS
Member (Idle past 2203 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 responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 325 by ringo, posted 06-28-2014 3:38 PM OS has not yet responded
 Message 330 by NoNukes, posted 06-28-2014 5:23 PM OS has responded
 Message 334 by RAZD, posted 06-28-2014 5:58 PM OS has responded

  
OS
Member (Idle past 2203 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 responded

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

  
OS
Member (Idle past 2203 days)
Posts: 67
Joined: 06-22-2014


Message 331 of 1486 (730511)
06-28-2014 5:31 PM
Reply to: Message 329 by NoNukes
06-28-2014 5:19 PM


Ye I don't see any description of the reverse decay you say is there.
Ar-40 is supposedly an exception, and it is also supposedly the most stable isotope-- I think.

There is also that pesky energy problem that works in the opposite direction as your post suggested.
The energy should be less in the opposite direction. The tricky things with isotopes is how does the proton count change. With some, it is the colder the faster. I suspect C14 maybe this way.

Edited by OS, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 329 by NoNukes, posted 06-28-2014 5:19 PM NoNukes has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 335 by NoNukes, posted 06-28-2014 6:05 PM OS has responded

  
OS
Member (Idle past 2203 days)
Posts: 67
Joined: 06-22-2014


Message 332 of 1486 (730512)
06-28-2014 5:36 PM
Reply to: Message 330 by NoNukes
06-28-2014 5:23 PM


Re: Ar-40 to K-40
Implied by what?
By the Argon isotope chart under "Argon" in Wikipedia.

Cool. Let's hear about why those things are nutjobs.
Tree rings don't determine the age of trees. Carbon-14 does, and I believe carbon-14 date don't match tree ring dating.

Ice melts, and the artic's icecap is constantly shifting. You can't prove it caused a flood or dates anything. Current research in this area is done at taxpayers expense, whereas most radiometric dating isn't.

Edited by OS, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 330 by NoNukes, posted 06-28-2014 5:23 PM NoNukes has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 333 by Coyote, posted 06-28-2014 5:56 PM OS has not yet responded
 Message 336 by NoNukes, posted 06-28-2014 6:11 PM OS has not yet responded
 Message 339 by RAZD, posted 06-28-2014 6:22 PM OS has responded

  
OS
Member (Idle past 2203 days)
Posts: 67
Joined: 06-22-2014


Message 337 of 1486 (730519)
06-28-2014 6:15 PM
Reply to: Message 335 by NoNukes
06-28-2014 6:05 PM


I should have logically said the colder the slower.

An exception to what general principle?
Ar-39, Ar-41, and Ar-42 can decay into potassium isotopes of the same number.

Carbon 14 decays by emitting a beta particle and gamma radiation, both of which carry away energy. The process is exothermic. Your suspicion is wrong.
Yet there are also other issues like water, and that you can't carbon date any corpse accurately.

Edited by OS, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 335 by NoNukes, posted 06-28-2014 6:05 PM NoNukes has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 341 by RAZD, posted 06-28-2014 6:29 PM OS has responded
 Message 343 by NoNukes, posted 06-28-2014 6:42 PM OS has responded
 Message 345 by Coyote, posted 06-28-2014 7:01 PM OS has not yet responded

  
OS
Member (Idle past 2203 days)
Posts: 67
Joined: 06-22-2014


Message 338 of 1486 (730520)
06-28-2014 6:19 PM
Reply to: Message 334 by RAZD
06-28-2014 5:58 PM


Re: so lets discuss reality then: step 1 --
Would you care to show how the science of dendrochronology has it all wrong? With objective evidence rather than bald assertion?
1. Quit lying that it is a science. 2. Quite [quit] pretending it is used to calibrate lambda for Radiocarbon Dating.

Edited by OS, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 334 by RAZD, posted 06-28-2014 5:58 PM RAZD has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 346 by NoNukes, posted 06-28-2014 7:01 PM OS has not yet responded
 Message 352 by RAZD, posted 06-28-2014 8:38 PM OS has not yet responded

  
OS
Member (Idle past 2203 days)
Posts: 67
Joined: 06-22-2014


Message 340 of 1486 (730522)
06-28-2014 6:26 PM
Reply to: Message 339 by RAZD
06-28-2014 6:22 PM


Re: Ar-40 to K-40
Have a good whine, and we'll watch the scientists laugh at you as you dig yourself deeper and deeper into the 85 pile.
Just remember what I said about dedrenchronlogy.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 339 by RAZD, posted 06-28-2014 6:22 PM RAZD has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 349 by RAZD, posted 06-28-2014 8:19 PM OS has responded

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2021