|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
Member (Idle past 1405 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 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
JonF Member (Idle past 168 days) Posts: 6174 Joined:
|
Yes, K40 dates do overlap with U238. As do many others.
Do we have any 4 billion year old K40 dates that we know were set to zero on earth? Ther are lots of dating methods. The oldest claimed date I know of for such is 4.28bya, Neodymium-142 Evidence for Hadean Mafic Crust (free registration required). The abstract:
quote: The Acasta gneiss near Great Slave Lake in north central Canada is purty darn well established at 4.03 bya, e.g. Age of the world's oldest rocks refined using Canada's SHRIMP: the Acasta gneiss complex, Northwest Territories, Canada.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
JonF Member (Idle past 168 days) Posts: 6174 Joined: |
Yes, I meant 235U.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
JonF Member (Idle past 168 days) Posts: 6174 Joined:
|
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 μm3 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.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
JonF Member (Idle past 168 days) Posts: 6174 Joined:
|
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.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
JonF Member (Idle past 168 days) Posts: 6174 Joined:
|
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.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
JonF Member (Idle past 168 days) Posts: 6174 Joined: |
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.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
JonF Member (Idle past 168 days) Posts: 6174 Joined: |
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.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
JonF Member (Idle past 168 days) Posts: 6174 Joined: |
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.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
JonF Member (Idle past 168 days) Posts: 6174 Joined:
|
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?
A common characteristic of nutjobs is not keeping their stories straight. Message 2:
Decays of Argon-40 to Potassium-40 could be made by supercooling. That's making a claim that it is possible. It isn't.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
JonF Member (Idle past 168 days) Posts: 6174 Joined: |
(duplicate)
Edited by JonF, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
JonF Member (Idle past 168 days) Posts: 6174 Joined:
|
But what do cold temperatures do to those forces? Nothing. We've tried.
Extreme cold makes metal brittle, for example Chemistry and nuclear physics are very different.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
JonF Member (Idle past 168 days) Posts: 6174 Joined: |
... but you can find the half-life of C-14 with a Geiger counter. ...
False. That one's true (but, like most of his outpourings, irrelevant).
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
JonF Member (Idle past 168 days) Posts: 6174 Joined: |
Wouldn't you also need patience, lots of patience? Yup, but not as much as for the ingrowth technique. And many scientists have exactly that patience. Call for an improved set of decay constants for geochronological use:
quote:
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
JonF Member (Idle past 168 days) Posts: 6174 Joined: |
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? A common characteristic of nutjobs is not keeping their stories straight.
Decays of Argon-40 to Potassium-40 could be made by supercooling. It hasn't been tried, especially with proton bombardment. How would you know then? We understand the process. I don't know if it's been tested; not all incredibly stupid ideas are worth testing. Another characteristic of nutjobs is never admitting error. You claimed you never said 40Ar could be turned into 40K; when I demonstrated your error you ignored it. An honest person would have said "Oh, yeah, I did say that". And what's this "especially with proton bombardment" stuff"? Remember you wrote:
Decays of Argon-40 to Potassium-40 could be made by supercooling. I don't know if rapid protons would be necessary. Now you're saying that it's likely proton bombardment is necessary? Can't keep your story straight. And protons?? 40K decays to 40Ar by emitting a gamma ray and a neutrino.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
JonF Member (Idle past 168 days) Posts: 6174 Joined:
|
Except that we KNOW that exponential decay matches the evidence and linear decay doesn't.
No, you really don't. It is a thermodynamic calculation It's a statistical calculation, and exponential decay has been observed literally millions of time. Linear decay has never been observed.
and there is nothing to suggest isotopic concentrations don't have full lives. WTF? I take it you don't understand the concept of half-life?
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024