Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 68 (9048 total)
292 online now:
kjsimons (1 member, 291 visitors)
Newest Member: Wes johnson
Upcoming Birthdays: Astrophile
Post Volume: Total: 887,582 Year: 5,228/14,102 Month: 149/677 Week: 8/26 Day: 8/2 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   The dating game
NosyNed
Member
Posts: 8964
From: Canada
Joined: 04-04-2003


Message 16 of 94 (392722)
04-01-2007 10:12 PM
Reply to: Message 4 by Reserve
04-01-2007 4:19 PM


Calculated rates
There is something else that has not as yet been mentioned.

As I understand it the decay rates can be calculated from quantum mechanics and known constants. Apparently these calculated rates agree with the measured rates. (though I can't check the math). Have you found any creationist sites that even mention this much less show what is wrong with the calculations?

If the measured rates agree with the calculations you need to either accept that there is a high probability that they are right or explain this amazing coincidence.

Of course, that isn't the only coincidence you have to explain. You have to explain all of them that RAZD points to in Message 14


This message is a reply to:
 Message 4 by Reserve, posted 04-01-2007 4:19 PM Reserve has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 17 by RAZD, posted 04-01-2007 10:42 PM NosyNed has not yet responded

  
NosyNed
Member
Posts: 8964
From: Canada
Joined: 04-04-2003


Message 37 of 94 (392861)
04-02-2007 6:25 PM
Reply to: Message 36 by Reserve
04-02-2007 6:19 PM


Ar- Ar
Ar-Ar is a deriviation of the K-Ar method. And subject to the same conditions as the K-Ar.

And how do you know this? It is surprising that you could have just googled about dating, stumbled across this sites and already can make such a firm statement about any of the dating methods. I'd be interested in the details that led you to the above conclusion.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 36 by Reserve, posted 04-02-2007 6:19 PM Reserve has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 43 by JonF, posted 04-02-2007 8:52 PM NosyNed has not yet responded
 Message 45 by Reserve, posted 04-02-2007 10:48 PM NosyNed has responded

  
NosyNed
Member
Posts: 8964
From: Canada
Joined: 04-04-2003


Message 41 of 94 (392887)
04-02-2007 7:55 PM
Reply to: Message 21 by Son Goku
04-02-2007 7:46 AM


Re: Calculated rates - Cavediver? Son Goku?
Even then I've only ever truly worked out free-particle decays. Actually working out decay rates for bound states like atoms would require teams of people (that's what 90% of the physicists at the Manhattan Project were doing) or a computer.

But it has been done? And what kind of agreement with measurements do you get? What are the inputs? E.g., speed of light, h bar etc.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 21 by Son Goku, posted 04-02-2007 7:46 AM Son Goku has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 48 by Son Goku, posted 04-03-2007 1:13 PM NosyNed has responded

  
NosyNed
Member
Posts: 8964
From: Canada
Joined: 04-04-2003


Message 46 of 94 (392949)
04-02-2007 11:13 PM
Reply to: Message 45 by Reserve
04-02-2007 10:48 PM


To simplify
I have a firm believe in the Bible, as for the dating methods, if I seem to make myself look like an expert in that field, I have misled you. I am not an expert in that field, and will not be for a long time, if ever.

Then you should have not stated that Ar-Ar has the same problem. At the least you should have said something like: "Doesn't this have the same problem?"

But in fact you were given the Dating from a Christian perspective reference. Which isn't all that much reading and covers it pretty well. That would have told you that Ar-Ar does not have the same problem. You shouldn't have had to ask.

To simplify things a bit what you should understand is that the creationist sites and "experts" have had plenty of time to learn about this. What you need to understand is that they are deliberately misleading you. I think the technical term for it is "lying".

They deliberately leave out important information about the dating techniques.

The take-away from this is don't trust what you are being told by these guys.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 45 by Reserve, posted 04-02-2007 10:48 PM Reserve has not yet responded

  
NosyNed
Member
Posts: 8964
From: Canada
Joined: 04-04-2003


Message 49 of 94 (393071)
04-03-2007 1:18 PM
Reply to: Message 48 by Son Goku
04-03-2007 1:13 PM


Thank you.
The true, non-chosen, inputs would be the fine structure constant, the weak and strong coupling constants and a few particle masses

All directly measureable values.

Thanks for the input.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 48 by Son Goku, posted 04-03-2007 1:13 PM Son Goku has not yet 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