Is there a direct link between radiometric dating and the speed of light? Atomic decay rates do not depend on the speed of light. Both are, however, 'children' of the same parent -- the Zero Point Energy. Because of this, and because the speed of light is in the numerator of every reduced radio decay rate equation, any changes in the speed of light are indicating changes in atomic decay rates.
Is there a direct link between c-dependent radioactive decay rates and geological processes? Furthermore, there is evidence that the main radioactive elements were concentrated in a layer low in the mantle and came to the surface progressively after that. I emailed you about this topic a year or two ago, and I've since taken a class in radioisotope chemistry at UCI. As a result I was using some of my texts to examine the decay of Americium and noted the naturally occurring decay chains for U, U and Th, as well as the fully decayed chain for Pu My thought is, can the relative natural abundances of these chains' terminal products Pb,, and be used to calculate an initial abundance and time frame for the original atomic abundances of the parent isotopes which could be compared to the predictions of Willie Fowler regarding stellar nucleogenesis processes.
I hope to hear from you soon! Thanks again for all your interesting and informative web postings and work. I believe that it is possible to determine the initial ratios of the parent elements in the various chains. It is through this mechanism that the radiometric age of the universe is usually calculated as being on the order of ten billion years. Professor Fowler did exactly this and has maintained his calculated radiometric age for the universe at about 10 billion years, with which I am basically in agreement.
Interestingly, using these sorts of ratios, one piece of moon rock dated as being 8. Firstly, supernovae have not added a significant amount of new elements to putative star-forming clouds. The key questions, then, are "Has the atmospheric ratio of carbon to carbon changed in the past, and if so, why and how much? But that may not have been true in the ancient past. For example, a worldwide flood would uproot and bury preflood forests.
Afterwards, less carbon would be available to cycle between living things and the atmosphere. With less carbon to dilute the carbon that is continually forming in the upper atmosphere, the ratio of carbon to carbon in the atmosphere would slowly begin to increase. If the ratio of carbon to carbon doubled and we did not know it, radiocarbon ages of things living then would appear to us to be one half-life or years older than their true ages.
If that ratio quadrupled, organic remains would appear 11, 2 x years older, etc. Consequently, a "radiocarbon year" would not correspond to an actual year. Another consequence of the flood would have greatly diluted the carbon to carbon ratio. The precipitation of limestone during the flood involved the release of vast quantities of dissolved carbon dioxide from the subterranean water chamber.
See pages 84 - and the technical note on page Since that carbon was isolated from the atmosphere before the flood, it would have been free of carbon Much of that released carbon dioxide undoubtedly mixed with some of the carbon dioxide in the preflood seas before all the limestone precipitated. This would have diluted the biosphere's ratio of carbon to carbon, resulting in artificially old carbon dates. If all of this is true, the ratio of carbon to carbon should have been building up in the atmosphere since the flood.
In fact, it should still be increasing. This is precisely what recent measurements show. Radiocarbon dating of organic-rich, sedimentary layers worldwide has consistently shown a surprising result. Radiocarbon ages do not increase steadily as we go down into layers of old but postflood organic matter, as one might expect. Instead, they increase at an accelerating rate. To achieve stability, these atoms must make adjustments, particularly in their nuclei.
In some cases, the isotopes eject particles, primarily neutrons and protons. These are the moving particles which constitute the radioactivity measured by Geiger counters and the like. The end result is stable atoms, but of a different chemical element not carbon because these changes have resulted in the atoms having different numbers of protons and electrons. This process of changing the isotope of one element designated as the parent into the isotope of another element referred to as the daughter is called radioactive decay.
Thus, the parent isotopes that decay are called radioisotopes. The daughter atoms are not lesser in quality than the parent atoms from which they were produced. Both are complete atoms in every sense of the word. Rather, it is a transmutation process of changing one element into another. Geologists regularly use five parent isotopes as the basis for the radioactive methods to date rocks: These parent radioisotopes change into daughter lead, lead, argon, strontium, and neodymium isotopes, respectively.
Thus, geologists refer to uranium-lead two versions , potassium-argon, rubidium-strontium, or samarium-neodymium dates for rocks. Note that the carbon or radiocarbon method is not used to date rocks, because most rocks do not contain carbon. Unlike radiocarbon 14C , the other radioactive elements used to date rocks—uranium U , potassium 40K , rubidium 87Rb , and samarium Sm —are not being formed today within the earth, as far as we know.
Thus it appears that God probably created those elements when He made the original earth. Chemical Analyses of Rocks Today Geologists must first choose a suitable rock unit for dating. They must find rocks that contain these parent radioisotopes, even if they are only present in minute amounts. Most often, this is a rock body, or unit, which has formed from the cooling of molten rock material called magma.
Radioactive Dating of Rocks: Questions Answered
Doesn't Radiometric Dating Prove the Billions of Years?
Isotopic systems that radiimetric been exploited for radiometric dating have half-lives ranging from only about 10 years e. This can reduce the problem of contamination. PARAGRAPH ! Accuracy of radiometric dating[ edit ] Thermal ionization mass spectrometer used in questipns dating. Accuracy of radiometric dating[ edit ] Thermal ionization mass spectrometer used in radiometric dating. This predictability allows the relative abundances of related nuclides to marriage without dating ost used as a common questions about radiometric dating to measure the time from the incorporation of the original nuclides into a material to the present. A particular isotope of a particular element is called a nuclide. A particular isotope of a particular element is called a nuclide? That is, at common questions about radiometric dating point in time, the daughter nuclide itself is radioactive. For instance, one half of the atoms of the nuclide in question will have decayed comjon a "daughter" nuclide or decay product, including alpha decay emission of alpha particles and beta decay electron free vietnam online dating sites. Isotopic systems that have been exploited for radiometric dating have half-lives ranging from only about 10 years e. The procedures questiosn to isolate and analyze the parent and daughter nuclides must be precise and accurate. On the other hand, the proportion of the original nuclide to its decay products changes in a predictable way as top free dating apps for windows phone original nuclide decays over time.