Posted on 06/07/2010 5:29:41 PM PDT by decimon
The Earth and Moon were created as the result of a giant collision between two planets the size of Mars and Venus. Until now it was thought to have happened when the solar system was 30 million years old or approx. 4,537 million years ago. But new research from the Niels Bohr Institute shows that the Earth and Moon must have formed much later – perhaps up to 150 million years after the formation of the solar system. The research results have been published in the scientific journal, Earth and Planetary Science Letters.
"We have determined the ages of the Earth and the Moon using tungsten isotopes, which can reveal whether the iron cores and their stone surfaces have been mixed together during the collision", explains Tais W. Dahl, who did the research as his thesis project in geophysics at the Niels Bohr Institute at the University of Copenhagen in collaboration with professor David J. Stevenson from the California Institute of Technology (Caltech).
Turbulent collisions
The planets in the solar system were created by collisions between small dwarf planets orbiting the newborn sun. In the collisions the small planets melted together and formed larger and larger planets. The Earth and Moon are the result of a gigantic collision between two planets the size of Mars and Venus. The two planets collided at a time when both had a core of metal (iron) and a surrounding mantle of silicates (rock). But when did it happen and how did it happen? The collision took place in less than 24 hours and the temperature of the Earth was so high (7000º C), that both rock and metal must have melted in the turbulent collision. But were the stone mass and iron mass also mixed together?
Until recently it was believed that the rock and iron mixed completely during the planet formation and so the conclusion was that the Moon was formed when the solar system was 30 million years old or approximately 4,537 million years ago. But new research shows something completely different.
Dating with radioactive elements
The age of the Earth and Moon can be dated by examining the presence of certain elements in the Earth's mantle. Hafnium-182 is a radioactive substance, which decays and is converted into the isotope tungsten-182. The two elements have markedly different chemical properties and while the tungsten isotopes prefer to bond with metal, hafnium prefers to bond to silicates, i.e. rock.
It takes 50-60 million years for all hafnium to decay and be converted into tungsten, and during the Moon forming collision nearly all the metal sank into the Earth's core. But did all the tungsten go into the core?
"We have studied to what degree metal and rock mix together during the planet forming collisions. Using dynamic model calculations of the turbulent mixing of the liquid rock and iron masses we have found that tungsten isotopes from the Earth's early formation remain in the rocky mantle", explains Tais W. Dahl, Niels Bohr Institute at the University of Copenhagen.
The new studies imply that the moon forming collision occurred after all of the hafnium had decayed completely into tungsten.
"Our results show that metal core and rock are unable to emulsify in these collisions between planets that are greater than 10 kilometres in diameter and therefore that most of the Earth's iron core (80-99 %) did not remove tungsten from the rocky material in the mantle during formation", explains Tais W. Dahl.
The result of the research means that the Earth and the Moon must have been formed much later than previously thought – that is to say not 30 million years after the formation of the solar system 4,567 million years ago but perhaps up to 150 million years after the formation of the solar system.
###
Contact: Tais W. Dahl, PhD. geochemistry, Cand. Scient. geophysics, Niels Bohr Institute, University of Copenhagen. Currently at Harvard University: 00 1 617-817-5506, tdahl@fas.harvard.edu
Using what dating method? And you know that it’s reliable by what observable method. Your fundamental error is in the false and sad assumption that I have no formal education in physics, chemistry, archaeology, or anthropology. You’re wrong.
/mark
>>Somebody who’s really dumb, isn’t really free...<<
When you have no argument, fall back to ad hominem. Are you sure you are in the right board? DU and KOS have completely different URLs.
How do you know God did not go back in time and planted the remmants to give man something to do
>>our fundamental error is in the false and sad assumption that I have no formal education in physics, chemistry, archaeology, or anthropology. You’re wrong.<<
Your statements make that conclusion inevitable. If you understood science you would not make the statements you make. If someone posts 3+3=5 and you agree, it means you do not understand arithmetic.
A=B=C.
Pretty straightforward.
Science is defined as “systematic knowledge of the physical or material world gained through observation and experimentation. “
Show me where these “scientists” observed and/or experimented upon the crashing of our planets and the formation of the earth.
Page the Brothers Grimm when you can.
Trying to hijack a thread again I see. This thread was about new ideas on the age of the Earth and Moon, it had nothing to do with toe or ‘creationists’.
>>Actually I was referring “dumb” as illustrated by your misuse of the word Luddite in this context. Thanks for proving my point.<<
Ah, so all you have is ad hominem. Nice to see the ignorant always use the same gambit.
>>This thread was about new ideas on the age of the Earth and Moon, it had nothing to do with toe or ‘creationists’.<<
I see you stalking me again. I don’t blame you — you want to learn and need me to guide you.
And I would say that, based on the responses, this has everything to do with creationists.
But thanks for playing.
Now get lost.
:) I see you are either ignorant, or ignoring the fact that recent discoveries of Dinosaurs’ bones (Supposedly hunderds of millions of years old) have been found with DNA, and that items, known to have been created recently, have been carbon dated to be thousands of years old? You don’t knopw what you’re talking about. I apologize to have to put it bluntly.
“If someone posts 3+3=5 and you agree, it means you do not understand arithmetic.”
This is observable, and hence disprovable. The age of the Earth is not.
Well the dispensationalists have changed thr date of the Rapture every few years since 33 AD. But only real scientists get called out for revisiting their data.
“How do you know God did not go back in time and planted the remmants to give man something to do.”
I’m not sure if you are being serious or not...But I would add, that it wasn’t even necessary to do that. The Earth can be eons old, and we can have a period of only a few thousand years from the Fall (If you believe in it).
Regardless of Young or old earth theory, We cannot know the age of the Earth, because it’s not only not observable, the processes involved are, as of yet, unobservable to us.
I don’t believe in the Rapture either.
Stop with the lead in via a history lesson, just take my G-d d@mn wallet now and leave me in my peaceful destitution.
Ah, quote mining. I expect no less from people who do not know science.
From http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/science1. a branch of knowledge or study dealing with a body of facts or truths systematically arranged and showing the operation of general laws: the mathematical sciences.
2. systematic knowledge of the physical or material world gained through observation and experimentation.
Sucks to be busted, eh?
And if I were to grant you your #2 definition, are you saying that astronomy, geology, physiology et seq are all wrong because the process was not observable?
You really need to stay away from subjects you don't understand.
//I see you stalking me again//
That is ridiculous and I was already reading this thread before you started in with your rant about ‘creationists’. I just called you out on it and you dont like getting exposed thats all.
Folks he will do this every time on these type of threads.
And I’m aware of the “Great Disappointment” in the 7th Day Adventists, and other religions. They don’t claim to be scientists.
It takes just as much faith to subscribe to this psuedo”science” as it does to subscribe to any religion. More, actually, because a Religion can be tested, there are eyewitnesses to “miracles,” and always have been.
Miracles are merely a form of science we can’t yet understand, but still can observe.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.