Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Nathan Zachary
I guess that really screws the carbon dating model too....

Nope. It does not affect it in the least bit. C-14 does not equal U-235. They have no affect on each other.

If you are referring to the relation of the natural abundance with time, C-14 does not operate on the same mechanism that U-235 does. The C-14 abundance is relatively constant because it is constantly produced in small quantities in the upper atmosphere. Since it only has a half life of ~5700 years, none of it could have remained even if 100% of all carbon at the formation of our planet was C-14. Contrast this with U-235 that has a half-life of 700 million years and no mechanism of production (it is formed in supernovas or other significant stellar events). Obviously a significant fraction of U-235 remains even after 6 half-lives (which if you do the calculation is about 1.5% of the initial abundance). Try the calculation with the half life of C-14 if it had no production rate (~800,000 half-lives--hint: you won't be able to use most calculators to find a value this small).

28 posted on 04/10/2006 10:33:42 PM PDT by burzum (A single reprimand does more for a man of intelligence than a hundred lashes for a fool.--Prov 17:10)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies ]


To: burzum; Nathan Zachary

Doesn't affect the atomic dating method for measuring much older and longer periods of time: Potassium/Argon. In this method a radioactive isoptope of postassium degenerates into inert Argon gas at a constant rate. It has nothing to do with uranium.


29 posted on 04/11/2006 8:40:16 AM PDT by B.Bumbleberry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson