Announcement

Collapse

Natural Science 301 Guidelines

This is an open forum area for all members for discussions on all issues of science and origins. This area will and does get volatile at times, but we ask that it be kept to a dull roar, and moderators will intervene to keep the peace if necessary. This means obvious trolling and flaming that becomes a problem will be dealt with, and you might find yourself in the doghouse.

As usual, Tweb rules apply. If you haven't read them now would be a good time.

Forum Rules: Here
See more
See less

Atomic Clocks!

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    3 Physics package realisations

    3.1 Atomic beam standard
    3.2 Atomic gas cell standard
    3.3 Active maser standard
    3.4 Fountain standard
    3.5 Ion trap standard-- wikipedia
    Well, I'll be damned.They have 5 different ways of being built.

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by Omniskeptical View Post
      Well, I'll be damned.They have 5 different ways of being built.
      ???

      I still have no idea of the purpose of this thread.

      Just a wild guess - are you talking about lasers stripping away all orbital electrons from Dy-163 which increases the bare nucleus' decay rate by 9 orders of magnitude? Here's Woodmorappe's AiG article that implies that this observation makes all radiometric dating unreliable.

      If such a condition ever existed on Earth it would have been destroyed along with the entire solar system by these rogue nuclei stripping charge as they make their way merrily across the Cosmos.

      https://answersingenesis.org/geology...in-laboratory/

      Or perhaps you just want to waste our time asking simple questions that can be easily Googled?

      K54

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by klaus54 View Post
        ???

        I still have no idea of the purpose of this thread.

        Just a wild guess - are you talking about lasers stripping away all orbital electrons from Dy-163 which increases the bare nucleus' decay rate by 9 orders of magnitude? Here's Woodmorappe's AiG article that implies that this observation makes all radiometric dating unreliable.

        If such a condition ever existed on Earth it would have been destroyed along with the entire solar system by these rogue nuclei stripping charge as they make their way merrily across the Cosmos.

        https://answersingenesis.org/geology...in-laboratory/

        Or perhaps you just want to waste our time asking simple questions that can be easily Googled?

        K54
        So you admit a decay doesn't automaticly trigger an elemental change?

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by Omniskeptical View Post
          So you admit a decay doesn't automaticly trigger an elemental change?
          Huh???

          K54

          Comment


          • #20
            decay = click of the geiger counter.

            Comment


            • #21
              Maybe you guys should make up your mind on what the subject is.

              Atomic clocks work by exciting an electron into a higher-energy state and then timing how long it takes to return ("decay") back into its ground state. Sort of. The point is that its not a nuclear process.

              Radioactive decay is a nuclear process that must involve the nucleus.

              Atomic clocks have nothing in common with radioactive decay and vice versa, except the word "decay" is applied to both processes and means different things depending on which process is the subject.

              Comment


              • #22
                Originally posted by Omniskeptical View Post
                decay = click of the geiger counter.
                So what?

                K54

                Comment


                • #23
                  Originally posted by JonF View Post
                  Maybe you guys should make up your mind on what the subject is.

                  Atomic clocks work by exciting an electron into a higher-energy state and then timing how long it takes to return ("decay") back into its ground state. Sort of. The point is that its not a nuclear process.

                  Radioactive decay is a nuclear process that must involve the nucleus.

                  Atomic clocks have nothing in common with radioactive decay and vice versa, except the word "decay" is applied to both processes and means different things depending on which process is the subject.
                  Thanks for the explanation, Jon.

                  Atomic is not necessarily nuclear.

                  I hope OS understands this. He seems to be going all over the place not knowing what he's talking about. I thought he was trying to push the idea that nuclear decay rates can vary, perhaps to criticize radiometric dating.

                  Who knows? Your guess is as good as mine.

                  K54

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Originally posted by klaus54 View Post
                    Thanks for the explanation, Jon.

                    Atomic is not necessarily nuclear.

                    I hope OS understands this. He seems to be going all over the place not knowing what he's talking about. I thought he was trying to push the idea that nuclear decay rates can vary, perhaps to criticize radiometric dating.

                    Who knows? Your guess is as good as mine.

                    K54
                    They certainly do vary; but I am pretty certain that isotopes in rock don't change elements, though that doesn't prevent rocks which have K/Argon-40, Strontium-90, or Uranium-235 from giving off clicks.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Originally posted by Omniskeptical View Post
                      They certainly do vary; but I am pretty certain that isotopes in rock don't change elements, though that doesn't prevent rocks which have K/Argon-40, Strontium-90, or Uranium-235 from giving off clicks.
                      Whatever you say, Boss!

                      K54

                      P.S. Click...

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Originally posted by Omniskeptical View Post
                        They certainly do vary; but I am pretty certain that isotopes in rock don't change elements, though that doesn't prevent rocks which have K/Argon-40, Strontium-90, or Uranium-235 from giving off clicks.
                        I can't parse that.

                        Are you claiming that radioactive atoms inside solids emit particles that activate a Geiger counter but do not transmute into other elements or other isotopes of the same element by doing so?

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Originally posted by Omniskeptical View Post
                          They certainly do vary; but I am pretty certain that isotopes in rock don't change elements, though that doesn't prevent rocks which have K/Argon-40, Strontium-90, or Uranium-235 from giving off clicks.
                          I do not thnk this is correct.
                          Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
                          Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
                          But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:

                          go with the flow the river knows . . .

                          Frank

                          I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            I suppose OS is talking about gamma decay.

                            So what's his point about atomic clocks?

                            K54

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Originally posted by klaus54 View Post
                              I suppose OS is talking about gamma decay.

                              So what's his point about atomic clocks?

                              K54
                              I thought atomic clocks used radioactive isotopes. This does seem to be necessarily the case.

                              Originally posted by JonF
                              Are you claiming that radioactive atoms inside solids emit particles that activate a Geiger counter but do not transmute into other elements or other isotopes of the same element by doing so?
                              Yes, energy particles at best, but click from such an energy "particle" wouldn't necessarily mean a change of element. Something simple such as carbon-14 has a specific frequency and a simple decay pattern for the nucleus. So the average would be much higher. Oh I forgot, not all lambda calibrations are down with a geiger counter.
                              Last edited by Omniskeptical; 06-06-2014, 02:48 PM.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Originally posted by Omniskeptical View Post
                                I thought atomic clocks used radioactive isotopes. This does seem to be necessarily the case.

                                Yes, energy particles at best, but click from such an energy "particle" wouldn't necessarily mean a change of element. Something simple such as carbon-14 has a specific frequency and a simple decay pattern for the nucleus. So the average would be much higher. Oh I forgot, not all lambda calibrations are down with a geiger counter.
                                What on Earth are you babbling about?

                                Geiger-Mueller counters "click" when a gamma ray photo hits the detector. So what? The nucleus emitting the gamma ray photon does not transmute.

                                What's it with you and Geiger counters???

                                K54

                                Comment

                                Related Threads

                                Collapse

                                Topics Statistics Last Post
                                Started by rogue06, Yesterday, 09:39 AM
                                1 response
                                28 views
                                1 like
                                Last Post shunyadragon  
                                Started by shunyadragon, 07-25-2021, 08:57 AM
                                0 responses
                                16 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post shunyadragon  
                                Started by shunyadragon, 07-23-2021, 06:14 PM
                                1 response
                                14 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post rogue06
                                by rogue06
                                 
                                Started by rogue06, 07-22-2021, 07:50 AM
                                1 response
                                18 views
                                1 like
                                Last Post shunyadragon  
                                Started by Cow Poke, 07-21-2021, 08:13 AM
                                13 responses
                                42 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Cow Poke  
                                Working...
                                X