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

  • #61
    Originally posted by klaus54 View Post
    Genius,

    You might want to learn what cosmic rays are before you write your Noble Prize opus.

    K54

    http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu...ro/cosmic.html
    True. When helping out with someone's theory (someone who I will not name), I didn't know electron holes went from the negative end to the positive end. The electrons are actually positively charges and the electron holes being negative do all the work, according to his theory. I need to try it with the Faraday Effect(?) someday. I mean by coiling a magnet. It was an interesting hypothesis.

    Edit: I admit I was too specific about the kind of radiation coming from magma.
    Last edited by Omniskeptical; 06-08-2014, 01:41 PM.

    Comment


    • #62
      Originally posted by JonF
      Nope. 235U produces "decay rays" and transmutes to 231Th. One 230Th for each decay of 235U, one decay of 235U for each 231Th. One to one.
      Evidently, I can take that as the consensus then.

      Comment


      • #63
        Originally posted by Omniskeptical View Post
        It can be detected in the ground area.
        No. There is a name for what you detect on the surface of the Earth: background radiation. There is a different name for radiation that originates in space and may or may not make it to the surface of the Earth: cosmic radiation. Two different things, two different names. If you want to speak of radiation which comes only from space or is in space, you speak of cosmic radiation. If you want to speak of the overall radiation we detect at the surface of the Earth, you speak of background radiation.

        Measurements have been simply assumptions, because the transmuting is not proven in the rock. It is awfully interesting that the bad assumptions start with Uranium.
        Radioactive decay was discovered because radioactive isotopes decay in rock, and it was radium. There have been literally tens of thousands of measurements of radioactive decay of rocks. We understand a lot of the physics. Radioactive decay in rocks is as well established as the fact that irons a solid under terrestrial surface conditions. You need to come up with evidence for your ludicrous assertions.

        Comment


        • #64
          Originally posted by Omniskeptical View Post
          Magma is an excellent suspect. It is hot, has more electron-holes than most matter, and is pressurized...
          Doesn't matter. Radioactive decay is a nuclear process. Electron-holes and electrons don't matter*, because they are only involved with chemical reactions.

          (*Yeah, electron capture decay involves the innermost electron of an atom, but it's rare).

          ...slowing transmuting while at the same time facilitating it.
          Nope, you are really worse than Jorge when it comes to scientific knowledge of subjects on which you pontificate. By an order of magnitude or more. That's really bad.

          The heat and/or pressure found in magma have been tested in the lab and do not affect radioactive decay rates.

          Are you sure you aren't confusing Sr-90 with Rb-Sr-87?
          I'm sure, are you capable of comprehending simple English: "...there are a very few radioactive isotopes that decay rapidly under those conditions, and only one is used in radiometric dating (87Rb)." notes that 87Rb would decay faster if heated to a few billions of degrees. 87Rb decays to 87Sr and is referred to as Rb-Sr dating. Knowing the type I'm dealing with, I anticipated that you might say that maybe all Rb-Sr dates are wrong because of that (im-)possible effect. So I wrote "Since Rb-Sr dates agree with dates obtained from other isotopes that are not subject to such acceleration, therefore there was no such acceleration."

          I never mentioned 90Sr (or, for that matter, 87Sr) and it appeared only in the fevered imaginations of your mind.

          Comment


          • #65
            Do you use differing frequencies to detect the "decay" of different rock elements?
            Looks like gibberish. No, we don't use different frequencies (oscillations per second) because there are no different frequencies to use, and the frequencies that sort of appear (the frequencies of a subatomic particles in their wave-like aspect) are not involved. We count numbers of atoms or ionizing particles passing through a detector.

            Comment


            • #66
              Originally posted by JonF View Post
              Nope, you are really worse than Jorge when it comes to scientific knowledge of subjects on which you pontificate. By an order of magnitude or more. That's really bad.
              I hate when people lie.

              The heat and/or pressure found in magma have been tested in the lab and do not affect radioactive decay rates.
              You couldn't get enough of both to get a good simulation.

              I'm sure, are you capable of comprehending simple English: "...there are a very few radioactive isotopes that decay rapidly under those conditions, and only one is used in radiometric dating (87Rb)." notes that 87Rb would decay faster if heated to a few billions of degrees. 87Rb decays to 87Sr and is referred to as Rb-Sr dating. Knowing the type I'm dealing with, I anticipated that you might say that maybe all Rb-Sr dates are wrong because of that (im-)possible effect. So I wrote "Since Rb-Sr dates agree with dates obtained from other isotopes that are not subject to such acceleration, therefore there was no such acceleration."
              Sure, if you are not mistaking it for Strontium-90 when determining its half life.

              I never mentioned 90Sr (or, for that matter, 87Sr) and it appeared only in the fevered imaginations of your mind.
              Whose fevered imaginations?

              Comment


              • #67
                Genius troll is genius.

                ETA: I just have to assume that omniskeptical is trolling. The alternative is just too depressing to consider.
                ~Formerly known as Chrawnus~

                Comment


                • #68
                  Originally posted by JonF View Post
                  Looks like gibberish. No, we don't use different frequencies (oscillations per second) because there are no different frequencies to use, and the frequencies that sort of appear (the frequencies of a subatomic particles in their wave-like aspect) are not involved. We count numbers of atoms or ionizing particles passing through a detector.
                  Oh, it is worse than I thought.

                  Comment


                  • #69
                    Originally posted by Omniskeptical View Post
                    This sounds like a wild goose chase. First, Chebshev polynomials which are now outdone, and now 87b as being the "source of isochrones".
                    More lithium. That's what you need, lithium.

                    Chebyshev (note spelling) polynomials have nothing to do with radioactive decay or radiometric dating. Rb-Sr dating is a method that produces a line called an "isochron" when the data is plotted. An "isochrone" is something else.

                    Comment


                    • #70
                      Originally posted by Omniskeptical View Post
                      Inane as in how? It might be produced even by the noise in the equipment.
                      Scientists are not morons. They invest a lot of time and effort and money to A) know how much noise there is in their equipment (and the don't assume it stays the same) and B) that noise is much much smaller than any signal they are claiming to measure.

                      Comment


                      • #71
                        Originally posted by JonF View Post
                        More lithium. That's what you need, lithium.

                        Chebyshev (note spelling) polynomials have nothing to do with radioactive decay or radiometric dating. Rb-Sr dating is a method that produces a line called an "isochron" when the data is plotted. An "isochrone" is something else.
                        NO, this has to do with your wild goose chases.

                        Comment


                        • #72
                          Originally posted by Omniskeptical
                          I admit I was too specific about the kind of radiation coming from magma.
                          You weren't too specific, you were wrong.
                          I hate when people lie.
                          Then don't do it.

                          Roy
                          Jorge: Functional Complex Information is INFORMATION that is complex and functional.

                          mikewhitney: What if the speed of light changed when light is passing through water? ... I have 3 semesters of college Physics.

                          Mountain Man: First of all, the Bible is a fixed document.
                          Mountain Man on covid-19: We're talking about an illness with a better than 99.9% rate of survival.

                          Sparko: Even the deists like Jefferson believed in the Christian God, ...

                          Comment


                          • #73
                            Originally posted by Roy View Post
                            Then don't do it.

                            Roy
                            Tell JonF that.

                            Comment


                            • #74
                              Originally posted by Chrawnus View Post
                              Genius troll is genius.

                              ETA: I just have to assume that omniskeptical is trolling. The alternative is just too depressing to consider.
                              It would appear magma doesn't have nuclear magnetic resonance.

                              Comment


                              • #75


                                Troll Alert! Troll Alert!

                                Comment

                                Related Threads

                                Collapse

                                Topics Statistics Last Post
                                Started by rogue06, Today, 09:39 AM
                                0 responses
                                15 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post rogue06
                                by rogue06
                                 
                                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