Where does out carbon come from? And what is a radioisotope anyway?
- Thread starter slim6y
- Start date
Help Support Aussie Pythons & Snakes Forum:
- Status
maddog-1979
Well-Known Member
awe....i wanted him to show us how to get an egg in a beer bottle
Monitor_Keeper
Well-Known Member
Didn't read butttt.......pretty pictures 
r3ptilian
Well-Known Member
Thanks for clearing that up, I used to lay awake at night trying to figure that out....
slim6y
Almost Legendary
I see no ladies here - there is a princess.... but no ladies....
Conversely, you're right, there is a PM function. But just like a channel on the televabision set - you can change it if you don't like it.
This just happens to be the 'science' show. S is for Science today.
And we were brought to you by the letters C and N and the number 14.
PM shmem.... Pffffft....
Time for -Peter to change the channel
Crack egg.
Pour contents into empty beer bottle.
Smash shell and push through beer bottle hole.
There really isn't a trick to it unless you want to get technical. Then, just use a funnel!
I don't see why we'd need to wait till next week? If everyone is confident about carbon and carbon 14 then I'm happy to move on to oxygen. Because oxygen, like carbon, is a jolly interesting atom.
Of course, without it we'll die.... Ironically, it's also killing us!
Beard has a method (that does kill kittens however) which could help you overcome your insomnia and relieve your..... mind of such wonders.
Last edited:
B
Bluetongue1
Guest
I am disappointed Slim6y. You have failed to address my specific corrections. These are your quotes: "But not knowing exactly how much carbon the Earth was being bombarded with 4 billion years ago, and then a continual stream still coming in to Earth, would make radio carbon dating of the Earth very difficult." and " Because the half life of C-14 (carbon 14) is under 6,000 years, it would be rather difficult to assume that you could go back 4 billion years considering the Earth is continually being bombarded by new carbon from other sources".
Would you like to put into true perspective the occurrence of meteor or other galactic collisions with planet earth? I hardly think that every several hundreds of millions of years between events warrant being called "constant". The percentage of added carbon contributed by such an event is also of questionable significant where a relative amount is not provided. Do you have data to shed light on this?
Why have you not explained the formation of C-14 isotope from cosmic radiation being absorbed by N-14 atoms? This is far and away the major source of this carbon isotope. Maybe the truth doesn't sit well with you argument...
I am glad to see that you mentioned nuclear explosions as contributing to C-14 in the atmosphere. You did state the amount of C-14 has varied in the past and this presents difficulties in carbon dating. This is why I mentioned that tree rings from living ancient trees plus fossilised wood has been used to provide an accurate baseline for carbon dating.
Your use of the term "decay at a constant(ish) rate" I can ascribe to providing an understanding to those who would not understand the term exponential and i have no genuine issue with.
Neither do I have no issue with you being technical. However, do not expect that this will confound me as I do have a good understanding of all the disciplines of science.
Blue
Would you like to put into true perspective the occurrence of meteor or other galactic collisions with planet earth? I hardly think that every several hundreds of millions of years between events warrant being called "constant". The percentage of added carbon contributed by such an event is also of questionable significant where a relative amount is not provided. Do you have data to shed light on this?
Why have you not explained the formation of C-14 isotope from cosmic radiation being absorbed by N-14 atoms? This is far and away the major source of this carbon isotope. Maybe the truth doesn't sit well with you argument...
I am glad to see that you mentioned nuclear explosions as contributing to C-14 in the atmosphere. You did state the amount of C-14 has varied in the past and this presents difficulties in carbon dating. This is why I mentioned that tree rings from living ancient trees plus fossilised wood has been used to provide an accurate baseline for carbon dating.
Your use of the term "decay at a constant(ish) rate" I can ascribe to providing an understanding to those who would not understand the term exponential and i have no genuine issue with.
Neither do I have no issue with you being technical. However, do not expect that this will confound me as I do have a good understanding of all the disciplines of science.
Blue
Last edited by a moderator:
vampstorso
Very Well-Known Member
ahhh Paul,
I love your threads, and posts...always give me a laugh haha,
even more so it makes me laugh when people don't get your humour and get all hurt about it hahaha
Piri is beautiful, but you knew that!
I love your threads, and posts...always give me a laugh haha,
even more so it makes me laugh when people don't get your humour and get all hurt about it hahaha
Piri is beautiful, but you knew that!
slim6y
Almost Legendary
Me thinks others don't share your sense of humour.... sigh....
Bluetongue... Bluetongue... Bluetongue... (thank god the magical for inventing copy and paste).
The making of C-14 in our atmosphere isn't and hasn't been constant....
Blah blah blah... Significance..... Blah blah blah... Uncertainty... Blah blah blah I'm ok with being right and others also....
Was also thinking - I better put this in here...
You're talking of very LARGE scale impacts, which are rare, but not totally exclusive, they occur at random times and have actually decreased significantly in the last 100 million years.
I'm going to be running late to class so forgive the very quick write up...
What you fail to address in your very statement is the fact that SMALL and very much off the radar collisions occur at a seemingly random amount DAILY!!! If not Hourly... If not minutely (that's the time, not the size), if not - every second....
It is not constant... Some days billions of tons, some days not... I'm sure in some cases the large impacts could have occurred as recently as 14,000 years ago... So it's not likely that it won't be still happening. But the fact that dust makes it into our atmosphere and can litter the ground with more carbon does suggest that every day we're shuffling.... in carbon!
PS - I hope you sung that last line....
Bluetongue... Bluetongue... Bluetongue... (thank god the magical for inventing copy and paste).
The making of C-14 in our atmosphere isn't and hasn't been constant....
Blah blah blah... Significance..... Blah blah blah... Uncertainty... Blah blah blah I'm ok with being right and others also....
Was also thinking - I better put this in here...
You're talking of very LARGE scale impacts, which are rare, but not totally exclusive, they occur at random times and have actually decreased significantly in the last 100 million years.
I'm going to be running late to class so forgive the very quick write up...
What you fail to address in your very statement is the fact that SMALL and very much off the radar collisions occur at a seemingly random amount DAILY!!! If not Hourly... If not minutely (that's the time, not the size), if not - every second....
It is not constant... Some days billions of tons, some days not... I'm sure in some cases the large impacts could have occurred as recently as 14,000 years ago... So it's not likely that it won't be still happening. But the fact that dust makes it into our atmosphere and can litter the ground with more carbon does suggest that every day we're shuffling.... in carbon!
PS - I hope you sung that last line....
Last edited:
slim6y
Almost Legendary
"It had already established (Milankovitch cycles) that 30,000 tons of cosmic dust fall on the Earth every year, unnoticed by us amid the general plethora of flying smuts (Phrase from the 60s not disguising the word as anything that it isn't)." (Malone, J 2001).
However, it is also been theorised that we pass through a particular band of cosmic dust every 100,000 years (or so). Most of the material will fall to the Earth because of the nature of the tilt or the orbit around the sun (there is an argument on which it is).
This isn't information I can critically quantify for not having done the physical research myself. I am merely relying on the evidence suggested by the real scientists who devote their entire life to this and then, the lecturers who told me that this was the case.
Without the use of the books I have at home, the internet, and the things I have heard, I could not have made the stuff up I told you.
So... Bluetongue... You're a wonderfully intelligent person who really loves science - and for that, you are wonderful. But you don't need to prove anyone wrong because you think you're more right.... Especially when the information I laid out here was in fact, correct.
Correct based on scientific evidence provided by scientific people with scientific brains that then divulge their information so we can continue to evolve....
However, it is also been theorised that we pass through a particular band of cosmic dust every 100,000 years (or so). Most of the material will fall to the Earth because of the nature of the tilt or the orbit around the sun (there is an argument on which it is).
This isn't information I can critically quantify for not having done the physical research myself. I am merely relying on the evidence suggested by the real scientists who devote their entire life to this and then, the lecturers who told me that this was the case.
Without the use of the books I have at home, the internet, and the things I have heard, I could not have made the stuff up I told you.
So... Bluetongue... You're a wonderfully intelligent person who really loves science - and for that, you are wonderful. But you don't need to prove anyone wrong because you think you're more right.... Especially when the information I laid out here was in fact, correct.
Correct based on scientific evidence provided by scientific people with scientific brains that then divulge their information so we can continue to evolve....
B
Bluetongue1
Guest
So you are saying that asteroids and meteoroids entering the earth's atmosphere are carrying carbon? Are you also saying carbon from these bodies is contributing to the C-14 in the atmosphere? Every 14000 years isn't continuous and are you implying that this impact had any effect, let alone significant effect on the C-14
I don't know where you are digging up your billions of tons per day and by the second impacts because they not supporter by astronomical observations. Have any idea what sort of a light show a billion tons a day would create in the atmosphere? Obviously not. You can pull these nonsense figures out of nowhere and impress others but the reality is, anyone who want to validate what you are saying is in for a rude shock.
Are you still insisting that the carbon made in the sun has ended up in earth?
If we go back to your original comment, what does the amount of C-14 in the atmosphere 4 billion years ago have to do with a radiometric technique that max's out at 60,000 years? Absolutely nothing.
The simple reality is that the C-14 level in the earth's atmosphere is not affected by carbon from outer space.
I am smiling. Are you?
I don't know where you are digging up your billions of tons per day and by the second impacts because they not supporter by astronomical observations. Have any idea what sort of a light show a billion tons a day would create in the atmosphere? Obviously not. You can pull these nonsense figures out of nowhere and impress others but the reality is, anyone who want to validate what you are saying is in for a rude shock.
Are you still insisting that the carbon made in the sun has ended up in earth?
If we go back to your original comment, what does the amount of C-14 in the atmosphere 4 billion years ago have to do with a radiometric technique that max's out at 60,000 years? Absolutely nothing.
The simple reality is that the C-14 level in the earth's atmosphere is not affected by carbon from outer space.
I am smiling. Are you?
P
-Peter
Guest
I'm still laughing at Bill Bryson be used to support an arguement. Intelligent guy, yes, funny, yes, travel writer and social commentator, yes. I call Clive James to the stand in support of my use of the term "ladies". No no, wait, Salman Rusdie, I call Salman Rushdie and, and Bono.
moosenoose
Legendary
An intellectual thread with a spelling mistake in the heading :lol: ....thank goodness it wasn't just a mere error in calculation
slim6y
Almost Legendary
An intellectual thread with a spelling mistake in the heading :lol: ....thank goodness it wasn't just a mere error in calculation
I tried to correct it after the error was discovered
Billions of tons - How big is a massive asteroid?
How much carbon is in a massive carbon-rich asteroid?
Has a massive asteroid ever hit the ground on Earth?
Has a massive carbon-rich asteroid ever hit the ground on Earth?
On average, there's 30,000 tons of carbon rich deposits from outer space hitting Earth each year. And every 100,000 years there's a spike as we pass through a carbon-rich dust....
I'm not making figures up.
Bill Bryson maybe a comedy writer - but his facts are backed with REFERENCES - laugh all you want....
I've already made it clear carbon-14 dating would NOT work to give us the age of the Earth but other forms of radio dating could.
Atmospheric carbon and ground carbon BOTH contribute to an animal and plant's carbon.
Again - you're not more right by showing off - you're just proving me right over and over again....
Last edited:
moosenoose
Legendary
I tried to correct it after the error was discovered
It's okay, I'll pretend I didn't see it
slim6y
Almost Legendary
It's okay, I'll pretend I didn't see it
I have fat fingers and the keys on my keyboard are too close together!!!
Still - doesn't change the carbon argument
B
Bluetongue1
Guest
Slim6y,
I seem to have been confused when I wrote my last post. There are sections of it that do not make sense to me as I read them now. Probably lack of sleep which has afflicted me of late. Nor have I given you credit for anything correct that you have said. For that I apologise. This really is not a discussion that should be conducted in his manner. I have made mistakes and not been willing to admit them for reasons that I shall not go into but they are not ego related. I would be comfortable to continue the discussion on a one to one basis but not on the forum. It should not be a contest to prove one another wrong but rather to improve the correctness of what has been stated where warranted.
You may be happy to leave it at that. Your decision.
Blue
I seem to have been confused when I wrote my last post. There are sections of it that do not make sense to me as I read them now. Probably lack of sleep which has afflicted me of late. Nor have I given you credit for anything correct that you have said. For that I apologise. This really is not a discussion that should be conducted in his manner. I have made mistakes and not been willing to admit them for reasons that I shall not go into but they are not ego related. I would be comfortable to continue the discussion on a one to one basis but not on the forum. It should not be a contest to prove one another wrong but rather to improve the correctness of what has been stated where warranted.
You may be happy to leave it at that. Your decision.
Blue
slim6y
Almost Legendary
Sorry to hear about your lack of sleep...
I've been working round the clock too... And blowing stuff up...
Got a nice wee vid of an experiment I did today:
[video=youtube_share;wSvDTHxg6kY]http://youtu.be/wSvDTHxg6kY[/video]
I always find when you're lacking sleep, or just generally need a lift up... Just blow some shi.... stuff up!!!
(Excuse the mess in the lab, but.... We've just had a building removed and my lab became a dumping ground. But on the plus side - the experiment worked well
Edit.... Shame you're not more local - I'd have a one to one with some short chain hydrocarbon drinking and no dog up me......
I've been working round the clock too... And blowing stuff up...
Got a nice wee vid of an experiment I did today:
[video=youtube_share;wSvDTHxg6kY]http://youtu.be/wSvDTHxg6kY[/video]
I always find when you're lacking sleep, or just generally need a lift up... Just blow some shi.... stuff up!!!
(Excuse the mess in the lab, but.... We've just had a building removed and my lab became a dumping ground. But on the plus side - the experiment worked well
Edit.... Shame you're not more local - I'd have a one to one with some short chain hydrocarbon drinking and no dog up me......
Last edited:
- Status
Similar threads
