Carbon dating problem Sexy teen wabecam 2013
Most likely, the effect will be dependent on the age.
I would think that the older the sample, the larger the overestimate.
As I have stated previously, we just don’t know a lot about radioactive decay.
Well, diffusion depends on the mass of the thing that is diffusing. Hayes has brought it up, we can take it into account, right?Sr-86 diffuses more quickly than Sr-87, and that has never been taken into account when isochrons are analyzed. Perhaps, but it’s rather tricky, because the rate of diffusion depends on the specific chemical and physical environment of each individual rock.If the effects of diffusion can be taken into account, it will require an elaborate model that will most certainly require elaborate assumptions. Hayes suggests a couple of other approaches that might work, but its not clear how well. If you believe the earth is very old, then most likely, all of the radioactive dates based on isochrons are probably overestimates. I have no idea, and I don’t think anyone else does, either. Hayes’s model indicates it could add as much as 29 billion years to ages determined with rubidium and strontium, although his model is rather simplistic.This newly-pointed-out flaw in the isochron method is a stark reminder of that.A good isochron was supposed to be rock-solid evidence (pun intended) that the radioactive date is reliable. I suspect that this flaw is not the last one that will be uncovered.