Radioactive dating

[Aijalon]

Radioactivity now exists. I have not seen proof it existed in the early history of earth. Has anyone else found proof or evidence for that? As it stands....I doubt it!

Radioactivity surely existed. The question about dating is the assumptions that are made about the amount of decayed isotope in the material before the dating is conducted.

First, the assumption is that all the matter in the universe started in an undecayed state. Yet, we have no proof that the universe contained only undecayed material at its beginning.

Secondly, the time of decay is predicated on the notion that the speed of light was constant, or, that the speed at which the universe aged was constant. However, cosmologists don't know what is the maximum speed at the fabric of space can expand, and, in this light (no pun intended) the speed of matter going across the universe was traveling much greater than the speed of light since the universe was compressed. In other words, the speed of light should be pro rated to account for the fact that the universe and all matter in was compressed into a small space.

As the universe expands, the light is stretched along with it, and this actually alters the calculations of the "constant" speed of light (which is not a factor included in the dating of materials).

 

[dad]

The speed of light in a vacuum is constant.

So is the suction power of a Hover vacuum cleaner...on earth!

 

[dad]

Quite hard question. And I don't think you would get ANY to-the-point reply.

What kind of thing we can look for which may indicate early radioactive decay? In a sense, this question simply preclude the use of decay constant in an argument. Without the decay constant, what else left in the radioactive function?

I think this question is unanswerable.

Well then, so much for dates based on assuming there was!

 

[dad]

Does it matter?

Ha. Hilarious. Now you hedge your bets. Of course it matters. Every rung on a ladder matters. They are selling a ladder here. They had to tuck it miles under because the thing was not eroded away...they HAD to have an explanation, so they cooked one up.

Where it happened is immaterial when the point is that it happened. The isotopes tell a story of prehistoric radiation.

Story indeed. You need many miracles and imaginary ages and no God to make it happen. The reaction likely happened, but not in this nature. No need for magic rivers and magic elevators rides miles under and back up, or now missing isotopes you claim once must have existed, or etc etc.

 

[dad]

The core of the sun is a giant nuclear fusion reactor, and the sun gives off a ton of radiation. It's one of the biggest, if not the biggest dangerous to astronauts.

Irrelevant. leaving aside you are really clueless what the core really is, of course there is radiation now on and near earth.

 

[dad]

noah was in the ark, and lots of cosmic stuff sceincetish will never explain has happened on this earth and with eyewitnessed and recorded history .

A wooden boat would not protect life from such a big change as you mentioned.

because scientish they don't want to know how the sun and cosmic events might change the environment. they can't or won't find those laws because they don't want to.
they have to have a constant lie to have a long age of the earth.
the problem is they don't ask the questions to learn the laws of a Living universe.
with bigger laws than their little minds can wrap around.
I mean these are the people who believe mammoths lived near the ice.. rotf!

Work on the parody attempt thingie by the way...pretty lame.

 

[Chicken Little]

and Gobekli tepe is proof God did exactly what he said .. then he had an event after that that buried it ,and to think he did a miracle just for you .

 

[dad]

Radioactivity surely existed.

I guess so, you just made a statement what more could we ask for?

The question about dating is the assumptions that are made about the amount of decayed isotope in the material before the dating is conducted.

No. The question is about isotopes that happen to now be in a state of decay, and which some think came to exist because of this. A simple nature change that affecyed already existing isotopes would account for them also.

First, the assumption is that all the matter in the universe started in an undecayed state. Yet, we have no proof that the universe contained only undecayed material at its beginning.

? Who claims this...source?

Secondly, the time of decay is predicated on the notion that the speed of light was constant, or, that the speed at which the universe aged was constant. However, cosmologists don't know what is the maximum speed at the fabric of space can expand, and, in this light (no pun intended) the speed of matter going across the universe was traveling much greater than the speed of light since the universe was compressed. In other words, the speed of light should be pro rated to account for the fact that the universe and all matter in was compressed into a small space.

Nice try, but don't quit your day job.

As the universe expands, the light is stretched along with it, and this actually alters the calculations of the "constant" speed of light (which is not a factor included in the dating of materials).

The redshifted light could be something other than what we are assuming it is. Be careful about claiming an expanding universe based on that, or have you something else?

 

[dad]

and Gobekli tepe is proof God did exactly what he said .. then he had an event after that that buried it ,and to think he did a miracle just for you .

Let us ponder your words of wisdom. Maybe give us a few months?

 

[Chicken Little]

nah it won't help..

 

[SnowyMacie]

Irrelevant. leaving aside you are really clueless what the core really is, of course there is radiation now on and near earth.

It's entirely relevant, the sun's radiation reaches Earth and thus radiaton has always been on Earth.

 

[dad]

It's entirely relevant, the sun's radiation reaches Earth and thus radiaton has always been on Earth.

Absurd. That is like saying an apple falls, therefore it was falling for 2 billion years. The only way the sun could radiate earth long ago in the same way as now is if the state was the same. We cannot just look at someone getting a tan now and conclude the rays always werethe same.

 

[SnowyMacie]

Absurd. That is like saying an apple falls, therefore it was falling for 2 billion years. The only way the sun could radiate earth long ago in the same way as now is if the state was the same. We cannot just look at someone getting a tan now and conclude the rays always werethe same.

The state of the sun is the same, it hasn't really changed states in about 4 billion years. It's level of activity has varied, but it's been the same state for as long as Earth has been going around it.

 

[dad]

The state of the sun is the same, it hasn't really changed states in about 4 billion years. It's level of activity has varied, but it's been the same state for as long as Earth has been going around it.

You know this...how? get a grip man.

 

[Strathos]

I tried radioactive dating once.

My lips are still glowing after the kiss goodnight.

 

[crjmurray]

I tried radioactive dating once.

My lips are still glowing after the kiss goodnight.

 

[Zosimus]

The state of the sun is the same, it hasn't really changed states in about 4 billion years. It's level of activity has varied, but it's been the same state for as long as Earth has been going around it.

Speculation.

 

[SnowyMacie]

You know this...how? get a grip man.

That's how stars work, we can see this by observing other stars in the universe, our sun is not an exception. Plus, the Earth is about 4 billion years old, and we can tell from rocks and ice about past climate and solar activity that reached other.

 

[SnowyMacie]

Speculation.

Not really, this is pretty basic astronomy.

 

[dad]

That's how stars work, we can see this by observing other stars in the universe, our sun is not an exception. Plus, the Earth is about 4 billion years old, and we can tell from rocks and ice about past climate and solar activity that reached other.

False. You cannot tell ages from rocks, you just assume it took ages in this nature to make rocks. Stars work this way...you do not know. Period. You do not know what else is out there we can't detect. You do not know where they came from. You do not know how far or how big. Etc.