The AMDF is a c 3 non-profit, publicly supported organization. Contributions are tax deductible to the extent allowed by law. Radiocarbon dating depends on several assumptions. One is that the thing being dated is organic in origin. Radiocarbon dating does not work on anything inorganic, like rocks or fossils. Only things that once were alive and now are important:twoThe second assumption is that the organism in question got its carbon from the atmosphere. A third is that the thing has remained closed to C14 since the carbon from which it was created died.
Index fossils are found in rock layers. And these rocks get Gafford, B. Neal Tate, Dean of the Robert B. SociologyAugust33 pp. This study was designed to examine the attitudes of undergraduate students toward interracial dating. The study examined the influence of race, gender, and previous interracial dating experience on interracial dating attitudes. - mcauctionservicellc.com variable of racial identity salience was also examined.
A final sample consisted of students, recruited from first year political science classes at the University of North Texas. An 11item self administered questionnaire was used to collect the data. A weak association was also found between greater racial identity salience and less positive interracial dating Dating - An Issue of Personal Choice First there was the passing notes, hand holding and name-calling of middle school.
What do you want to be accomplishing in these prime dating years? More importantly, is that what you are accomplishing?
How Does Radiometric Dating Work? - Ars Technica
On the contrary, there is a quite a range of opinions on the subject with marriage incorporated into a number of them. Marriage is not a frivolous topic. Consequently its precursor, datingalso bears significance.
One might also think that college students, being in the midst of their Teenage dating in GenX The fast pace world with globalization being the bottomline agenda for every organization. Continuous change along with integration of new technology and new innovations being carried out by the NASA gaining importance in the market. With new high end technology like ipads, tablets,iphones etc, more portable and easy interactive interface.
Access through different online portals such as facebook, orkut etc to different locations of people, having numerous connections to be made.
When we think of the generation pased by we think of arrange marriages, casual relations among your own relatives or with your extended family not beyond that. Arranged marriages being carried out on the consent of both the families involved.
Interaction of boy and a girl as a brother and a sister, further the interaction with your concerned husband choosen by your parents.
Mar 07, 9. Extend your thinking: The slow decay of radioactive materials can be used to find the age of rocks, fossils, and archaeological artifacts. In a process called radiometric dating, scientists measure the proportions of radioactive atoms and daughter atoms in an object to determine its age. Radiometric dating is a very accurate way to date the age of an object if the object was in a closed system. Also if the number of parent and daughter isotopes are known from its creation. However it is very difficult for an object to be in an isolated system for many years. It is also impossible to know the. Simply stated, radiometric dating is a way of determining the age of a sample of material using the decay rates of radio-active nuclides to provide a 'clock.'. It relies on three basic rules, plus a couple of critical assumptions. The rules are the same in all cases; the assumptions are different for each method.
Girls were not allowed to go outside their house for work and they were told to not talk to men outside their families. You have been given full freedom to talk, to room around with your brothers and sisters.
And also given you access to internet sites for your references used in college studies. Nowdays, teenage students of age Sign Up. Sign In. Sign Up Sign In. Home Essays Relative and Radiometric The series for U looks like this:.
A indicates alpha decay; B indicates beta decay. We can calculate the half-lives of all of these elements.
All the intermediate nuclides between U and Pb are highly unstable, with short half-lives. Then any excess of Pb must be the result of the decay of U When we know how much excess Pb there is, and we know the current quantity of U, we can calculate how long the U in our sample has been decaying, and therefore how long ago the rock formed. Th and U also give rise to radioactive series - different series from that of U, containing different nuclides and ending in different nuclides of lead.
Chemists can apply similar techniques to all three, resulting in three different dates for the same rock sample. Uranium and thorium have similar chemical behavior, so all three of these nuclides frequently occur in the same ores. If all three dates agree within the margin of error, the date can be accepted as confirmed beyond a reasonable doubt. Since all three of these nuclides have substantially different half-lives, for all three to agree indicates the technique being used is sound.
But even so, radioactive-series dating could be open to question.
And radiometric dating essay share your opinion
The rock being dated must remain a closed system with respect to uranium, thorium, and their daughter nuclides for the method to work properly. Both the uranium and thorium series include nuclides of radon, an inert gas that can migrate through rock fairly easily even in the few days it lasts.
To have a radiometric dating method that is unquestionably accurate, we need a radioactive nuclide for which we can get absolutely reliable measurements of the original quantity and the current quantity. Is there any such nuclide to be found in nature? The answer is yes. Which brings us to the third method of radiometric dating.
Method 3: Potassium-Argon Dating. The element potassium has three nuclides, K39, K40, and K Only K40 is radioactive; the other two are stable. K40 is unusual among radioactive nuclides in that it can break down two different ways. It can emit a beta particle to become Ca40 calciumor it can absorb an electron to become Ar40 argon Argon is a very special element.
Argon is a gas at Earth-normal temperatures, and in any state it exists only as single atoms. By contrast, potassium and calcium are two of the most active elements in nature.
Sep 04, Radiometric dating is the method used to determine the age of material. Rocks for example are made up of elements and some of these elements are unstable and will decay to form a different element over time, this is called radiometric decay. Scientists use a spectrometer to determine the amount of each parent and daughter isotope in the material.
They both form compounds readily and hold onto other atoms tenaciously. What does this mean? It means that before a mineral crystallizes, argon can escape from it easily. It also means that when an atom of argon forms from an atom of potassium inside the mineral, the argon is trapped in the mineral.
So any Ar40 we find deep inside a rock sample must be there as a result of K40 decay. That and some simple calculations produce a figure for how long the K40 has been decaying in our rock sample. What happens if our mineral sample has not remained a closed system? What if argon has escaped from the mineral? What if argon has found its way into the mineral from some other source?
If some of the radiogenic argon has escaped, then more K40 must have decayed than we think - enough to produce what we did find plus what escaped. In other words, a mineral that has lost argon will be older than the result we get says it is.
Opinion radiometric dating essay above
In the other direction, if excess argon has gotten into the mineral, it will be younger than the result we get says it is. An isochron dating method isochron dating is described in the next section can also be applied to potassium-argon dating under certain very specific circumstances.
When isochron dating can be used, the result is a much more accurate date.
Radiometric dating is a method of determining the approximate age of an artifact by measuring the amount of radioactive decay that has occurred. Radiometric dating is mostly used to determine the age of rocks, though a particular form of radiometric dating-called Radiocarbon dating -can date wood, cloth, skeletons, and other organic material. Radiometric Dating: The Assumptions of Scientists Words | 3 Pages. learned rocks and fossils could be used as timepieces, to tell the age of Earth. Radiometric dating is common method, often relied on by the world, which uses rocks to tell the age of Earth and its materials. Second Essay RADIOMETRIC DATING. Radiocarbon dating depends on several assumptions. One is that the thing being dated is organic in origin. Radiocarbon dating does not work on anything inorganic, like rocks or fossils.
Method 4: Rubidium-Strontium Dating. Yet a fourth method, rubidium-strontium dating, is even better than potassium-argon dating for old rocks.
The nuclide rubidium Rb87 decays to strontium Sr87 with a half-life of 47 billion years. Strontium occurs naturally as a mixture of several nuclides. If three minerals form at the same time in different regions of a magma chamber, they will have identical ratios of the different strontium nuclides. The total amount of strontium might be different in the different minerals, but the ratios will be the same. Now, suppose that one mineral has a lot of Rb87, another has very little, and the third has an in-between amount.
That means that when the minerals crystallize there is a fixed ratio of RbSr As time goes on, atoms of Rb87 decay to Sr, resulting in a change in the RbSr87 ratio, and also in a change in the ratio of Sr87 to other nuclides of strontium.
The decrease in the RbSr87 ratio is exactly matched by the gain of Sr87 in the strontium-nuclide ratio. It has to be - the two sides of the equation must balance.
Sorry, that radiometric dating essay speaking, would
If we plot the change in the two ratios for these three minerals, the resulting graph comes out as a straight line with an ascending slope. This line is called an isochron. When every one of four or five different minerals from the same igneous formation matches the isochron perfectly, it can safely be said that the isochron is correct beyond a reasonable doubt.
There are numerous other radiometric dating methods: the samarium-neodymium, lutetium-hafnium, rhenium-osmium, and lead isochron methods just to name a few.
A full cite for this book is given in the bibliography. Now, why is all this relevant to the creation-vs. Every method of radiometric dating ever used points to an ancient age for the Earth. For creationists to destroy the old-Earth theory, they must destroy the credibility of radiometric dating. They have two ways to do this. They can criticize the science that radiometric dating is based on, or they can claim sloppy technique and experimental error in the laboratory analyses of radioactivity levels and nuclide ratios.
Option 1: Criticize the Theory. Is there any way to criticize the theory of radiometric dating? Well, look back at the axioms of radiometric dating methods. Are any of those open to question. Answer: yes, two of them are. Or at least, they seem to be.
Do we know, for a fact, that half-lives are constant axiom 1? Do we know for a fact that nuclide ratios are constant axiom 2? However, if all we had were theoretical reasons for believing axiom 1, we would be right to be suspicious of it. Do we have observational evidence? On several occasions, astronomers have been able to analyze the radiation produced by supernovas. In a supernova, the vast amount of energy released creates every known nuclide via atomic fusion and fission.
Some of these nuclides are radioactive. We can also detect the characteristic radiation signatures of radioactive decay in those nuclides. We can use that information to calculate the half-lives of those nuclides.
In every case where this has been done, the measured radiation intensity and the calculated half-life of the nuclide from the supernova matches extremely well with measurements of that nuclide made here on Earth. And when we look at a supernova in the Andromeda Galaxy, 2, years old, we see nuclides with the exact same half-lives as we see here on Earth.
Not just one or two nuclides, but many. For these measurements to all be consistently wrong in exactly the same way, most scientists feel, is beyond the realm of possibility.
What about nuclide ratios? Are they indeed constant? The chemical behavior of an element depends on its size and the number of electrons in its outer shell. This is the foundation of the periodic table of the elements, a basic part of chemistry that has stood without challenge for a hundred and fifty years. The shell structure depends only on the number of electrons the nuclide has, which is the same as the number of protons in its nucleus.
K39 is chemically identical to K40; the only way we can distinguish between them is to use a nonchemical technique like mass spectrometry. Water molecules containing oxygen are lighter and therefore evaporate faster than water molecules with oxygen However, as far as is known such fractionation occurs only with light nuclides: oxygen, hydrogen, carbon. Sr86 atoms and Sr87 atoms behave identically when they bond with other atoms to form a mineral molecule.
If there are ten Sr86 atoms for every Sr87 atom in the original magma melt, there will be ten Sr86 atoms for every Sr87 atom in the minerals that crystallize from that melt. Option 2: Criticize the Techniques. The only other possible source of error is in laboratory technique. To translate theory into useful measurements, the lab procedures must be accurate. A contaminated rock sample is useless for dating. A sample that is taken from the surface, where atoms could get in and out easily, is also useless.
Samples must be taken by coring, from deep within a rock mass. To date a rock, chemists must break it down into its component elements using any of several methods, then analyze nuclide ratios using a mass spectrometer. But we can try to minimize error. And when we do, the dates produced can be accepted as accurate. When samples taken from different parts of a given igneous rock formation are dated by different people at different labs over many years, the possibility that all those measurements could be wrong is vanishingly small.
Some may well be wrong. If nine analyses agree, and a tenth produces radically different results, the odd-man-out is usually considered a result of some kind of error and discarded.
And some radiometric techniques have a much better success ratio than that. Creationist objections to radiometric dating techniques basically fall into three categories:.
The assumptions that are used in radiometric dating techniques are perfectly justified given current physics. Creationist geologist John Woodmorappe is the best known of the creationists who attempt this approach. Based on this, he claims that radiometric dating methods don't produce consistent results, that geologists conceal radiometric dates which don't match what's expected, and that therefore the whole methodology of radiometric dating is worthless.
In an article for the creationist journal Creation Science Research QuarterlyWoodmorappe listed odd aberrant dates, and claimed that there are many, many more. What he did not say is that those were winnowed out of tens of thousands of radiometric dates which do give more reasonable results.
But if we run dating tests on 10, samples and get aberrant results 3. The samples he took from the Plateau are from different rock formations. For any type of radiometric dating to work properly, all samples must come from the same formation. But we have more than that. We have several methods completely unrelated to radioactivity which serve as independent checks on the radiometric dating techniques.
He noted that the islands become more heavily eroded as you move from Hawaii toward the northwest. He interpreted this to mean that the islands become older as you move northwest along the chain. The islands do indeed become older as you move northwest.
Opinion radiometric dating essay the
And the degree of erosion corresponds roughly with the radiometric dates. No island in the chain is dated as being significantly older than the erosion rate implies, nor is any island in the chain dated as being significantly younger than the erosion rate indicates.
Both modern corals and fossil corals deposit daily and annual growth bands. By careful analysis of these bands, we can tell how many days there were in a year when the coral was growing. For modern corals, this technique yields day-bands per year, more or less, just as it should.
For corals that grew in formations identified as Early Devonian, the technique shows a little over day-bands per year. Assuming the rate of slowing has remained constant, a day-count of days per year indicates an age of roughly million years. And when Early Devonian rocks are dated radiometricallywe get dates of roughly million years.
Radiometric dating essay
Yet another cross-check on radiometric dating is provided by plate tectonics. There are several ways of measuring this movement that themselves have nothing to do with radiometric dating. The plate that forms the Pacific Ocean basin is moving northwest at at a known rate. The Pacific Plate is moving; the hot spot remains fixed; and the result is a series of volcanic islands growing upward over the hot spot.
Between Hawaii and Midway Island km northwest of Hawaii are some thirty volcanoes, active and extinct. Many of these volcanoes have had lava flows dated by the potassium-argon method. In all these cases, the radiometric date agrees substantially with the date derived from extrapolation of plate motion. Particularly striking is the correlation for Midway Island itself. By drift rate it should be about 27 million years old. By K- Ar dating, the volcanic rock that forms Midway's core is Two other island chains that are located over Pacific Plate hot spots show substantially similar patterns of motion to the Hawaiian Islands.
And their radiometric dates match as well. Three independent methods of dating these islands, and they all agree within acceptable ranges of error. What are the chances of all three being wrong in such ways as to produce the same wrong answer?