Re: Scientific proof for an old earth

"Ian Chua" <ichua@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:1177696516.201118.272840@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
On Apr 27, 6:15 am, "Armin Held" <armin-h...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Again and again, the dating methods of the natural sciences are
criticized.
For this reason we want to present here a proof for the high age of the
earth which is independant of any dating method. It is due to Karl
Philberth
and accomplishes a dating of the elements of the earth's crust on the
basis
of the nuclide map alone.

It is based upon the fact that there are atoms which
disintegrate radioactively. A chemical element may exist in different
forms
with different weights. They are called isotopes, and some of them,
usually
the heavier ones of an element, are radioactive. Each of the radioactive
isotopes has a characteristic time interval, which is called 'radioactive
half-life', within which half of atoms decay. These radioactive
half-lives
can be different and are characteristic for every kind of isotope. They
are
virtually independent of external factors such as pressure and
temperature,
as well as the chemical compound, in which the atom may be bound.

Now, it is an incontestable fact that all possible 263 stable
and all 23 long-lived isotopes with a radioactive half-life of more than
500
million years exist in the earth's crust and can be traced. On the other
hand, the 39 isotopes with a radioactive half-life between 10,000 and 500
million years are completely absent (the only exeption are a few isotopes
which are constantly being produced until today, either as intermediate
products of the decay chains of the long-lived uranium-238 and
uranium-235,
or as products of cosmic-ray hits, such as carbon-14.)

There is only one possible explanation: so much time must
have
passed since the formation of the elements of the earth's crust that all
isotopes which are not long-lived disintegrated to such an extent that
they
can no longer be detected. This is the case after approximately thirteen
radioactive half-lives. The following table points out how many per cent
of
an isotope are left after 1, 2, 3 ... radioactive half-lives:

1 2 3 4 5 6
7
half-lives
50 25 13 6,3 3,1 1,6 0,8
% remaining

8 9 10 11 12 13
half-lives
0,4 0,2 0,1 0,05 0,02 0,01 %
remaining

On the other hand, for the long-lived isotopes, less than thirteen
half-lives must have passed, because they are still present in a
traceable
quantity. Since the detection limit coincides with a radioactive
half-life
of about 500 million years, one can estimate that the time of the general
formation of the elements must be approximately 13 x 500 million = 6.5
billion years ago.

One might postulate that during the emergence of the earth's
elements all 286 stable and long-lived isotopes were formed, but none of
the
39 isotopes with shorter half-lifes, or that they would later have
disappeared somehow. But, appart from the half-life, there is no
systematic
difference between the traceable and the missing isotopes, either in
their
physical structure of their atomic cores, and energy balance, or in their
chemical characteristics. Therefore, no reason can be found, why, on the
one
hand, all stable and long-lived isotopes exist until today, while, on the
other hand, all those with shorter half-lives are completely absent. The
only factor which distinguishes them is their radioactive half-life. A
coincidental probability for exactly this distribution is smaller than
one
in one quintillion!

The undeniable fact that all the isotopes with a radioactive half-life of
less than 500 million years can no longer be detected on earth, while all
the others still exist, can only be explained by an age of approximately
6.5
billion years for the chemical elements.

read more: http://www.urzeitundendzeit.de/creation_and_evolution.htm

Nope - 6.5 billion years is still too young - these elements had
existed
from time immemorial. They may appear to be only 6.5 billion years.


Elements, including both the radioactive isotopes and the stable isotopes,
have been created in stellar interiors and supernova explosions on a
continuous basis during the entire existence of the Universe. Hence 6.5
billion years is a sort of "canonical" figure for the order of magnitude of
the age of the Earth.

Certainly not from time immemorial; there is in fact evidence of a supernova
event adding to the composition of the solar system shortly before it
formed.

The figure is also an estimate or "ballpark" age.

--
Mike Dworetsky

(Remove pants sp*mbl*ck to reply)

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Scientific proof for an old earth
    ... They are called isotopes, and some of them, usually ... half-life', within which half of atoms decay. ... and all 23 long-lived isotopes with a radioactive half-life of more than 500 ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Scientific proof for an old earth
    ... They are called isotopes, and some of them, usually ... half-life', within which half of atoms decay. ... and all 23 long-lived isotopes with a radioactive half-life of more than 500 ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Scientific proof for an old earth
    ... earth which is independant of any dating method. ... They are called isotopes, and some of them, usually ... half-life', within which half of atoms decay. ... and all 23 long-lived isotopes with a radioactive half-life of more than 500 ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Scientific proof for an old earth
    ... earth which is independant of any dating method. ... They are called isotopes, and some of them, usually ... half-life', within which half of atoms decay. ... and all 23 long-lived isotopes with a radioactive half-life of more than 500 ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Scientific proof for an old earth
    ... earth which is independant of any dating method. ... They are called isotopes, and some of them, usually ... half-life', within which half of atoms decay. ... and all 23 long-lived isotopes with a radioactive half-life of more than 500 ...
    (talk.origins)
Loading