|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
Member (Idle past 1431 days) Posts: 20714 From: the other end of the sidewalk Joined: |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Peanut Gallery for Great debate: radiocarbon dating, Mindspawn and Coyote/RAZD | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Coyote Member (Idle past 2132 days) Posts: 6117 Joined:
|
Here's a significantly better article, by one of our very own posters:
RATE’s Radiocarbon: Intrinsic or Contamination? by Kirk Bertsche RATE’s Radiocarbon: Intrinsic or Contamination?Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge. Belief gets in the way of learning--Robert A. Heinlein How can I possibly put a new idea into your heads, if I do not first remove your delusions?--Robert A. Heinlein It's not what we don't know that hurts, it's what we know that ain't so--Will Rogers If I am entitled to something, someone else is obliged to pay--Jerry Pournelle If a religion's teachings are true, then it should have nothing to fear from science...--dwise1
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Pressie Member Posts: 2103 From: Pretoria, SA Joined: |
mindspawn mentioned the name and I'm trying to figure out who or what he is. From what I can get on the net, it seems as if he's Douglas Keenan.
From what I can gather, it seems as if he's a climate change denier who writes a lot. Nothing about his qualifications. Then he writes a lot about dendrochronology. Lots of blogs, etc. Could anyone actually tell us what his qualifications are and who he is?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Pressie Member Posts: 2103 From: Pretoria, SA Joined: |
Thanks Coyote.
Anyone who tries to show that Dr Bertsche is wrong on carbon dating must either have volumes full of contrary evidence; or be very, very foolish. I think I do know in which one of those categories Dr Pitman MD could be included. Edited by Pressie, : Spelling
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Pollux Member Posts: 303 Joined:
|
The last time I was at the seaside, the tide came in and went out twice a day with a bigger variation between high and low than between spring and neap high tide. But leaving that aside, MS wants enough salt to enter the lake to stop the diatoms growing, then to clear back to fresh to allow growth, and this to happen on a two week cycle. Any salt water that did get in would layer at the bottom or the lake and not affect the upper areas for the main diatom growth anyway. This is not clutching at straws; it is blindly grasping at rainbows!
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Pollux Member Posts: 303 Joined: |
Sean Pitman is an ardent YEC Seventh-day Adventist. He has a website called educate truth and seems to feel he has a mission to keep all SDAs faithful to YEC.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Pressie Member Posts: 2103 From: Pretoria, SA Joined: |
To me the concept is ridiculously funny, but it can have tragic results.
At school (in our country that normally goes till you're 18, Grade 12) one of my classmates was raised as an True Christian (PTY LTD) . Known in the US as True Christian (TM). SDA. Not even allowed to drink Coca Cola at home. After school he went to Uni, got brilliant grades, but the cognitive dissonance got too much for him. He killed himself after 3 years. Gassed himself in his car. Reality contradicted his beliefs. With tragic results for him and his family. Edited by Pressie, : Changed sentence
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
JonF Member (Idle past 194 days) Posts: 6174 Joined: |
A Slice Through Time - Dendrochronology and Precision Dating.
Again the .DOCX is much more accurate OCR, but the PDF has the original images. I'm pretty sure a couple of the dates are the wrong numbers but I haven't found them.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Percy Member Posts: 22492 From: New Hampshire Joined: Member Rating: 4.9 |
NoNukes writes: I think you are missing the point. Fusion rates are affected by magnetic fields. I didn't say they weren't.
I cannot think of any good reason to conduct fission experiments in a strong magnetic field, but I would not expect fission rates to be affected. Well, I wouldn't myself expect that fission rates would be completely unaffected by sufficiently strong magnetic fields, but that's not what we're talking about. We're talking about what one would expect were Mindspawn's claim true, that strong magnetic fields blocking off the solar wind result in a 10x increase in decay rates. I'm arguing that were it true then the effect would have shown up in fusion experiments already conducted. And you're arguing they wouldn't. And as I've tried to point out a couple times, this discussion has little meaning because we're arguing about something that Mindspawn made up. Obviously I'm no expert on nuclear science. I'm not familiar with things like the "energy per nucleon curve for the elements." I'm just arguing from a few basic principles, so that being said let me try to explain again by responding to this:
Yes, Percy, it generally is the case that in hydrogen fusion reactors no fission occurs. Hydrogen of course cannot fission, and tritium, deuterium, and helium would all require energy rather than release energy if they were to fission. Helium 4 in particular has a very low neutron absorption cross section. When Helium 3 absorbs a neutron it becomes He4 which is extremely stable. Essentially no fission takes place in the sun. You're describing an idealized process. Any sufficiently energetic particle (in plentiful supply during fusion) striking an atomic nucleus will split it. That's what fission is. Are you perhaps thinking of self-sustaining fission? --Percy
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
NoNukes Inactive Member |
Well, I wouldn't myself expect that fission rates would be completely unaffected by sufficiently strong magnetic fields, but that's not what we're talking about. Interesting. What mechanism do you think would allow magnetism to have an effect on fission rates? Notice that neutrons are not deflected by magnetic fields and uranium atoms are essentially stationary.
We're talking about what one would expect were Mindspawn's claim true, that strong magnetic fields blocking off the solar wind result in a 10x increase in decay rates. We both agree that such a thing is not plausible. The best argument against the claim is that no such shielding effect has been noticed when decay rates are measured in high magnetic fields. I also provided an alternate argument which mindspawn could use to get around that problem. What I am objecting to here is your particular line of reasoning, namely that some effect, like for instance magnetism, should have a similar effects on decay rates, fusion and fission. In response I pointed out that magnetism as a huge effect on fusion, and a near zero effect on fission and decay rates. In passing I have also objected to your belief in decay particle fission chain reactions. Chain reactions with alpha particles, no less. It is of historical significance that such things do not work! When Einstein originally spoke about his equation E=mc2, he expressed the idea that the equation was not of huge significance with regards to making bombs because he could not think of a way to make a chain reaction. It was only after a colleague told Einstein about his experiments neutrons that Einstein became alarmed. Einstein's alarm resulted in his writing to the US president about his fears that German scientists were working on neutron chain reactions. To Einstein's dismay the result of his warning was the creation of the Manhattan project and the nuking of Nagasaki and Hiroshima. No nukes. Really. That's what Einstein wanted, but his actions created the opposite result.
Obviously I'm no expert on nuclear science. I'm not familiar with things like the "energy per nucleon curve for the elements." Then perhaps your knowledge is not sufficient to produce the correct answer to the question of which nuclear reactions are feasible and which are not. I'm not an expert, but I know some nuclear physics. Added by edit. Link to binding energy per nucleon curve is below. schoolphysics ::Welcome:: ----------------------------------------------
Any sufficiently energetic particle (in plentiful supply during fusion) striking an atomic nucleus will split it. Is the parenthetical in your above statement correct? Is there a plentiful supply of sufficiently energetic neutrons? No. You made two claims. You don't mention the first one in your last post, but I'll address both here anyway 'cause I'm verbose like that. First you said that decay particles could cause a chain reaction. My response is that decay particles from say U238 or Th230 do not have sufficient energy to strike other U238 or Th230 nuclei. U238 decay like most other alpha decays produces alpha particles of a singular energy. There are no random high energy particles of higher energy. That fixed energy is related to the reason that decay rates are essentially constant. That energy is about 5 Mev in the case of U238 which is insufficient for the task you give it. So in the case of decay, your parenthetical is not met. With regard to fusion producing neutrons. You claim that neutrons are in abundance during fusion, but what is the basis for your claim? Yes there are neutrons on the sun, but did you know that the Hydrogen-Hydrogen reaction chain that produces a fusion of hydrogen to helium-4 does not release any free neutrons at any step? I'm not saying that no neutrons are produced on the sun, but perhaps my statement will give you something to think about. Secondly, the question of whether the neutrons have sufficient energy is exactly the problem that you acknowledge that you cannot address using your current level of knowledge of nuclear physics. The answer is that experimental fusion reactors on earth barely reach temperatures to allow a few hydrogen atoms to fuse, and those energies do not allow fissioning helium which would be an endothermic rather than exothermic reaction. So yeah, if you put some heavy atoms into a fusion chamber you might see some fission if in fact there are actually any significant amounts of neutrons (which ain't guaranteed). But who does that? Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given. Edited by NoNukes, : Add link to graphUnder a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846) I believe that a scientist looking at nonscientific problems is just as dumb as the next guy.Richard P. Feynman If there is no struggle, there is no progress. Those who profess to favor freedom, and deprecate agitation, are men who want crops without plowing up the ground, they want rain without thunder and lightning. Frederick Douglass
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
shalamabobbi Member (Idle past 2875 days) Posts: 397 Joined:
|
Man you guys are engaged in massive overkill for mindspawn whose issues with science are more to do with psychological problems than anything else but I guess it's fun.
(See Additional experimental evidence for a solar influence on nuclear decay rates, which is the technical paper that is the subject of the Purdue article referenced by Mindspawn, New system could predict solar flares, give advance warning). quote: see last post by bcrowellYesterday's Nuclear Decay Related to Today's Flare | Physics Forums Edited by shalamabobbi, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
NoNukes Inactive Member |
Man you guys are engaged in massive overkill for mindspawn who's issues with science are more to do with psychological problems than anything else but I guess it's fun. I'll admit to finding it difficult to resist a good back and forth about physics.
quote: You mean you cannot actually detect solar flares from earth before they even happen using a mysterious, unknown effect? Who knew? Fischbach applied for US and EPO patents on his solar flare detection. His US Patent was granted despite the examiner's belief that the invention did not work. But of course a patent on an invention that does not work is meaningless anyway. The EPO did not find the granting of a US Patent the least bit persuasive. They completely dismissed the idea that neutrinos were the cause of the phenomenon (for good reason) and were not amused by the fact that Fischbach could not (or at least did not) describe how to analyze decay rate data to identify solar flare predictions when he filed his application.Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846) I believe that a scientist looking at nonscientific problems is just as dumb as the next guy.Richard P. Feynman If there is no struggle, there is no progress. Those who profess to favor freedom, and deprecate agitation, are men who want crops without plowing up the ground, they want rain without thunder and lightning. Frederick Douglass
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Percy Member Posts: 22492 From: New Hampshire Joined: Member Rating: 4.9 |
Hi NoNukes,
It would take more time than I have to separate your information from your misinformation. I'm not questioning your nuclear information, but you keep assigning me claims I've never made, earlier about uranium fission about which I chose not to comment, and now about chain reactions with alpha particles:
NoNukes writes: In passing I have also objected to your belief in decay particle fission chain reactions. Chain reactions with alpha particles, no less. It is of historical significance that such things do not work! I'm not going to try to sort out this and all the rest of it. If you think Mindspawn's made up effect wouldn't show up in fusion experiments if it really existed, fine. I don't care. --Percy
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Percy Member Posts: 22492 From: New Hampshire Joined: Member Rating: 4.9 |
shalamabobbi writes: Man you guys are engaged in massive overkill for mindspawn whose issues with science are more to do with psychological problems than anything else but I guess it's fun. Actually I see this more the way you do. NoNukes has got me in his crosshairs because he's certain that Mindspawn's fictional effect couldn't affect fusion experiments. The effect is made up - we may as well be arguing about how many leprechauns are involved. --Percy
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
NoNukes Inactive Member |
I'm not questioning your nuclear information, but you keep assigning me claims I've never made, earlier about uranium fission about which I chose not to comment, and now about chain reactions with alpha particles: Really Percy? Surely you know me better than that.
Percy writes: Each decay of an atomic nuclei emits particles which go on to collide with other nuclei, in turn causing them to split and emit particles which go on to collide with other nuclei, and so on ad infinitum. Percy, did you not write the above in Message 212 ? Given that you said 'every' decay emits particles, was there some I should not have applied your statement to alpha decay? Was my choice of alpha decay somehow special? Could you defend your position better using another decay particle? Do beta decay particles cause fission? And what claim did I assign to you regarding U238 fission. Haven't I talked only about U238 decay? Are you confusing fission with decay? Perhaps you did not say what you meant to say. Perhaps you meant to describe a non-spontaneous fission chain reaction. But that is not what you did describe.
Percy writes: NoNukes has got me in his crosshairs because he's certain that Mindspawn's fictional effect couldn't affect fusion experiments. Given that the effect is fictional, I am not certain of any such thing, nor have I expressed any such claim. I've been pretty clear about the issue I have with your argument.
It would take more time than I have to separate your information from your misinformation. I don't believe I've posted misinformation. But I'm not perfect and I may well have made some errors even though I don't see any that you've pointed out. And perhaps I did press to hard. I keep forgetting how unusual it is for someone to admit to any mistake.Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846) I believe that a scientist looking at nonscientific problems is just as dumb as the next guy.Richard P. Feynman If there is no struggle, there is no progress. Those who profess to favor freedom, and deprecate agitation, are men who want crops without plowing up the ground, they want rain without thunder and lightning. Frederick Douglass
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Pollux Member Posts: 303 Joined:
|
That is very sad. I was YEC for years but wondered why the scientists were so sure of long ages. I was able to study the evidence and go where it led. (Thank you RAZD) I see many YEC that have the view of scientists that they are seeing just what they want to see and/or are ignoring contrary results and/or are led by Satan. The few that I have been able to present any evidence to just retreat to saying they will believe the Bible.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024