On Sep 25, 2007, at 12:17 PM, Christine Smith wrote:
> C-14 should be practically non-existent in any rock
> older than about 100,000 years old...however, because
> uranium and other radioactive materials give off
> neutrons, and because C-14 is formed by nitrogren
> capturing a neutron, C-14 can be formed at low levels
> in rocks secondarily, thus creating a (relatively
> constant?) "background" concentration?? (I read this
> explanation at a debate forum discussing
> creationism...)
Yes, this can be significant due to the large cross-section of N14 for
thermal neutron capture. The amount of C14 created in this way depends
on the amount of nitrogen and the nearness to radioactive deposits.
Here's a reference:
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/c14.html
This would probably affect coal more than diamond, though diamond can
also contain nitrogen inclusions so could also be affected.
BTW, one of the few YEC's who understands C14 and AMS is Gerald
Aardsma, who got his PhD under Ted Litherland at the U. of Toronto AMS
laboratory. He has pointed out that some of his fellow YEC's erroneous
fossil fuel dating claims are due to misinterpretation of the data:
http://www.biblicalchronologist.org/answers/c14_results.php
Kirk
To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Tue Sep 25 21:14:52 2007
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Tue Sep 25 2007 - 21:14:52 EDT