Radiometric method for dating volcanic deposits

I think one of the most frequent misconceptions is how we know the relative amounts of parent/daughter isotopes when a rock or crystal is formed.I'm not an expert in geochemistry, but I'd love if someone could go into better detail here.Wikipedia link: This technique is NOT superior to old techniques because it doesn't have much in the way of mass resolving power (in their online supplement you can see significant interferences from other peaks on the peaks they care about).This instrument achieves one of about ~1,000 and to do U-Pb dating well in zircon you need ~4,000.First off all I'm going to editorialize: This new paper is incredibly sensationalist and does not show any real issues with U-Pb dating in zircon (nor are the claimed effects real).

radiometric method for dating volcanic deposits-40radiometric method for dating volcanic deposits-73radiometric method for dating volcanic deposits-54radiometric method for dating volcanic deposits-39

How does this new technique work and is it superior?

Where does the carbon 14 in living tissue come from? It's always seemed to me that there should be no reason the ratios of carbon 14 to carbon 12 should be any different in living organisms than in the environment and the carbon 14 in the environment should decay at the same rate.

The primary natural source of carbon-14 on Earth is cosmic ray action upon nitrogen in the atmosphere, and it is therefore a cosmogenic nuclide.

After all, textbooks, media, and museums glibly present ages of millions of years as fact.

Yet few people know how radiometric dating works or bother to ask what assumptions drive the conclusions. This figure wasn’t established by radiometric dating of the earth itself. Radiohalos shouldn’t exist, according to conventional wisdom!

Leave a Reply