What is radiometric dating and how does it work
Dating > What is radiometric dating and how does it work
Click here: ※ What is radiometric dating and how does it work ※ ♥ What is radiometric dating and how does it work
Using the basic ideas of bracketing and radiometric dating, researchers have determined the age of rock layers all over the world. Arndts R, Overn W. But caballeros like Albert Oppel hit upon the same principles at about about the same time or earlier. Only rarely does a creationist actually find an incorrect radiometric result Austin 1996; Rugg and Austin 1998 that has not already been revealed and discussed in the scientific literature. However, as we have met, it has survived their most ardent attacks. Late in 1904, Rutherford took the first step toward radiometric dating by suggesting that the released by radioactive decay could be trapped in a rocky material as atoms. It therefore assumes the reader has some familiarity with radiometric dating.
This dating is based on evidence from of material and is consistent with the radiometric ages of the oldest-known terrestrial and. Following the development of radiometric age-dating in the early 20th century, showed that some were in excess of a billion years old. The oldest such minerals analyzed to date—small crystals of from the of —are at least 4. It is hypothesised that the accretion of Earth began soon after the formation of the calcium-aluminium-rich inclusions and the meteorites. Because the exact amount of time this accretion process took is not yet known, and the predictions from different accretion models range from a few million up to about 100 million years, the exact age of Earth is difficult to determine. It is also difficult to determine the exact age of the on Earth, exposed at the surface, as they are of minerals of possibly different ages. Further information: Studies of , the layering of rocks and earth, gave an appreciation that Earth may have been through many changes during its existence. These layers often contained of unknown creatures, leading some to interpret a progression of organisms from layer to layer. His observations led him to formulate important concepts i. In the 1790s, hypothesized that if two layers of rock at widely differing locations contained similar fossils, then it was very plausible that the layers were the same age. William Smith's nephew and student, , later calculated by such means that Earth was about 96 million years old. In the mid-18th century, the naturalist suggested that Earth had been created separately from, and several hundred thousand years before, the rest of the universe. Lomonosov's ideas were mostly speculative. In 1779 the tried to obtain a value for the age of Earth using an experiment: He created a small globe that resembled Earth in composition and then measured its rate of cooling. This led him to estimate that Earth was about 75,000 years old. Other naturalists used these hypotheses to construct a , though their timelines were inexact as they did not know how long it took to lay down stratigraphic layers. In 1830, geologist , developing ideas found in 's works, popularized the concept that the features of Earth were in perpetual change, eroding and reforming continuously, and the rate of this change was roughly constant. He assumed that Earth had formed as a completely molten object, and determined the amount of time it would take for the near-surface to cool to its present temperature. His calculations did not account for via a process then unknown to science or, more significantly, inside the Earth, which allows more heat to escape from the interior to warm rocks near the surface. Even more constraining were Kelvin's estimates of the age of the Sun, which were based on estimates of its thermal output and a theory that the Sun obtains its energy from gravitational collapse; Kelvin estimated that the Sun is about 20 million years old. William Thomson Lord Kelvin Geologists such as had trouble accepting such a short age for Earth. For biologists, even 100 million years seemed much too short to be plausible. In theory of , the process of random heritable variation with cumulative requires great durations of time. According to modern biology, the total evolutionary history from the beginning of life to today has taken place since , the amount of time which passed since the of all living organisms as shown by geological dating. In a lecture in 1869, Darwin's great advocate, , attacked Thomson's calculations, suggesting they appeared precise in themselves but were based on faulty assumptions. The physicist in 1856 and astronomer in 1892 contributed their own calculations of 22 and 18 million years respectively to the debate: they independently calculated the amount of time it would take for the Sun to condense down to its current diameter and brightness from the nebula of gas and dust from which it was born. Their values were consistent with Thomson's calculations. However, they assumed that the Sun was only glowing from the heat of its. The process of solar was not yet known to science. He calculated the amount of time it would have taken for to give Earth its current 24-hour day. His value of 56 million years added additional evidence that Thomson was on the right track. In 1899 and 1900, calculated the rate at which the oceans should have accumulated from processes, and determined that the oceans were about 80 to 100 million years old. Main article: Overview By their chemical nature, contain certain and not others; but in rocks containing radioactive isotopes, the process of generates exotic elements over time. By measuring the of the stable end product of the decay, coupled with knowledge of the and initial concentration of the decaying element, the age of the rock can be calculated. Typical radioactive end products are from decay of -40, and from decay of and. If the rock becomes molten, as happens in Earth's , such nonradioactive end products typically escape or are redistributed. Thus the age of the oldest terrestrial rock gives a minimum for the age of Earth, assuming that no rock has been intact for longer than the Earth itself. Convective mantle and radioactivity In 1892, Thomson had been made in appreciation of his many scientific accomplishments. Kelvin calculated the age of the Earth by using , and he arrived at an estimate of about 100 million years. He did not realize that the Earth was convecting, and this invalidated his estimate. In 1895, produced an age-of-Earth estimate of 2 to 3 billion years using a model of a convective mantle and thin crust. Kelvin stuck by his estimate of 100 million years, and later reduced it to about 20 million years. The discovery of introduced another factor in the calculation. After 's initial discovery in 1896, and discovered the radioactive elements and in 1898; and in 1903, Pierre Curie and announced that radium produces enough heat to melt its own weight in ice in less than an hour. Geologists quickly realized that this upset the assumptions underlying most calculations of the age of Earth. These had assumed that the original heat of the Earth and Sun had dissipated steadily into space, but radioactive decay meant that this heat had been continually replenished. George Darwin and John Joly were the first to point this out, in 1903. Invention of radiometric dating Ernest Rutherford in 1908. In radioactive decay, an element breaks down into another, lighter element, releasing alpha, beta, or in the process. They also determined that a particular isotope of a radioactive element decays into another element at a distinctive rate. Some radioactive materials have short half-lives; some have long half-lives. This suggested that it might be possible to measure the age of Earth by determining the relative proportions of radioactive materials in geological samples. The pioneers of radioactivity were chemist and the energetic Rutherford. Boltwood had conducted studies of radioactive materials as a consultant, and when Rutherford lectured at Yale in 1904, Boltwood was inspired to describe the relationships between elements in various decay series. Late in 1904, Rutherford took the first step toward radiometric dating by suggesting that the released by radioactive decay could be trapped in a rocky material as atoms. At the time, Rutherford was only guessing at the relationship between alpha particles and helium atoms, but he would prove the connection four years later. Soddy and had just determined the rate at which radium produces alpha particles, and Rutherford proposed that he could determine the age of a rock sample by measuring its concentration of helium. He dated a rock in his possession to an age of 40 million years by this technique. Rutherford wrote, I came into the room, which was half dark, and presently spotted Lord Kelvin in the audience and realized that I was in trouble at the last part of my speech dealing with the age of the Earth, where my views conflicted with his. To my relief, Kelvin fell fast asleep, but as I came to the important point, I saw the old bird sit up, open an eye, and cock a baleful glance at me! That prophetic utterance refers to what we are now considering tonight, radium! Rutherford assumed that the rate of decay of radium as determined by Ramsay and Soddy was accurate, and that helium did not escape from the sample over time. Rutherford's scheme was inaccurate, but it was a useful first step. Boltwood focused on the end products of decay series. In 1905, he suggested that was the final stable product of the decay of radium. It was already known that radium was an intermediate product of the decay of uranium. Rutherford joined in, outlining a decay process in which radium emitted five alpha particles through various intermediate products to end up with lead, and speculated that the radium-lead decay chain could be used to date rock samples. Boltwood did the legwork, and by the end of 1905 had provided dates for 26 separate rock samples, ranging from 92 to 570 million years. He did not publish these results, which was fortunate because they were flawed by measurement errors and poor estimates of the half-life of radium. Boltwood refined his work and finally published the results in 1907. Boltwood's paper pointed out that samples taken from comparable layers of strata had similar lead-to-uranium ratios, and that samples from older layers had a higher proportion of lead, except where there was evidence that lead had out of the sample. His studies were flawed by the fact that the decay series of thorium was not understood, which led to incorrect results for samples that contained both uranium and thorium. However, his calculations were far more accurate than any that had been performed to that time. Refinements in the technique would later give ages for Boltwood's 26 samples of 410 million to 2. Arthur Holmes establishes radiometric dating Although Boltwood published his paper in a prominent geological journal, the geological community had little interest in radioactivity. Rutherford remained mildly curious about the issue of the age of Earth but did little work on it. However, Strutt's student became interested in radiometric dating and continued to work on it after everyone else had given up. Holmes focused on lead dating, because he regarded the helium method as unpromising. He performed measurements on rock samples and concluded in 1911 that the oldest a sample from Ceylon was about 1. These calculations were not particularly trustworthy. For example, he assumed that the samples had contained only uranium and no lead when they were formed. More important research was published in 1913. In that same year, other research was published establishing the rules for radioactive decay, allowing more precise identification of decay series. Many geologists felt these new discoveries made radiometric dating so complicated as to be worthless. His work was generally ignored until the 1920s, though in 1917 , a professor of geology at Yale, redrew geological history as it was understood at the time to conform to Holmes's findings in radiometric dating. Barrell's research determined that the layers of strata had not all been laid down at the same rate, and so current rates of geological change could not be used to provide accurate timelines of the history of Earth. Holmes published The Age of the Earth, an Introduction to Geological Ideas in 1927 in which he presented a range of 1. No great push to embrace radiometric dating followed, however, and the die-hards in the geological community stubbornly resisted. They had never cared for attempts by physicists to intrude in their domain, and had successfully ignored them so far. The growing weight of evidence finally tilted the balance in 1931, when the of the US decided to resolve the question of the age of Earth by appointing a committee to investigate. Holmes, being one of the few people on Earth who was trained in radiometric dating techniques, was a committee member, and in fact wrote most of the final report. Thus, Arthur Holmes' report concluded that radioactive dating was the only reliable means of pinning down geological time scales. Questions of bias were deflected by the great and exacting detail of the report. It described the methods used, the care with which measurements were made, and their error bars and limitations. Techniques for radioactive dating have been tested and fine-tuned on an ongoing basis since the 1960s. Forty or so different dating techniques have been utilized to date, working on a wide variety of materials. Dates for the same sample using these different techniques are in very close agreement on the age of the material. Lead isotope isochron diagram showing data used by Patterson to determine the age of the Earth in 1956. The quoted age of Earth is derived, in part, from the Canyon Diablo meteorite for several important reasons and is built upon a modern understanding of cosmochemistry built up over decades of research. Most geological samples from Earth are unable to give a direct date of the formation of Earth from the solar nebula because Earth has undergone differentiation into the core, mantle, and crust, and this has then undergone a long history of mixing and unmixing of these sample reservoirs by , and. All of these processes may adversely affect isotopic dating mechanisms because the sample cannot always be assumed to have remained as a closed system, by which it is meant that either the parent or daughter a species of atom characterised by the number of neutrons and protons an atom contains or an intermediate daughter nuclide may have been partially removed from the sample, which will skew the resulting isotopic date. To mitigate this effect it is usual to date several minerals in the same sample, to provide an. Alternatively, more than one dating system may be used on a sample to check the date. Some meteorites are furthermore considered to represent the primitive material from which the accreting solar disk was formed. Some have behaved as closed systems for some isotopic systems soon after the solar disk and the planets formed. Nevertheless, ancient lead of have been used to date the formation of Earth as these represent the earliest formed lead-only minerals on the planet and record the earliest homogeneous lead-lead isotope systems on the planet. These have returned age dates of 4. Statistics for several meteorites that have undergone isochron dating are as follows: 1. Severin ordinary chondrite 1. Juvinas basaltic achondrite 1. Allende carbonaceous chondrite 1. Ar-Ar age spectrum 4. Ar-Ar age spectrum 4. Ar-Ar age spectrum 4. The meteorite was used because it is both large and representative of a particularly rare type of meteorite that contains minerals particularly , FeS , metallic - alloys, plus silicate minerals. This is important because the presence of the three mineral phases allows investigation of isotopic dates using samples that provide a great separation in concentrations between parent and daughter nuclides. This is particularly true of uranium and lead. Lead is strongly and is found in the sulfide at a much greater concentration than in the silicate, versus uranium. Because of this segregation in the parent and daughter nuclides during the formation of the meteorite, this allowed a much more precise date of the formation of the solar disk and hence the planets than ever before. Fragment of the Canyon Diablo iron meteorite. The age determined from the Canyon Diablo meteorite has been confirmed by hundreds of other age determinations, from both terrestrial samples and other meteorites. The meteorite samples, however, show a spread from 4. This is interpreted as the duration of formation of the solar nebula and its collapse into the solar disk to form the Sun and the planets. This 50 million year time span allows for accretion of the planets from the original solar dust and meteorites. The moon, as another extraterrestrial body that has not undergone plate tectonics and that has no atmosphere, provides quite precise age dates from the samples returned from the Apollo missions. Rocks returned from the Moon have been dated at a maximum of 4. Lunar samples, since they have not been disturbed by weathering, plate tectonics or material moved by organisms, can also provide dating by direct examination of tracks. The accumulation of dislocations generated by high energy cosmic ray particle impacts provides another confirmation of the isotopic dates. Altogether, the concordance of age dates of both the earliest terrestrial lead reservoirs and all other reservoirs within the Solar System found to date are used to support the fact that Earth and the rest of the Solar System formed at around 4. Special Publications, Geological Society of London. Special Publications, Geological Society of London. University of Chicago Press. American Journal of Science. For the abstract, see: Chemical Abstracts Service, American Chemical Society 1907. New York, London: American Chemical Society. The Outcrop, Geology Alumni Newsletter. PDF from the original on 2009-02-26. Australian Journal of Earth Sciences. Oxford University Press US. Archived from on 24 November 2008. Geological Society, London, Special Publications. University of Chicago Press. PDF from the original on 2010-07-02. Radioactivity and Geology: An Account of the Influence of Radioactive Energy on Terrestrial History 1st ed. Reprinted by BookSurge Publishing 2004. London: Charles Scribner's Sons. Reprinted by Juniper Grove 2007. Rutherford: Being the life and letters of the Rt. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta. PDF from the original on 2010-06-21. Conference Proceedings, Origin of the Earth and Moon. Houston, Texas: Lunar and Planetary Institute. PDF from the original on 16 December 2008. Stanford University Press: 147, 169. Proceedings, Eleventh Annual V. Hot Springs, Virginia: Lunar and Planetary Institute. PDF from the original on 16 December 2008. Multimethod radiometric age for a bentonite near the top of the Baculites reesidei Zone of southwestern Saskatchewan Campanian-Maastrichtian stage boundary? Canadian Journal of Earth Sciences, v. A radiometric age for the Cretaceous-Tertiary boundary based on K-Ar, Rb-Sr, and U-Pb ages of bentonites from Alberta, Saskatchewan, and Montana. Canadian Journal of Earth Sciences, v. Stratigraphy, sedimentology, and vertebrate paleontology of the Judith River Formation Campanian near Muddy Lake, west-central Saskatchewan. Bulletin of Canadian Petroleum Geology, v. The first radiometric ages from the Judith River Formation Upper Cretaceous , Hill County, Montana. Canadian Journal of Earth Sciences, v. A Triassic, Jurassic and Cretaceous time scale. Society of Economic Paleontologists and Mineralogists, Special Publication No. A Geologic Time Scale: 1982 edition. Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, 131p. A Geologic Time Scale, 1989 edition. Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, p. Relative age inference in paleontology. A Cretaceous time scale. Evolution of the Western Interior Basin. Geological Association of Canada, Special Paper 39, p. The Decade of North American Geology 1983 Geologic Time Scale.
Last updated
