Carbon dating is a nice scientific methodology to arrive at dates of fossils, which are found now-and-then across the globe. This depends on the Carbon-14 isotope that accumulates in living things, as well as the later decay, with a half-life of about 5730 years. A neutron in C-14 "spontaneously" decays into a proton, giving out an electron and an electron anti-neutrino (which means it turns into a stable Nitrogen 14 atom).
Let us review the C-14 decay. Statistically, the confidence level, which depends on the type of testing, etc., is pretty good. For beta radiation based testing, it is within 2% of estimate, given about 4 hours of measurement for 10 grams of fossil. This gives ratio of C-14 atoms to the C-12 atoms in the fossil, which then gives estimate of age of the same. A gram of carbon containing 1 atom of carbon-14 per 10E12 atoms will emit 2 beta particles per 5 seconds (refer Wikipedia).
Actually, if we look into Wikipedia and check the life span of various particles, there are specific estimates of lifetime of neutrons, protons and electrons as well.
Given the half-life of C-14 being 5730 years, it is estimated that about 50% of them decay in that time period. In a fossil preserved for 5730 years, which has, say, 1x10E10 atoms of C-14, we can assume that it would have had 2x10E10 atoms 5730 years ago. When we dig deeper into the quantum level, the question then arises on "which" of the atoms decay, while which "live" longer? Of the 2x10E10, there is a regular decay of atoms, which seems to be quite consistent too, as claimed by Carbon dating process.
The rate of decay, being consistent, would also mean that within, say 575 years, some atoms would have decayed, the counts for which must be within the expected range of errors. After 1150 years some more. After 5730 years, we find that 1x10E10 have decayed. Some C-14 may decay after 57,300 years too.
(1) However, which atom(s) get to decay earlier and which atom(s) get to "live" as long as 53,000 years? Is there any coordination? What other factors are involved?
(2) How would the consistency of rate of decay be explained, while at same time the atoms are assumed to have no "intelligence, information, data-exchange", etc. (unless I have read wrong)? How could one atom decay after 575 years, while another lives for 57300 years (or longer) - and on what basis? If it is purely by chance, then consistency cannot be easily explained. If it is not by chance, what is the scientific process?
(3) If a scientific process cannot be attributed, then is there "coordination" of activities? Do atoms have "life" defined within it? Or is that controlled by an "elusive God"?
(4) If these are not acceptable, then is there a collective "consciousness"? Can there be individual consciousness, even at atomic level (which is the smallest level we observe, due to our own limitations and limitations of instruments we have developed)?
Diverging a bit, I would like to recall here a nice view of "dark times", in a speech by a descendant of a Punjabi immigrant in the USA. She said "the darkness may not be the darkness of death, but it could also be the darkness of the womb - before birth, before a new beginning".
(5) In the same line of thinking, should we consider the decay of the Neutron as its death? Or should we think of the birth of the proton and electron by division of the Neutron?
Some experts, with more knowledge on the science of decay, half-life, life of particles, may throw light to us common folks, who are stumped by basic questions when we look at the quantum level.
Let us review the C-14 decay. Statistically, the confidence level, which depends on the type of testing, etc., is pretty good. For beta radiation based testing, it is within 2% of estimate, given about 4 hours of measurement for 10 grams of fossil. This gives ratio of C-14 atoms to the C-12 atoms in the fossil, which then gives estimate of age of the same. A gram of carbon containing 1 atom of carbon-14 per 10E12 atoms will emit 2 beta particles per 5 seconds (refer Wikipedia).
Actually, if we look into Wikipedia and check the life span of various particles, there are specific estimates of lifetime of neutrons, protons and electrons as well.
| Here are some figures of "Mean Lifetime" from Wikipedia: | |
| Proton | More than 2.1×10E29 years |
| Electron | More than 6.6×10E28 years |
| Free Neutrons | 881.5±1.5 s (more than 14 minutes) |
| Muon | 2.197×10E−6 seconds (2.197 millionth of a second) |
| Tau particle | 2.9×10E−13 seconds (0.29 trillionth of a second) |
| W and Z Bosons | Halflife of 3×10E−25 seconds (0.3 trillionth trillionth of a second) |
Given the half-life of C-14 being 5730 years, it is estimated that about 50% of them decay in that time period. In a fossil preserved for 5730 years, which has, say, 1x10E10 atoms of C-14, we can assume that it would have had 2x10E10 atoms 5730 years ago. When we dig deeper into the quantum level, the question then arises on "which" of the atoms decay, while which "live" longer? Of the 2x10E10, there is a regular decay of atoms, which seems to be quite consistent too, as claimed by Carbon dating process.
The rate of decay, being consistent, would also mean that within, say 575 years, some atoms would have decayed, the counts for which must be within the expected range of errors. After 1150 years some more. After 5730 years, we find that 1x10E10 have decayed. Some C-14 may decay after 57,300 years too.
(1) However, which atom(s) get to decay earlier and which atom(s) get to "live" as long as 53,000 years? Is there any coordination? What other factors are involved?
(2) How would the consistency of rate of decay be explained, while at same time the atoms are assumed to have no "intelligence, information, data-exchange", etc. (unless I have read wrong)? How could one atom decay after 575 years, while another lives for 57300 years (or longer) - and on what basis? If it is purely by chance, then consistency cannot be easily explained. If it is not by chance, what is the scientific process?
(3) If a scientific process cannot be attributed, then is there "coordination" of activities? Do atoms have "life" defined within it? Or is that controlled by an "elusive God"?
(4) If these are not acceptable, then is there a collective "consciousness"? Can there be individual consciousness, even at atomic level (which is the smallest level we observe, due to our own limitations and limitations of instruments we have developed)?
Diverging a bit, I would like to recall here a nice view of "dark times", in a speech by a descendant of a Punjabi immigrant in the USA. She said "the darkness may not be the darkness of death, but it could also be the darkness of the womb - before birth, before a new beginning".
(5) In the same line of thinking, should we consider the decay of the Neutron as its death? Or should we think of the birth of the proton and electron by division of the Neutron?
Some experts, with more knowledge on the science of decay, half-life, life of particles, may throw light to us common folks, who are stumped by basic questions when we look at the quantum level.
No comments:
Post a Comment