The number 14 of the process carbon 14 dating
The number 14 of the process carbon 14 dating - mature datinguk com
One of these assumptions is that nuclear decay rates have always been constant.Although C decays fairly quickly, heavier isotopes (such as uranium-238) decay much more slowly.
(We could “round up” the value of 0.0007 p MC at 17 half-lives to 0.001 p MC, but the 0.00038 p MC at 18 half-lives is definitely below the detection threshold.) Since each half-life is 5,730 years, this means that no C has even been detected in diamonds, which some scientists claim are billions of years old!When today’s rates are used to calculate ages from certain radioisotope ratios, the results indicate that billions of years’ worth of nuclear decay of the heavier radioisotopes has occurred.But there is evidence that this decay occurred in accelerated “spurts,” Why the High Radiocarbon Age Estimates?Yet this assumption leads to a contradiction: If these organic samples really are many millions of years old, then they should be radiocarbon “dead.” But they aren’t! Evolutionists have attempted to blame these surprising results on a number of mechanisms. Furthermore, laboratories take great pains to keep contamination to a minimum, and researchers have found that, provided a sufficiently large testing sample is used (in the ballpark of 100 milligrams or so), the amount of such possible lab contamination is negligible compared to the C already present within the specimen.Finally, although contamination can sometimes occur, it should not be assumed in a particular instance unless there are good reasons to believe that it has.Could this be a clue that radioisotope “clocks” might have “ticked” at different rates in the past, and that this variation in “ticking” is different for different radioisotopes?
If so, this would explain the discrepancy between the radiocarbon method and other radioisotope techniques.
If the scientist did not realize that the pre-Flood C/C ratio was hundreds of times smaller than today’s value, he would calculate the animal’s age to be approximately 9 × 5,730 years = 51,570 years old—even though it had just died!
Of course, he would realize that this age was nonsense, because he saw the fresh carcass.
And 4,500 years is less than one radiocarbon half-life, so from Figure 2 we might expect 4,500-year-old samples to have C found within organic samples thought to date from the time of the Flood is generally only about 0.1 to 0.5 p MC.
From Figure 1, a value of 0.098 ≈ 0.1 p MC corresponds to 10 half-lives, or about 57,000 years.
Smallest Detectable Amount of Radiocarbon Sensitive instruments called acceleration mass spectrometers (AMS) are used to count the C/C ratio in a sample drops below 0.001 p MC?