• New TOR Mirror: suicidffbey666ur5gspccbcw2zc7yoat34wbybqa3b
    oei6bysflbvqd.onion

  • Hey Guest,

    If you want to donate, we have a thread with updated donation options here at this link: About Donations

Darkover

Darkover

Illuminated
Jul 29, 2021
3,934
Living cells continuously rebuild themselves, by taking in food and putting out waste. A lot of the atoms in that cycle are carbon atoms, which is the main component of sugars and pretty much all proteins that make living cells work.

Now, the interesting thing is there are several different kinds of carbon. An atom consists of a cloud of electrons orbiting a nucleus made up of protons and neutrons. The number of protons determines what element it is - carbon has 6 protons, hydrogen has 1 proton, oxygen has 8 protons, etc. The number of electrons is usually the same as the number of protons. But the number of neutrons can vary, and this affects how stable the atom is. Most carbon atoms have 6 protons and 6 neutrons, and they're called "carbon-12", or C-12, because they have 12 protons and neutrons total. But there are also small amounts of C-14 in nature - carbon with 6 protons and 8 neutrons, 14 total. C-14 is also carbon and behaves like normal C-12 as far as life chemistry is concerned, but those extra neutrons don't like to be there. Because of that, in every second there's a small chance that a C-14 nucleus will spontaneously decay into a nitrogen-14 nucleus by transforming one of the neutrons into a proton. Even though the decay happens at a random point in time for each individual atom, for large numbers of atoms the decay becomes very predictable: in about 5730 years, about half of the C-14 atoms in any given sample will have decayed.

Now remember that living organisms continuously replace their atoms. So in any living organism, the fraction of its carbon atoms that are C-14 will be about the same as the amount of C-14 in nature, which is about 1 in 1 trillion atoms. That might not sound like much, but 12 grams of carbon is about 6000 trillion trillion atoms, so there'd still be about 6000 trillion C-14 atoms in those 12 grams.

But once an organism dies it no longer keeps replacing its atoms, so the composition of atoms it had when it died is preserved. Combine this with the above decay phenomenon, and you'll see that over thousands of years the fraction of C-14 in the organism will decrease because the C-14 decays. So if you find a fossil where about 1 in 2 trillion carbon atoms are C-14, that organism probably died about 5700 years ago. If it's 1 in 4 trillion that's about 12,000 years, and if it's 1 in 256 trillion that's about 46,000 years.

That's also why carbon dating only works on (previously) living things, and only on somewhat long but not too long time scales. You can't measure the C-14 fraction with absolute precision, and that measurement error gets magnified the farther back you go. But you also can't use carbon dating on an organism that died last week or a few decades ago, because that time is too short to make out a difference in the C-14 fraction with any certainty.
 
  • Informative
  • Like
Reactions: AbusedInnocent, Forever Sleep and Alexei_Kirillov
Alexei_Kirillov

Alexei_Kirillov

Missed my appointment with Death
Mar 9, 2024
628
So if I'm understanding correctly, the reason why you can't use carbon dating on relatively recent organisms is because the fraction of C-14 will seem the same as before death, since not enough of them have decayed yet?
 
Havnis

Havnis

XXXX'ed out 🌲🌲🌲🌲
May 15, 2024
167
So if I'm understanding correctly, the reason why you can't use carbon dating on relatively recent organisms is because the fraction of C-14 will seem the same as before death, since not enough of them have decayed yet?
Yes

n=(no) ⋅e^ (−λt) ; λ=0.0001209 per year for C-14
n number of remaining C-14
no initial number of C-14
For no=100

C-14 has half time of 5730 years, meaning for any giving amount of C-14, it takes 5730 years for decay of half the amount.

Screenshot 20240526 061424 Brave
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: AbusedInnocent and Alexei_Kirillov
Dr Iron Arc

Dr Iron Arc

Into the Unknown
Feb 10, 2020
19,892
I don't know if I could ever consider dating Carbon. I mean they would also need to at least have some hydrogen, oxygen, and some other vital elements as well mixed in with all the carbon…
 
  • Yay!
Reactions: Havnis, Alexei_Kirillov, derpyderpins and 2 others

Similar threads

F
Replies
17
Views
1K
Suicide Discussion
Into-the-abyss
I
soulkitty
Replies
13
Views
780
Recovery
jar-baby
jar-baby
DarkRange55
Replies
2
Views
354
Offtopic
Pluto
Pluto