HOURGLASS OF THE ROCKS
Ecclesiastes 1:10
“Is there any thing whereof it may be said, See, this is new? it hath been already of old time, which was before us.”
Evolutionary geologists find ages for rocks, using a method known as radiometric dating. For example, uranium-lead dating relies on the change of uranium into lead. The rate at which uranium changes into lead is not linear, but can nevertheless be measured. This value is called the half-life. If we know the half-life of uranium, and the amount of lead that there was in the rock, when it was formed, then we can calculate the age of the rock, assuming that no lead has been added to or taken out of the rock.
Imagine an hourglass. Sand is flowing from the top to the bottom. You could measure how much sand was in the top of the hourglass, and also how much in the lower part. Finally, you would measure the rate at which sand flows from top to bottom. You might think you could use these values to calculate how long the hourglass had been going, but you would be wrong. This is because you do not know if all the sand started in the top, or if the glass was shaken at some time, making the sand go through faster. In the same way, geologists assume that an igneous rock was formed without any lead in it, but it is impossible to know this. They also assume that the half-life of uranium has never changed. But we now have considerable evidence to suggest that the half-life changed rapidly in the past.
There is, however, a fully reliable method of dating the Earth. This involves using the dates found in the Bible, yielding an age of just over 6,000 years.
Help us, Lord, to weigh everything we know against the truth of Scripture. Thank You for Your word, Lord. We pray that it might guide us into truth. Amen.
Ref: Humphreys, R. (et al), Radioactivity and the Age of the Earth, (ICR). Image: Adobe Stock image, licensed to author.
Ecclesiastes 1:10
“Is there any thing whereof it may be said, See, this is new? it hath been already of old time, which was before us.”
Evolutionary geologists find ages for rocks, using a method known as radiometric dating. For example, uranium-lead dating relies on the change of uranium into lead. The rate at which uranium changes into lead is not linear, but can nevertheless be measured. This value is called the half-life. If we know the half-life of uranium, and the amount of lead that there was in the rock, when it was formed, then we can calculate the age of the rock, assuming that no lead has been added to or taken out of the rock.
Imagine an hourglass. Sand is flowing from the top to the bottom. You could measure how much sand was in the top of the hourglass, and also how much in the lower part. Finally, you would measure the rate at which sand flows from top to bottom. You might think you could use these values to calculate how long the hourglass had been going, but you would be wrong. This is because you do not know if all the sand started in the top, or if the glass was shaken at some time, making the sand go through faster. In the same way, geologists assume that an igneous rock was formed without any lead in it, but it is impossible to know this. They also assume that the half-life of uranium has never changed. But we now have considerable evidence to suggest that the half-life changed rapidly in the past.
There is, however, a fully reliable method of dating the Earth. This involves using the dates found in the Bible, yielding an age of just over 6,000 years.
Help us, Lord, to weigh everything we know against the truth of Scripture. Thank You for Your word, Lord. We pray that it might guide us into truth. Amen.
Ref: Humphreys, R. (et al), Radioactivity and the Age of the Earth, (ICR). Image: Adobe Stock image, licensed to author.
AGING STARS
Genesis 1:16b
“…he made the stars also.”
Today, I want to talk about aging stars. But I am not referring to your favorite movie icon of yesteryear. Instead, I am talking about stars in the universe.
How old is a star? And how can we tell?
Big Bang cosmologists refer to the ages of stars in billions of years. One recent science article talked about a star, which they said was so old that it was formed just after the Big Bang itself. The article, published in 2014, gives the age of the universe as 13.7 billion years old. I used to teach physics and chemistry in public high schools in Britain, until 1999. In the textbook, which I used at that time, the age of the universe was given as 12.3 billion years. This age was repeated in a subsequent edition of the book, in 2001. So, in the 13 years from 2001 to 2014, the universe got 1.4 billion years older, which is an increase of 11.3%. How could such a large margin of error be introduced, with so little comment? Could it be that the star to which I referred could be measured more accurately, pushing back the age of the universe?
It turns out that the age of the star is actually measured relative to the dating of the Big Bang. In the case of this particular star, they examine its chemistry (by studying its spectrum), and fit its age with whatever chemistry they think may have been available at the time. Such guesswork is not needed, when we realize that God has already given us reliable and intelligible dates for when creation events happened, in His word.
we thank You and praise You that Your word is true. Help us to submit to what You say, rather than following blindly after the will of the world. Amen.
Genesis 1:16b
“…he made the stars also.”
Today, I want to talk about aging stars. But I am not referring to your favorite movie icon of yesteryear. Instead, I am talking about stars in the universe.
How old is a star? And how can we tell?
Big Bang cosmologists refer to the ages of stars in billions of years. One recent science article talked about a star, which they said was so old that it was formed just after the Big Bang itself. The article, published in 2014, gives the age of the universe as 13.7 billion years old. I used to teach physics and chemistry in public high schools in Britain, until 1999. In the textbook, which I used at that time, the age of the universe was given as 12.3 billion years. This age was repeated in a subsequent edition of the book, in 2001. So, in the 13 years from 2001 to 2014, the universe got 1.4 billion years older, which is an increase of 11.3%. How could such a large margin of error be introduced, with so little comment? Could it be that the star to which I referred could be measured more accurately, pushing back the age of the universe?
It turns out that the age of the star is actually measured relative to the dating of the Big Bang. In the case of this particular star, they examine its chemistry (by studying its spectrum), and fit its age with whatever chemistry they think may have been available at the time. Such guesswork is not needed, when we realize that God has already given us reliable and intelligible dates for when creation events happened, in His word.
we thank You and praise You that Your word is true. Help us to submit to what You say, rather than following blindly after the will of the world. Amen.
FASTER URANIUM DECAY
Ecclesiastes 1:10
�Is there any thing whereof it may be said, See, this is new? it hath been already of old time, which was before us.�
In two previous Creation Moments, I have described how radiometric dating works, and how uranium changes into lead. We found that, for every atom of uranium that decays, eight atoms of helium are made. If a rock contained no lead when it was formed, then all the lead must have been made from uranium, and there would be 8 times as many helium atoms as lead atoms.
Mica crystals, containing uranium and lead, were examined. The amount of helium in the crystal was measured. Then the amount of helium that there should be was found. The difference between the mass of helium calculated, and the mass of helium at the end of the experiment, shows how much helium has escaped. If the age of the crystal were known, we could calculate the escape age.
Unfortunately, we do not know the age of the crystals. However, the crystals have two possible ages�an evolutionary age of 1.5 billion years, and a creationist age. The amount of helium that has escaped, or diffused, is divided first by 1.5 billion, then by 6,000 years�the creationist age. Both ages are plotted on a graph, along with other plots from other crystals. Finally, some independent experimental results were obtained for helium diffusion by deliberately heating other crystals.
The results of these experiments, when plotted on to a graph, fit with the creationist long-age rates, and not with the evolutionary model.
Thank You, Lord, for scientists, carrying out real science experiments. Thank You that we can expect scientific observations to be consistent with biblical truth. Thank You for pointing us to the truth of Your world. Amen.
Ref: Humphreys, R. (et al), Radioactivity and the Age of the Earth, (ICR). Image: Adobe Stock Photos, licensed to author.
Ecclesiastes 1:10
�Is there any thing whereof it may be said, See, this is new? it hath been already of old time, which was before us.�
In two previous Creation Moments, I have described how radiometric dating works, and how uranium changes into lead. We found that, for every atom of uranium that decays, eight atoms of helium are made. If a rock contained no lead when it was formed, then all the lead must have been made from uranium, and there would be 8 times as many helium atoms as lead atoms.
Mica crystals, containing uranium and lead, were examined. The amount of helium in the crystal was measured. Then the amount of helium that there should be was found. The difference between the mass of helium calculated, and the mass of helium at the end of the experiment, shows how much helium has escaped. If the age of the crystal were known, we could calculate the escape age.
Unfortunately, we do not know the age of the crystals. However, the crystals have two possible ages�an evolutionary age of 1.5 billion years, and a creationist age. The amount of helium that has escaped, or diffused, is divided first by 1.5 billion, then by 6,000 years�the creationist age. Both ages are plotted on a graph, along with other plots from other crystals. Finally, some independent experimental results were obtained for helium diffusion by deliberately heating other crystals.
The results of these experiments, when plotted on to a graph, fit with the creationist long-age rates, and not with the evolutionary model.
Thank You, Lord, for scientists, carrying out real science experiments. Thank You that we can expect scientific observations to be consistent with biblical truth. Thank You for pointing us to the truth of Your world. Amen.
Ref: Humphreys, R. (et al), Radioactivity and the Age of the Earth, (ICR). Image: Adobe Stock Photos, licensed to author.
URANIUM HALF-LIFE AND DECAY
Micah 5:2
�But thou, Bethlehem Ephratah, though thou be little among the thousands of Judah, yet out of thee shall he come forth unto me that is to be ruler in Israel; whose goings forth have been from of old, from everlasting.�
The half-life is a value which gives an indication of the rate of decay of radioactive isotopes. Radioactive decay occurs in an exponential, rather than linear way. Suppose an isotope, which we will call X, has a half-life of 1 year. If we have 32lb of X today, then in a year, we will have just 16lb � half of 32. In another year, however, we will lose only 8lb more�half of 16. The year after that, there will be 4lb left, and so on.
The term half-life is misleading. Half-life is a notional number, showing how long it would take for half a given radioactive material to decay. When we say that uranium-238 has a half-life of 4,500 million years, this figure is not a problem for creationists. We simply mean that uranium is decaying at a rate, whereby half of it would not decay until 1,500 million years had passed.
Uranium-238 decays into stable lead-206 by a 14 step process. Eight of these steps involves the release of an alpha particle, which is the nucleus of a helium atom. So, every atom of uranium that turns into lead will also yield 8 atoms of helium. An igneous rock should, therefore, contain 8 helium atoms for every one lead atom. Of course, it doesn�t. Helium can escape into the atmosphere. But this means that we can calculate the speed at which helium can leave radioactive rocks. Measuring this speed reveals that uranium must actually have decayed very much faster in the past than it does today.
We thank You, Lord, that You know all things. You are not taken in by human technology today. No true science can or will oppose Your word�though for a season, people sometimes think that they have disproved Your word. Help us to stand strong for You, and to believe all that You have told us. Amen.
Micah 5:2
�But thou, Bethlehem Ephratah, though thou be little among the thousands of Judah, yet out of thee shall he come forth unto me that is to be ruler in Israel; whose goings forth have been from of old, from everlasting.�
The half-life is a value which gives an indication of the rate of decay of radioactive isotopes. Radioactive decay occurs in an exponential, rather than linear way. Suppose an isotope, which we will call X, has a half-life of 1 year. If we have 32lb of X today, then in a year, we will have just 16lb � half of 32. In another year, however, we will lose only 8lb more�half of 16. The year after that, there will be 4lb left, and so on.
The term half-life is misleading. Half-life is a notional number, showing how long it would take for half a given radioactive material to decay. When we say that uranium-238 has a half-life of 4,500 million years, this figure is not a problem for creationists. We simply mean that uranium is decaying at a rate, whereby half of it would not decay until 1,500 million years had passed.
Uranium-238 decays into stable lead-206 by a 14 step process. Eight of these steps involves the release of an alpha particle, which is the nucleus of a helium atom. So, every atom of uranium that turns into lead will also yield 8 atoms of helium. An igneous rock should, therefore, contain 8 helium atoms for every one lead atom. Of course, it doesn�t. Helium can escape into the atmosphere. But this means that we can calculate the speed at which helium can leave radioactive rocks. Measuring this speed reveals that uranium must actually have decayed very much faster in the past than it does today.
We thank You, Lord, that You know all things. You are not taken in by human technology today. No true science can or will oppose Your word�though for a season, people sometimes think that they have disproved Your word. Help us to stand strong for You, and to believe all that You have told us. Amen.
CURIOSITY FOR LIFE ON MARS
Isaiah 45:18
�For thus saith the LORD that created the heavens; God himself that formed the earth and made it; he hath established it, he created it not in vain, he formed it to be inhabited: I am the LORD; and there is none else.�
Like many people of my generation, I was fascinated by the Apollo Moon landings from 1969 through 1972. As a small boy, I keenly watched all the special programs that I could on BBC TV. I clearly remember one of the BBC experts, signing off the Apollo 17 broadcast, by telling us that NASA would certainly have people on Mars before 1990. I waited eagerly, but it never happened.
Perhaps the development of the Mars Rovers has helped somewhat. I love the photographs from the surface of Mars. And I love the idea of discovery, purely for the sake of discovery. I don�t think there needs to be any political justification for finding out as much as we can about the Red Planet.
Of course, that position is slightly na�ve. There is no question that NASA is not carrying out voyages of discovery for the sake of pure discovery. There is an agenda. And that agenda is to emulate David Bowie, by finding life on Mars.
One rover, called Curiosity, has recently reported pictures of sedimentary rocks, with halos of silica. One possible, and likely, mechanism for the production of these halos is the action of water. It is interesting to think that water may have shaped large parts of the surface of Mars. However, matters being what they are, the inference is being made, as it has been made so many times before, that the existence of water on Mars is possible evidence for life. This is not the case. Life requires water, of that there is no doubt. But water does not imply life. It is the Earth that God has caused to be inhabited.
We praise You, our Heavenly Father, that You have made everything well, and have made this planet a suitable home for us, in Your purposes. We pray for Godly discoveries and discoverers, who will bring honor and glory to Your Name. Amen.
Isaiah 45:18
�For thus saith the LORD that created the heavens; God himself that formed the earth and made it; he hath established it, he created it not in vain, he formed it to be inhabited: I am the LORD; and there is none else.�
Like many people of my generation, I was fascinated by the Apollo Moon landings from 1969 through 1972. As a small boy, I keenly watched all the special programs that I could on BBC TV. I clearly remember one of the BBC experts, signing off the Apollo 17 broadcast, by telling us that NASA would certainly have people on Mars before 1990. I waited eagerly, but it never happened.
Perhaps the development of the Mars Rovers has helped somewhat. I love the photographs from the surface of Mars. And I love the idea of discovery, purely for the sake of discovery. I don�t think there needs to be any political justification for finding out as much as we can about the Red Planet.
Of course, that position is slightly na�ve. There is no question that NASA is not carrying out voyages of discovery for the sake of pure discovery. There is an agenda. And that agenda is to emulate David Bowie, by finding life on Mars.
One rover, called Curiosity, has recently reported pictures of sedimentary rocks, with halos of silica. One possible, and likely, mechanism for the production of these halos is the action of water. It is interesting to think that water may have shaped large parts of the surface of Mars. However, matters being what they are, the inference is being made, as it has been made so many times before, that the existence of water on Mars is possible evidence for life. This is not the case. Life requires water, of that there is no doubt. But water does not imply life. It is the Earth that God has caused to be inhabited.
We praise You, our Heavenly Father, that You have made everything well, and have made this planet a suitable home for us, in Your purposes. We pray for Godly discoveries and discoverers, who will bring honor and glory to Your Name. Amen.
PLEASE VISIT MY WIFE'S WEBSITE. SHE RUNS "YOUNG LIVING" WHICH PROVIDES ALL NATURAL OILS THAT CAN BE USED INTERNALLY AND EXTERNALLY INCLUDING A DIFFUSER WHICH PUTS AN AMAZING ODOR IN THE AIR. THIS PRODUCT IS SO AMAZING AND KNOW THAT YOU WILL GET YEARS OF ENJOYMENT FROM IT. GO TO HTTP://WWW.YOUNGLIVING.ORG/CDROSES
No comments:
Post a Comment