A Tripolation Posted October 7, 2010 Share Posted October 7, 2010 I was given a link to this article by a professor: http://www.halos.com/ A speck of polonium in molten rock can be compared to an Alka-Seltzer dropped into a glass of water. The beginning of effervescence is equated to the moment that polonium atoms began to emit radiactive particles. In molten rock the traces of those radioactive particles would disappear as quickly as the Alka-Seltzer bubbles in water. But if the water were instantly frozen, the bubbles would be preserved. Likewise, polonium halos could have formed only if the rapidly "effervescing" specks of polonium had been instantly encased in solid rock. Unfortunately, I do not have the geology/chem background to point out the errors in this. And maybe there aren't any, but the authors are still inferring baseless 'facts'. Does anything pop out that makes this either credible or psuedoscience? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Skeptic Posted October 7, 2010 Share Posted October 7, 2010 Its basically a description of radioactive dating methods. But the "instantly" part is wrong, and polonium has too short a half-life to be used for dating, and the dating would use isotope ratios rather than a halo. Also just because they call them "polonium halos" doesn't mean that that is what they are. http://www.talkorigi...los/gentry.html 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A Tripolation Posted October 8, 2010 Author Share Posted October 8, 2010 Ah. I see. Thanks for the excellent article Mr S. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now