Gmail Calendar Documents Reader Web more »
Recently Visited Groups | Help | Sign in
Google Groups Home
Message from discussion Neutron Decay (was Re: WHY Re: Age of the Earth)
The group you are posting to is a Usenet group. Messages posted to this group will make your email address visible to anyone on the Internet.
Your reply message has not been sent.
Your post was successful
 
From:
To:
Cc:
Followup To:
Add Cc | Add Followup-to | Edit Subject
Subject:
Validation:
For verification purposes please type the characters you see in the picture below or the numbers you hear by clicking the accessibility icon. Listen and type the numbers you hear
 
Steve Carlip  
View profile  
 More options Jan 24 1994, 12:47 am
Newsgroups: talk.origins
From: car...@dirac.ucdavis.edu (Steve Carlip)
Date: Mon, 24 Jan 1994 03:41:43 GMT
Local: Sun, Jan 23 1994 10:41 pm
Subject: Re: Neutron Decay (was Re: WHY Re: Age of the Earth)

In article <7Fkdu*...@alturia.abq.nm.us> anew...@alturia.abq.nm.us writes:
><Stephen F. Schaffner (ssch...@roc.SLAC.Stanford.EDU)> wrote:
>> [...] could you explain just what is unknown about such
>> decays that casts doubt about their reliability for dating purposes?
>The cause of the randomness of the event, for one thing.  That is, what
>determines the magnitude of a given element's half-life

This is certainly understood in principle.  For the case of alpha
decay, as a number of others have noted in previous postings,
the simple underlying mechanism is quantum mechanical tunneling
through a potential barrier.  You will find a simple explanation in
any elementary quantum mechanics textbook; for example, Ohanion's
_Principles of Quantum Mechanics_ has a nice example of alpha decay
on page 89.  The fact that the process is probabilistic, and the
exponential dependence on time, are straightforward consequences of
quantum mechanics.  (The time dependence is a case of "Fermi's
golden rule" --- see, for example, page 292 of Ohanion.)

An exact computation of decay rates is, of course, much more
complicated, since it requires a detailed understanding of the
shape of the potential barrier.  In principle, this is computable
from quantum chromodynamics (an extremely well-tested theory), but
in practice the computation is much too complex to be done exactly.
There are, however, reliable approximations available, and in
addition the shape of the potential can be measured experimentally.

For beta decay, the underlying fundamental theory is different; one
begins with electroweak theory (for which Glashow, Weinberg and
Salam won their Nobel prize) rather than quantum chromodynamics.
Again, though, I don't know of anything here that is "unknown."  

>and what determines
>that a given atom will undergo that decay at a certain point in time?
>Although the process is "truly random", as I've heard posited, SOMEthing's
>gotta cause it!

Why?  Your intuition about cause and effect is based on experience
at certain physical scales, much larger than atomic scales.  What
makes you so sure that individual events at the subatomic level must
have individual "causes"? It's certainly *possible* that we will find
some kind of underlying causal theory that "explains" quantum mechanics,
but I don't see any reason to believe that such a theory *must* exist.
 Are you really ready to throw out modern physics on the basis of a
philosophical preconception?

Steve Carlip
car...@dirac.ucdavis.edu


    Reply to author    Forward  
You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.

Create a group - Google Groups - Google Home - Terms of Service - Privacy Policy
©2009 Google