Helium diffusion dating


04-Aug-2017 05:08

At higher temperatures, Helium will have an easier time escaping from rock, though higher pressures found deeper within the crust will slow the Helium down.

The ability of Helium to migrate through rock makes it very hard to consider it a reliable dating source.

With more of the parent product existing in the rock sample, more of the daughter product will have been created; with less of the parent product existing in the rock sample, less of the daughter product will have developed.

The resulting plotted points should line up near a single sloping line which is then used to calculate the age.

Scientists usually look at the daughter product of the decay in order to determine the approximate age of a rock or mineral.

The reasoning for this is that the helium release by alpha decay can too easily escape the surrounding rock. Over a long period of time, the parent element will decay at a calculable rate into the daughter product.

The diffusion values that were measured (the amount of gas that came out of the rock in a certain period of time at certain temperatures) were used as equivalent values to the natural environment (Henke, 2005).

Another serious procedural error is that there is no distinction in the amount of Helium diffused that separates Helium would be the result of decay, so to simply state that a certain amount of Helium diffused from the rock would be inaccurately representing the facts.

Gases readily try to expand and fill all available space, and a vacuum acts just as one imagines: it "pulls" the gas out of the rock much faster than it would ordinarily move when confined in cubic miles of rock.In order to fully quantify the rock samples they obtained, the above two questions need to be thoroughly answered to secure the quality of the rock being sampled.However, neither of these questions were answered, and the wording of the paragraph indicates that the samples that were sent to the laboratory were excavated thirty years previous and not fresh. His criticisms range from using faulty standard deviation for error factors to incorrectly identifying rock samples that could lead to very serious errors in measurements to using equations that yield inconsistent dates as examples of how traditional radioisotope dating is flawed.The samples RATE tested were from a borehole sample retrieved in 1974 with no statement made as to the storage or collection conditions of the samples.