Please turn on javascript in your browser to play chess.
Science Forum

Science Forum

  1. Standard member vivify
    rain
    29 Sep '17 14:53
    When scientists say the earth 4 billion years old, are they referring to the planet or the materials the planet is made of?

    If earth is 4 billion years old, wouldn't it stand to reason that what composes the earth is even older? Or, were earth's materials formed at roughly the same time?

    On a side note: since atoms are made from stars, is our sun producing new atoms as well? Or are atoms made only in certain types of stars? Also, can scientists tell how old an atom is, meaning if it was a newly formed atom or one that's existed for billions of years?
  2. 29 Sep '17 15:04 / 5 edits
    Originally posted by @vivify
    When scientists say the earth 4 billion years old, are they referring to the planet or the materials the planet is made of?

    If earth is 4 billion years old, wouldn't it stand to reason that what composes the earth is even older? Or, were earth's materials formed at roughly the same time?

    On a side note: since atoms are made from stars, is our sun pr ...[text shortened]... d an atom is, meaning if it was a newly formed atom or one that's existed for billions of years?
    When scientists say the earth 4 billion years old, are they referring to the planet or the materials the planet is made of?

    the planet.
    If earth is 4 billion years old, wouldn't it stand to reason that what composes the earth is even older?

    if what you mean by "what composes the earth" is the chemical elements, yes. And MUCH older.
    But if what you mean by "what composes the earth" is the various rock types, then I believe the answer is "it's complicated".
    since atoms are made from stars, ...

    hydrogen atoms aren't made by stars. Generally only the atoms of the heavier elements come from stars.
    is our sun producing new atoms as well?

    new KINDS of atom from other kinds of atoms, yes.
    Also, can scientists tell how old an atom is, meaning if it was a newly formed atom or one that's existed for billions of years?

    No. Atoms don't 'age' although some eventually suddenly 'decay' into different kinds of atom. Although we can deduce that the highly unstable radioactive ones are extremely unlikely to be very old, that isn't because they 'age', because they don't.
  3. Standard member vivify
    rain
    29 Sep '17 16:56
    Originally posted by @humy
    When scientists say the earth 4 billion years old, are they referring to the planet or the materials the planet is made of?

    the planet.
    If earth is 4 billion years old, wouldn't it stand to reason that what composes the earth is even older?

    if what you mean by "what composes the earth" is the chemical elements, yes ...[text shortened]... e ones are extremely unlikely to be very old, that isn't because they 'age', because they don't.
    No. Atoms don't 'age' although some eventually suddenly 'decay' into different kinds of atom. Although we can deduce that the highly unstable radioactive ones are extremely unlikely to be very old, that isn't because they 'age', because they don't.

    Does this mean an atom will exist forever?

    Thank you for your help.
  4. 29 Sep '17 18:22 / 1 edit
    Originally posted by @vivify
    [b]No. Atoms don't 'age' although some eventually suddenly 'decay' into different kinds of atom. Although we can deduce that the highly unstable radioactive ones are extremely unlikely to be very old, that isn't because they 'age', because they don't.

    Does this mean an atom will exist forever?

    Thank you for your help.[/b]
    An atom can undergo various kinds of nuclear reactions. For instance two hydrogen atoms can fuse to form a helium atom, a process that fuels most of our sunlight. One can also, for instance, remove electrons from atoms in order to ionize them, a process that also occurs naturally.

    Atoms in the same quantum state are indistinguishable and there is no way to measure their "age." To estimate the age of e.g. the Earth other methods are used.
  5. 29 Sep '17 18:50 / 5 edits
    Originally posted by @vivify

    Does this mean an atom will exist forever?
    That simple question is a surprisingly difficult one to answer.

    I have heard of one theory that not even said 'stable' atoms are totally stable over something like a trillion trillion trillion trillion years and every atom will eventually decay to pure energy within something like that massive time period squared BUT don't know if that theory has any scientific credence at all. (ANYONE? )

    I have also heard of a prediction based on computer simulations of the future of our universe that every atom in the universe will gradual over something like a trillion trillion trillion trillion years end up in black holes and thus be destroyed.

    So I would guess the answer might be that no atom will exist forever but not sure of what the fate of most atoms would be.
  6. Standard member sonhouse
    Fast and Curious
    29 Sep '17 18:53
    Originally posted by @humy
    That simple question is surprisingly difficult to answer.

    I have heard of one theory that not even said 'stable' atoms are totally stable over something like a trillion trillion trillion trillion years and every atom will eventually decay to pure energy within something like that massive time period squared but don't know if that theory has any scientific ...[text shortened]... r might be that no atom will exist forever but not sure of what the fate of most atoms would be.
    Unless the other end of the black hole is a big bang of a new universe, then everything is eventually recycled.
  7. Standard member wolfgang59
    Infidel
    02 Oct '17 20:42
    Originally posted by @sonhouse
    Unless the other end of the black hole is a big bang of a new universe, then everything is eventually recycled.
    Our local council says that polystyrene cant be recycled and goes to landfill.
  8. 02 Oct '17 22:01
    Have they figured out the source of atoms and energy yet?
  9. 03 Oct '17 04:43
    Originally posted by @eladar
    Have they figured out the source of atoms and energy yet?
    Who are they? The creationists?
  10. 03 Oct '17 09:28
    Originally posted by @fabianfnas
    Who are they? The creationists?
    No, this is the science forum. They are the ones who assume God does not exist.

    Nice side step of the question.
  11. 03 Oct '17 19:46
    Originally posted by @eladar
    No, this is the science forum. They are the ones who assume God does not exist.

    Nice side step of the question.
    So you say that 'they' are the scientists, they who has a clue?
    And then we have 'creationists' who doesn't have a clue, those who answer 'goddidit' or use words like 'faith' and are sworn enemies of science and rationality?

    If this is your point, then I cannot agree more.
  12. 03 Oct '17 21:05 / 4 edits
    Originally posted by @fabianfnas
    Who are they? The creationists?
    Oh that is a joke.
    They figuring out the source of atoms and energy ...how? From reading the Bible with a literal interpretation and sacrifice some good plump succulent lambs and, when they tried all that and noticed it doesn't work, pray to God to just tell them.
  13. 03 Oct '17 23:36
    Originally posted by @fabianfnas
    So you say that 'they' are the scientists, they who has a clue?
    And then we have 'creationists' who doesn't have a clue, those who answer 'goddidit' or use words like 'faith' and are sworn enemies of science and rationality?

    If this is your point, then I cannot agree more.
    I take it the answer is no.
  14. 04 Oct '17 04:26 / 1 edit
    Originally posted by @eladar
    I take it the answer is no.
    The answer to any creationist is always 'no'.
    One don't even have to know the question. Just 'no', that's enough.

    Have any creationist received the Nobel Price in Physics?
    No, never. That says it all.
  15. 04 Oct '17 07:56
    Originally posted by @eladar
    Have they figured out the source of atoms and energy yet?
    The Big Bang.

    What caused the big bang? No-one knows.