forums

Off-Topic Space, the final frontier, these are the voyages of NASA

Salt said:
You would be surprised how much we take for granted as common knowledge is based on some modicum of faith.
Click to expand...
My minimal understanding is that through the radioactive dating of decay they can date rocks back 3.8 million years on earth and minerals longer but they’ve dated meteorite rocks which landed on earth to 4.5 million years or so. Apparently they’ve dated the moon’s age and somehow have come up with approximations incorporating that. I’m not sure how that works though unless they find moon rocks on earth and can date those as being at least 4.5 million years old and even so, when did they get here?

Assumptions are everywhere here it seems.
 
Advertisement
Memnon said:
In some aspects, but not entirely; the theory of relativity only goes until a certain point, but didn’t expand beyond Black holes or what happens after.

Theoretical quantum time travel really comes from Igor Dmitriyevich Novikov.

But time travel in general as a concept has been around since the earliest civilizations, the Anciet Sumerians, Kemetians, Indians, Chinese, Japanese & several others all have time travel in their historical lore.
Click to expand...

I knew that, was just testing you to make sure you did! :rk5i6fxwjlgev5j6.jpg:
 
RVACane said:
My minimal understanding is that through the radioactive dating of decay they can date rocks back 3.8 million years on earth and minerals longer but they’ve dated meteorite rocks which landed on earth to 4.5 million years or so. Apparently they’ve dated the moon’s age and somehow have come up with approximations incorporating that. I’m not sure how that works though unless they find moon rocks on earth and can date those as being at least 4.5 million years old and even so, when did they get here?

Assumptions are everywhere here it seems.
Click to expand...

I am ok with the dating methods and can accept it as best we have at the moment as long as the assumptions are transparent and acknowledged. We have to start from somewhere.

We just really don’t know how much of the radioactive element may have been there to begin with so can’t say with certainty how much decay has taken place or if the rate has always been constant. We just have to assume the original conditions to justify the conclusions.

Different radiometric dating methods can also yield different results using the same rock samples. That makes cross referencing difficult when you are getting different results sometimes off by millions of years.

So when they say the earth is so many billions of years old down to the decimal it gives the impression that it’s precise. At best it’s an approximation and that depends on your methodology.

I get @ddann ‘s cynicism. These popular science articles sometimes portray information as if it is a certainty when they should just admit it as being “probable”.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
SpikeUM said:
Isnt this one of Einsteins theories?
Click to expand...
I think his theories thought it possible for time travel in one direction only but not backwards.

I think this notion of quantum time travel is highly speculative and is more thought experiment than anything real.
 
RVACane said:
My minimal understanding is that through the radioactive dating of decay they can date rocks back 3.8 million years on earth and minerals longer but they’ve dated meteorite rocks which landed on earth to 4.5 million years or so. Apparently they’ve dated the moon’s age and somehow have come up with approximations incorporating that. I’m not sure how that works though unless they find moon rocks on earth and can date those as being at least 4.5 million years old and even so, when did they get here?

Assumptions are everywhere here it seems.
Click to expand...
The figure of Earth’s age comes from studying the formation of the Solar system, because all the planetary bodies within the Solar System pretty much all formed around the same time.

If the Sun is 4.6 billion years old, then the things that rotate around the Sun are likely the same age.

Given the Sun’s size, it’s absolute magnitude, distance from the Milky Way core, volume, mass, density & several other variables, the math all points to a specific time. Then, back that up with the nucleocosmochronology by studying & analyzing the elemental radioactive decay of material in space & you can get a good approximation.

And in conjunction with understanding the life cycles of Main-sequence Stars with the kind of thermonuclear fusion that takes place in its core, you can know the radioactive chemistry taking place inside of it & how long until it’s density will collapse in on itself.

Planets do not exist unto themselves in the Universe, they are “children” of Stars. If you know the birth of a star, then you can know the bodies that surround it.
 
Advertisement
Memnon said:
It’s far from barren...

Io has hyper-geological activity with several hundred volcanoes, it’s surface is mostly made of silicate rock with molten lava & iron sulfate. It’s the 3rd largest Moon in the solar system, even bigger than our own & due to it’s distance from Jupiter has an extensive amount of thermonuclear radioactivity & high density atmospheric pressure.

And because of Jupiter’s intense magnetic field, the volcanic plasma from Io is hyperactive.

It’s pretty much very similar to Venus, except it actually produces more metal due to cooling & has a ton of a crystalized forsterite under it’s surface. It’s like a giant rocky, volcanic sulfur & liquid metal factory, with really interesting composition underneath.
Click to expand...
 
SpikeUM said:
I knew that, was just testing you to make sure you did! :rk5i6fxwjlgev5j6.jpg:
Click to expand...
Time travel is also space travel.

If you were to go back in time to the same exact point in space - 12 hours earlier - you would be in the vacuum of space. Your time travel mechanism would also need to account for the Earth's orbit around the sun, and its rotation.
 
ddann said:
“Habitable oceans”?
Click to expand...
Perhaps a reboot of SeaQuest?

tLQfttXkG.jpg
 
Advertisement
ddann said:
But no cosmic dolphins?
Click to expand...
I don’t think anyone has ever proposed the idea that there are Cetaceans on other planets or Moons, because there’s no evidence to suggest that there is any.

When researchers talk about the possibility of aquatic life in water on other planets they’re referring to microbial biological organisms, either single-celled or multi-celled, they don’t mean Chordata as we know them to be on Earth now.

Don’t take this the wrong way, but are you some kind of Science denier or something?
 
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Back
Top