Changes

There is a fairly well-known example of chemical state affecting electron capture activity.  The ⁷Be nucleus (Beryllium-7) is an electron capturer with a half-life of about 53 days, turning into Lithium-7.  The variation is about 1.5%.  While this half-life is way too short to be useful for radiometric dating, the effect of the chemical state is noticeable.  The reason is that, because the atomic number is only four, the 2s valence electrons are very close to the 1s electrons involved in capture.<ref>Huh, C.-A., Dependence of the decay rate of ⁷Be on chemical forms, Earth and Planetary Science Letters 171:325–328, 1999.</ref>  See [[Systematics of beta decay]] for more details.

There is a fairly well-known example of chemical state affecting electron capture activity.  The ⁷Be nucleus (Beryllium-7) is an electron capturer with a half-life of about 53 days, turning into Lithium-7.  The variation is about 1.5%.  While this half-life is way too short to be useful for radiometric dating, the effect of the chemical state is noticeable.  The reason is that, because the atomic number is only four, the 2s valence electrons are very close to the 1s electrons involved in capture.<ref>Huh, C.-A., Dependence of the decay rate of ⁷Be on chemical forms, Earth and Planetary Science Letters 171:325–328, 1999.</ref>  See [[Systematics of beta decay]] for more details.

There is no reason to expect that the rate of decay of a radioactive material is largely constant, and it was almost certainly not constant near the creation or beginning of the universe.

There is good reason to expect that the rate of decay of a radioactive material is largely constant.  Nevertheless, some creationists, perhaps with a goal of calling into question the reliability of radiometric dating for the purpose of advancing a "young Earth" doctrine, raise objections about the science.<ref>Sibley, Andrew (August 2013). [https://creation.com/radioactive-decay-rates-and-solar-activity Variable radioactive decay rates and the changes in solar activity] (a creationist website). ''Creation Ministries International'' (from the ''Journal of Creation 27(2):3–4''). Retrieved January 4, 2018.</ref><ref>Wieland, Carl. [https://creation.com/rate-group-reveals-exciting-breakthroughs RATE group reveals exciting breakthroughs!] (a creationist website). ''''Creation Ministries International''. Retrieved January 4, 2018.</ref><ref>Walker, Tas (April 2000). [https://creation.com/radioactive-decay-rate-depends-on-chemical-environment Radioactive decay rate depends on chemical environment] (a creationist website). ''Creation Ministries International'' (from the ''Journal of Creation 14(1):4–5''). Retrieved January 4, 2018.</ref><ref>Woodmorappe, John (August 2001). [https://creation.com/billion-fold-acceleration-of-radioactivity-demonstrated-in-laboratory Billion-fold acceleration of radioactivity demonstrated in laboratory] (a creationist website). ''Creation Ministries International'' (from the ''Journal of Creation 15(2):4–6''). Retrieved January 4, 2018.</ref><ref>Thomas, Brian (August 5, 2009). [https://www.icr.org/article/4816 Radioactive Decay Rates Not Stable] (a creationist website). ''Institute for Creation Research''. Retrieved January 4, 2018.</ref><ref>Snelling, Andrew A. (October 1, 2009). [https://answersingenesis.org/geology/radiometric-dating/radiometric-dating-problems-with-the-assumptions/ Radiometric Dating: Problems with the Assumptions] (a creationist website). ''Answers in Genesis''. Retrieved January 4, 2018.</ref><ref>Knapp, Alex (May 3, 2011). [https://www.forbes.com/sites/alexknapp/2011/05/03/radioactive-decay-rates-may-not-be-constant-after-all/#4634f095147f Radioactive Decay Rates May Not Be Constant After All]. ''Forbes''. Retrieved January 4, 2018.</ref> One common objection relates to Beryllium-7, explained above.  The discrepancy is very small.  Another involves a very large discrepancy, that can be provoked in a particle accelerator, by radically altering the electron cloud.  The conditions for this to happen do not occur in nature.  There are other tiny discrepancies, apparently related to the rotation of the Sun.  One general claim that creationists make is that "Radioactive decay rates were almost certainly not constant near the creation or beginning of the universe" without giving any reason for this belief.  But even if decay rates changed wildly in the earliest days of the universe, if they have stayed essentially constant for 13 billion years, the universe must be at least 13 billion years old.

<ref>Sibley, Andrew (August 2013). [https://creation.com/radioactive-decay-rates-and-solar-activity Variable radioactive decay rates and the changes in solar activity] (a creationist website). ''Creation Ministries International'' (from the ''Journal of Creation 27(2):3–4''). Retrieved January 4, 2018.</ref><ref>Wieland, Carl. [https://creation.com/rate-group-reveals-exciting-breakthroughs RATE group reveals exciting breakthroughs!] (a creationist website). ''''Creation Ministries International''. Retrieved January 4, 2018.</ref><ref>Walker, Tas (April 2000). [https://creation.com/radioactive-decay-rate-depends-on-chemical-environment Radioactive decay rate depends on chemical environment] (a creationist website). ''Creation Ministries International'' (from the ''Journal of Creation 14(1):4–5''). Retrieved January 4, 2018.</ref><ref>Woodmorappe, John (August 2001). [https://creation.com/billion-fold-acceleration-of-radioactivity-demonstrated-in-laboratory Billion-fold acceleration of radioactivity demonstrated in laboratory] (a creationist website). ''Creation Ministries International'' (from the ''Journal of Creation 15(2):4–6''). Retrieved January 4, 2018.</ref><ref>Thomas, Brian (August 5, 2009). [https://www.icr.org/article/4816 Radioactive Decay Rates Not Stable] (a creationist website). ''Institute for Creation Research''. Retrieved January 4, 2018.</ref><ref>Snelling, Andrew A. (October 1, 2009). [https://answersingenesis.org/geology/radiometric-dating/radiometric-dating-problems-with-the-assumptions/ Radiometric Dating: Problems with the Assumptions] (a creationist website). ''Answers in Genesis''. Retrieved January 4, 2018.</ref><ref>Knapp, Alex (May 3, 2011). [https://www.forbes.com/sites/alexknapp/2011/05/03/radioactive-decay-rates-may-not-be-constant-after-all/#4634f095147f Radioactive Decay Rates May Not Be Constant After All]. ''Forbes''. Retrieved January 4, 2018.</ref>

For a fairly technical explanation of the radioactivity process, see the [[Radioactivity|radioactivity page]].

For a fairly technical explanation of the radioactivity process, see the [[Radioactivity|radioactivity page]].