Changes

283 bytes added ,  23:52, September 22, 2019
m
Move the John Ray remark to a separate "antiquated notions" section, similar to what was done for H. G. Wells on the radioactivity page.
Line 49: Line 49:  
*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>
 
*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>
   −
As early as of 1673, John Ray, an English naturalist, reckoned with alternative that ''"im the primitive times and soon after the Creation the earth suffered far more concussions and mutations in its superficial part than afterward"''.<ref name="Rappaport1997">{{cite book |title=When Geologists Where Historians, 1665-1750 |author=Rhoda Rappaport |publisher=Cornell University Press |place=Ithaca and London |year=1997 |pages=194 |isbn=978-0801-433863 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=30U3W2kI7foC |quote=}}</ref>  The process of decay is as follows.  Atoms consist of a heavy central core called the [[nucleus]] surrounded by clouds of lightweight particles (electrons), called [[electron shell]]s. The energy locked in the nucleus is enormous, but cannot be released easily. The phenomenon we know as heat is simply the jiggling around of atoms and their components, so in principle a high enough temperature could cause the components of the core to break out. However, the temperature required to do this is in in the millions of degrees, so this cannot be achieved by any natural process that we know about. The second way that a nucleus could be disrupted is by particles striking it. However, the nucleus has a strong positive charge and the electron shells have a strong negative charge. Any incoming negative charge would be deflected by the electron shell and any positive charge that penetrated the electron shells would be deflected by the positive charge of the nucleus itself.
+
The process of decay is as follows.  Atoms consist of a heavy central core called the [[nucleus]] surrounded by clouds of lightweight particles (electrons), called [[electron shell]]s. The energy locked in the nucleus is enormous, but cannot be released easily. The phenomenon we know as heat is simply the jiggling around of atoms and their components, so in principle a high enough temperature could cause the components of the core to break out. However, the temperature required to do this is in in the millions of degrees, so this cannot be achieved by any natural process that we know about. The second way that a nucleus could be disrupted is by particles striking it. However, the nucleus has a strong positive charge and the electron shells have a strong negative charge. Any incoming negative charge would be deflected by the electron shell and any positive charge that penetrated the electron shells would be deflected by the positive charge of the nucleus itself.
    
The decay process is as follows.  
 
The decay process is as follows.  
Line 112: Line 112:  
#[[Uranium-thorium]]
 
#[[Uranium-thorium]]
 
#[[Rubidium-strontium dating]]
 
#[[Rubidium-strontium dating]]
 +
 +
==Antiquated notions==
 +
As early as of 1673, John Ray, an English naturalist, wrote that
 +
:''"in the primitive times and soon after the Creation the earth suffered far more concussions and mutations in its superficial part than afterward"''.<ref name="Rappaport1997">{{cite book |title=When Geologists Where Historians, 1665-1750 |author=Rhoda Rappaport |publisher=Cornell University Press |place=Ithaca and London |year=1997 |pages=194 |isbn=978-0801-433863 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=30U3W2kI7foC |quote=}}</ref> 
 +
This was hundreds of years before radioactivity was discovered.  While we don't know for sure just what "concussions" and "mutations" would mean in modern terminology, if we assume they meant meteor strikes and radioactive decay, respectively, his remarks are rather striking.
    
== Bibliography ==
 
== Bibliography ==
SkipCaptcha, Automoderated users, edit
3,266

edits