Skip to main content

Greenland Shark


Some demand respect simply because they exist. You may as well give respect to a bucket of dirt.
-----------
On days like today I must give my salute to Archimedes, and not just because he was the greatest scientist of antiquity.  More importantly, it was he who first wrote about the lever, of which the greatest application is the modern corkscrew.  Cheers!
-----------
Did you know the Greenland shark, the world’s largest fish, is very long lived?  One example was recently determined to be between 272 and 512 years old.  How can you do this?  It has no birth certificate or driver’s license.  It was done through carbon dating.  But carbon dating* works only on dead life forms, such as long buried bones or old dead wood.  In the ocean, when anything dies, it is consumed within days or months.  So, you can’t just find dead sharks lying about.  It turns out that within the shark’s eye, there remains some embryonic tissues.  These can be dated, and was.  Amazing.
-----------
Opportunity knocks only once?  Hmm.  Often there is no knock at all. You must look for it!
-----------------------------------------------------
By The Way...
Carbon Dating. Now what is carbon testing?  Basically, because of the sun, radioactive Carbon (C14) is created in all carbon forms on the planet. The compares with normal of Carbon (C12).  The radioactive form decomposes with a half-life of 5730 years.  This means that half of the radioactive form decomposes to the normal form in this time. 
All living things consume carbon-based nutrients.  This means they all have C14 internal to their systems. And over the years, the amount of C14 in every organism is about constant in proportion to its mass. An organism (like the shark or us or a tree) stops absorbing C14 when it dies. So if you take some dead object and measure the ratio of C14 to C12 you can estimate the age of the object.  This is how it’s done.
There are multiple factors about this, such as it must be old enough for the measurement to be meaningful. It cannot be too old to account for errors in measurement.  You must have a sufficient amount of organic material to make the measurement accurate.  An age of 40,000 years is about the max to give reliable dating. It does not work for fossils because they include no original materials.  For Paleolithic measurements the C14 technique does not work at all.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Accepting Fake Information

Every day, we are all bombarded with information, especially on news channels.  One group claims it's false; another calls it the truth. How can we know when to accept it or alternatively how can we know it's false? There are several factors which influence acceptance of fake or false information. Here are the big four.  Some just don’t have the knowledge to discern fact/truth from fiction/fact/false*. Some fake information is cleverly disguised and simply appears to be correct. Some fake information is accepted because the person wants to believe it. Some fake information is accepted because there is no other information to the contrary. However, the acceptance of  information  of any kind become a kind of  truth , and this is a well studied topic. In the link below is an essay on “The Truth About Truth.” This shows simply that what is your point of view, different types of information are generally accepted, fake or not.   https://www.linkedin.com/posts/g-donald-allen-420b03

Your Brain Within Your Brain

  Your Bicameral Brain by Don Allen Have you ever gone to another room to get something, but when you got there you forgot what you were after? Have you ever experienced a flash of insight, but when you went to look it up online, you couldn’t even remember the keyword? You think you forgot it completely. How can it happen so fast? You worry your memory is failing. Are you merely absent-minded? You try to be amused. But maybe you didn’t forget.   Just maybe that flash of insight, clear and present for an instant, was never given in the verbal form, but another type of intelligence you possess, that you use, and that communicates only to you. We are trained to live in a verbal world, where words matter most. Aside from emotions, we are unable to conjure up other, nonverbal, forms of intelligence we primitively, pre-verbally, possess but don’t know how to use. Alas, we live in a world of words, stewing in the alphabet, sleeping under pages of paragraphs, almost ignoring one of

Is Artificial Intelligence Conscious?

  Is Artificial Intelligence Conscious? I truly like the study of consciousness, though it is safe to say no one really knows what it is. Some philosophers has avoided the problem by claiming consciousness simply doesn’t exist. It's the ultimate escape clause. However, the "therefore, it does not exist" argument also applies to "truth", "God", and even "reality" all quite beyond a consensus description for at least three millennia. For each issue or problem defying description or understanding, simply escape the problem by claiming it doesn’t exist. Problem solved or problem avoided? Alternately, as Daniel Dennett explains consciousness as an account of the various calculations occurring in the brain at close to the same time. However, he goes on to say that consciousness is so insignificant, especially compared to our exalted notions of it, that it might as well not exist [1] . Oh, well. Getting back to consciousness, most of us have view