a thoughtful web.
Good ideas and conversation. No ads, no tracking.   Login or Take a Tour!
comment by tacocat
tacocat  ·  3375 days ago  ·  link  ·    ·  parent  ·  post: Carbon dating suggests early Quran is older than Muhammad [really?]

https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/3j51hw/carbon_dating_suggests_worlds_oldest_koran_could/cumcu6m

Basically, yes, they only tested the paper and also carbon dating isn't laser accurate, especially for newer items being tested.





OftenBen  ·  3375 days ago  ·  link  ·  

Ok, I know that nukes affect how things are carbon dated. Radon in basements too, I think. What are other factors that make radiocarbon dating difficult/imprecise?

user-inactivated  ·  3375 days ago  ·  link  ·  

A stab -- rates of decay are based on averages.

user-inactivated  ·  3374 days ago  ·  link  ·  

Decay rates are statistical averages, correct. In this case 5700 +/- 50 or so years. For those who don't understand this, if I had a bucket of C14 that weighed 10 pounds, in roughly 5700 years I would have a bucket that weighs very marginally less than 10 pounds (E=MC^2 converts a very, VERY small amount of mass into energy during radioactive decay) but would be 1/2 C14 and 1/2 Nitrogen-14 (N14) If we sit and count the atoms at this point we should expect to be close to 1/2 and 1/2. This is why there is an error bar on any radiocarbon dating.

tacocat  ·  3375 days ago  ·  link  ·  

Ask in the reddit thread. I'm not a scientist but I know they don't carbon date to a specific year.