A question for all you time travelers

[Mr__Bill]

what have you guys been smoking?

interesting question, and, I just came across these:

Agents Seize $1.2 Billion Worth of Pot in Calif.


How to Bake Marijuana Brownies

Bill, over here in the dark

[cabinetman]

Maybe the type of object would matter. If it was a bagel, I wouldn't eat it.
.

[docrowan]

I, too, think it would show the age, because the materials would break down over time. Radio carbon dating depends on the ratio of carbon 12 to carbon 14. Carbon 14 is constantly generated in our upper atmosphere by cosmic rays. Plants and animals take in the carbon 14 as part of their living cells, when they die the carbon 14 begins to radioactively decay and is no longer replinished. Sensitive instruments can measure the ratio of carbon 14 to carbon 12. It must be calibrated using tree rings and so forth because the amount of carbon 14 in the atmosphere has fluctuated some over time due to changes in cosmic ray activity. According to scientists, there is a 60,000 year limit to how far back it can date objects. Your time traveling object could really mess with their minds.

Here's something MORE mind-bending (in my opinion). One of my favorite movies is "Somewhere In Time" in which Christopher Reeve travels back in time through will power and self-hypnosis alone. Early in his life he is at a party and an old woman he doesn't know walks up to him, hands him a pocket watch, and says "Come back to me". Years later, he still has the pocket watch, finds out who she was, and travels in time back to her with the pocket watch she gave him. A romance insues for a few days, then he is startled back into present time, leaving the pocket watch in her hands. This, then, is the same pocket watch that she gives him as a young man.

The mind bending part is the pocket watch was never built by a watch-maker. It is clearly a mand-made object that had to have been built by someone, yet in the movie there would never have been a time when this watch was raw materials in the hands of a watch-maker. When I realized this as a junior high-schooler I understood why time-travel to the past is logically impossible.

[leehljp]

Yeah, I think it would date very old, too. Either that or 42, like gerti said. It's a toss-up, really.

"42?" Gooooood Gracious! I must be REAL Ancient! I am 62+! Does carbon dating go back that far? At least I don't think it was invented when I was born! I have body parts that have almost turned to carbon. Is that what Carbon Dating is?

[docrowan]

"42?" Gooooood Gracious! I must be REAL Ancient! I am 62+! Does carbon dating go back that far? At least I don't think it was invented when I was born! I have body parts that have almost turned to carbon. Is that what Carbon Dating is?

Lee,

You are ancient! (Can I say that cause you're my neighbor?)

The '42' is a reference to a sci-fi/comedy novel "The Hitchhiker's Guide To The Galaxy".

[cgallery]

Today's fantasy is tomorrows science. Always has been and always will be.

So tomorrow the scientists will be working on 5'4" blonds with large hips, small waists, and large busts, falling over themselves to make me (and each other) happy?

Oh wait, different kind of fantasy.

[LinuxRandal]

So tomorrow the scientists will be working on 5'4" blonds with large hips, small waists, and large busts, falling over themselves to make me (and each other) happy?

Oh wait, different kind of fantasy.

Not really.....

Genetic engineering and movies like Cherry 2000.

[woodturner]

Well, you need more info, as Carbon dating for example only works on objects that were once alive. Doesn't work on Stone for instance.

Whether carbon dating "works" or is accurate is a different debate, but carbon dating works on ANY material containing carbon, whether it was ever alive or not, including stone.

[woodturner]

Ok, all you Dr. Who, Star Trek, Quantum Leap and time travelers ...

Here's the scenario:

A time traveler brings an object from the present time, travels back eons and leaves the object in the past.

Assuming the object was manufactured - i.e. did not exist in present form at some prior date - and you travelled back in time to before that prior date, the object would not exist. In other words, you could not transport it back to an earlier time.

[docrowan]

Whether carbon dating "works" or is accurate is a different debate, but carbon dating works on ANY material containing carbon, whether it was ever alive or not, including stone.

Only as long as the carbon that was incorporated into the material came from an atmospheric source. For instance, if I compressed coal (millions of years old) to create a blank to carve a statue, it would not contain any carbon 14, even though I had just created it. For most practical purposes, Russianwolf is correct in that the material had to have come from a living creature as these are by far the most common things to ingest atmospheric carbon and incorporate it as part of their structure.

[Russianwolf]

Whether carbon dating "works" or is accurate is a different debate, but carbon dating works on ANY material containing carbon, whether it was ever alive or not, including stone.

Show me any case where Carbon dating has been used on a specimen that was not "once-living".

Every source I've ever founds says that the item has to have been "once-living" which would not include stone as stone was never alive.

[Alex Franke]

...which would not include stone as stone was never alive.

Ahh -- then the REAL mind-bender is whether or not carbon dating would work on one of these!

[cgallery]

Show me any case where Carbon dating has been used on a specimen that was not "once-living".

Every source I've ever founds says that the item has to have been "once-living" which would not include stone as stone was never alive.

Can you find the age of rocks by using radiocarbon dating or are they generally too old? If a rock was shot from a volcano and isn't that old, can we use radiocarbon dating?

Samples of rock are not able to be dated using radiocarbon, because rocks contain no organic carbon from living organisms that are of recent enough age. Most rocks formed hundreds of thousands if not millions of years ago. Geologic deposits of coal and lignite formed from the compressed remains of plants contain no remaining radiocarbon so they cannot be dated. Radiocarbon dating is limited to the period 0 - 60 000 years, because the 'half-life' of radiocarbon is about 5700 years, so to date rocks scientists must use other methods. There is a number of different techniques available. We can date volcanic rocks using a method called argon-argon dating for instance. This method uses principles of isotopic decay like radiocarbon, but different isotopes (argon-39 and argon 40) which have a longer halflife (1250 million years). This means scientists can date rock which is many millions of years old. The technique can date materials the size of one grain of volcanic ash, using a laser. There are other methods which can be used as well which operate using different radiochemistries. The only way to date a volcanic ash layer using radiocarbon dating is to find ash within a lake sediment or peat layer and then date the organic carbon from above and below it, and therefore fix an age for the ash event. This is a commonly used approach to date volcanic events over the past 60 000 years around the world.

Source: http://www.c14dating.com/k12.html

[Greg in Maryland]

Maybe the type of object would matter. If it was a bagel, I wouldn't eat it.
.

I've heard that you're like Mikey and will eat anything ... I guess I heard wrong.

[Greg in Maryland]

Potassium-argon dating, uranium-lead dating, thermo-luminescence obsidian hydration or uranium trail dating are alternatives to carbon dating and can be used on rocks, ceramics and other items