Professional Documents
Culture Documents
http://en.allexperts.com/q/Archaeology-654/Dating-methods.htm
Answer
There are several others:
Potassium-Argon
Protien racitimization
Magnetic dating
Ceramic Thermoluminesence
Tree Ring dating
Varve Dating
Other than Potasium-Argon and Carbon 14 there are other radioactive decay clocks which are being
brought into use but these are the two most common.
Protien racitimization looks at the rate at which protiens in bone "flip" and this occurs at a reasonably
predictive rate. Its usefulness is limited to about 3 to 400 years.
Magnetic dating is highly accurate (in 20 year time spans) and looks at the clay materials of a hearth
which when heated fixes the magnetic particles in the direction of north at the last firing of the hearth.
This along with any charcoal may give a very precise date for the hearth. The samples are carefully
encased in plaster with the modern north indicated and then the sample is taken into the lab where it is
reoriented to north and the micro magnetic differences are tested and then compared to a chart of how
long ago this "north" occurred.
Ceramic Thermoluminesence uses a similar principal as the magnetic dating above but looks at the
molecular structure under high temp to determine its magnetic seting.
Tree ring dating is rather obvious
Varve dating is similar to tree ring dating in that in sediments in ponds and other water sources, thin
layers are deposited. And like tree rings can be counted and the age of common deposits can be
determined.
Xxx
http://archaeology.about.com/od/dterms/g/dendrochro.htm
Dendrochronology
By K. Kris Hirst, About.com
Definition:
Dendrochronology is an archaeological dating technique which uses the growth rings of long-lived trees
as a calendar. Tree-ring dating was one of the first absolute dating method, and was invented in the early
decades of the 20th century by astronomer Andrew Ellicott Douglass and archaeologist Clark Wissler.
In general, during the lifetimes of trees, each year the tree grows is marked by a growth ring; the tree
gains a little bit of girth each year. The width of the ring added to the outside of the tree is in part
dependent on the amount of moisture available to the tree--thus trees in the same area add thin rings
during dry years and thick rings during wet years. If a research can obtain a string of tree samples that
overlap, a precise sequence of tree rings can be derived.
Over the past hundred years or so, tree ring sequences have been built all over the world, with the longest
to date consisting of a 10,000 year sequence in central Europe completed on oak trees by the Hohenheim
Laboratory.
XXX
http://geology.about.com/od/geotime_dating/a/K_argon_dating.htm
Potassium-Argon Dating Methods
Filed In:
1. Fossils, Time & Evolution
2. > Geologic Time and Dating
The potassium-argon (K-Ar) isotopic dating method is especially useful for determining the age of
lavas. Developed in the 1950s, it was important in the development of plate tectonics and calibration of
the geologic time scale.
Potassium-Argon Basics
Potassium occurs in two stable isotopes (41K and 39K) and one radioactive isotope (40K). Potassium-40
decays with a half-life of 1250 million years, meaning that half of the 40K atoms are gone after that span
of time. Its decay yields argon-40 and calcium-40 in a ratio of 11 to 89. The K-Ar method works by
counting the number of these radiogenic 40Ar atoms trapped inside a mineral grain.
Potassium is a reactive metal and argon is an inert gas, which simplifies some things. Potassium is always
locked up in minerals whereas argon is not part of any minerals. Argon makes up 1 percent of the
atmosphere. So assuming that no air gets into a mineral grain when it first forms, it has zero argon
content. That is, a fresh mineral grain has its K-Ar "clock" set at zero.
from the spike, and the remaining 40Ar is radiogenic. Because the spike is precisely known, the 40Ar is
measured by comparison to it.
Variations in this data may point to errors anywhere in the process, which is why all the steps of
preparation are recorded in detail.
K-Ar analyses cost several hundred dollars per sample and take a week or two.
The 40Ar-39Ar Method
A variant of the K-Ar method gives better data by making the overall measurement process simpler. The
key is to put the sample in a neutron beam, which converts potassium-39 into argon-39. Because 39Ar has
a very short half-life, it is guaranteed to be absent in the sample beforehand, thus it makes a clean
indicator of the potassium content. The advantage is that all the information needed for dating the sample
comes from the same argon measurement. Accuracy is greater and errors are lower. This method is
commonly called "argon-argon dating."
The physical procedure for 40Ar-39Ar dating is the same except for three differences:
Before the mineral sample is put in the vacuum oven, it is irradiated along with samples of standard
materials by a neutron source.
There is no 38Ar spike needed.
Four Ar isotopes are measured: 36Ar, 37Ar, 39Ar and 40Ar.
The analysis of the data is more complex than in the K-Ar method, because the irradiation creates argon
atoms from other isotopes beside 40K. These effects must be corrected, and the process is intricate enough
to require computers.
Ar-Ar analyses cost around $1000 per sample and take several weeks.
Conclusion
The Ar-Ar method is considered superior, but some of its problems are avoided in the older K-Ar method.
Also, the cheaper K-Ar method can be used for screening or reconnaissance purposes, saving Ar-Ar for
the most demanding or interesting problems.
These dating methods have been under constant improvement for more than 50 years. The learning curve
has been long and is far from over today. With each increment in quality, more subtle sources of error
have been found and taken into account. Good materials and skilled hands can yield ages that are certain
to within 1 percent, even in rocks only 10,000 years old, in which quantities of 40Ar are vanishingly small.
XXX
4
http://geology.about.com/od/geotime_dating/a/timeyardstick.htm
About Isotopic Dating: Yardsticks for Geologic Time
The Century in Review
By Andrew Alden, About.com
The work of geologists is to tell the true story of Earth's historymore precisely, a story of Earth's
history that is ever more true. A hundred years ago, we had little idea of the story's lengthwe had no
good yardstick for time. Today, with the help of isotopic dating methods, we can determine the ages of
rocks nearly as well as we map the rocks themselves. For that we can thank radioactivity, discovered at
the turn of the last century.
The Need for a Geologic Clock
A hundred years ago, our ideas about the ages of rocks and the age of the Earth were vague. But
obviously rocks are very old things. Judging from the amount of rocks there are, plus the imperceptible
rates of the processes forming themerosion, burial, fossilization, upliftthe geologic record must
represent untold millions of years of time. It is that insight, first expressed in 1785, that made James
Hutton the father of geology.
So we knew about "deep time," but exploring it was frustrating. For more than a hundred years the best
method of arranging its history was the use of fossils or biostratigraphy. That only worked for
sedimentary rocks, and only some of those. Rocks of Precambrian age had only the rarest wisps of fossils.
No one knew even how much of Earth history was unknown! We needed a more precise tool, some sort
of clock, to begin to measure it.
The Rise of Isotopic Dating
In 1896, Henri Becquerel's accidental discovery of radioactivity showed what might be possible. We
learned that some elements undergo radioactive decay, spontaneously changing to another type of atom
while giving off a burst of energy and particles. This process happens at a uniform rate unaffected by
ordinary temperatures or ordinary chemistry.
The principle of using radioactive decay as a dating method is simple. Consider this analogy: a barbecue
grill full of burning charcoal. The charcoal burns at a known rate, and if you measure how much charcoal
is left and how much ash has formed, you can tell how long ago the grill was lit.
The geologic equivalent of lighting the grill is the time at which a mineral grain solidified, whether that is
long ago in an ancient granite or just today in a fresh lava flow. The solid mineral grain traps the
radioactive atoms and their decay products, helping to ensure accurate results.
5
Within a few years, experimenters published some trial dates of rocks. Realizing that the decay of
uranium produces helium, Ernest Rutherford in 1905 determined an age for a piece of uranium ore by
measuring the amount of helium trapped in it. Bertram Boltwood in 1907 used lead, the end-product of
uranium decay, as a method to assess the age of the mineral uraninite in some ancient rocks.
The results were spectacular but premature. The rocks appeared to be astonishingly old, ranging in age
from 400 million to more than 2 billion years. But at the time, no one knew about isotopes. Once isotopes
were explicated, during the 1910s, it became clear that radiometric dating methods were not ready for
prime time.
With the discovery of isotopes, the dating problem went back to square one. For instance, the uranium-tolead decay cascade is really twouranium-235 decays to lead-207 and uranium-238 decays to lead-206,
but the second process is nearly seven times slower. Some 200 other isotopes were discovered in the next
decades; those that are radioactive then had their decay rates determined in painstaking lab experiments.
By the 1940s, this fundamental knowledge and advances in instruments made it possible to start
determining dates that mean something to geologists. But techniques are still advancing today because
with every step forward, a host of new scientific questions can be asked and answered.
Methods of Isotopic Dating
There are two main methods of isotopic dating. One detects and counts radioactive atoms through their
radiation. The pioneers of radiocarbon dating used this method because carbon-14, the radioactive isotope
of carbon, is very active, decaying with a half-life of just 5730 years. The first radiocarbon laboratories
were built underground, using antique materials from before the 1940s era of radioactive contamination,
with the aim of keeping background radiation low. Even so, it can take weeks of patient counting to get
accurate results, especially in old samples in which very few radiocarbon atoms remain. This method is
still in use for scarce, highly radioactive isotopes like carbon-14 and tritium (hydrogen-3). (Anne Marie
has also prepared this worked-out example of radiocarbon dating.)
Most decay processes of geologic interest are too slow for decay-counting methods. The other method
relies on actually counting the atoms of each isotope, not waiting for some of them to decay. This method
is harder, but more promising. It involves preparing samples and running them through a mass
spectrometer, which sifts them atom by atom according to weight as neatly as one of those coin-sorting
machines.
For an example, consider the potassium-argon method. Atoms of potassium come in three isotopes.
Potassium-39 and potassium-41 are stable, but potassium-40 undergoes a form of decay that turns it to
argon-40 with a half-life of 1,277 million years. Thus the older a sample gets, the smaller the percentage
of potassium-40, and conversely the greater the percentage of argon-40 relative to argon-36 and argon-38.
Counting a few million atoms (easy with just micrograms of rock) yields dates that are quite good.
Isotopic dating has underlain the whole century of progress we have made on Earth's true history. And
what happened in those billions of years? That's enough time to fit all the geologic events we ever heard
of, with billions left over. But with these dating tools we've been busy mapping deep time, and the story is
getting more accurate every year.
Isotope Help from About Chemistry
About AtomsRadiocarbon Dating Example
XXX
http://geology.about.com/od/geotime_dating/a/uraniumlead.htm
Uranium-Lead Dating
By Andrew Alden
Concordia diagram, with ages along the curve measured in million years.
Of all the isotopic dating methods in use today, the uranium-lead method is the oldest and, when done
carefully, the most reliable. Unlike any other method, uranium-lead has a natural cross-check built into it
that shows when nature has tampered with the evidence.
Basics of Uranium-Lead
Uranium comes in two common isotopes with atomic weights of 235 and 238 (we'll call them 235U and
238U). Both are unstable and radioactive, shedding nuclear particles in a cascade that doesn't stop until
they become lead (Pb). The two cascades are different235U becomes 207Pb and 238U becomes 206Pb.
What makes this fact useful is that they occur at different rates, as expressed in their half-lives (the time
it takes for half the atoms to decay). The 235U207Pb cascade has a half-life of 704 million years and
the 238U206Pb cascade is considerably slower, with a half-life of 4.47 billion years.
So when a mineral grain forms (specifically, when it first cools below its trapping temperature), it
effectively sets the uranium-lead "clock" to zero. Lead atoms created by uranium decay are trapped in the
crystal and build up in concentration with time. If nothing disturbs the grain to release any of this
radiogenic lead, dating it is straightforward in concept. In a 704-million-year-old rock, 235U is at its halflife and there will be an equal number of 235U and 207Pb atoms (the Pb/U ratio is 1). In a rock twice as
old there will be one 235U atom left for every three 207Pb atoms (Pb/U = 3), and so forth. With 238U the
7
Pb/U ratio grows much more slowly with age, but the idea is the same. If you took rocks of all ages and
plotted their two Pb/U ratios from their two isotope pairs against each other on a graph, the points would
form a beautiful line called a concordia (see the example in the right column).
Zircon in Uranium-Lead Dating
The favorite mineral among U-Pb daters is zircon (ZrSiO4), for several good reasons.
First, its chemical structure likes uranium and hates lead. Uranium easily substitutes for zirconium while
lead is strongly excluded. This means the clock is truly set at zero when zircon forms.
Second, zircon has a high trapping temperature of 900C. Its clock is not easily disturbed by geologic
eventsnot erosion or consolidation into sedimentary rocks, not even moderate metamorphism.
Third, zircon is widespread in igneous rocks as a primary mineral. This makes it especially valuable for
dating these rocks, which have no fossils to indicate their age.
Fourth, zircon is physically tough and easily separated from crushed rock samples because of its high
density.
Other minerals sometimes used for uranium-lead dating include monazite, titanite and two other
zirconium minerals, baddeleyite and zirconolite. However, zircon is so overwhelming a favorite that
geologists often just refer to "zircon dating."
But even the best geologic methods are imperfect. Dating a rock involves uranium-lead measurements on
many zircons, then assessing the quality of the data. Some zircons are obviously disturbed and can be
ignored, while other cases are harder to judge. In these cases, the concordia diagram is a valuable tool.
Concordia and Discordia
Consider the concordia: as zircons age, they move outward along the curve. But now imagine that some
geologic event disturbs things to make the lead escape. That would take the zircons on a straight line back
to zero on the concordia diagram. The straight line takes the zircons off the concordia.
This is where data from many zircons is important. The disturbing event affects the zircons unequally,
stripping all the lead from some, only part of it from others and leaving some untouched. The results from
these zircons therefore plot along that straight line, establishing what is called a discordia.
Now consider the discordia. If a 1500-million-year-old rock is disturbed to create a discordia, then is
undisturbed for another billion years, the whole discordia line will migrate along the curve of the
concordia, always pointing to the age of the disturbance. This means that zircon data can tell us not only
when a rock formed, but also when significant events occurred during its life.
The oldest zircon yet found dates from 4.4 billion years ago. With this background in the uranium-lead
method, you may have a deeper appreciation of the research presented on the University of Wisconsin's
"Earliest Piece of the Earth" page, including the 2001 paper in Nature that announced the record-setting
date.
XXX
http://geology.about.com/library/bl/time/blgeotimescale.htm
Era
Dates (m.y.)
Phanerozoic
Cenozoic
66-0
Mesozoic
251-66
Paleozoic
542-251
Proterozoic Neoproterozoic
1000-542
Mesoproterozoic 1600-1000
Paleoproterozoic 2500-1600
Archean
Neoarchean
2800-2500
Mesoarchean
3200-2800
Paleoarchean
3600-3200
Eoarchean
4600-3600
(c) 2005 Andrew Alden, licensed to About.com, Inc. (fair use policy). Data from Geologic Time Scale of 2004)
All of geologic time, from the Earth's origin about 4600 million years ago to today, is divided into three
eons. The first two eons, Archean and Proterozoic, and their seven eras are together informally referred to
as Precambrian time. Read summaries of the Archean Eon and the Proterozoic Eon.
The eras of the Proterozoic and Phanerozoic eons are each further divided into periods, shown in this
geologic time scale.
The periods of the three Phanerozoic eras are divided in turn into epochs. (See the Phanerozoic epochs
listed together.) Epochs are subdivided into ages. Because there are so many ages, they are presented
separately for the Paleozoic Era, the Mesozoic Era and the Cenozoic Era.
The dates and colors shown on this table were specified by the International Commission on Stratigraphy
in 2004. Colors are used to indicate the age of rocks on geologic maps. There are two major color
standards, the international standard and the U.S. Geological Survey standard. (All of the geologic time
scales here are made using the USGS standard.)
XXX
http://en.allexperts.com/q/Archaeology-654/DAting-Methods.htm
Question
I asked a creationists about current dating methods and this is what he said, is what he's saying valid?
You are repeating some claims by the evolutionists that are simply NOT TRUE. "scientists use several
dating methods which all coincide with the same age" They don't tell you they select those that agree and
throw away MANY others that don't agree. "dating methods on the fossil records on the continents seems
conclusive" NOT TRUE!!!
Dr. John Morris, a geologist, explains in easy-to-understand terms how true science supports a young
Earth. Includes a critique of major dating methods. Filled with facts that will equip layman and scientist
alike. Transparency masters are provided in the second half of this book. Use them in your Sunday
school, church or youth group to challenge and teach.
Radioactive dating in general depends on three major assumptions:
1. When the rock forms (hardens) there should only be parent radioactive atoms in the rock and no
daughter radiogenic (derived by radioactive decay of another element) atoms;
2. After hardening, the rock must remain a closed system, that is, no parent or daughter atoms should be
added to or removed from the rock by external influences such as percolating ground water; and
3. The radioactive decay rate must remain constant.
Radiometric dating methods make assumptions that have been proven to be inconsistent. If any of
these assumptions are violated, then the technique fails and any dates' are false. Leaching, varying
isotope ratios, etc. indicate the methods at best are unreliable. Dr. Steve Austin at ICR tested rocks from
the bottom and top of Grand Canyon. Three of the four methods showed that the bottom rocks were
younger than the top rock an IMPOSSIBLE conclusion. The radiological methods date rocks that were
liquid and are now solid. These rocks do not contain fossils. The fossil bearing rock is sedimentary (laid
down under water in Noah's flood). Evolutionists consistently disregard radiometric dates that conflict
with their time scheme. If a date doesn't support evolution they throw it away. See John Morris' "Young
Earth" and the book Bone of Contention for a detailed study of missing links of apes to men.
10
Carbon Dating is a method that is often cited to prove evolution. It does not because:
1) as a method it can only extend to 50,000 years not millions of years,
2) C14 can only date tissue not fossils (stone impressions of bones). When you find (some have been
found) real dinosaur bones it is a testimony to creation because biological tissue won't last millions of
years.
3) Carbon 14 has not come to balance in the atmosphere indicating a young not old atmosphere.
Answer
Dear Eric
There are so many things wrong with this, I scarcely know where to begin. The cardinal assumptions (13) about radiometric dating that your creationist correspondent cites are correct, and they hold true for
most applications of the major dating methods we use to reconstruct earth history (i.e., potassium-argon,
uranium-series, radiocarbon).
It is not true that geologists discard MANY dates that disagree with previous ones. It is the case that
occasionally contamination, bad preparation, or mechanical errors result in one or two dates in a much
larger series of dates for a particular rock sample being discordantly young or old. What the creationist
fails to point out is that if their young chronology was true, then ALL the dates should be young, not just
one or two that are explicable in terms of contamination or processing errors.
When the results of radiometric dating studies are published in the scientific literature, they typically
include ALL the dates, regardless of how well they fit with prior hypotheses about the age of the samples.
Then in the discussion section of the paper the authors explain why outlying dates might be rejected.
Other scientists who disagree with these arguments can then examine the evidence and make their own
case for accepting the discordant dates.
Applying more than one dating method to the same rock formation is not the exception, it is the rule in
geochronology. Agreements among different dating systems are what we scientists call "independent
verification". The more lines of evidence that point to the same conclusion, the surer you can be that your
conclusion is valid. (Like having both fingerprints and DNA in a crime scene analysis.) It is true that
popular summaries of geological dating (like high school or college textbooks) might list a single value
for a geological event, for the purpose of simplicity or presentation, but if you dig into the mainstream
scientific literature, you will easily enough find the actual dates accompanied by their lab numbers, the
proportions of radioisotopes upon which they are based, the assumptions of the dating model, and the
debate about the validity of the dates.
Grand Canyon Study by the ICR's Steve Austin? Never heard of it. Were this finding of reversed
chronology in the "Grand Canyon" valid, and more to the point, replicated by other scientists it would
have been a headline paper in Science or Nature. That it isn't speaks volumes about its validity. ICR
publishes all kinds of silly pseudo-scientific sounding stuff that takes issue with some of the minor
problems with geology, paleontology, and anthropology, magnifying them through rhetorical tricks into
allegedly fatal flaws. But what they consistently fail to point out that when real scientists discover these
mistakes they work hard to fix them, or, failing that to modify their hypotheses accordingly.
11
Creationists, in contrast, are still pushing the same 3000-year old Genesis-based cosmogenic myth, in
spite of the fact that nearly every major discovery in biology, chemistry, geology, history, and
anthropology has proven their account of human origins wrong over and over. This is why, when you
step back from the debate and look at the behavior of the participants with an anthropologist's eye, you
instantly recognize that "creation science" is a faith-based argument, not science. It is just as immune
from being proven wrong to its adherents as are the tenets of any of the world's religions.
Their comments on radiocarbon dating are gibberish. Inasmuch as Willard Libby won the Nobel Prize for
Physics for discovering the principle of radiocarbon dating, you'd think that such flaws as are claimed
here would have been discovered in the review process for that award.
For a good take on these issues, see Niles Eldredges' book, The Triumph of Evolution and the Failure of
Creationism. The title pretty much says it all.
Cheers,
John Shea
12
13
Xhttp://archaeology.about.com/cs/datingtechniques/a/timing_2.htmxx
In 1929, they found a charred log near Show Low, Arizona, that connected the two patterns. It was now
possible to assign a calendar date to archaeological sites in the American southwest for over 1000 years.
Determining calendar rates using dendrochronology is a matter of matching known patterns of light and
dark rings to those recorded by Douglass and his successors. Dendrochronology has been extended in the
American southwest to 322 BC, by adding increasingly older archaeological samples to the record. There
are dendrochronological records for Europe and the Aegean, and the International Tree Ring Database has
contributions from 21 different countries.
The main drawback to dendrochronology is its reliance on the existence of relatively long-lived
vegetation with annual growth rings. Secondly, annual rainfall is a regional climatic event, and so tree
ring dates for the southwest are of no use in other regions of the world.
http://archaeology.about.com/cs/datingtechniques/a/timing_3.htm
15
Calibration
In the 50 or so years since Libby and his associates created the radiocarbon dating technique, refinements
and calibrations have both improved the technique and revealed its weaknesses. Calibration of the dates
may be completed by looking through tree ring data for a ring exhibiting the same amount of C14 as in a
particular sample--thus providing a known date for the sample. Such investigations have identified
wiggles in the data curve, such as at the end of the Archaic period in the United States, when atmospheric
C14 fluctuated, adding further complexity to calibration.
One of the first modifications to C14 dating came about in the first decade after the Libby-ArnoldAnderson work at Chicago. One limitation of the original C14 dating method is that it measures the
current radioactive emissions; Accelerator Mass Spectrometry dating counts the atoms themselves,
allowing for sample sizes up to 1000 times smaller than conventional C14 samples.
While neither the first nor the last absolute dating methodology, C14 dating practices were clearly the
most revolutionary, and some say helped to usher in a new scientific period to the field of archaeology.
Xxx
http://archaeology.about.com/cs/datingtechniques/a/timing_4.htm
16
Obsidian Hydration
Obsidian hydration uses the rate of rind growth on volcanic glass to determine dates; after a new fracture,
a rind covering the new break grows at a constant rate. Dating limitations are physical ones; it takes
several centuries for a detectable rind to be created, and rinds over 50 microns tend to crumble. The
Obsidian Hydration Laboratory at the University of Auckland, New Zealand describes the method in
some detail. Obsidian hydration is regularly used in Mesoamerican sites, such as Copan.
Thermoluminescence dating
Thermoluminescence (called TL) dating was invented around 1960 by physicists, and is based on the fact
that electrons in all minerals emit light (luminesce) after being heated. It is good for between about 300 to
about 100,000 years ago, and is a natural for dating ceramic vessels. TL dates have recently been the
center of the controversy over dating the first human colonization of Australia. There are several other
forms of luminescence dating as well, but they are not as frequently used to date as TL.
Archaeo- and Paleo-magnetism
Archaeomagnetic and paleomagnetic dating techniques rely on the fact that the earth's magnetic field
varies over time. The original databanks were created by geologists interested in the movement of the
planetary poles, and they were first used by archaeologists during the 1960s. Jeffrey Eighmy's
Archaeometrics Laboratory at Colorado State provides details of the method and its specific use in the
American southwest.
Oxidized Carbon Ratios
This newly developed method is a chemical procedure that uses a dynamical systems formula to establish
the effects of the environmental context (systems theory), and was developed by Douglas Frink and the
Archaeological Consulting Team. OCR has been used recently to date the construction of Watson Brake.
Racemization Dating
Racemization dating is a process which uses the measurement of the decay rate of carbon protein amino
acids to date once-living organic tissue. All living organisms have protein; protein is made up of amino
acids. All but one of these amino acids (glycine) has two different chiral forms (mirror images of each
other). While an organism lives, their proteins are composed of only 'left-handed' (laevo, or L) amino
acids, but once the organism dies the left-handed amino acids slowly turn into right-handed (dextro or D)
amino acids. Once formed, the D amino acids themselves slowly turn back to L forms at the same rate. In
brief, racemization dating uses the pace of this chemical reaction to estimate the length of time that has
elapsed since an organism's death. For more details, see racemization dating
Racemization can be used to date objects between 5,000 and 1,000,000 years old, and was used recently
to date the age of sediments at Pakefield, the earliest record of human occupation in northwest Europe.
17
Xxx
http://archaeology.about.com/cs/datingtechniques/a/timing_5.htm
from the above chart, it is an extremely crucial aspect to our studies. But that's another feature.
Secondly, never rely on one dating methodology. If at all possible, the archaeologist will have several
dates taken, and cross check them by using another form of dating. This may be simply comparing a suite
of radiocarbon dates to the dates derived from collected artifacts, or using TL dates to confirm Potassium
Argon readings.
I believe it is safe to say that the advent of absolute dating methods completely changed our profession,
directing it away from the romantic contemplation of the classical past, and toward the scientific study of
human behaviors. Not everybody is happy with this change, but it is a change towards science
nonetheless.
Xxx
http://chemistry.about.com/od/workedchemistryproblems/a/c14dating.htm
carbon dating
radioactive decay
isotopes
worked chemistry problems
Introduction
In the 1950s W.F. Libby and others (University of Chicago) devised a method of estimating the age of
organic material based on the decay rate of carbon-14. Carbon-14 dating can be used on objects ranging
from a few hundred years old to 50,000 years old.
Carbon-14 is produced in the atmosphere when neutrons from cosmic radiation react with nitrogen atoms:
14
7N
Free carbon, including the carbon-14 produced in this reaction, can react to form carbon dioxide, a
component of air. Atmospheric carbon dioxide, CO2, has a steady-state concentration of about one atom
of carbon-14 per every 1012 atoms of carbon-12. Living plants and animals that eat plants (like people)
take in carbon dioxide and have the same 14C/12C ratio as the atmosphere.
19
However, when a plant or animal dies, it stops intaking carbon as food or air. The radioactive decay of the
carbon that is already present starts to change the ratio of 14C/12C. By measuring how much the ratio is
lowered, it is possible to make an estimate of how much time has passed since the plant or animal lived.
The decay of carbon-14 is:
14
6C
Example Problem
A scrap of paper taken from the Dead Sea Scrolls was found to have a 14C/12C ratio of 0.795 times that
found in plants living today. Estimate the age of the scroll.
Solution
The half-life of carbon-14 is known to be 5720 years. Radioactive decay is a first order rate process,
which means the reaction proceeds according to the following equation:
log10 X0/X = kt / 2.30
where X0 is the quantity of radioactive material at time zero, X is the amount remaining after time t, and k
is the first order rate constant, which is a characteristic of the isotope undergoing decay. Decay rates are
usually expressed in terms of their half-life instead of the first order rate constant, where
k = 0.693 / t1/2
so for this problem:
k = 0.693 / 5720 years = 1.21 x 10-4/year
log X0 / X = [(1.21 x 10-4/year] x t] / 2.30
X = 0.795 X0, so log X0 / X = log 1.000/0.795 = log 1.26 = 0.100
therefore, 0.100 = [(1.21 x 10-4/year) x t] / 2.30
t = 1900 years
Recent Chemistry Features
More Worked Problems
20
Worked Chemistry Problem IndexAtomic Mass & Isotope AbundanceIsotopes & Nuclear Symbols
New posts to the Chemistry forums:
Salt Water?Electronic configuration of nickel.
Suggested Reading
Carbon FactsHalf Life DefinitionIsotope Definition
Related Articles
Xxx
21
http://www.c14dating.com/index.html
INTRODUCTION
http://www.c14dating.com/int.html
BY: THOMAS HIGHAM
"Everything which has come down to us from heathendom is wrapped in a thick fog; it belongs to a space of time we cannot
measure. We know that it is older than Christendom, but whether by a couple of years or a couple of centuries, or even by more
than a millenium, we can do no more than guess." [Rasmus Nyerup, (Danish antiquarian), 1802 (in Trigger, 1989:71)].
Nyerup's words illustrate poignantly the critical power and importance of dating; to order time.
Radiocarbon dating has been one of the most significant discoveries in 20th century science. Renfrew
(1973) called it 'the radiocarbon revolution' in describing its impact upon the human sciences. Oakley
(1979) suggested its development meant an almost complete re-writing of the evolution and cultural
emergence of the human species. Desmond Clark (1979) wrote that were it not for radiocarbon dating,
"we would still be foundering in a sea of imprecisions sometime bred of inspired guesswork but more
often of imaginative speculation" (Clark, 1979:7). Writing of the European Upper Palaeolithic, Movius
(1960) concluded that "time alone is the lens that can throw it into focus".
The radiocarbon method was developed by a team of scientists led by the late Professor Willard F. Libby
of the University of Chicago in immediate post-WW2 years. Libby later received the Nobel Prize in
Chemistry in 1960:
"for his method to use Carbon-14 for age determinations in archaeology, geology, geophysics, and other
branches of science."
According to one of the scientists who nominated Libby as a candidate for this honour;
"Seldom has a single discovery in chemistry had such an impact on the thinking of so many fields of
human endeavour. Seldom has a single discovery generated such wide public interest."
Today, there are over 130 radiocarbon dating laboratories around the world producing
radiocarbon assays for the scientific community.
The C14 technique has been and continues to be applied and used in many, many different fields
including hydrology, atmospheric science, oceanography, geology, palaeoclimatology, archaeology and
biomedicine.
22
below is an impressive list of some of the types of carbonaceous samples that have been commonly
radiocarbon dated in the years since the inception of the method:
The historical perspective on the development of radiocarbon dating is well outlined in Taylor's (1987)
book "Radiocarbon Dating: An archaeological perspective". Libby and his team intially tested the
radiocarbon method on samples from prehistoric Egypt. They chose samples whose age could be
independently determined. A sample of acacia wood from the tomb of the pharoah Zoser (or Djoser; 3rd
Dynasty, ca. 2700-2600 BC) was obtained and dated. Libby reasoned that since the half-life of C14 was
5568 years, they should obtain a C14 concentration of about 50% that which was found in living wood
(see Libby, 1949 for further details).
The results they obtained indicated this was the case. Other analyses were conducted on samples of
known age wood (dendrochronologically aged). Again, the fit was within the value predicted at 10%.
The tests suggested that the half-life they had measured was accurate, and, quite reasonably, suggested
further that atmospheric radiocarbon concentration had remained constant throughout the recent past. In
1949, Arnold and Libby (1949) published their paper "Age determinations by radiocarbon content:
Checks with samples of known age" in the journal Science. In this paper they presented the first results of
the C14 method, including the "Curve of Knowns" in which radiocarbon dates were compared with the
known age historical dates (see figure 1). All of the points fitted within statistical range. Within a few
24
years, other laboratories had been built. By the early 1950's there were 8, and by the end of the decade
there were more than 20.
Figure 1: The "Curve of Knowns" after Libby and Arnold (1949). The first acid test of the new method was based upon radiocarbon dating of
known age samples primarily from Egypt (the dates are shown in the diagram by the red lines, each with a 1 standard deviation included). The
Egyptian King's name is given next to the date obtained. The theoretical curve was constructed using the half-life of 5568 years. The activity ratio
relates to the carbon 14 activity ratio between the ancient samples and the modern activity. Each result was within the statistical range of the true
historic date of each sample.
In the 1950s, further measurements on Mediterranean samples, in particular those from Egypt whose age
was known through other means, pointed to radiocarbon dates which were younger than expected. The
debate regarding this is outlined extensively in Renfrew (1972). Briefly, opinion was divided between
those who thought the radiocarbon dates were correct (ie, that radiocarbon years equated more or less to
solar or calendar years) and those who felt they were flawed and the historical data was more accurate. In
the late 1950's and early 1960's, researchers measuring the radioactivity of known age tree rings found
fluctuations in C14 concentration up to a maximum of 5% over the last 1500 years.
In addition to long term fluctuations, smaller 'wiggles' were identified by the Dutch scholar Hessel de
Vries (1958). This suggested there were temporal fluctuations in C14 concentration which would
neccessitate the calibration of radiocarbon dates to other historically aged material. Radiocarbon dates of
sequential dendrochronologically aged trees primarily of US bristlecone pine and German and Irish oak
have been measured over the past 10 years to produce a calendrical / radiocarbon calibration curve which
now extends back over 10 000 years (more on Calibration). This enables radiocarbon dates to be
calibrated to solar or calendar dates.
Later measurements of the Libby half-life indicated the figure was ca. 3% too low and a more accurate
half-life was 573040 years. This is known as the Cambridge half-life. (To convert a "Libby" age to an
age using the Cambridge half-life, one must multiply by 1.03).
The major developments in the radiocarbon method up to the present day involve improvements in
measurement techniques and research into the dating of different materials. Briefly, the initial solid
carbon method developed by Libby and his collaborators was replaced with the Gas counting method in
the 1950's. Liquid scintillation counting, utilising benzene, acetylene, ethanol, methanol etc, was
developed at about the same time. Today the vast majority of radiocarbon laboratories utilise these two
methods of radiocarbon dating. Of major recent interest is the development of the Accelerator Mass
Spectrometry method of direct C14 isotope counting. In 1977, the first AMS measurements were
25
conducted by teams at Rochester/Toronto and the General Ionex Corporation and soon after at the
Universities of Simon Fraser and McMaster (Gove, 1994). The crucial advantage of the AMS method is
that milligram sized samples are required for dating. Of great public interest has been the AMS dating of
carbonacous material from prehistoric rock art sites, the Shroud of Turin and the Dead Sea Scrolls in the
last few years.
The development of high-precision dating (up to 2.0 per mille or 16 yr) in a number of gas and liquid
scintillation facilities has been of similar importance (laboratories at Belfast (N.Ireland), Seattle (US),
Heidelberg (Ger), Pretoria (S.Africa), Groningen (Netherlands), La Jolla (US), Waikato (NZ) and Arizona
(US) are generally accepted to have demonstrated radiocarbon measurements at high levels of precision).
The calibration research undertaken primarily at the Belfast and Seattle labs required that high levels of
precision be obtained which has now resulted in the extensive calibration data now available. The
development of small sample capabilities for LSC and Gas labs has likewise been an important
development - samples as small as 100 mg are able to be dated to moderate precision on minigas counters
(Kromer, 1994) with similar sample sizes needed using minivial technology in Liquid Scintillation
Counting. The radiocarbon dating method remains arguably the most dependable and widely applied
dating technique for the late Pleistocene and Holocene periods.
XXX
MEASUREMENT
There are three principal methods of measuring residual C14 activity.
26
Counting Liquid
In the majority of LSC facilities, the scintillation solvent is benzene (C6H6) or a mixture of benzene and
toluene (C6H6CH3). Benzene has been chosen because of its excellent light transmission properties and
the high chemical conversion yield of sample C to benzene. The sample is first converted to CO2, then
reacted with molten lithium to form lithium carbide (Li2C2), before being catalytically trimerised to
benzene. Benzene synthesis procedures vary considerably in different laboratories. The details outlined
below describe the procedures used in the Waikato laboratory to give the reader some idea of how the
chemical conversions may be carried out.
The carbon is first oxidised to CO2, either by acid hydrolysis (for carbonates), or combustion in an
oxygen stream or combustion bomb (for organic materials). The combustion gases are passed over heated
CuO to complete the oxidation of CO, NO, N2O and NO2 and also of tar substances. The CO2 may then
be then purified using a chain of wet chemical reagents; for example, AgNO3 and Hg(NO3)2 to
precipitate halogens, and the oxidising agents KI/I2 and K2Cr2O7 to remove nitrogen and sulphur
compounds. Silica gel and dry ice traps (-80C) remove any water remaining in the gas (see figure 1).
The purified CO2 is then reacted with molten lithium in a stainless steel or inconel reaction vessel in
vacuo:
2CO2 + 10Li => Li2C2 + 4Li2O
This reaction was first described by Barker (1953), who developed the reaction using lithium instead of
barium, and later improved by Polach and Stipp (1967). The CO2 is bled slowly onto the molten Li where
it is converted to Li2C2. The carbide is heated to ca. 800C (furnace temperature) and placed under active
vacuum for 30 minutes to remove any unreacted gases and complete the carbide synthesis (Gupta and
Polach, 1985). The lithium carbide is cooled and then hydrolysed to acetylene gas (Li2C2):
Li2C2 + 2H2O => C2H2 + 2LiOH
The acetylene is purified by passing through a phosphoric acid trap to remove ammonia compounds, and
again, dry ice traps to remove water vapour. Finally the acetylene is trimerised to benzene using a suitable
catalyst. There are a variety of vanadium or chromium activated catalysts available, including a silicaalumina vanadium activated catalyst developed by John Noakes (CAIS, Univ. of Georgia), a vanadiumalumina-silica catalyst produced at the Institute of Geography, Univ. of Petersburg by Dr Kh. A. Arslanov
and another at the British Museum by Dr J. Ambers. The catalytic trimerisation for some catalysts may be
more efficient at reduced temperatures (e.g. 5C).
3C2H2 => C6H6
Benzene is then driven off the catalyst at ca. 100C and collected under vacuum at ca. -65C. The
benzene is then stored in a vial under refrigeration to await counting.
This sequence of reactions requires a high degree of operator skill because of the complexity of the
equipment and the nature of the reactions. It is important that a standardised routine is followed carefully
and consistently, so that yields remain high and there is little cross-contamination between samples.
27
Counting vials
The synthesised benzene is transferred into counting vials of a variety of types. The counting vials contain
the sample solvent and the scintillator. Commercially available LS vials used for benzene counting are
commonly composed of either Teflon, quartz or low-K glass (e.g. Polach et al.1983; Haas 1979; Devine
& Haas 1987; Noakes & Valenta 1989; Hogg & Noakes, 1992; Hogg 1993). Polyethylene and
polypropylene vials are very useful for non-aromatic solvents, but their permeability makes them
unsuitable for repeatable long-term benzene use.
In a comparison of different vial types, Hogg et al . (1991) concluded that, for spectrometers using true
anticoincidence detection and extensive passive shielding (as in the Perkin Elmer 1220 Quantulus),
Teflon or synthetic silica vials produced the highest performance in terms of 14C detection efficiency and
background. The authors also noted that synthetic silica had superior physical properties to Teflon. The
silica vials vary in size according to the weight of the sample benzene being counted, including 0.3 ml
and 1 ml minivials, 3 ml standard vials and 12 ml vials, suitable for high precision applications. Low-K
glass vials are supplied in either 7 ml or 20 ml sizes.
The most commonly used scintillator in 14C dating is PPO + POPOP, either dissolved in toluene or
directly in sample benzene. Polach et al (1983) made a comparative study of various scintillators and
concluded that dry powder butyl-PBD dissolved in sample benzene (15g/l) gave superior and stable
performance even under extreme quench conditions. Some Packard spectrometers utilise an active plastic
holder (Pico adaptor) which helps to reduce background radiation. These instruments require a secondary
wave shifter (usually bis-MSB, see Cook, Harkness & Anderson 1989) to be added to the butyl-PBD. In
the Waikato laboratory, the scintillator (butyl-PBD) is dissolved directly into the sample benzene at a
concentration of 15g/l. The vial is then transferred into a Quantulus spectrometer and allowed to cool and
dark adapt for a minimum of 8 hours prior to the commencement of counting.
Liquid Scintillation Spectrometry
The essential electronic components of the Liquid Scintillation (LS) Spectrometer according to Gupta and
Polach (1985), are photo multiplier tubes (PMTs), high voltage supply, signal preamplifiers, pulse and
summing amplifiers, coincidence logic, timer and scaler (Gupta and Polach, 1985:50). The LS
spectrometer measures electronically the pulses of light generated from photon emissions emitted by a
scintillator in response to a radioactive decay event. The PMTs register an electronic pulse proportional to
the energy of a particular beta decay when a photon or light particle is emitted within the benzene
cocktail. The anode current generated from a PMT, then, is a function of the level of radioactivity
(Horrocks, 1974).
External factors interfering with -decay detection by LSC
Optical cross talk
Optical cross-talk occurs between opposed PMTs. An event occurring in one tube initiates a pulse in the
other (Noakes, 1977). Ionising events may occur in either PMT due to interactions between the molecules
of the tube material and surrounding radiation. Butterfield and Polach (1983) and Gupta and Polach
(1985) have described methods used to reduce optical cross talk in LS counters, both by optimising and
refining electronic circuitry to enable differentiation between sample and non-sample events and by
masking areas in the counting chamber to reduce reflection. Carefully designed vials and vial holders can
also help to reduce cross-talk, by minimising the view of opposing PMTs to each other.
28
Rn emits alpha and beta particles, the latter with a decay energy of 5.587 meV. This decay interferes
with the 14C spectrum, resulting in higher count rates and radiocarbon ages that are too young. Radon's
short half-life of 3.82 days, however, means that a delay in counting eliminates the problem. Sample
benzene is therefore often left for 3 - 4 weeks to allow any radon that may be present to decay. Potential
222
Rn contamination is more significant in older samples because of their lower count rates.
Natural radioactivity and cosmic radiation
Natural atmospheric radiation influences sample count rates. This is reduced through shielding of the
counting environment. This may be passive or active shielding. The passive shield consists of lead which
shields the counting chamber from external radiation. The term 'active shielding' describes electronic
means of recognising and eliminating background causing events from the sample beta spectrum. Active
shielding occurs in two forms in modern LS counters.
The Perkin Elmer Quantulus, utilises an electronic anti-coincidence guard, comprising a liquid scintillator
guard containing it's own phototubes, surrounding the counting chamber and sample PMTs. Ionising
radiation from non-sample external sources passing through the guard scintillator leaves excited atoms
and molecules in it which are seen by the guard PMTs. If an ionising event is recorded simultaneously in
the guard and sample tubes, it is rejected as a background count. Some Packard counters utilise 'time
resolved counting' to differentiate between, sample events with a low pulse index (see Roessler et al, 1991
for details), and background events with a higher pulse index.
Most higher performance counters use multi-channel analysers (MCAs) to store and evaluate counting
data. The MCAs are software-controlled to provide complete flexibility in data acquisition.
29
XXX
http://www.rlaha.ox.ac.uk/
Dating
o
o
o
Radiocarbon dating
Luminescence dating
Tephrochronology and Quaternary Geochronology
Xxxx
Radiocarbon dating
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Radiocarbon dating is a radiometric dating method that uses the naturally occurring
radioisotope carbon-14 (14C) to determine the age of carbonaceous materials up to about 60,000
years.[1] Raw, i.e. uncalibrated, radiocarbon ages are usually reported in radiocarbon years
"Before Present" (BP), "Present" being defined as AD 1950. Such raw ages can be calibrated to
give calendar dates.
30
One of the most frequent uses of radiocarbon dating is to estimate the age of organic remains
from archaeological sites. When plants fix atmospheric carbon dioxide (CO2) into organic
material during photosynthesis they incorporate a quantity of 14C that approximately matches the
level of this isotope in the atmosphere (a small difference occurs because of isotope
fractionation, but this is corrected after laboratory analysis). After plants die or they are
consumed by other organisms (for example, by humans or other animals) the 14C fraction of this
organic material declines at a fixed exponential rate due to the radioactive decay of 14C.
Comparing the remaining 14C fraction of a sample to that expected from atmospheric 14C allows
the age of the sample to be estimated.
The technique of radiocarbon dating was developed by Willard Libby and his colleagues at the
University of Chicago in 1949.[2] Libby estimated that the steady state radioactivity
concentration of exchangeable carbon-14 would be about 14 disintegrations per minute (dpm)
per gram. In 1960, he was awarded the Nobel Prize in chemistry for this work. He first
demonstrated the accuracy of radiocarbon dating by accurately measuring the age of wood from
an ancient Egyptian royal barge whose age was known from historical documents.[2]
Contents
1 Basic physics
2 Computation of ages and dates
3 Measurements and scales
o 3.1 Calibration
3.1.1 The need for calibration
3.1.2 Calibration methods
4 Radiocarbon half-life
o 4.1 Libby vs Cambridge values
5 Carbon exchange reservoir
6 Speleothem studies extend 14C calibration
7 Examples
8 See also
9 Notes
10 References
11 External links
Basic physics
Atmospheric 14C, New Zealand[3] and Austria.[4] The New Zealand curve is representative for the
Southern Hemisphere, the Austrian curve is representative for the Northern Hemisphere. Atmospheric
nuclear weapon tests almost doubled the concentration of 14C in the Northern Hemisphere.[5]
Carbon has two stable, nonradioactive isotopes: carbon-12 (12C), and carbon-13 (13C). In
addition, there are trace amounts of the unstable isotope carbon-14 (14C) on Earth. Carbon-14 has
a half-life of 5730 years and would have long ago vanished from Earth were it not for the
unremitting cosmic ray impacts on nitrogen in the Earth's atmosphere, which create more of the
31
isotope. The neutrons resulting from the cosmic ray interactions participate in the following
nuclear reaction on the atoms of nitrogen molecules (N2) in the atmospheric air:
The highest rate of carbon-14 production takes place at altitudes of 9 to 15 km (30,000 to 50,000
ft), and at high geomagnetic latitudes, but the carbon-14 spreads evenly throughout the
atmosphere and reacts with oxygen to form carbon dioxide. Carbon dioxide also permeates the
oceans, dissolving in the water. For approximate analysis it is assumed that the cosmic ray flux is
constant over long periods of time; thus carbon-14 is produced at a constant rate and the
proportion of radioactive to non-radioactive carbon is constant: ca. 1 part per trillion (600 billion
atoms/mole). In 1958 Hessel de Vries showed that the concentration of carbon-14 in the
atmosphere varies with time and locality. For the most accurate work, these variations are
compensated by means of calibration curves. When these curves are used, their accuracy and
shape are the factors that determine the accuracy and age obtained for a given sample.
Plants take up atmospheric carbon dioxide by photosynthesis, and are ingested by animals, so
every living thing is constantly exchanging carbon-14 with its environment as long as it lives.
Once it dies, however, this exchange stops, and the amount of carbon-14 gradually decreases
through radioactive beta decay.
mean- or average-life: mean or average time each radiocarbon atom spends in a given
sample until it decays.
half-life: time lapsed for half the number of radiocarbon atoms in a given sample, to
decay,
Notice that dates are customarily given in years BP which implies t(BP) = -t because the time
arrow for dates runs in reverse direction from the time arrow for the corresponding ages. From
these considerations and the above equation, it results:
For a raw radiocarbon date:
and for a raw radiocarbon age:
After replacing values, the raw radiocarbon age becomes any of the following equivalent
formulae:
using logs base e and the average life:
and
using logs base 2 and the half-life:
only the statistical counting uncertainty. However, some laboratories supplied an "error
multiplier" that could be multiplied by the uncertainty to account for other sources of error in the
measuring process. More recently, the laboratories try to quote the overall uncertainty, which is
determined from control samples of known age and verified by international intercomparison
exercises [6]. In 2008, a typical uncertainty better than 40 radiocarbon years can be expected for
samples younger than 10,000 years. This, however, is only a small part of the uncertainty of the
final age determination (see section Calibration below).
As of 2007, the limiting age for a 1 milligram sample of graphite is about ten half-lives,
approximately 60,000 years[7]. This age is derived from that of the calibration blanks used in an
analysis, whose 14C content is assumed to be the result of contamination during processing (as a
result of this, some facilities[7] will not report an age greater than 60,000 years for any sample).
A variety of sample processing and instrument-based constraints have been postulated to explain
the upper age-limit. To examine instrument-based background activities in the AMS instrument
of the W. M. Keck Carbon Cycle Accelerator Mass Spectrometry Laboratory of the University of
California, a set of natural diamonds were dated. Natural diamond samples from different
sources within rock formations with standard geological ages in excess of 100 my yielded 14C
apparent ages 64,920430 BP to 80,0001100 BP as reported in 2007[8].
Calibration
The need for calibration
Calibration curve for the radiocarbon dating scale. Data sources: Stuiver et al. (1998)[9]. Samples with a
real date more recent than AD 1950 are dated and/or tracked using the N- & S-Hemisphere graphs. See
preceding figure.
A raw BP date cannot be used directly as a calendar date, because the level of atmospheric 14C
has not been strictly constant during the span of time that can be radiocarbon dated. The level is
affected by variations in the cosmic ray intensity which is in turn affected by variations in the
earth's magnetosphere. In addition, there are substantial reservoirs of carbon in organic matter,
the ocean, ocean sediments (see methane hydrate), and sedimentary rocks. Changes in the Earth's
climate can affect the carbon flows between these reservoirs and the atmosphere, leading to
changes in the atmosphere's 14C fraction.
Aside from these changes due to natural processes, the level has also been affected by human
activities. From the beginning of the industrial revolution in the 18th century to the 1950s, the
fractional level of 14C decreased because of the admixture of large quantities of CO2 into the
atmosphere, the combustion production of fossil fuel. This decline is known as the Suess effect,
and also affects the 13C isotope. However, atmospheric 14C was almost doubled for a short period
during the 1950s and 1960s due to atomic bomb tests.
Calibration methods
The raw radiocarbon dates, in BP years, are calibrated to give calendar dates. Standard
calibration curves are available, based on comparison of radiocarbon dates of samples that can be
34
Radiocarbon half-life
Libby vs Cambridge values
Carbon dating was developed by a team led by Willard Libby. He worked out a carbon-14 halflife of 556830 years, the Libby half-life. Later a more accurate figure of 573040 years was
determined, which is known as the Cambridge half-life. This is, however, not relevant for
radiocarbon dating. If calibration is applied, the half-life cancels out, as long as the same value is
used throughout the calculations. Laboratories continue to use the Libby figure to avoid
inconsistencies with previous publications.
When CO2 is transferred from the atmosphere to the oceans, it initially shares the 14C
concentration of the atmosphere. However, turnaround times of CO2 in the ocean are similar to
the half-life of 14C (making 14C also a dating tool for ocean water[13]. Marine organisms feed on
this "old" carbon, and thus their radiocarbon age reflects the time of CO2 uptake by the ocean
35
rather than the time of death of the organism. This marine reservoir effect is partly handled by a
special marine calibration curve [14], but local deviation of several 100 years exist.
Erosion and immersion of carbonate rocks (which are generally older than 80,000 years and so
shouldn't contain measurable 14C) causes an increase in 12C and 13C in the exchange reservoir,
which depends on local weather conditions and can vary the ratio of carbon that living organisms
incorporate. This is believed negligible for the atmosphere and atmosphere-derived carbon since
most erosion will flow into the sea.[15] The atmospheric 14C concentration may differ substantially
from the concentration in local water reservoirs. Eroded from CaCO3 or organic deposits, old
carbon may be assimilated easily and provide diluted 14C carbon into trophic chains. So the
method is less reliable for such materials as well as for samples derived from animals with such
plants in their food chain.
Volcanic eruptions eject large amount of carbonate into the air, causing an increase in 12C and 13C
in the exchange reservoir and can vary the exchange ratio locally. This explains the often
irregular dating achieved in volcanic areas.[15]
The earth is not affected evenly by cosmic radiation, the magnitude of the radiation depends on
land altitude and earth's magnetic field strength at any given location, causing minor variation in
the local 14C production. This is accounted for by having calibration curves for different locations
of the globe. However this could not always be performed, as tree rings for calibration were only
recoverable from certain locations in 1958.[16] The rebuttals by Mnnich et al.[17] and by Barker[18]
both maintain that while variations of carbon-14 exist, they are about an order of magnitude
smaller than those implied by Crowe's calculations.
These effects were first confirmed when samples of wood from around the world, which all had
the same age (based on tree ring analysis), showed deviations from the dendrochronological age.
Calibration techniques based on tree-ring samples have contributed to increase the accuracy
since 1962, when they were accurate to 700 years at worst.[19]
Examples
Thera eruption
Vinland map
See also
Xxx
Radiometric dating
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Radiometric dating (often called radioactive dating) is a technique used to date materials,
usually based on a comparison between the observed abundance of a naturally occurring
radioactive isotope and its decay products, using known decay rates.[1] It is the principal source
of information about the absolute age of rocks and other geological features, including the age of
the Earth itself, and can be used to date a wide range of natural and man-made materials. Among
the best-known techniques are radiocarbon dating, potassium-argon dating and uranium-lead
dating. By allowing the establishment of geological timescales, it provides a significant source of
information about the ages of fossils and the deduced rates of evolutionary change. Radiometric
dating is also used to date archaeological materials, including ancient artifacts.
Different methods of radiometric dating vary in the timescale over which they are accurate and
the materials to which they can be applied.
37
Contents
local electron density, therefore these isotopes may not be as suitable for radiometric dating.) But
in general, the half-life of any nuclide is essentially a constant. Therefore, in any material
containing a radioactive nuclide, the proportion of the original nuclide to its decay product(s)
changes in a predictable way as the original nuclide decays over time. This predictability allows
the relative abundances of related nuclides to be used as a clock that measures the time from the
incorporation of the original nuclide(s) into a material to the present.
The processes that form specific materials are often conveniently selective as to what elements
they incorporate during their formation. In the simplest case, the material will incorporate a
parent nuclide and reject the daughter nuclide. In this case, the only atoms of the daughter
nuclide present in a sample must have been deposited by radioactive decay since the sample
formed. When a material incorporates both the parent and daughter nuclides at the time of
formation, a correction must be made for the initial proportion of the radioactive substance and
its daughter; generally this is done by construction of an isochron, e.g. in Rubidium-strontium
dating.
Accurate radiometric dating generally requires that neither the parent nuclide nor the daughter
product can enter or leave the material after its formation, that the parent has a long enough halflife that it will still be present in significant amounts at the time of measurement (except as
described below under "Dating with shortlived extinct radionuclides"), the half-life of the parent
is accurately known, and enough of the daughter product is produced to be accurately measured
and distinguished from the initial amount of the daughter present in the material. The procedures
used to isolate and analyze the parent and daughter nuclides must be precise and accurate.[citation
needed]
If a material that selectively rejects the daughter nuclide is heated, any daughter nuclides that
have been accumulated over time will be lost through diffusion, setting the isotopic "clock" to
zero. The temperature at which this happens is known as the blocking temperature or closure
temperature and is specific to a particular material and isotopic system. These temperatures are
experimentally determined in the lab by artificially resetting sample minerals using a hightemperature furnace.
The age equation
Considering that radioactive parent elements decay to stable daughter elements [3], the
mathematical expression that relates radioactive decay to geologic time, called the age equation,
is [4]:
where
t = age of the sample
D = number of atoms of the daughter isotope in the sample
P = number of atoms of the parent isotope in the sample
39
The decay constant (or rate of decay[5]) is the fraction of a number of atoms of a radioactive
nuclide that disintegrates in a unit of time. The decay constant is inversely proportional to the
radioactive half-life of the parent isotope, which can be obtained from tables such as the one on
this page.
Limitation of techniques
Although radiometric dating is accurate in principle, the precision is very dependent on the care
with which the procedure is performed. The possible confounding effects of initial contamination
of parent and daughter isotopes have to be considered, as do the effects of any loss or gain of
such isotopes since the sample was created.
Precision is enhanced if measurements are taken on different samples from the same rock body
but at different locations. Alternatively, if several different minerals can be dated from the same
sample and are assumed to be formed by the same event and were in equilibrium with the
reservoir when they formed, they should form an isochron. Finally, correlation between different
isotopic dating methods may be required to confirm the age of a sample.
The precision of a dating method depends in part on the half-life of the radioactive isotope
involved. For instance, carbon-14 has a half-life of about 6000 years. After an organism has been
dead for 60,000 years, so little carbon-14 is left in it that accurate dating becomes impossible. On
the other hand, the concentration of carbon-14 falls off so steeply that the age of relatively young
remains can be determined precisely to within a few decades. The isotope used in uraniumthorium dating has a longer half-life, but other factors make it more accurate than radiocarbon
dating.[citation needed]
The uranium-lead radiometric dating scheme is one of the oldest available, as well as one of the
most highly respected. It has been refined to the point that the error in dates of rocks about three
billion years old is no more than two million years.[citation needed]
40
Uranium-lead dating is often performed on the mineral "zircon" (ZrSiO4), though it can be used
on other materials. Zircon incorporates uranium atoms into its crystalline structure as substitutes
for zirconium, but strongly rejects lead. It has a very high blocking temperature, is resistant to
mechanical weathering and is very chemically inert. Zircon also forms multiple crystal layers
during metamorphic events, which each may record an isotopic age of the event. In situ microbeam analysis can be achieved via laser ICP-MS or SIMS techniques [6] .
One of its great advantages is that any sample provides two clocks, one based on uranium-235's
decay to lead-207 with a half-life of about 700 million years, and one based on uranium-238's
decay to lead-206 with a half-life of about 4.5 billion years, providing a built-in crosscheck that
allows accurate determination of the age of the sample even if some of the lead has been lost.
Other long time scale methods
Two other radiometric techniques are used for long-term dating. Potassium-argon dating
involves electron capture or positron decay of potassium-40 to argon-40. Potassium-40 has a
half-life of 1.3 billion years, and so this method is applicable to the oldest rocks. Radioactive
potassium-40 is common in micas, feldspars, and hornblendes, though the blocking temperature
is fairly low in these materials, about 125C (mica) to 450C (hornblende).
Rubidium-strontium dating is based on the beta decay of rubidium-87 to strontium-87, with a
half-life of 50 billion years. This scheme is used to date old igneous and metamorphic rocks, and
has also been used to date lunar samples. Blocking temperatures are so high that they are not a
concern. Rubidium-strontium dating is not as precise as the uranium-lead method, with errors of
30 to 50 million years for a 3-billion-year-old sample.
Carbon-14 is a radioactive isotope of carbon, with a half-life of 5,730 years (very short compared
with the above). In other radiometric dating methods, the heavy parent isotopes were synthesized
in the explosions of massive stars that scattered materials through the Galaxy, to be formed into
planets and other stars. The parent isotopes have been decaying since that time, and so any parent
isotope with a short half-life should be extinct by now.
Carbon-14 is an exception. It is continuously created through collisions of neutrons generated by
cosmic rays with nitrogen in the upper atmosphere. The carbon-14 ends up as a trace component
in atmospheric carbon dioxide (CO2).
An organism acquires carbon from carbon dioxide during its lifetime. Plants acquire it through
photosynthesis, and animals acquire it from consumption of plants and other animals. When an
41
organism dies, it ceases to intake new carbon-14 and the existing isotope decays with a
characteristic half-life (5730 years). The proportion of carbon-14 left when the remains of the
organism are examined provides an indication of the time lapsed since its death. The carbon-14
dating limit lies around 58,000 to 62,000 years.[7]
The rate of creation of carbon-14 appears to be roughly constant, as cross-checks of carbon-14
dating with other dating methods show it gives consistent results. However, local eruptions of
volcanoes or other events that give off large amounts of carbon dioxide can reduce local
concentrations of carbon-14 and give inaccurate dates. The releases of carbon dioxide into the
biosphere as a consequence of industrialization have also depressed the proportion of carbon-14
by a few percent; conversely, the amount of carbon-14 was increased by above-ground nuclear
bomb tests that were conducted into the early 1960s. Also, an increase in the solar wind or the
earth's magnetic field above the current value would depress the amount of carbon-14 created in
the atmosphere. These effects are corrected for by the calibration of the radiocarbon dating scale.
See the article on radiocarbon dating.
Other short time scale methods
Another relatively short-range dating technique is based on the decay of uranium-238 into
thorium-230, a substance with a half-life of about 80,000 years. It is accompanied by a sister
process, in which uranium-235 decays into protactinium-231, which has a half-life of 34,300
years.
While uranium is water-soluble, thorium and protactinium are not, and so they are selectively
precipitated into ocean-floor sediments, from which their ratios are measured. The scheme has a
range of several hundred thousand years.
Natural sources of radiation in the environment knock loose electrons in, say, a piece of pottery,
and these electrons accumulate in defects in the material's crystal lattice structure. Heating the
object will release the captured electrons, producing a luminescence. When the sample is heated,
at a certain temperature it will glow from the emission of electrons released from the defects, and
this glow can be used to estimate the age of the sample to a threshold of approximately 15
percent of its true age. The date of a rock is reset when volcanic activity remelts it. The date of a
piece of pottery is reset by the heat of the kiln. Typically temperatures greater than 400 degrees
Celsius will reset the "clock". This is termed thermoluminescence.
Finally, fission track dating involves inspection of a polished slice of a material to determine the
density of "track" markings left in it by the spontaneous fission of uranium-238 impurities.
The uranium content of the sample has to be known, but that can be determined by placing a
plastic film over the polished slice of the material, and bombarding it with slow neutrons. This
causes induced fission of 235U, as opposed to the spontaneous fission of 238U. The fission tracks
produced by this process are recorded in the plastic film. The uranium content of the material can
then be calculated from the number of tracks and the neutron flux.
42
This scheme has application over a wide range of geologic dates. For dates up to a few million
years micas, tektites (glass fragments from volcanic eruptions), and meteorites are best used.
Older materials can be dated using zircon, apatite, titanite, epidote and garnet which have a
variable amount of uranium content. Because the fission tracks are healed by temperatures over
about 200C the technique has limitations as well as benefits. The technique has potential
applications for detailing the thermal history of a deposit.
Large amounts of otherwise rare 36Cl were produced by irradiation of seawater during
atmospheric detonations of nuclear weapons between 1952 and 1958. The residence time of 36Cl
in the atmosphere is about 1 week. Thus, as an event marker of 1950s water in soil and ground
water, 36Cl is also useful for dating waters less than 50 years before the present. 36Cl has seen use
in other areas of the geological sciences, including dating ice and sediments.
argon-argon (Ar-Ar)
fission track dating
helium (He-He)
iodine-xenon (I-Xe)
lanthanum-barium (La-Ba)
lead-lead (Pb-Pb)
lutetium-hafnium (Lu-Hf)
neon-neon (Ne-Ne)
optically stimulated luminescence dating
potassium-argon (K-Ar)
radiocarbon dating
rhenium-osmium (Re-Os)
rubidium-strontium (Rb-Sr)
samarium-neodymium (Sm-Nd)
uranium-lead (U-Pb)
uranium-lead-helium (U-Pb-He)
uranium-thorium (U-Th)
uranium-uranium (U-U)
See also
Exponential decay
Half-life
Isochron dating
Isotope geochemistry
Isotopic signature
Radioactive decay
Radioactivity
sensitive high resolution ion microprobe (SHRIMP)
References
1. ^ International Union of Pure and Applied Chemistry. "radioactive dating". Compendium of
Chemical Terminology Internet edition.
2. ^ http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physics/ParticleAndNuclear/decay_rates.html How to Change
Nuclear Decay Rates
3. ^ Georgia Perimeter College - Radiometric dating
4. ^ U.S. Geological Survey - Radiometric Time Scale
5. ^ University of South Carolina - Center for Science Education - Decay rates
6. ^ SIMS ion micropobes able to achieve zircon analysis are SHRIMP or Cameca IMS 12701280.
refer to Trevor Ireland, Isotope Geochemistry: New Tools for Isotopic Analysis, Science,
December 1999, Vol. 286. no. 5448, pp. 2289 - 2290
7. ^ Ingentaconnect Cosmic Background Reduction In The Radiocarbon Measurement By Sci
External links
vde
Chronology
44
No Web Exercises
45
No Web Exercises
Exercise 1-2
Chronological Methods
George H. Michaels
and Brian M. Fagan
46
Introduction Superposition
Stratigraphy Cross Dating
Artifacts of Known Age Dendrochronology
Radiocarbon Dating Potassium Argon Dating
Obsidian Hydration Dating Paleomagnetic and Archaeomagnetic Dating
Luminescence Other Isotopic Dating
Conclusion
47
As this example has shown you, post depositional processes, both natural and
human, can result in very complex stratigraphy. Although stratigraphy and the Law
of Superposition can help us determine the relative ages of occupations, one must
be very alert to alterations in stratigraphy that may throw chronological reckoning
off. Various phenomena, such as hole digging or mudslides, can completely
reverse stratigraphy. Thus, long profiles or profiles from a number of units are
necessary to avoid misinterpretation.
Relative dating is an invaluable tool, but does not tell us WHEN an event occurred,
just the ORDER in which events occurred. The oldest technique for establishing
the actual ages of deposits is to use artifacts of a known age. These can be coins
with minting dates stamped on them, writings with dates included, or objects that
we know were only manufactured during a certain time.
50
Limitations of Dendrochronology
There are limitations on dendrochronology. Some of those limitations include:
In some areas of the world, particularly in the tropics, the species available
do not have sufficiently distinct seasonal patterns that they can be used.
Where the right species are available, the wood must be well enough
preserved that the rings are readable. In addition, there must be at least 30
intact rings on any one sample.
There also must be an existing master strip for that area and species. There is
an absolute limit on how far back in the past we can date things with tree
rings. Although bristle cone pine trees can live to 9,000 years, this is a very
rare phenomenon. As we try to push our matching of archaeological
51
specimens beyond the range for which we have good control data, our
confidence in the derived dates diminishes.
Finally, the prehistoric people being studied had to have built fairly
substantial structures using wood timbers. In most of the world that did not
begin to happen until about 4,000 to 5,000 years ago!
Links
The Ultimate Tree-Ring Web Pages
The Malcolm and Carolyn Wiener Laboratory for Aegean and Near Eastern Dendrochronology
at Cornell University
The Laboratory of Tree-Ring Research, University of Arizona
References
52
Radiocarbon, or Carbon-14, dating is probably one of the most widely used and
best known absolute dating methods. It was developed by J. R. Arnold and W. F.
Libby in 1949, and has become an indispensable part of the archaeologist's tool kit
since. Its development revolutionized archaeology by providing a means of dating
deposits independent of artifacts and local stratigraphic sequences. This allowed
for the establishment of world-wide chronologies.
Reactions
53
Diffusion
Ingestion
54
Using this technique, almost any sample of organic material can be directly dated.
There are a number of limitations, however.
First, the size of the archaeological sample is important. Larger samples are
better, because purification and distillation remove some matter. Although
new techniques for working with very small samples have been developed,
like accelerator dating, these are very expensive and still somewhat
experimental.
Second, great care must be taken in collecting and packing samples to avoid
contamination by more recent carbon. For each sample, clean trowels should
be used, to avoid cross contamination between samples. The samples should
be packaged in chemically neutral materials to avoid picking up new C-14
from the packaging. The packaging should also be airtight to avoid contact
with atmospheric C-14. Also, the stratigraphy should be carefully examined
to determine that a carbon sample location was not contaminated by carbon
from a later or an earlier period.
Fourth, the ratio of C-14 to C-12 in the atmosphere is not constant. Although
it was originally thought that there has always been about the same ratio,
radiocarbon samples taken and cross dated using other techniques like
dendrochronology have shown that the ratio of C-14 to C-12 has varied
significantly during the history of the Earth. This variation is due to changes
in the intensity of the cosmic radiation bombardment of the Earth, and
changes in the effectiveness of the Van Allen belts and the upper atmosphere
to deflect that bombardment. For example, because of the recent depletion of
the ozone layer in the stratosphere, we can expect there to be more C-14 in
the atmosphere today than there was 20-30 years ago. To compensate for
this variation, dates obtained from radiocarbon laboratories are now
corrected using standard calibration tables developed in the past 15-20 years.
When reading archaeological reports, be sure to check if the carbon-14 dates
reported have been calibrated or not.
55
Finally, although radiocarbon dating is the most common and widely used
chronometric technique in archaeology today, it is not infallible. In general,
single dates should not be trusted. Whenever possible multiple samples
should be collected and dated from associated strata. The trend of the
samples will provide a ball park estimate of the actual date of deposition.
The trade-off between radiocarbon dating and other techniques, like
dendrochronology, is that we exchange precision for a wider geographical
and temporal range. That is the true benefit of radiocarbon dating, that it can
be employed anywhere in the world, and does have a 50,000 year range.
Using radiocarbon dating, archaeologists during the past 30 years have been
able to obtain a much needed global perspective on the timing of major
prehistoric events such as the development of agriculture in various parts of
the world.
Links
Radiocarbon Journal
References
56
57
K-Ar Processing
The technique works well for almost any igneous or volcanic rock, provided
that the rock gives no evidence of having gone through a heatingrecrystallization process after its initial formation. For this reason, only
trained geologists should collect the samples in the field.
Links
59
Geochron Laboratories
Helpful References
60
upon whether the environmental conditions (eg. soil temperature and soil relative
humidity) of the archaeological site are known.
Hydration Profile
Hydration begins after any event which exposes a fresh surface (e.g. cracking of a
lava flow on cooling, manufacture of an obsidian artifact, or glacial abrasion of an
obsidian pebble). Providing one can identify which process created the exposed
surface or crack in the rock, it is possible to date when that process took place.
Hydration rind thickness is a (non-linear) function of time. The hydration rate is
primarily a function of temperature, though chemical composition of the sample is
also an important factor. For this reason, it is necessary to calibrate the samples
within a limited geographical area against a sample of known age and similar
chemical composition.
61
The rate of hydration is not uniform throughout the world. Variations exist
in temperature over time from site to site. Temperature effects are
particularly difficult to evaluate. Variations also exist in sample chemical
composition. Samples from different obsidian sources hydrate at different
rates. Moisture is another source of variability. The amount of moisture
present at a site can affect the hydration rate of an obsidian sample. It is
really necessary to produce a calibration curve for each archaeological site
or area being studied, and this is not always possible.
Artifact reuse may lead to an erroneous date. For example, one person
fashions a tool out of an obsidian nodule and uses it to skin a deer. Once that
person finishes using the tool, it is discarded. Several hundred years later, a
second person finds the tool, resharpens it, uses it to shave the bark off of a
tree branch, and then later discards it as well. Several thousand years later,
an archaeologist discovers the tool and takes it to a laboratory to be dated.
The archaeologist found the tool at a site that was an arrowshaft workshop.
However, instead of dating the surface on the tool that was used to shave
bark, the surface that was used to skin the deer several hundred years earlier
is dated. The archaeologist, would be lead to beleive by this erroneous date
that arrow production started several hundred years earlier than what was
expected.
63
Links
The Diffusion Laboratory
The Northwest Research Obsidian Studies Laboratory
International Association for Obsidian Studies
The Obsidian Hydration Laboratory at the Centre for Archaeological Research, University of
Auckland, New Zealand
References
Freter, AnnCorinne. 1993. Obsidian-Hydration Dating: Its Past, Present, and
Future Application in Mesoamerica. Ancient Mesoamerica 4(2):285-303.
Friedman, Irving and F. W. Trembour. 1983. Obsidian Hydration Dating Update.
American Antiquity 48(3):544-547.
Friedman, Irving Fred W. Trembour,Franklin L. Smith, and George I. Smith. 1994.
Is Obsidian Hydration Dating Affected by Relative Humidity? Quaternary
Research 41(2):185-190.
Michels, Joseph W. and Ignatius S. T. Tsong. 1980. Obsidian Hydration Dating: A
Coming of Age. In Advances in Archaeological Method and Theory, Volume 3,
edited by M. B. Schiffer, pp. 405-444. Academic Press, New York, New York.
Michels, Joseph W., Ignatius S. T. Tsong, and Charles M. Nelson. 1983. Obsidian
Dating and East African Archeology. Science 219:361-366.
Origer, Thomas M. 1989. Hydration Analysis of Obsidian Flakes Produced by Ishi
During the Historic Period. In Current Directions in California Obsidian Studies,
edited by Richard E. Hughes, pp. 69-77. Contributions of the University of
California Archaeological Research Facility No. 48, University of California,
Berkeley, California.
After World War II, geologists developed the paleomagnetic dating technique to
measure the movements of the magnetic north pole over geologic time. In the early
to mid 1960s, Dr. Robert Dubois introduced this new absolute dating technique to
archaeology as archaeomagnetic dating.
settle, they maintain this magnetization, unless they are reheated or disturbed. This
process is called thermoremanent magnetization in the case of lava and clay, and
depositional remanent magnetization in the case of lake and ocean sediments.
In addition to changing in orientation, the magnetic north pole also wanders around
the geographic north pole. Archaeomagnetic dating measures the magnetic polar
wander.
For example, in the process of making a fire pit, a person can use clay to create the
desired shape of the firepit. In order to harden the clay permanently, one must heat
it above a certain temperature (the Curie point) for a specified amount of time. This
heating, or firing, process resets the iron particles in the clay. They now point to
the location of magnetic north at the time the firepit is being heated. When the
firepit cools the iron particles in the hardened clay keep this thermoremanent
magnetization. However, each time the firepit is reheated above the Curie point
while being used to cook something, or provide heat, the magnetization is reset.
Therefore, you would use archaeomagnetic dating to date the last time the firepit
was heated above the Curie point temperature.
Links
Archaeometry Journal Home Page
Paleomagnetic Data at NOAA National Data Center
Centre for Environmental Magnetism and Palaeomagnetism (CEMP)
Fort Hoofddijk Paleomagnetic Laboratory, Utrecht University, Netherlands
Institute for Rock Magnetism, University of Minnesota
Rock-Magnetism & Paleomagnetism Lab, Geological Survey of Japan
Los Hornos: A Case Study in Chronology
Laboratory of Earth's Magnetism, Saint-Petersburg State University, Russia
CSU Archaeometric Laboratory
68
References
Eighmy, J.L. 1980. Archaeomagnetic Dating: A Handbook for Archaeologists.
Eighmy, J.L., and R.S. Sternberg, eds. 1990. Archaeomagnetic Dating.
Butler, R.F. 1992. Paleomagnetism: Magnetic Domains to Geologic Terrains.
reconnect with the molecules, but some will not. The electrons that dont reconnect
eventually encounter imperfections in the microscopic structure of the ceramics or
minerals, and they become trapped by these imperfections. Over time energy (in
the form of more and more trapped electrons) is stored in these structural
imperfections. By heating the ceramic or mineral to above 500 degrees Celcius,
these trapped electrons are released, creating a flash of light called
thermoluminescence. When a laser light source is used to stimulate the release of
electrons, the process is called optically stimulated luminescence.
Luminescence Profile
In the process of making a ceramic vessel, the soft clay vessel must be heated in a
kiln to harden it. The process of firing the vessel releases the trapped electrons
(energy), and resets the thermoluminescence clock to zero. The process of
accumulation of electrons (energy) and then release when heated occurs every time
the ceramic vessel is reheated. What an archaeologist would be able to measure
using this technique is the last time the vessel was heated above 500 degrees
Celcius, either at the time the vessel was first fired or the last time it was heated if
it was used as a cooking vessel. In the laboratory, the release of electrons can be
induced through heating or the use of a laser beam. The intensity of the light
emmisions (luminescence) can be measured to determine the amount of time that
has passed since the vessel was last heated and the present laboratory heating of
the vessel.
70
and surrounding sediments. Lastly, the age of the sample is determined by dividing
the equivalent dose by the burial dose rate (DE/DR = Age).
This method is applicable to samples that range in age from a few hundred years to
several hundred thousand years.
Links
Journal of Luminescence
The Dalhousie Thermally and Optically Stimulated Luminescence and ESR Laboratory
The Research Laboratory for Archaeology and the History of Art, Oxford University
Aberystwyth Luminescence Dating Laboratory
The Sheffield Centre for International Drylands Research (SCIDR), England
Center for Applied Dosimetry
Archaeometry Research Group Heidelberg, Germany
The University of Washington Luminescence Dating Laboratory
71
References
Aitken, Martin J. 1985. Thermoluminescence Dating.
Aitken, Martin J. (in press) Optical Dating: A Review for Non-Specialists.
Quaternary Science Reviews
Ollerhead, Jeff, David J. Huntley, and Glenn W. Burger. 1994. Luminescence
Dating of the Buctouche Spit, New Brunswick. Canadian Journal of Earth
Sciences 31: 523-531.
Technique
Date
Range
Materi
Limitati
als
ons
Dated
Links
Argon 40/Argon 39
K-feldspar
Michigan Memorial
Phoenix Project
Uranium/Thorium/Pb
72
Uranium Series
Lead/Uranium
calcite,
upto 70,000 bone,
tooth,
years
shell
Archaeometry Research
Group
sediment
s, lead1-400 years
based
paints
There are several other dating techniques employed in archaeology. Some of these
include: fission-track dating, paleomagnetic and archaeomagnetic dating, obsidian
hydration dating, and thermoluminescence dating. Many of these techniques are
still experimental, or have not found wide acceptence in archaeology yet, hence
they have not been discussed here. For more information on dating techniques
consult:
Fagan, Brian M. - In the Beginning: An Introduction to Archaeology .
Michels, Joseph - Dating Techniques in Archaeology .
You may now return to the Exercise menu by clicking on the "Main" button below.
Please refer to the next section of your Study Guide for the next assignment.
73
Exercise 2-1
Archaeological Survey in the Field
The Basin of Mexico
George H. Michaels
and Stuart T. Smith
Introduction Letter
Explanation of simulation Simulation
74
Your proposal indicated that you wanted to do a survey of the Basin of Mexico to
determine what changes there were, if any, in the settlement pattern from the
earliest agricultural period up to the time of Teotihuacan's dominance of the Basin.
Your study area includes the very important pre-Aztec metropolis of Teotihuacan.
What you are interested in documenting is any detectable changes in the sizes,
locations, and numbers of the smaller support communities from the period of
incipient agriculture to state formation.
You have a very good team of assistants lined up to work with you, as well as
excellent contacts in Mexico who can provide you with additional experienced
personel should you need them. Your labor needs will be determined by the size of
your sample, and the amount of time you have to spent in the field. In short, you
will have to be careful about your survey strategy to make sure that you do not run
out of money.
Of course, your other major concern is that the sample that you do collect is
representative of the range of site types, sizes, and temporal affiliations in the
Basin. A badly biased sample will significantly affect your conclusions about
settlement patterns.
Below you will be able to take a look at the topography of the Basin, and look at
the locations of prominent geographic features which may have influenced the
distribution of human populations in the Basin.
After examining the map, you should click on the "Next" button to download the
survey simulation. The first card of the simulation is a breakdown of your bugetary
constraints. This is an indication of the cost factors that you must take into
consideration in planning your strategy. It is also where you will determine the
numbers of vehicles and assistants that will be used to calculate costs as the survey
progresses. Think carefully about this.
After that you can enter the control center of your field camp and begin setting up
your survey.
76
Please note that there is no specific end to the survey simulation. When you are
satisfied with your survey strategy, the sample you have collected and the results
of your preliminary analysis then you are finished with the software portion of the
assignment. You will still need to discuss the results with your research group and
develop a report to share with the rest of your discussion section. Note that unless
you are doing a judgemental survey, there is no way to reproduce a survey, so
make sure to take notes and print out the pertinent tables and bar charts to shore up
your argument BEFORE you quit the program.
77
Exercise 4-1
The Ice Age
George H. Michaels
and Brian M. Fagan
Introduction Glaciation
Global Views of the Comparison of Major World Vegetation
Wurm/Weichsel/Wisconsin Fullglacial Zones
A Pleistocene Bestiary Sea Level Changes
References Conclusion
78
79
80
81
82
83
Glyptodon
Mammoth
Bison bison
Bison bonasus
Bison priscus
Cave Bear
Cave Lion
Eucladoceros
Giant Cheetah
Mastodon
Megatherium
Short-faced Hyena
Smilodon
Wooley Rhinoceros
84
Bison bison
Common Name: Buffalo
Scientific Name: Bison bison
Related to: No Other Living Species
Current Status: Previously endangered, but now recovering.
Distribution: Found throughout the Great Plains and Midwest of North America.
Common from the Late Pleistocene until the Nineteenth Century. The species fell
prey to heavy hunting by Europeans, and would now be extinct except for early
conservation and breeding efforts. Still only found in national parks and state and
private game preserves.
85
Bison bonasus
Common Name: European Bison or Wisent
Scientific Name: Bison bonasus
86
87
Bison priscus
Common Name: Steppe Wisent
Scientific Name: Bison priscus
Related to: Both European and American bison.
Current Status: Extinct.
Distribution: Originally found throughout the Northern and Central European
steppes. Migration across Berengia and into North America eventually lead to the
evolution of Bison bison. Species apparently became extinct during the Late
Pleistocene, being replaced in North America by B. bison , and in Europe by B.
bonasus.
88
89
Cave Bear
Common Name: Cave Bear
Scientific Name: Ursus spelaeus
Related to: Brown Bear (U. arctos )
Current Status: Extinct
Distribution: Common throughout eastern and western Europe during the last
major glacial stage. Species experienced a period of rapid decline and eventual
extinction during the last phase of the last glacial maximum.
90
Cave Lion
Common Name: Cave Lion
91
Scientific Name: Panthera leo spelea (probably related to P. leo atrox in North
America during the Late Pleistocene)
Related to: Indian Lion (P. leo persica)
Current Status: Extinct
Distribution: Common throughout Europe and northern Asia (and probably parts of
North America in the species P. leo atrox) during the last major glacial stage.
Species experienced a period of rapid decline and eventual extinction during the
last phase of the last glacial maximum.
92
Distribution of Cave Lions (Panthera leo atrox ) in North America During the
Wurm/Weichsel/Wisconsin Fullglacial
93
Eucladoceros
Common Name: Bush-Antlered Deer
Scientific Name: Eucladoceros sp.
Related to: No Other Living Species
Current Status: Extinct.
Distribution: Found throughout Eurasia during the early part of the Late
Pleistocene. No known living close relatives.
94
Giant Cheetah
Common Name: Giant Cheetah
95
96
Glyptodon
Common Name: Giant Armadillo
Scientific Name: Gylptodon sp.
97
Related to: Very distantly related to the much smaller armadillo common
throughout South and Central America, and Texas.
Current Status: Extinct.
Distribution: Glyptodonts proper were found throughout South America from the
Tertiary period through the Pleistocene. A close relative, the Glyptotherium, was
found in Central America and southern North America during the Late Pleistocene.
Both became extinct at the close of the Late Pleistocene.
98
Mammoth
Common Name: Wooley mammoth
Scientific Name: Mammuthus primigenius
Related to: No modern relatives. Last shared a common ancestor with modern
elephants (Primelephas gomphotheriodes ) about 5 millions years ago.
Current Status: Extinct
Distribution: Common in Europe, northern Asia and much of North America
during the last major glacial stage. Species experienced rapid decline and eventual
extinction during the last phase of the last glacial maximum in all parts of the
world.
99
100
Mastodon
Common Name: Mastodon
Scientific Name: Mastodon americanus
101
Related to: No modern relatives. Last shared a common ancestor with modern
elephants and mastodons sometime before 10 millions years ago.
Current Status: Extinct
Distribution: Found primarily in North and South America during the last major
glacial stage. Family experienced rapid decline and eventual extinction during the
end of the Pleistocene in all parts of the world.
102
Megatherium
Common Name: Giant Ground Sloth
Scientific Name: Megatherium americanum
Related to: No Modern Species.
Current Status: Extinct.
Distribution: M. americanum was common throughout South America during the
Pliocene and Pleistocene. With a length of up to 5-6 meters, they were larger and
more heavily built han modern elephants! A closely related genus (Eremotherium )
occurred in North America during the Pleistocene, but appears to have been largely
restricted to the area that is now Florida.
103
104
Short-Faced Hyena
Common Name: Short-Faced Hyena
Scientific Name: Pachycrocuta brevirostris
Related to: Very distantly related to spotted hyenas found in Africa today.
Current Status: Extinct.
Distribution: The short-faced hyena was a common form of hunting hyena found in
Eurasia during the Early-Middle Pleistocene. Distantly related to Chasmaporthetes
ossifragus (the hunting hyena), the only hyena species to have migrated into North
America. Both species became extinct slightly before the Late Pleistocene.
105
Smilodon
Common Name: Sabre-Toothed Tiger
106
107
108
Wooley Rhinoceros
Common Name: Wooley Rhinoceros
Scientific Name: Coelodonta antiquitatis
109
110
Butzer, Karl W.
1971 Environment and Archaeology: An Ecological Approach to Prehistory
(Second Edition). Aldine-Atherton, New York.
Flint, Richard Foster
1957 Glacial and Pleistocene Geology. John Wiley & Sons, Inc., New York.
(Sixth Printing 1967)
Nilsson, Tage
1983 The Pleistocene: Geology and Life in the Quaternary Ice Age.
Ferdinand Enke Verlag, Stuttgart.
CONTINUE DOWNLOADING
112