(July 8, 2022 at 4:44 am)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote:(July 8, 2022 at 4:34 am)Brian37 Wrote: For example I am certain that there is a different molecular arrangement between non life carbon based structures, and the extremely dynamic flexible amino acids that make up carbon based life. That part I am certain I am getting correct.
And also, the elements can also have each, several isotopes depending on the element. I am also certain I am correct about that.
But here IS where I am confused. Somebody pointed out to me isotopes do not matter but it is the volume of carbon. This is confusing to me and I want to get that part right so I am not being inaccurate so some stupid fundy can say, "You got that wrong, so my flood mythology is correct".
If I am misunderstanding isotopes please correct me.
I think you're asking about radiocarbon dating. If so, then both the isotope AND the amount of that isotope matter very much. Most radiocarbon dating is done by determining the amount of a specific isotope of carbon in the sample being tested. This is usually (but not always) carbon14, since the decay rates are well known. There's also a process called 'isotopic fractionation' which uses other carbon isotopes.
Boru
Ok so this is half and half understanding and misunderstanding on my part.
So that idiot who was claiming isotopes don't matter at all, he is full of shit because context does matter. It does depending on the context we are talking about. Thank you, I knew I wasn't going crazy.
An aside, every time I figure out what atomic weight is, I remember for a while, then forget. I hate that.
