Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: dragnet2

Actually it’s impossible to know what further study will find. It’s not valid to see this as the start of a trend, it’s just another data point.

The fact that the error box is considered to be so small that a two million year shift is seen as a big deal to anyone is interesting, though. I really wonder whether that’s the case or whether the pin in the chart that this study moves back by 300,000 to 1.9 million years is just a straw-man case for raising a hoopla when in fact it’s just adjustment within the box.

If we’ve really got a solid, and I mean solid, basis for dating the solar system’s “beginning” this accurately, it’s news to me. While this isn’t my current work, it’s close enough to it that I’ve got some basis for being surprised.

I’m also wondering at which of several different points within a very long and drawn out process they’re putting the “start” peg.

Two million years, which is just more than the box of adjustment they’re giving for this study’s finding, is a blink of an eye when it comes to the creation of a solar system.

At any rate, my strong suspicion is that we’re seeing the adjustment of a prior finding being treated as some sort of revolution when it’s really just another data point. Personally, I’d consider anything that comes in this close to be more in the way of a _confirmation_ of a prior finding than in opposition to it.

It’s like saying a gun’s inaccurate if two holes are within a minute of angle of each other, but don’t lay one on the other, though they’re kissing distance apart.

If I had time right now I’d go look at the source papers, but it’ll have to wait for now.


52 posted on 08/24/2010 4:51:14 PM PDT by saundby
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies ]


To: saundby
My first reaction on seeing the headline was that it was a misprint, two million years being so insignificant as to be silly to report on.

That's understandable, however, it would also seem to indicate past studies dating the solar system were quite accurate, and further studies will likely reveal the age is yet older that previously thought, not younger.

Actually it’s impossible to know what further study will find.

That is why I said, "It would seem to indicate" and used words such as, "likely".

My comments are based on previous finding, not just personal opinion.

53 posted on 08/24/2010 4:59:32 PM PDT by dragnet2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson