Atmospheric C14 is measured permil Permil of what?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Calvadosser
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Atmospheric
Calvadosser
Messages
39
Reaction score
0
Atmospheric C14 is measured "permil". Permil of what?

I'm interested in understanding how the level of atmospheric radiocarbon has declined since atmospheric nuclear testing ended. Please excuse my ignorance of what is no doubt something extremely elementary.

Atmospheric C14 measurements are available - for example http://scrippsco2.ucsd.edu/data/flask_co2_and_isotopic/daily_iso/mlo_c14indiv.csv These tables give "Atmospheric Delta-14C (permil) derived from flask air samples."

The measured C14 is given as "permil" but I don't know what it is permil of.

Please help me understand what this means, so I can convert the measurements given into absolute units. Thank you for your help.

Martin
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
Hi Martin! :smile:
Calvadosser said:
Atmospheric C14 measurements are available - for example http://scrippsco2.ucsd.edu/data/flask_co2_and_isotopic/daily_iso/mlo_c14indiv.csv These tables give "Atmospheric Delta-14C (permil) derived from flask air samples."

Unfortunately, there is no way of being sure whether it means "per thousand" or "per million" :rolleyes:

see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Per_mil :redface:
 
Last edited by a moderator:


I believe it is usually given as a ratio to stable C12.

As for "per thousand" vs "per million", judging by the Wiki article referenced by tiny-tim, it is "per thousand". Another pointer to that is that in the tabulated data provided includes another quantity which is expressed as "ppm" which is explicitly "per million".
 


Beee - thanks for that. I also thought it probably was relative to C12 - but the values go up to 900 in some C14 measurements. The symbol "0/00" is used sometimes - definitely indicating parts per 1000.

So I'm still puzzled what it is parts per 1000 of.
 
Toponium is a hadron which is the bound state of a valance top quark and a valance antitop quark. Oversimplified presentations often state that top quarks don't form hadrons, because they decay to bottom quarks extremely rapidly after they are created, leaving no time to form a hadron. And, the vast majority of the time, this is true. But, the lifetime of a top quark is only an average lifetime. Sometimes it decays faster and sometimes it decays slower. In the highly improbable case that...
I'm following this paper by Kitaev on SL(2,R) representations and I'm having a problem in the normalization of the continuous eigenfunctions (eqs. (67)-(70)), which satisfy \langle f_s | f_{s'} \rangle = \int_{0}^{1} \frac{2}{(1-u)^2} f_s(u)^* f_{s'}(u) \, du. \tag{67} The singular contribution of the integral arises at the endpoint u=1 of the integral, and in the limit u \to 1, the function f_s(u) takes on the form f_s(u) \approx a_s (1-u)^{1/2 + i s} + a_s^* (1-u)^{1/2 - i s}. \tag{70}...

Similar threads

Back
Top