Oldest Living Tree: National Geographic

  • Thread starter Thread starter lvlastermind
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Tree
AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers around the determination of the age of a living tree and the methods used for dating its root system. Participants express curiosity about how scientists ascertain the age without using carbon dating on living parts, noting that carbon dating was applied to dead sections of the roots. This raises questions about the accuracy of the dating process, specifically whether the oldest parts of the tree were indeed identified and whether the dates provided are in calendar years or carbon years. There is also mention of a 134-year-old woman, prompting skepticism about her age and the need for more context regarding her life experiences, particularly historical events she should remember. Overall, the conversation highlights the complexities and potential inaccuracies in age determination methods in both natural and human contexts.
lvlastermind
Messages
101
Reaction score
0
Just thought this was interesting...


http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2008/04/080414-oldest-tree.html
 
Physics news on Phys.org
You're right. But how did they determine the age of the root system? Can't use carbon dating as its still living ...
 
This brings to mind the great tree Yggdrasil.
 
Maybe it's a talking tree and they just asked it how old it is.

By the way, anyone else see this supposedly 134 year old woman story?

I really wish they'd explained how she figures what her age is and more dialogue with her... I mean, if she's really that old she ought to remember things like the Boer War and World War I.
 
Yah i heard about that and wasnt sure what to make of it... Hard to imagine a 134 year old woman in a 3rd world country...
 
joeyar said:
You're right. But how did they determine the age of the root system? Can't use carbon dating as its still living ...

They carbon dated dead parts of the roots, raising two questions.

1. Did they really find the oldest part of the tree?
2. Is "9550" calendar date or carbon date?

Nowhere is hinted that they calibrated the carbon date, which is not always common practice. The standard protocol has not been used which is that:

9550 BP (before present) is a carbon date which would calibrate to 10,785 Cal BP (Calendar years before present)

If it was calibrated, hence 9550 Cal BP then the outcome of the carbon dating would have been 8638 BP.

The conversion table is here: Intcal04
 
Similar to the 2024 thread, here I start the 2025 thread. As always it is getting increasingly difficult to predict, so I will make a list based on other article predictions. You can also leave your prediction here. Here are the predictions of 2024 that did not make it: Peter Shor, David Deutsch and all the rest of the quantum computing community (various sources) Pablo Jarrillo Herrero, Allan McDonald and Rafi Bistritzer for magic angle in twisted graphene (various sources) Christoph...
Thread 'My experience as a hostage'
I believe it was the summer of 2001 that I made a trip to Peru for my work. I was a private contractor doing automation engineering and programming for various companies, including Frito Lay. Frito had purchased a snack food plant near Lima, Peru, and sent me down to oversee the upgrades to the systems and the startup. Peru was still suffering the ills of a recent civil war and I knew it was dicey, but the money was too good to pass up. It was a long trip to Lima; about 14 hours of airtime...

Similar threads

Back
Top