Except the response is STAGGERINGLY ILLOGICAL because it ignores that Lead per se is a stable element and presumes that ALL the Lead found on Earth was a result of the decay paths indicated. No reason at all was given to believe that to be the case.
Conversation
Notices
-
ecsd (ecsd@commons.whatiwanttoknow.org)'s status on Friday, 16-Feb-2024 14:24:01 UTC 
ecsd
-
Santa Claes πΈπͺππ°π (clacke@libranet.de)'s status on Friday, 16-Feb-2024 14:24:00 UTC 
Santa Claes πΈπͺππ°π
@ecsd Correct. 1.4% of our lead is of an isotope Pb-204 that mainly comes from the supernova that created our heavy elements.
But the reasoning in the post applies to the other 98.6% of our lead. This could have been mentioned to make a better argument.
-
ecsd (ecsd@commons.whatiwanttoknow.org)'s status on Friday, 16-Feb-2024 14:24:20 UTC
ecsd
What you're saying is that yes, most of our lead is from the decay of other elements. My intuition rejects that (trivially), but it could be true [thus news to me & I learned something today.] Does the isotope article say that? Just say 'yes' and I'll find it.
==
Changing the subject, does nothing decay Into Technetium? Sad. {laughs}
-
Santa Claes πΈπͺππ°π (clacke@libranet.de)'s status on Friday, 16-Feb-2024 14:24:20 UTC
Santa Claes πΈπͺππ°π
@ecsd It says that. The big decay chains terminate in lead 206, 207 and 208 and primordial lead is lead 204 (with some minor decay chains terminating there too).
It's quite astonishing! I had your reaction when I heard this argument and I looked it up.
It actually makes sense if you imagine that the primordial distribution is pretty even between lead and the next heavier element etc. After a few billion years, radiogenic lead, the decay-product lead, represents a large chunk of all that mass that was initially heavier elements. Even if there were only two elements heavier than lead, that would already mean most lead today would be radiogenic.
-
All Chirp! content and data are available under the