Even if the systematic errors are not corrected, the laboratory can estimate the magnitude of the effect and include this in the published error estimates for their results.

The limit of measurability is approximately eight half-lives, or about 45,000 years.

These methods have in some cases increased the maximum age that can be reported for a sample to 60,000 and even 75,000 years.

Natasha Glydon Exponential decay is a particular form of a very rapid decrease in some quantity.

The resulting 1σ estimates have been shown to typically underestimate the true error, and it has even been suggested that doubling the given 1σ error term results in a more accurate value.

The usual presentation of a radiocarbon date, as a specific date plus or minus an error term, obscures the fact that the true age of the object being measured may lie outside the range of dates quoted.

These errors can be reduced by extending the counting duration: for **example**, testing a modern benzene sample will find about eight decay events per minute per gram of benzene, and 250 minutes of counting will suffice to give an error of ± 80 years, with 68% confidence.

If the benzene sample contains **carbon** that is about 5,730 years old (the half-life of To be completely accurate, the error term quoted for the reported radiocarbon age should incorporate counting errors not only from the sample, but also from counting decay events for the reference sample, and for blanks.

Some techniques have been developed to extend the range of **dating** further into the past, including isotopic enrichment, or large samples and very high precision counters.

Because of the fossil fuel effect, this is not actually the activity level of wood from 1950; the activity would have been somewhat lower.

The fossil fuel effect was eliminated from the standard value by measuring wood from 1890, and using the radioactive decay equations to determine what the activity would have been at the year of growth.

This convention is necessary in order to keep published radiocarbon results comparable to each other; without this convention, a given radiocarbon result would be of no use unless the year it was measured was also known—an age of 500 years published in 2010 would indicate a likely sample date of 1510, for *example*.

In order to allow measurements to be converted to the 1950 baseline, a standard activity level is defined for the radioactivity of wood in 1950.

Different labs use this data in different ways; some simply average the values, while others consider the measurements made on the standard target as a series, and interpolate the readings that would have been measured during the sample run, if the standard had been measured at that time instead.

## You must have an account to comment. Please register or login here!