Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Science

muriel_volestrangler

(103,226 posts)

3. I think this article has misread the press release

Reply to eppur_se_muova (Reply #2)

Sat Feb 8, 2025, 07:30 PM

Feb 8

The press release just mentions

"More than 98 per cent of all carbon atoms have a mass of 12 atomic mass units, but a few carbon atoms are heavier, with a mass of 13 or 14 atomic mass units."

without saying how much this sample had. The actual paper talks about "delta 13C" (section 6.3), with negative figures, and goes into detail I won't pretend to understand to conclude that it's most likely biological carbon.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

5 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Experts Discover Ancient Life Locked Inside a 2.5 Billion-Year-Old Ruby as a Residue [View all] Judi Lynn Feb 8 OP

Fascinating JMCKUSICK Feb 8 #1

"Normal" isotopic abundance is 98.9 to 1.07%, C-12 vs C-13. C-14 only traces. Something's not right here. eppur_se_muova Feb 8 #2

I think this article has misread the press release muriel_volestrangler Feb 8 #3

OK, thanks. Good data, good paper, bad journos (again) ? eppur_se_muova Feb 8 #4

Beat me to it. One can see the effects of C13 natural abundance in the mass... NNadir Feb 12 #5