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

eppur_se_muova

(39,067 posts)

4. OK, thanks. Good data, good paper, bad journos (again) ?

Reply to muriel_volestrangler (Reply #3)

Sat Feb 8, 2025, 09:26 PM

Feb 2025

I'd say delta 13C is a pretty clear indicator of C-13 depletion, not enrichment. And it's probably 2% of the normal abundance, not the total abundance -- i.e. 1.07% depleted by ~2% OF 1.07% to give around 1.05%. (hence the quibble re. sig figs)

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 2025 OP

Fascinating JMCKUSICK Feb 2025 #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 2025 #2

I think this article has misread the press release muriel_volestrangler Feb 2025 #3

OK, thanks. Good data, good paper, bad journos (again) ? eppur_se_muova Feb 2025 #4

Beat me to it. One can see the effects of C13 natural abundance in the mass... NNadir Feb 2025 #5