Is this hypothesis correct ?
Hypotheses : Humans could not have appeared on the earth earlier than 3.75 billion years ago.
1 Potassium 40 is the radioactive emission from the human body that relatively has the largest half-life. (1.25 billion years).
2 The age of the Solar System is 5 billion years old.
From 1 And 2
For a human with a stable configuration [longest half-life determinable] -
humans could not have existed on Earth for more than 3.75 billion years.
- The_Doc_ManLv 72 months agoFavourite answer
From a strict syllogistic viewpoint, you are probably correct. Note, however, that all you did was establish an upper bound for the age of humanity based on ONE and ONLY one factor. You have not considered other factors that might well reduce that time from 3.75 bn years to something considerably smaller.
- hoarsemanLv 72 months ago
I think there are much simpler reasons available .
- ไม่เป็นไรLv 72 months ago
Yes, it looks correct to me.
- CarolOklaLv 72 months ago
One part of that hypothesis is incorrect. The oldest rocks on Earth are 4.3 billion years old, not 5 billion years old.
The rest of the hypothesis is correct.
There is another problem with this hypothesis that I didn't mention before I fell asleep. Earth is on its 3rd atmosphere. Earth's atmosphere was toxic to humans until the Great Oxygen Event. That didn't happen until 2.4 to 2.1 billion years ago. You start with some false premises and uncoordinated facts. That invalidates the hypothesis. Decimal points and the places after the decimal point are important.