Here is a look at some common everyday materials that are radioactive. Some of these objects may pose a health risk, but most of them are a harmless part of your everyday environment. In almost all cases, you get more exposure to radiation if you take a ride in a plane or get a dental x-ray. Still, it's good to know the sources of your exposure.
More exponential decay examples (video) | Khan Academy
Radiometric dating, often called radioactive dating, is a technique used to determine the age of materials such as rocks. It is based on a comparison between the observed abundance of a naturally occurring radioactive isotope and its decay products, using known decay rates. It is the principal source of information about the absolute age of rocks and other geological features, including the age of the Earth itself, and it can be used to date a wide range of natural and man-made materials. The best-known radiometric dating techniques include radiocarbon dating, potassium-argon dating, and uranium-lead dating. By establishing geological timescales, radiometric dating provides a significant source of information about the ages of fossils and rates of evolutionary change, and it is also used to date archaeological materials, including ancient artifacts. The different methods of radiometric dating are accurate over different timescales, and they are useful for different materials. In many cases, the daughter nuclide is radioactive, resulting in a decay chain.
Radiometric dating is a much misunderstood phenomenon. Evolutionists often misunderstand the method, assuming it gives a definite age for tested samples. Creationists also often misunderstand it, claiming that the process is inaccurate.
By Griffon , December 29, in Physics. I've been poking about on the internet again as you do and found a whole load of stuff by creationists about the problems with carbon 14 radiometric dating. Specifically they report with some glee that coal has been found to contain measurable amounts of carbon14 which it should not of course because it is about million years old and dates from the carboniferous period. C14 has a half life of years and is only good to date objects to 50, years or so. Although I can find any number of references to this seemingly vital finding on the creationist sites, I can find almost no attempt to refute or explain this anomaly on serious science sites.