• 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文期刊>Lithos: An International Journal of Mineralogy, Petrology, and Geochemistry >Response to Baksi, A., 2012, ‘New ~(40)Ar/~(39)Ar dating of the Grande Ronde lavas, Columbia River Basalts, USA: Implications for duration of flood basalt eruption episodes' by Barry et al., 2010-Discussion'
【24h】

Response to Baksi, A., 2012, ‘New ~(40)Ar/~(39)Ar dating of the Grande Ronde lavas, Columbia River Basalts, USA: Implications for duration of flood basalt eruption episodes' by Barry et al., 2010-Discussion'

机译：对Baksi，A.，2012年的回应：Barry等人的“新的（40）Ar /〜（39）Ar年代，美国哥伦比亚河玄武岩大朗德熔岩的定年：对洪水玄武岩喷发持续时间的影响”， 2010-讨论”

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
       
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

Baksi (2012) claims that a number of radiometric ages presented in Barry et al. (2010) are statistically invalid and that many of the samples were altered, thus not able to date the eruptions, and that there is no compelling evidence for a limited duration for the eruption of the Grande Ronde Basalts (GR Basalts), USA. However, Baksi (2012), has simply reiterated some of the assessment of the data presented in the paper and has used an 'Alteration Index', in order to assess the data. The 'Alteration Index' commonly shows that basaltic ground-mass is altered and from this Baksi (2012) deduces that the ages are incorrect. In contrast, much work on young volcanics has shown that phenocrysts are often sources of incorrect ages. In any assessment of data, we maintain that whilst alteration is an important consideration, the best approach should include not just alteration, but also experimental reproducibility, stratigraphic order, comparison with other analyses, and analytical techniques, and that the application of an 'Alteration Index' is not a straightforward guide to the validity of an age.
机译：Baksi（2012）声称，Barry等人提出了许多辐射年龄。 （2010年）在统计上是无效的，并且许多样本已被更改，因此无法确定喷发的日期，并且在美国隆德玄武岩（GR Basalts）的爆发期间，没有令人信服的证据。但是，Baksi（2012）只是简单地重申了对本文中提供的数据的某些评估，并使用了“变更指数”来评估数据。 “变化指数”通常表明玄武岩地面质量发生了变化，根据Baksi（2012）的推论，年龄是不正确的。相比之下，许多有关年轻火山的工作表明，隐晶通常是年龄不正确的来源。在任何数据评估中，我们都坚持认为，虽然变更是一个重要的考虑因素，但最佳方法不仅应包括变更，还应包括实验的可重复性，地层顺序，与其他分析和分析技术的比较，以及“变更”的应用索引”并不是年龄有效性的直接指南。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
获取原文

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号