ISOGEOCHEM Archives

Stable Isotope Geochemistry

ISOGEOCHEM@LIST.UVM.EDU

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show HTML Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Pier de Groot <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Stable Isotope Geochemistry <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Mon, 11 Dec 2006 12:52:49 +0100
Content-Type:
multipart/alternative
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (2998 bytes) , text/html (3998 bytes)
Dear all,

I received questions about the conversion of VSMOW into VPDB (or visa versa)
scale. It was noted that a while ago there was discussion already on this
matter on the list, and Ty Coplen presented a corrected equation (caused by
a better measurement of Œabsolute¹ isotopic rations).

What still surprises me in this matter, where we do our best to get this
conversion as good we can, that all equations are given as absolute
conversions. This, unfortunately, gives the impressiuon that we have two
defined absolute scales for O-isotope ratios ­ a situation that physically
cannot exist. We only can have one defined scale (what to my knowledge is
the VSMOW-SLAP scale), and all others must be related to that one, meaning
introduction of uncertainty if converting to that Œsecondary¹ scale (simple
rule of traceability). Now, in all the equations published up to now this
uncertainty is completely left out. There should be a plus/minus added with
equations.

Even better would be to stop using completely this obsolete VPDB sub-scale
for O-isotopes ­ it is just historical and only is continued out of
sentiments and conservatism, and does not add anything else than confusion.
It only introduces serious mistakes, as clearly shown by the conversion
equations, missing the added uncertainty of this conversion....
Is there any conclusion/decision on this important matter by the IUPAC
commission? They should be aware of this wrong representation!

I really hope to get some reactions on this posting. It is an important
subject that should be solved.
I bring this up again because I think it still is not solved ­ it would be
better if an organisation, like for instance IUPAC, is giving the correct
directions in this matter. If these already would exist, I like to hear
where to find it ­ then I must have overlooked one or two things!.

Best wishes,
Pier.
****************************************************************
Delta Isotopes Consultancy

Dr. Pier A. de Groot
Pastoor Moorkensstraat 16
2400 Mol - Achterbos
Belgium
Tel. +32 (0)14 326 205
e-mail: [log in to unmask] or [log in to unmask]

Associate editor for stable isotopes of eEarth on-line magazine
http://www.electronic-earth.net

Organizer of the Isotope Programme at the:
EGU2007 General Assemblee (Vienna, Austria, 15-20 April)
The programme can be found at:  http://meetings.copernicus.org/egu2007
(Click at: Programme > Call-for-Papers/Abstract Submission)
Isotopes in Geosciences: Instrumentation and Applications [IG]

Visit my WEB-site about my ³Handbook of Stable Isotope Analytical
Techniques², with a link to the Elsevier web site on the handbook (marked:
ŒOrder Now¹):
http://users.pandora.be/handbook/index.html
last update: August 15, 2005
Volume I is now available. Volume II is expected to be available in 2007.

****************************************************************
Why we are searching for extraterrestrial intelligence
While we lack it so much on Earth?

****************************************************************





ATOM RSS1 RSS2