Ok, we'll change from https://www.earthlymission.com/dinosaur-mummy-science-discov... to https://www.nationalgeographic.com/magazine/2017/06/dinosaur.... Thanks!
This is in the FAQ at https://news.ycombinator.com/newsfaq.html and there's more explanation here:
only to watch it break into countless pieces!! :(
I had seen dinosaur skeletons in museums before but it didn't compare. Also guided tours through the limited access of the park were amazing, almost surreal, with fossils of dinosaur bones just popping out of the ground now and then plus the chance of seeing active digs.
Lots of neat little caves, bones all over. Very awesome place. Especially when you're a dinosaur obsessed 8 year old.
There was one time we were going down the river and there was a cow on the bank stuck in the mud up almost up to its neck. I remember the adults going to find the rancher and a lot of fuss and the cow was eventually saved.
> To give you an idea of how intact the mummified nodosaur is: it still weighs 2,500 pounds!
How does it weight less as a stone fossil than as an organic life form mostly made of water?
Most stone is 2-3 times as dense as water
> Most stone is 2-3 times as dense as water
Presumably because the water was completely filling a volume, whereas the stone is very much not.
Chemical traces of things like pigmentation can remain in fossilized soft tissue, I suppose that counts as "original material", but this thing isn't made out of meat anymore.
Perhaps though it contains some original carbon that can be used to do some very old radiocarbon dating, which could improve geological strata based dating of other fossil finds.
Because you are comparing different things. The fossil comprises only the anterior part of the animal. The tail and posterior legs are missing.
(Am I being too cynical?)
2. There is less pressure to produce right now given oversupply and shipping constraints in Alberta
3.Suncor cares more about its reputation than some of the other players in the tar sands
4. The Royal Tyrell Museum is well known to most Albertans, kids go there on school trips and it would likely seem like the obvious thing to do (stop work) when presented with such a find.
5. I have no idea if there is a finders fee, but that fossil is probably more valuable than anything that loader was processing all day.
6. It's a dinosaur - most folks find them pretty cool. :)
Imagine for example a machine that takes off 1 layer of atoms at a time, painstakingly charting them, and then another layer of software that figures out probabilistically whether the arrangement of atoms means that a decayed strand of DNA was here... and then probabilistically adds together the the billions of decayed shreds of DNA.
Maybe the relative positions of the base pairs are still probabilistically informative despite decaying and many of them breaking apart. I don't know. But it seems like there's a plausible way to try to extract data from fossilized DNA.
Scientists have been working very diligently to try to recover DNA from millions of years ago, but the reality is any DNA found has a very good chance of being from bacteria & other organisms from the more recent past.
Still there are (disputed) claims to have found DNA that's millions of years old:
For this particular mummified dinosaur, if they found lots of somewhat preserved soft tissue, maybe hundreds of pounds, chances are that there could be trillions of DNA segments. Very likely no single gene will be unbroken, but with many fragments broken in different places the theoretical possibility to reconstitute the genetic code is there. You also don't start from zero knowledge. Humans and birds share about 65% of the genetic code , and dinosaurs are closer to birds than humans are.
half life is a general term that is frequently used in biochemistry, enzyme kinetics, chemistry and nuclear physics
as a general term it is converse of doubling time and is simply a measure of stability or observed activity
I'm not sure if you read this link before but I encourage you to - it includes a nice summary of the issues.
Because we have no certain model of the dinosaur, behaviorally, we can guess at that and ML our way to that, too.
And boom: you have your ersatz sim dino, and it only took like three Matrioshka brains.
The data is thought to be pretty accurate (±5M years) and it's from radiometric dating of the oil sands.
It looks like their site is another on the list that lifts our articles and recirculates them on social media.
Why is that relevant? Tissue has been replaced by minerals which presumably are much denser than flesh.
We've banned this account for now, but if you want to email firstname.lastname@example.org with a better username, we can rename it for you and unban it.