Jason,
   
  Thank you for responding to my questions. I am also trying to gain a 
self-meteoriticized education. I was unaware of the attachment rule. 
   
   
  PS - Attachments aren't supposed to be posted to the list, per list 
guidelines - you ask people if they want them and then send out privately... 
  And if that pic's of a 'Venusian meteorite,' you should head out to Ludlow, 
CA, because there's a hell of a big area out there covered in beautiful 
desert-varnished basalt - I mean Venusian meteorites - just like that, with 
some pieces weighing a good few hundred pounds......downflow from Amboy Crater, 
a beautiful cindercone
   
  Unfortunately, I can not head out to Ludlow, CA to see the desert-varnish 
basalt, but I can assure you that it is not desert varnish.
   
  Wikipedia definintion of desert varnish
    Originally scientists thought that desert varnish was made from substances 
drawn out of the rocks it coats. Microscopic and microchemical observations, 
however, show that a major part of varnish is clay (which could only arrive by 
wind). Clay, then, acts as a substrate to catch additional substances that 
chemically react together when the rock reaches high temperatures in the desert 
sun. Wetting by dew is also important in the process. The varnish is primarily 
composed of particles of clay along with iron and manganese oxides.
  Another important characteristic of desert varnish is that it has an 
unusually high concentration of manganese. Manganese is relatively rare in the 
earth's crust, making up only 0.12% of its weight. In desert varnish, however, 
manganese is 50 to 60 times more abundant. This significant enrichment is 
thought to be caused by biochemical processes (many species of bacteria use 
manganese).
   
  I've already had basic mineralogical testing on my samples. (Remember, I have 
been working with the geologists at the National University of Peru). The 
mineralogical composition of the fusion crust is identical to the composition 
of the matrix. The analysis of the matrix, whole rock, and a cut/slice of the 
fusion crust show a very low concentration of Fe and Mn. The actual values are: 
Fe 4.93%, Mg 1.48%, Mn .23%, and Ni 69 ppm.
   
  The samples I have and the samples on venusmeteorite.com are not desert 
varnish. I know what desert varnish looks like. I've spent a great deal of time 
in the desert and have seen many rocks with desert varnish. With the 
cooperation of the UNSA geologist, it was ruled-out early in the analysis.  
Varnish is additive to the underlying matrix.
   
  One volcanologist said that it may be possible that my samples could be 
wind-polished basalt. This is a real possibility that I am currently pursuing 
beside the fact that the samples came from a prehistoric alluvial plain and 
showed evidence that there was an impact.
   
  Is it possible that a basaltic rock "bubbled up" and subsequently polished by 
the wind. Yes, it might be possible. I view it as unlikely due to the extreme 
hardness of this particular basalt (>8 mohs), but it is a possibility, and I 
will not rule out ANY possibility. He has requested a sample which I will be 
sending out when I travel to Lima in the next few weeks. 
   
  The extreme hardness of my samples has been puzzling to myself and the 
geologists at UNSA. My sample exceeds the natural hardness of basalt. In fact, 
it exceeds the hardness of quartz, which is considered to be the hardest 
naturally occurring mineral. Quartz hardness is 8.0, and my samples exceed 8.0 
on the Mohs scale. Currently, the only known method of creating basalt harder 
than quartz is to grind it, apply a special heat treatment at 1300°C where it 
re-crystallises, giving it extreme Hardness: 8-9 on the Mohs scale. This 
process is known as cast-basalt. Where you would normally expect basalt to 
streak on quartz I have a picture showing how quartz streaks on my basaltic 
sample and I also have a video of the area showing the natural state 
(baby-powder fine sand)  If you're interested, I'll send them off-topic.
   
   
  Best Regards,
   
  Randall
   
   

   
   
   
  

Jason Utas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
    Hell, here are a few more of some random ones.
  Jason

 
  On 2/15/07, Jason Utas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:     Here's a pair of pics 
of my favorite cratered Sikhote.....
  Jason

 
    On 2/15/07, Jason Utas <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > wrote:     Hello Randall, 
  With my self-meteoriticized education, I might be able to help with at least 
a few of your questions...

 
  On 2/14/07, Randall Gregory <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > wrote:
    Mr. Webb,McCafferty and any interested parties on the list.
   
  If you don't mind, coud you please answer a couple of questions?
   
  Could your Martian impact scenario apply to ejecta from Mercury?
  http://www.lpi.usra.edu/meetings/lpsc2003/pdf/1933.pdf
   
  "The spatial density (number per unit volume) of meteoroids varies as a 
function of distance from the sun, distance from a planet, ecliptic latitude 
and longitude" Are there any projections on the total number of spatial 
meteoroids related to planetary volume? 
   
  Do meteoroids tend to group or stream?  Or are streams and groupings a rare 
occurrence?
  Excluding space dust, my feelings are that streams and groups would be 
predominant.
   
  Depends - if gravity is great enough to draw them together, one would 
logically assume that, not only would they group, but they'd tend to come back 
together to form a single whole.  With 'meteoroids,' however, (the definition 
of which tends to mean dust-sized, a stream is much more likely simply because 
the gravitational forces between particles are negligible, whereas the solar 
wind's push on each is comparatively massive.  
  
 
     
  Due to a lower escape velocity, would a large asteroid impact on Mercury 
close to it's aphelion be more likely to produce ejecta reaching the escape 
velocities of Mercury/Sun than a similar event on Venus?  Any probability 
studies? 
   
   
  Hardly matters - the point is that both are possible.  
  
 
    (For probability, I would assume the best/worst possible conditions: 
equatorial launch, launch relative to planetary rotation, lowest daily 
temperature range, and rock composition/density (basaltic mass).
   
  Do you know of any studies with respect to meteoroids in space arriving to 
earth as meteorites, do they have totally random trajectories due to collisions 
or would they generally follow a straight course from their home 
asteroid/planet? To put it quite simply, depending on rotation, impact time, 
solar orientation, and impact angle could ejecta from a the inner planets 
travel in a relatively straight line away from the sun. And would this same 
scenario apply to planets outside earth's orbit. Could they travel in a similar 
fashion towards Earth? And could this relate to the Earth's orientation to the 
sun at the time of meteroite impact. In other words, would outer planet 
meteroids be more likely to fall at night and inner planet meteorids fall 
during the day. 
   
  Is fusion crust thickness directly related to the mineral characteristics of 
density, hardness, melting point, thermal conductivity, and internal 
tempurature of the meteoroid? Am I wrong in assuming that it is? Are there 
other factors? 
   
   
  Of course - though no one's actually studied the topic scientifically, at 
least to my knowledge.  
  
 
    Would a shock-heated ejecta upon encountering the extreme cold of space 
cause any changes in the density of the underlying material? What about ejecta 
at melt temperature?
   
   
  Cause changes in density how?  Of course it would become more dense to a 
degree, but most ejected meteorites aren't shock-melted anyways, so this would 
have no real effect on the meteorite.  Most are simply shocked and have thin 
veins of melt.  
  There are exceptions, and, when dealing with Mercury and Venus, this might be 
more likely due to the required increase in the energy of the impactor 
(necessary to eject material from these target sources specifically), but this 
enters into the realm of pure speculation... 
  
 
    What would be the effect on micrometeorite pitting on various meteoroids? 
   
  Negligible.  This would have an effect on the top few millimeters of surface 
at most, all of which burns off upon entry into the earth's atmosphere.  Not 
sure where you're going with that...
  
 
     
  "Interplanetary dust particles (micro-meteoroids) were expected to form 
well-defined craters upon impacting exposed material in space. Studying the 
frequency and features of these craters will provide data on the mass-flux 
distribution of micro-meteoroids and, to a lesser extent, on the velocity, 
magnitude and direction"  - Study of Meteoroid Impact Craters on Various 
Materials, NASA Langley Research Center. 
   
   
  Yes and no...all of our man-made materials that have been exposed have been 
relatively next to earth, a large planetary body - who knows how this would 
compare with statistics from bodies exposed to deeper space.  
  
 
    Some of my samples show pitting which may be caused by micro-meteoroid 
collisions. Due to the extreme hardness of the sample and sub-millimeter 
thickness of the fusion crust these pits have been preserved. The ablated 
material gathers on the trailing edge of these pits on orientated samples. 
   
  This is very uncommon, and I happen to collect such specimens (Sikhote-Alin 
only to date, as I've yet to find any craters on any other meteorites).  But 
you're forgetting that these aren't true micro-meteoroids - they're pieces of 
the meteorite itself that broke off and reimpacted larger fragments in their 
last few moments of heated flight.  
  Regarding 'craters on' Franconia irons, it seems much more likely to me that 
these are simply pits caused by the sub-surface vaporization of siliceous 
material rather than actual impacting bodies...seeing as they were surrounded 
and contain small amounts of the stony material, this seems like a very good 
possibility.  
 
     
  Do you know of any meteorites currently in collections that exhibit pitting? 
What are the characteristics of the ablated material?
   
  I'll send a picture in a minute, but again, they're not 'micro-meteoroid' 
impacts, just impacts of a meteorite into itself, within the earth's 
atmosphere.  What do you mean by 'ablated material?'  
  
 
     
  Are all meteorites tested for density and most specifically hardness? 
   
  No, meteorites are like terrestrial rocks to a great degree in this respect - 
they vary greatly depending on type, and within type classifications 
themselves.  
  
 
     
  And could anyone please help me retrieve this article:
   
  author = {{Blanchard}, M.~B.},
    title = "{Artificial Meteor Ablation Studies}",
booktitle = {IAU Colloq. 13: Evolutionary and Physical Properties of 
Meteoroids},
     year = 1973, 
   editor = {{Hemenway}, C.~L. and {Millman}, P.~M. and {Cook}, A.~F.},
    pages = {241-+},
   adsurl = { 
http://adsabs.harvard.edu/cgi-bin/nph-bib_query?bibcode=1973eppm.coll..241B&db_key=AST},
  adsnote = {Provided by the Smithsonian/NASA Astrophysics Data System
   
   
  The closest I've gotten so far is this:
   
  
http://ntrs.nasa.gov/search.jsp?R=863979&id=2&qs=No%3D20%26Ne%3D35%26N%3D4294967263%26Ns%3DArchiveName%7C0
 
   
  You might also look for these:
   
  Blanchard M.B., 1969. Preliminary results of artificial meteor ablation. 
Meteoritics 4, 261-261.
    Blanchard M.B., 1972. Artificial meteor ablation studies: iron oxides. J. 
Geophys Research 
  77, 2442-2455.
  Blanchard M.B., 1972. Artificial meteor ablation studies: iron oxides. J. 
Geophys Research 
  77, 2442-2455.
  Blanchard M.B., 1972. Artificial meteor ablation studies: iron oxides. J. 
Geophys Research 
  77, 2442-2455.

    Blanchard M.B., 1972. Artificial meteor ablation studies : iron oxides. J. 
Geophys Research 
  77, 2442-2455.
  Blanchard Maxwell B., Cunningham Gary G., 1973. Preliminary results of 
artificial meteor 
  ablation of an olivine mineral sample. Meteoritics 8, 15-15. 
  Blanchard M. B., 1973. Artificial meteor ablation studies . In Hemenway C.L., 
Millman P.M., 
  Cook A.F. (eds.): Evolutionary and Physical Properties of Meteoroids., 
N.A.S.A., Wash-
  ington D.C. SP-319, 241-254.
  Blanchard M B . Cunnmgham G.G., 1974. Artificial meteor ablation studies: 
olivine. J. 
  Geophys. Research 79, 3973-3980.

    Blanchard M.B., 1972. Artificial meteor ablation studies: iron oxides. J. 
Geophys Research 
  77, 2442-2455.

    Blanchard M.B., 1972. Artificial meteor ablation studies: iron oxides. J. 
Geophys Research 
  77, 2442-2455.

    Blanchard M.B., 1972. Artificial meteor ablation studies: iron oxides. J. 
Geophys Research 
  77, 2442-2455.

   
  Or simply browse this....
   
    
http://72.14.253.104/search?q=cache:_yuQQphzlJcJ:www.isas.ac.jp/publications/reportSP/no15/6.PDF+Artificial+Meteor+Ablation+Studies+blanchard&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=13&gl=us
   
  Might find that helpful...no idea.  I wasn't able to actually find the 
article, but it looks as if it's on record at NASA if you want it badly 
enough...the first link I sent.  
  Regards, 
  Jason
   
  PS - Attachments aren't supposed to be posted to the list, per list 
guidelines - you ask people if they want them and then send out privately... 
  And if that pic's of a 'Venusian meteorite,' you should head out to Ludlow, 
CA, because there's a hell of a big area out there covered in beautiful 
desert-varnished basalt - I mean Venusian meteorites - just like that, with 
some pieces weighing a good few hundred pounds......downflow from Amboy Crater, 
a beautiful cindercone.  

    Blanchard M.B., 1972. Artificial meteor ablation studies: iron oxides. J. 
Geophys Research 
  77, 2442-2455.

    Blanchard M.B., 1972. Artificial meteor ablation studies: iron oxides. J. 
Geophys Research 
  77, 2442-2455.

    
 
     
   
  Randall
   
   
   
  Rob,
   
  I was wondering if there would there be any ablation at all on the outbound 
martian rock, from a planet with:
   
  Surface atmospheric pressure: ~6.1 mb (about 1/150th that of Earth's) 
Surface gas density: ~0.020 kg/m3 
 
  Surface temperature: ~210 K (-63 degrees Celsius)
  Low escape velocity
   
  And is it possible to achieve such a low impact angle or would gravity and 
aerodynamic drag increase the angle so that a 1-3 degree trajectory may not be 
possible. I believe existing ballistic models could be combined with a Mars 
atmosphere model and gravitational model that might help to answer this 
question. 
   
  Quite possibly a composite mathematical model borrowing code from the many 
existing models might add validity to your theory. I believe Mars atmosphere 
models, ballistic, compression, heating, and the myriad are all fairly 
constant. It might not be such a large undertaking to help determine if a 
lightly shocked rock could be back-spinned into space. I'd really like to see a 
model like this applied to the other planets such as Mercury. 
   
  Would anyone like to start a project on this?
   
  In your estimation, could one determine what the minimum energy values are 
needed for this event to occur? And could this model be applied to Mercury? ;)
   
  Randall

Rob McCafferty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
  
--- "Sterling K. Webb"   
wrote:

> [I have a theory, of course, but not room enough
> in this margin to write it down.]
> 


I believe Fermat wrote something the same thing and it 
took nearly 300 years to prove it. Sterling, make a 
mental note to ACTUALLY write the theory down to save
some poor sucker from having to write a 200page thesis
in the future.

Would not Martian ablation on the way out from Mars 
simply be destroyed by terrestrial ablation on the way 
in to us? You know how much of the meteorites are
removed by the process. I find it difficult to believe
any could survive.

I often thought that rock could escape it's host 
planet through the rarefaction zone above the 
impactors trajectory. However, how this tallies with
low shock levels I don't know. 
As I understand, the low shock would need to be right
at the very edge of the impact site. Not ideal for 
launching up into a rarefaction zone. ... 

Unless, {and here's a wild guess that's probably WAAAY
off but I'll accept criticism with dignity, only a
little sobbing and wailing}... 

Could a low angle impact [1-3degrees] produce 
sufficient rarefaction befind it to allow the low
shocked rock at the trailing edge of the impact site
to be 'grazed off' in a backward direction, back up
the initial path of the impactor? 

Rob McC 



____________________________________________________________________________________
Never miss an email again!
Yahoo! Toolbar alerts you the instant new Mail arrives.
http://tools.search.yahoo.com/toolbar/features/mail/
______________________________________________
Meteorite-list mailing list
Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com
http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list 


    
---------------------------------
  We won't tell. Get more on shows you hate to love
(and love to hate): Yahoo! TV's Guilty Pleasures list.   
  
  
  

______________________________________________
Meteorite-list mailing list
Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com 
http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list 












 
---------------------------------
Cheap Talk? Check out Yahoo! Messenger's low PC-to-Phone call rates.
______________________________________________
Meteorite-list mailing list
Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com
http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list

Reply via email to