Re: [meteorite-list] Looking for a picture of Krinov
Hi, Rob, List, In the field: http://www.tunguska.ru/history/persone/krinov/ The Academician: http://www.tstu.ru/eng/tambov/tambov_img/imena_img/levkoev.jpg Sterling K. Webb --- - Original Message - From: "Rob Wesel" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Meteorite List" Sent: Thursday, March 29, 2007 5:27 PM Subject: [meteorite-list] Looking for a picture of Krinov Hello all Anyone out there have an image of Krinov or know where I can find one? Any help would be greatly appreciated Rob Wesel http://www.nakhladogmeteorites.com -- We are the music makers... and we are the dreamers of the dreams. Willy Wonka, 1971 __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] Looking for a picture of Krinov ERROR
Hi, Rob, Betrayed by Google! The second URL below is Igor Levkoev, not Yevgeny Krinov. My bad. So only one photo found: http://www.tunguska.ru/history/persone/krinov/ Sterling K. Webb - - Original Message - From: "Sterling K. Webb" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Rob Wesel" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "Meteorite List" Sent: Thursday, March 29, 2007 6:00 PM Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Looking for a picture of Krinov Hi, Rob, List, In the field: http://www.tunguska.ru/history/persone/krinov/ The Academician: http://www.tstu.ru/eng/tambov/tambov_img/imena_img/levkoev.jpg Sterling K. Webb --- - Original Message - From: "Rob Wesel" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Meteorite List" Sent: Thursday, March 29, 2007 5:27 PM Subject: [meteorite-list] Looking for a picture of Krinov Hello all Anyone out there have an image of Krinov or know where I can find one? Any help would be greatly appreciated Rob Wesel http://www.nakhladogmeteorites.com -- We are the music makers... and we are the dreamers of the dreams. Willy Wonka, 1971 __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] Looking for a picture of Krinov ONE MORE
Hi, Rob, List, Saved by Google! Here's another photo of Krinov: http://www.tstu.ru/win/tambov/tambov_img/imena_img/krinov.jpg which is the one I meant to get before being Konfused by Kyrillic. Sterling K. Webb (or should that be "Ctepлинг"?) - - Original Message - From: "Sterling K. Webb" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Rob Wesel" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "Meteorite List" Sent: Thursday, March 29, 2007 6:51 PM Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Looking for a picture of Krinov ERROR Hi, Rob, Betrayed by Google! The second URL below is Igor Levkoev, not Yevgeny Krinov. My bad. So only one photo found: http://www.tunguska.ru/history/persone/krinov/ Sterling K. Webb --------- - Original Message - From: "Sterling K. Webb" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Rob Wesel" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "Meteorite List" Sent: Thursday, March 29, 2007 6:00 PM Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Looking for a picture of Krinov Hi, Rob, List, In the field: http://www.tunguska.ru/history/persone/krinov/ The Academician: http://www.tstu.ru/eng/tambov/tambov_img/imena_img/levkoev.jpg Sterling K. Webb --- - Original Message - From: "Rob Wesel" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Meteorite List" Sent: Thursday, March 29, 2007 5:27 PM Subject: [meteorite-list] Looking for a picture of Krinov Hello all Anyone out there have an image of Krinov or know where I can find one? Any help would be greatly appreciated Rob Wesel http://www.nakhladogmeteorites.com -- We are the music makers... and we are the dreamers of the dreams. Willy Wonka, 1971 __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] Space junk re-entry just misses Chilean jetliner
Hi, Since the Progress module was still docked with the ISS when this happened, it seems it was a "natural" bolide, probably far, far away from the plane. If so, we missed a chance to start a new and very exclusive "Hammer List"! A little scribbled arithmetic shows that the average total upper surface area exposed by all the commercial air flights of all the world's airlines summed up by the time they spend in the air amounts to the same collisional cross-section as about 10 square kilometers of land down here on the planet. Probably have to wait thousands of years for a meteorite hit on a plane... Sterling K. Webb -- - Original Message - From: "Chris Peterson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: Thursday, March 29, 2007 4:29 PM Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Space junk re-entry just misses Chilean jetliner So far, I've heard nothing to make me think that anything from space, natural or otherwise, came within a few kilometers of this plane. Is there anything to support this other than the report of the pilot? I've found that pilots, in general, provide some of the worst quality meteor reports. I'm doubtful that many pilots are capable of judging the distance to a meteor. Odds are, this thing actually burned up many kilometers above the plane. Chris * Chris L Peterson Cloudbait Observatory http://www.cloudbait.com - Original Message - From: "Kevin Forbes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: Thursday, March 29, 2007 2:25 PM Subject: [meteorite-list] Space junk re-entry just misses Chilean jet liner > Burning space junk falls near passenger plane > NZPA | Wednesday, 28 March 2007 > > The Civil Aviation Authority will investigate how falling space junk > came > within kilometres of a passenger flight into Auckland today. > > > The pilot of the Chilean plane saw the burning debris both in front > and > behind the aircraft while flying across the Pacific before landing > safely at > Auckland International Airport, One News reported tonight. > > Russian authorities had warned an obsolete satellite was expected to > fall in > the area, but it happened 12 hours early. > > A CAA spokesman said details had not yet been passed on to the > authority, > but a safety investigation would be launched once a report on the > incident > was received. > > > -- > Kevin. __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] Tennessee fall picture on postcard on
Hi, List, Robin, You ask: > any information about the Cosby Creek Fall? The NHM Catalogue of Meteorites says: "Two masses, one said to have weighed 2000lb and the other 112lb, were known before 1837, G. Troost (1840); C.U. Shepard (1842, 1847). The larger mass was forged into various articles, V.F. Buchwald (1975). Distinct from Waldron Ridge ( q.v._ ) and Greenbrier County ( q.v._ ). Analysis, 6.57 %Ni, 91.5 ppm.Ga, 431 ppm.Ge, 2.9 ppm.Ir, J.T. Wasson (1970). Analysis, classification and origin, B.-G. Choi et al. (1995)." > Any samples? Are they ever traded? Well, there's one on eBay right now, starting at $0.01: http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=110107596539 And, if you're in a more expansive (or expensive) mood, etched whole slices are apparently available at $4 a gram: http://www.islandmeteorite.com/pages/cosbys-creek.htm Next... Let me tell you about this wonderful thing called Google... For example, if you Google "meteorite database," you will be rewarded with an armload of internet databases about meteorites with more information than a mind can hold, starting with: http://tin.er.usgs.gov/meteor/ , which is always a good place to start. A meteorite has to be tough to survive in Tennessee I guess. Of 26 Tennessee meteorites, 21 are Irons (only one was a Fall), 2 are Mesosiderites, and only 3 are Stones (Drake Creek, a witnessed Fall in 1827; Petersburg, an 1855 witnessed Diogenite Fall; and Maryville, an 1983 witnessed Fall). Tennesseeans do not seem to notice rocks falling from the sky very well, nor meteorites lying about the landscape, but they are powerful good at ploughing them up! And East Tennessee is replete with Irons from the early 19th century. Every spot where one (or two or five) meteorite(s) fell is an excellent spot to look for more! Assuming you could locate these old Iron Find locations, that metal detector might prove useful there. On the other hand, Kansas is flatter... a lot flatter. Sterling K. Webb - - Original Message - From: Robin Galyan To: meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com Sent: Thursday, March 29, 2007 10:46 AM Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Tennessee fall picture on postcard on Many thanks to several of you profound students of the heavenly rocks, you are all right on the button! Yes, there are several other postcards like that one that are properly identified, but of course none have the detailed information like you all have presented me.Makes me want to really go to Kansas and see if I still have any farming friends out thereand take my detector of course. Now, on the other topic I presented...Does anyone have any information about the Cosby Creek Fall?Any samples? Are they ever traded? Any information about how they were found? What about the Harriman finds? Im interested as you can see mostly in finds in East TN. Thanks again, Robin Knoxville __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] Wow, nice tactites
Hi, Thiz reportor neads an speell checher. Sterling K. Webb --- - Original Message - From: "Darren Garrison" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: Friday, March 30, 2007 10:54 PM Subject: [meteorite-list] Wow, nice tactites http://news10now.com/content/all_news/?ArID=100315&SecID=83 Museum exhibit showcases different uses of glass Updated: 3/30/2007 7:06:21 PM By: Kat De Maria Curiosities of Glassmaking pays tribute to unusual collections that date back centuries known as "cabinets of curiosities." "The cabinet of curiosities typically included botanical specimens, insects, unusual horns or tusks, and skeletons. Kind of all the kinds of things that were made in the natural world that were deemed interesting and unusual," modern glass curator Tina Oldknow said. So, Tina decided to create her own cabinets of curiosity. She went through the museum's collections and filled these cases with all things glass, many of which were rather unique. "I found odd things from Corning Glass Works made during the second World War. Because of the metal shortages, they made things like glass-tipped bullets and glass irons," Oldknow said. Some of the curiosities date back a whole lot further, such as beads from the tenth century B.C. that were believed to ward off the evil eye and balls to ward off witches. And, those items don't even count among the most morbid. "We have a copy of a patent that was issued by the US government in 1903 to a man from Herkimer, New York for preserving the dead in glass," Oldknow said. Some of the curiosities aren't even man-made. "We also have in our collection wonderful examples of glass made by nature: fulgarites made when lightning strikes sand or tactite made from meteorite impacts," Oldknow said. The curator said the items' diversity represents the range of glass displayed elsewhere in the museum. "They really don't expect to see the kind of range of things that they see throughout the museum. This show is kind of a little encapsulation of all that," Oldknow said. And, some other things for curiosity's sake. __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] National Geographic Re-Airing "Ancient Astroid", the origins of Libyan Desert Glass
Hi, Gerry Go back one year in the List Archives to March 2-6, 2006. You will find this topic talked to death (I helped). I posted. Norm Lehrman posted. MexicoDoug posted. We kicked around whether the LDG could be from the Kabira crater, or any crater or impact, if it could be tektites when it's so wet, why the fluorine/boron levels are what they are, and much more. I said that they WERE tektites that had lain underwater for millions of years when that desert was swamp and lakes, which it was: http://six.pairlist.net/pipermail/meteorite-list/2006-March/021154.html and in defense: http://six.pairlist.net/pipermail/meteorite-list/2006-March/021179.html http://six.pairlist.net/pipermail/meteorite-list/2006-March/021183.html If it had been more than a year, I'd have posted it all again, but it's quicker to just go look at the List Archives, if you like that sort of thing. - Original Message - From: "Gerald Flaherty" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: Sunday, April 01, 2007 9:42 PM Subject: [meteorite-list] National Geographic Re-Airing "Ancient Astroid", the origins of Libyan Desert Glass Hi List, In response to Anne Black's picture of LDG in Michael Johnson's "Rocks From Space" a few days ago I posted news of a TV program concerned with one theory of the origins of Libyan Desert Glass. I didn't get much of a response from the List. I'm not sure why unless this subject is not of interest to anyone or everyone is comfortable with their personal understanding of the origins of LDG. Yet if anyone is so inclined, that show, "Ancient Astroid", will be aired again on Tuesday April 3, at 12:00 noon Eastern Daylight Time on "The National Geographic Channel". And Oh, you're welcome in advance to anyone to whom this notice might apply. Have a good evening. Jerry Flaherty __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] Commercialization, meteorite coins and other ridiculous wastes of time
Hi, Thaddeus, List > curation of specimens safeguards [them] Well, that's the assumption of those who "curate," but is it justified? Museums of today, great medieval libraries, and all famed institutions of preservation have the survival of knowledge in its physical form as their justification. There are two possible strategies for survival. First, consolidation in a fortress, a protective enclave dedicated to their preservation, an ivory, stone, or steel tower. Or, secondly, dissemination, spread the treasure far and wide, to be possessed by as many hands as possible. We can look to history for a test of the two strategies, used with two treasures of equal age and common origin: Greek literature and Greek money, both arising in the 7th century BC in the same lands. Money was (and always is) disseminated. There is virtually no issue of Greek coinage of which we do not possess, these millennia later, excellent examples, thousands of distinguishable types, mintings, issues, a staggering variety. Dissemination has preserved these objects well from no other cause than their commercial value. Literature is the classic case of preservation by assorted institutions, from the great Library of Alexandria down to hundreds of other ancient repositories, and continued "curation" by similar institutions dedicated solely to that purpose for centuries. The result? I have seven plays by Sophocles; do you have a copy of the other 116? The missing 73 plays of Aeschylus? The lost 76 plays of Euripides? A "Complete Works" of the great poet Archiochus? Even one complete poem? No? Neither does anybody else... Keenly, someone will point out that coins are mechanically produced and reproduced, but literature has not been, until the printing press. This is not true, however. Manuscripts were "manufactured" by vast factories, scriptoria employing direct human industry, for many centuries, copies by the ton. The key difference between the two is how the attempt to preserve them was conducted down through history. The method of reverential "temples" of preservation failed; the method of crass commercial valuation succeeded. Sterling K. Webb - Original Message -From: Thaddeus BesedinTo: Jake BakerCc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Sunday, April 01, 2007 10:21 AMSubject: Re: [meteorite-list] Commercialization,meteorite coins and otherridiculous wastes of timeJake,Indeed propaganda is important, but it should be provided at no charge if itis the preservation and dissemination of knowledge that is desired. Ameteorite coin is no better a fetish than a meteorite itself, accompaniedwith accessible information.In defense of academic repositories, the curation of specimens safeguardsscientifically-important materials from the fate of commodities; too badcommodification has been a necessary evil in permitting the accessibility weenjoy in our pursuit of possession of meteorites.-ThaddeusJake Baker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:I've read the messages about this subject bantered about.First I have a problem with 'scient ific' repositories and museums. I like tobe able to look closely at what I choose and not what some academic wants tospoon feed me. My mind can process more than a few 'selected' pieces oncertain subjects. If you ask to see a particular piece or subject the stockanswer is 'you'll have to make an appointment' or 'that is scheduled forMarch two years from now'. I may never get back to see it. In a lot of casesI helped fund it with taxes. It isn't right that a few employees andscientists are the only people 'allowed' to see, touch and experience thesewonders of our world. Yes institutes rescue and preserve items but for what?So the articles can sit in a drawer, box or bottle for years and thebuilding finally burns down and nothing is left? It's selfish and selfserving.I like the way that museums used to be. Everything they had was on display.I grew up in Iowa and as a child in the 1960s spent days in the Iowa StateCapitol Museum looking at everything from civil war relics, stuf fed animals,American Indian garments of the 17-1800s to Dr. Bean's one of a kind fossilplates. Dr. Bean was a dentist who spent years extracting crinoid (sp)colonies from limestone parent material. His works have a world widereputation. When we went to Iowa on vacation in 1999 I wanted to show myhusband Dr Bean's fossils but the answer was 'that's not available . . . .". I was truly disappointed there wasn't a single fossil on display.With the individual collector (or dealer) that doesn't happen. People areproud of what they have found, traded for or purchased. Most are more thanwilling to share their knowledge with adults and ch
Re: [meteorite-list] Commercialization, meteorite coins and other ridiculous wastes of time
Hi, Rob, OK, you can stuff the Natural History Museum with all the meteorites you can find, but when London falls to the barbarian hordes in 2714 AD, and one can see the NHM in one great writhing pyre of flame with the silhouettes of wild horsemen all about, howling with joy and waving their spears topped with the severed heads of curators... don't say I didn't warn you. Sterling K. Webb -- - Original Message - From: "Rob McCafferty" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Sterling K. Webb" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Sent: Wednesday, April 04, 2007 7:55 AM Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Commercialization, meteorite coins and other ridiculous wastes of time A great post Sterling. I kinda knew the Library of Alexandria was coming as soon as you mentioned the two possible methods of safeguarding. Qhile the curation and storing of these artifacts in institutions is vitally important, that they are locked away invisible to all but a select few is a travesty. I'm proud to show off my limited collection to anyone who shows an interest. Who is doing science the greater service? OK it's the Natural History Museum, isn't it...Well I'm doing my bit! Rob McC __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] LOOKING FOR STAN TURECKI
Hi, Stan is eBay seller "laserprogram" and has current auctions open. I would think you could contact him that way. "Ask Seller A Question," like about the Kurt Lesker Vacuum Forepump Trap and Molecular Seive, for example... Sterling K. Webb --- - Original Message - From: "dean bessey" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: Thursday, April 05, 2007 1:29 AM Subject: [meteorite-list] LOOKING FOR STAN TURECKI Does anybody know how to contact Stan? I have these two email addresses: [EMAIL PROTECTED] and [EMAIL PROTECTED] But neither seems to work anymore. If anybody has his current email address it would be appriciated. Thanks DEAN Sucker-punch spam with award-winning protection. Try the free Yahoo! Mail Beta. http://advision.webevents.yahoo.com/mailbeta/features_spam.html __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] Matteo's Hatred SPAM
Hi,
Here's what on-line translation offers for:
Giovanni lascia perdere, qui è normale se uno non è un
professore di lingue, venga preso in giro...sopratutto da
certi personaggi qui presenti in questa lista piuttusto
degrinatori nel confronto degli europei[.]
Google Translate:
Giovanni leaves to lose, is normal here if he is not a
university professor of languages, comes above all
taken in turn. from sure here present personages
in this list piuttusto degrinatori in the comparison
of the Europeans
Babel Fish:
Giovanni leaves to lose, here normal if a not university
professor of languages, comes above all taken in turn...
from sure here present personages in this list piuttusto
degrinatori in the comparison of the Europeans
Free Translation:
Giovanni forgets it, here is normal if one is not a
professor of tongues, comes teased. ..sopratutto
from certain here present characters in this strip
piuttusto degrinatori towards the European
Dictionary.com:
Giovanni leaves to lose, is normal here if he is not a
university professor of languages, comes above all
taken in turn. from sure here present personages
in this list piuttusto degrinatori in the comparison
of the Europeans.
InterTran:
Youthful let go, there it is right whether a not it is a teacher nor
linguistics, I am from engrossed around. sopratutto by certifies
persona there presenti un this checklist piuttusto degrinatori in
the beside of the Europeans
With Dictionary in hand, my best guess:
Giovanni forgets himself. Here it is normal that, if one is not a
university professor of languages, criticism and teasing will
come from all around. Above all else, certain persons who
frequent this List would rather denigrate and confront all
Europeans.
I think that's pretty close.
"Piuttusto" is apparently a mis-spelling of "piuttosto," an
intensifying adverb, as in: "Morte piuttosto che dishonore"
("Death rather than Dishonor").
List members who speak or understand only their own language
(like me) are not being mannerly when they criticize those who
attempt an language unfamiliar to them for The List. It is also
inconsistent to complain that you can't understand someone's
language while at the same time criticizing them for the content
of what they say. Can't have it both ways, guys.
That said, it does SEEM that Matteo communicates reasonably
well: feelings of resentment, contempt, and a pervasive paranoia
about the motivations of others. That may be a totally erroneous
impression, of course. He may be in reality a cheerful and
friendly open-hearted fellow goaded into irritability by criticism.
Can't tell from the messages; it's like a bad cellphone connection.
It's NOT spam, though. Objectively, you can't say his posts are
anything but concise, pithy, and they are no more frequent than
any other vendor. It's not worth a thread. Besides, I can tell you
one thing about Matteo, even though I don't understand his language --
he's willing to fight back, so piling on will just keep it going.
Unless that's what you enjoy.
Sterling K. Webb
---
- Original Message -
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "giovannisostero" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "Fredmeteorhall"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: "Meteorite-list" ; "ValparInt"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, April 05, 2007 2:58 AM
Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Matteo's Hatred SPAM
Giovanni lascia perdere, qui è normale se uno non è un
professore di lingue, venga preso in giro...sopratutto da
certi personaggi qui presenti in questa lista piuttusto
degrinatori nel confronto degli europei
ciao
matteo
- Original Message -
Da : "giovannisostero" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
A : "Fredmeteorhall" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: Meteorite-list ,
ValparInt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Oggetto : Re: [meteorite-list] Matteo's Hatred SPAM
Data : Thu, 5 Apr 2007 09:48:57 +0200
> > Paul, A Matteo translator is: Three or more bottles of
> > red vino, a loaf of Italian bread and a large slice of
> cheese.
>
> It would be highly appreciated that discussions based on
> personal bad feeelings, would not degenerate into
> generalized commets about the habits of a nation or its
> people. Generalizations difficultly pay dividends,
> expecially is a scientific community; I do personally know
> several US patetented idiots, however I will never extend
> my scarce opinion about them to the other american friends
> I have, just because all US citizens are eating hamburgers
> and "freedom fries"... Thanks,
> Giovanni
>
>
> --
> Passa a Infostrada. ADSL e Telefono senza limiti e senza
> canone Telecom http://click.libero.it/infostrada
>
Re: [meteorite-list] Matteo's Hatred SPAM
Hi, John said: > About the only 'American" food > I can think of is pemmican... Most of the world's domesticated animals originate in the "Old World" hemisphere, cows and chickens, sheep and goats, pigs, camels, elephants, water buffalo, and all of a long, long list. But the number of domesticated plants from that hemisphere is short. They were of importance because they were essential in their regions which were largely monocultural: wheat, rice, barley, millet, oats. And Kazakhstan supplied the APPLE. The Western Hemisphere provided virtually no domesticated animals. The Turkey. OK. Is the Llama really domesticated? (They don't think they are.) Does the Guinea Pig count? But most of the world's domesticated planets originate in the "New World" hemisphere. The Americas are the origin of those species of plants that constitute about 80% to 85% of foods of plant origin presently consumed by the entire planet! The Americas are the source of: CORN, all varieties, including the pod corns, popping corn, sweet corn, flint corn, feed corn, and red, yellow, black and blue corn. The POTATO, both all varieties of "white" potatoes and the sweet potatoes and yams. BEANS, again all varieties, from lima beans to snap beans to pod beans in their endless variations of pea beans, pinto beans, kidney beans, red beans (which used to called the "Arizona Strawberry"). All the varieties of SQUASH, both spring and fall, yellow, green, and red, and all PUMPKINS, of whatever kind. The one and only TOMATO. PEPPERS, both hot and sweet, originated in the Americas; the number of varieties run into the 100's. The EGGPLANT, MANIOC (or Cassava) which is what we call TAPIOCA and which supplies 37% of the food calories of the African continent. Also the PINEAPPLE, the AVOCADO, and ARROWROOT. CACAO, otherwise known as CHOCOLATE, which some persons think a very important "food." The CHAYOTE, the SAPODILLA, CASHEWS, PECANS, BUTTERNUTS, HICKORY NUTS, BRAZIL NUTS, PAPAYAS, GRANADILLAS, GUAVAS, MAGUEY, SURINAM CHERRIES, PERSIMMONS, and the SUNFLOWER SEED. Then, there's the BLACKBERRY, the BLUEBERRY, and the STRAWBERRY. I repeat, the STRAWBERRY. And the CRABAPPLE and the CRANBERRY, the PIMENTO, the RASPBERRY and VANILLA. All of these plants were in full domestication and use before "1492" except for one last food, the PEANUT, which had yet to be "buttered." I probably left some out because there are so many! And, of course, dishes involving combinations of these native American food stuffs are equally ancient. John, did you ever partake of an exotic concoction called "Chili"? (Tomatoes, beans, peppers, chocolate, and careless rabbit.) The Hopi invented something called "Bar-B-Que," although I don't think that's what they called it. At any rate, remove all these domesticated plants from your life, and eating becomes far less interesting. Remove plants of American origin from the world's food supply and billions would die. "American" foods have spread so thoroughly around the world that they are often regarded locally as being of quintessentially "native" origin. About 40 years ago, when forced to spend a Thanksgiving far from home, a co-worker invited me to go with him to his grandparents for Thanksgiving, saying "They're from Abruzzo (Italy) and for holidays they cook all the old-time dishes just like they used to up in the hills. It's not what you think Italian cooking is; it's REAL Italian cooking." The big dish turned out to be Possum Stew with Cornbread Dumplings and a red sauce (tomatoes) laced with enough chili peppers to challenge anybody. Abruzzo is a mountainous region; the wily possum (native to the Americas) escaped into the Apennines 400 years ago and thrived; the "imported" corn grows well in hills while wheat does not; and the Abruzzi really like hot peppers of all kinds. I didn't have the heart to tell him that my grandparents who came from similar, but quite American, hill country also used to stew possum with cornbread dumplings (minus the hot peppers). Or squirrels, if the possums proved too wily, under the name of burgoo. Some American food can be an acquired taste. And I daily give thanks to the "Old World" for The Cow that makes our hamburgers possible. Sterling K. Webb - - Original Message - From: "JKGwilliam" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "giovannisostero" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "Fredmeteorhall" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: "Meteorite-list" ; "ValparInt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thursday, April 05, 2007 8:
Re: [meteorite-list] Happy Easter Everyone and Everywhere! ... RMR
nd stately the Great Eastern swam up my bay, she was 600 feet long, Her moving swiftly surrounded by myriads of small craft I forget not to sing; Nor the comet that came unannounced out of the north flaring in heaven, Nor the strange huge meteor-procession dazzling and clear shooting over our heads, (A moment, a moment long it sail'd its balls of unearthly light over our heads, Then departed, dropt in the night, and was gone;) Of such, and fitful as they, I sing-with gleams from them would gleam and patch these chants, Your chants, O year all mottled with evil and good-year of forebodings! Year of comets and meteors transient and strange-lo! even here one equally transient and strange! As I flit through you hastily, soon to fall and be gone, what is this chant, What am I myself but one of your meteors? -Walt Whitman (* John Brown) Sterling K. Webb - - Original Message - From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: Saturday, April 07, 2007 4:23 PM Subject: [meteorite-list] Happy Easter Everyone and Everywhere! ... RMR *RMR = Remotely Meteorite-Related ;-) The Daffodils (by William Wordsworth) Composed 1804 - Published 1807 I wandered lonely as a cloud That floats on high o'er vales and hills, When all at once I saw a crowd, A host, of golden daffodils, Beside the lake, beneath the trees, Fluttering and dancing in the breeze. Continuous as the stars that shine* <= RMR And twinkle on the milky way,* <= RMR They stretched in never-ending line Along the margin of a bay: Ten thousand saw I at a glance, Tossing their heads in sprightly dance. The waves beside them danced; but they Out-did the sparkling waves in glee: A poet could not but be gay, In such a jocund company: I gazed - and gazed - but little thought What wealth the show to me had brought: For oft, when on my couch I lie In vacant or in pensive mood, They flash upon that inward eye Which is the bliss of solitude; And then my heart with pleasure fills, And dances with the daffodils. __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] This is the funniest meteorite dealer I'veseen?
Hi, Anne wrote: > Can anyone tell me what "SM-30 magnetic > susceptibility mean log X" is? According to: http://www.lpl.arizona.edu/~bcohen/publications/LPSC06_SIPI.pdf "The instrument used for the measurements is the SM-30 Magnetic Susceptibility Meter, (TERRAPLUS USA INC. 625 Valley Road Littleton, Colorado 80124). It operates at a frequency of 9 kHz with measurement times of 5s for basic mode and 8s for drift correction modes. The meter contains an oscillator with a pickup coil. The frequency of the oscillator depends on the distance of the meter from rock. The change in frequency is proportional to the amount of susceptibility of the rock. To find out the change it is necessary to measure the oscillator frequency twice. The pick-up step or first measurement is held near the rock. The compensation step or second measurement is carried out when the meter is held away from the rock (free air measurement)." Certain values of "log X" demonstrate the presence of metal. I presume that X is the magnetic susceptibility as measured by the SM-30. At first I thought "This Mars meteorite has Paranormal magnetic properties with organic, and amino acids. OXYGEN ISOTOPES on Starchasers Exhibit 11 performed on Thermo Finnigan Delta Plus is d18 O 4.55 d17 O 2.49 direct match for Mars Oxygen Isotopes plotts" was PURE goobledegook, but: http://uwacadweb.uwyo.edu/sif/instrumentation/deltaplusxp.htm shows The Finnigan Delta Plus XP Mass Spectrometer in all its stable isotope flinging glory. I'll bet this guy wasted a tremendous amount of cash on analysis of these worthless rocks. The tests would be quite useful IF they were meteorites, but they're still just Field Stones. Check out Gallery II. Now, there's an unusual meteorite! What I cannot explain is his meteorite's "paranormal" properties! Can it read your mind? Well, maybe he means "paramagnetic"? Sterling K. Webb - Original Message - From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: Tuesday, April 10, 2007 1:32 AM Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] This is the funniest meteorite dealer I'veseen? No, he is not an IMCA member. Can anyone tell me what "SM-30 magnetic susceptibility mean log X" is? And BTW, the IMCA Board reserves the right to ask that any suspect meteorite, presented to be a Meteorite by an IMCA member, be analyzed by a Lab of the Board's choosing. And it has happened. Goodnight. Anne M. Black www.IMPACTIKA.com [EMAIL PROTECTED] President, I.M.C.A. Inc. www.IMCA.cc -- In a message dated 4/9/2007 10:37:40 P.M. Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Hello everyone, I was looking around the internet and came across this link, I think you will get a kick out of it. these are supposed to be meteorites, they do not even resemble meteorites. But he Guarantees these to be authentc. sure hope is is not an IMCA member. http://www.rocksmuseumonline.com/index.php?pr=Home_Page http://www.rocksmuseumonline.com/index.php?pr=AR11 Joe Kerchner illinoismetoerites.com -- __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] Kalahari lunar meteorite stones - photos
Hi, Adam, Matteo, List It's a True Moon: "The regolith origin is also supported by the finding of solar wind implanted rare gases (L. Schultz, Mainz)." > No obvious crust It HAS a crust. A weird crust, but it's got one. Now, I'm a petrologico-idiot, so all I looked at was that weird crust. Look at the edges of the cut surfaces; the crust is so thin as to not show in places and where it does show on the edge, it is very thin, less than a millimeter. The crust is not dark, but appears virtually translucent. I would guess that it is entirely glassy. It's iron that makes crust dark, but the iron content of these babies is only 3.5%. Fully one-third of the stone is 2 parts silicon to 1 part calcium. That's a good formula for glass (sand and lime). My speculative nature also inclines me to think that the re-entry may have been unusually slow. The heating may have been "gentler" and the cooling more gradual. I search in vain for any indication of flow lines. Nope. > What makes this stone any different...? How many stones do you find that look like they were dipped in molten glass? I exclude natural glasses. Impactites are glasses themselves, although they're rife with clasts and junk. This is an "ordinary" chunk of apparently unremarkable basalt dipped in glass; you find many of those? (And, can I have them?) 8=) And before geologists jump all over me, I also exclude rocks found on the slopes of a volcano, in a limestone dripping cave, maybe even in some stream washouts... You're standing in a sand desert. There's a chuck of basalt with a thin glassy coat. Well, I'm suspicious. I posted before about the discarding of apparently valid meteorites that were sedimentary because they were "unacceptable." A large French stone was thrown away in the 1920's because it was "a basalt." There should be Venusites on Earth, say the dynamic studies, but would they too be passed by, ignored? Hunters! Get a big plastic garbage can, paint a "?" on it, toss the throw-away oddities in it. Give it time... Stack'em in the backyard in plastic milk crates. Use'em to edge your garden. Something. Sterling K. Webb - - Original Message - From: "M come Meteorite Meteorites" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Adam Hupe" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "Adam" Sent: Tuesday, April 10, 2007 2:44 PM Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Kalahari lunar meteorite stones - photos I agree with Adam, this material its many similar to a Quartz nodule pass for a lunar meteorite I have here in my meteorwrong collection...we are sure this 2 meteorites its real meteorites? Matteo - Original Message - Da : Adam Hupe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> A : Adam Oggetto : Re: [meteorite-list] Kalahari lunar meteorite stones - photos Data : Tue, 10 Apr 2007 12:20:24 -0700 (PDT) #1 > Wow, > > If I would have picked up these stones, I probably > would have thrown them back. I cannot see a single > indicator that these are planetary. > > No obvious crust > No indications of shock > No vesicles > and what looks like quartz > > Thanks for the images although I have learned not to > read too much from them. I normally do not comment on > images because I have been wrong in the past but felt > compelled in this case. > > All the Best, > > Adam > #2 > Maybe I should go through my meteorite-wrong pile > again. I noticed they gave it a weathering grade of > 1. I thought metal had to be present in order to > qualify a weathering grade and that they are generally > not assigned to achondrites. The CRE age seems to be > no different than a rock that spent 300 years in the > desert. > What makes this stone any different than a terrestrial > impactite? Adam > __ > Meteorite-list mailing list > Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com > http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] FW: Re: Kalahari Lunar
Hi, I recall, but cannot find in the archives (too long ago) of the List, a thread that batted back and forth rumors about Kalahari 008 and 009 having been found elsewhere and having been "planted" in the Kalahari. It was vague, certainly speculative, and nobody claimed to have come up with the inside scoop. http://www.uni-muenster.de/imperia/md/content/planetologie/pdf/bischoff/meteorites_from_botswana.pdf says "In 1999, the first meteorites from Botswana were recovered. Most samples (seven) were purchased from natives in the small village of Kuke. We suggest that these samples were found close to Kuke in the Kalahari desert. As reported by the finder, the other four samples were recovered during geological field work in various areas of Botswana in April (Mabe), September (Kalahari 008 and 009), and November 1999 (Matisama). Kalahari 008 and Kalahari 009 were found close to the small village of Kuke and are chemically and petrographically different lunar rocks. However, we suggest that both samples represent distinct lithologies of one meteoroid and that the lunar sample broke apart at the find site. The other nine samples are H-group ordinary chondrites. Based on different petrologic types, the degrees of shock metamorphism and weathering pairing of most samples can be ruled out. We conclude that only Kalahari 004 and Kalahari 005 are paired." So, there were many other meteorites (H) that came from the Kuke area initially and were offered for sale. It would seem that the finder then searched the area further and found four more, including the lunar duo. http://www.lpi.usra.edu/meetings/metsoc2005/pdf/5059.pdf "Two of these samples were found close to the small village of Kuke (Kalahari 008 and Kalahari 009) and are chemically and petrographically different lunar rocks. However, it is suggested that both samples represent distinct lithologies of one meteoroid that broke apart at the find site... During geological field work Kalahari 008 and 009 were found roughly 50 m apart in front of a small dune in September 1999." http://www.lpi.usra.edu/meetings/metsoc2005/pdf/5270.pdf says: "The combined 26Al and 36Cl 4pi exposure ages are 350±120 yr for Kalahari 008 and 220±40 yr for Kalahari 009 that is the shortest exposure age of any meteorite. If both objects are lunar meteorites, the transition time from the Moon to the earth was 230±90 yr and ejection depth was more than >1,100 g/cm2 on the Moon. Small amounts of cosmogenic nuclides are also produced in-situ on the Earth's surface. The 26Al and 36Cl concentrations in Kalahari 009 can be explained by ~0.3 Myr exposure time in the Kalahari Desert (1,000 m elevation and 21°S). Long terrestrial ages, 0.3-0.5 Myr, were found for Dhofar lunar and Martian meteorites... For the case of Kalahari 009, cosmogenic nuclides could have been produced on the Earth's surface, without previous exposure in space. Cosmogenic nuclide results do not exclude that Kalahari 009 is a terrestrial object. However, the 36Cl concentration in Kalahari 008 is ~15% higher than saturation of 36Cl production on the Earth's surface, therefore Kalahari 008 was exposed in space." So, if I wanted to plant a 30-pound chuck of the Moon in Botswana or anywhere else, like my back yard, where would I go to get one? Inquiring minds want to know... Sterling K. Webb --- - Original Message - From: "Michael Farmer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "meteorite list" Sent: Tuesday, April 10, 2007 7:18 PM Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] FW: Re: Kalahari Lunar I have heard that this area would be nearly impossible to find meteorites. It is clear that they are not from that area. Michael Farmer --- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > > > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > Randy and List, Last July Chauncey Walden and I > drove all the way around the > reported find location of these Kalahari Lunars. > This part of the Central Kalahari Nature > Reserve (national not private) is not a sandy > desert like those far to the north or the Namib to > the west. In this location is the ground is almost > totally covered in knee high grass and scattered > trees. We did not see any igneous rocks in this area > in fact there are not many rocks of any type in this > area. If I remember correctly it is part of the > worlds largest body of sand. So any rock would look > odd and stand out. I know it was totally different > from what I had envisioned and hoped for. Tough area > to hunt meteorites. Much better for photographing > lions and cheetah. > Regards, Fred Olsen, Denver > > > > __ > Meteorite-list mailing list > Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com > http://six.pairlist.net/mai
[meteorite-list] MORE ON KALAHARI 008 - 009
Hi, On August 10, 2005, Jeff Grossman posted: "When this meteorite came to my attention as a member of the NomCom, warning bells went off in my head too. Enough evidence was presented to us to convince us that these were meteorites, although I expected this not to be the case, that we had to name them. But the find story is very odd. My reading of it is this: somebody who knows nothing about meteorites is driving his vehicle in the Kalahari. In a brushy area (based on satellite imagery: get World Wind, then search the MetBull database for Kalahari 008/9 and click on the nasa link to see the place), he parks in front of a sand dune and there he sees a rock: no fusion crust, probably very nondescript looking, the size of a cantaloupe melon. Oh, he says, here's something cool... a rock! I think I'll drag this 30 lb thing back home with me. But first, I think I'll comb the area for more. Hmmm." Then, later the same day, Norbert Claussen posted: "Last but not least, I agree with Jeff Grossmann's notion that the find story is odd. Unconfirmed rumors have it that these lunaites were either found in South Africa or in the neighboring Namibia (both countries with strict meteorite laws), and that the "find location" in Botswana was just made up for obvious reasons. However, these rumors aren't consistent with the fact that the finder obviously isn't interested in selling any of his stuff - it wouldn't make much sense to make up anything in this case... Anyway, the story is strange, and it sounds improbable that a person who's not into meteorites at all recovers a large lunaite, AND - having no idea of what he has there - combs the place for additional fragments. That's really odd." However, please note that the Bischoff paper says that "the other four samples were recovered during geological field work in various areas of Botswana." If the finder was doing "geological field work," this suggests that the finder is a geologist, which is not an absolute disqualifier for a knowledge of meteorites. Presumably, he is working near Kuke because he's already acquired meteorites from there. If it's an elaborate setup for the reasons Norbert suggested, it's a damned good one. Try to prove otherwise... On the other hand, if he's a geologist in the largest sandcovered area of the planet and sees a large rock, ANY large rock, doesn't he check it? Fred Olson said: "We did not see any igneous rocks in this area. In fact there are not many rocks of any type in this area. If I remember correctly it is part of the worlds largest body of sand. So any rock would look odd and stand out." But if you find a rock, you check it... Sterling K. Webb __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] NEW Plutonic Angrite - NWA 4590 "Tamassint"
Hi, Here's a nice discussion of the FeO of Mercury: http://www.psrd.hawaii.edu/Oct01/MercuryMtg.html We used to think FeO was 5-6%; now the thinking is 2-3%, which gives us this interesting sequence for the inner planets: Mercury 3%, Venus 7%, Earth 8%, Mars 18% FeO, making an inverse relationship between FeO and the amount of iron in their cores (?). There's the suggestion that David mentioned, that it's old Mercurian crust from the Big Whack that's been hanging around for 4+ billion years. David said to Rob: "As you point out, this material would have to enter a stable orbit around the Sun until relatively recently." That sounds like he means a close inner system orbit. If you mean an inner solar system orbit, there is no stable place for a rubble collection, sunward asteroid belt, or other assortments of planetary leftovers that far downtown. And, oddly, the inner system has been searched for various supposed asteroids, the "Vulcanoids," many times with no success. There is no quiet home life for small bodies in the inner system as long as there are large bodies in the neighborhood throwing, if not their weight, their gravity around. There IS a place where large collections of small bodies can persist for a long, long time, a giant junkyard and planetary leftover surplus yard from 1.6 to 4.2 AU (more or less), called the Asteroid Zone. It is full of stuff from the inner system. Remember the recent SRI study that showed that the dynamics of the many large iron cores in the Zone demonstrate that they likely came from very close in (from sunward of Mercury out to sunward of Venus)? Of course, there no "identified" parent bodies, but that failing is common for many types of meteorites. A radical theory! Meteorites come from the Asteroid Zone!!! No, wait... Is that a new idea? Sterling K. Webb - Original Message - From: "Rob McCafferty" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Greg Hupe" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thursday, April 12, 2007 11:58 AM Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] NEW Plutonic Angrite - NWA 4590 "Tamassint" Greg, In light of recent comments about new rocks getting scant discussion, I will make some input on this one. I have to spend some time to pore/paw? over the Lunar and Planetary Science stuff in detail but it it seems interesting at a glance through. The great diversity of minerals in this rock and the fact that there are seemingly angrites of many different types and form make this new rock a great discovery. I used to think they were simply melted CVs but the structure of this seems to throw this into question. Probably wrong but it's very interesting. Can't wait until the messenger probe finally does it's stuff and starts sending back answers on Mercury. How embarrasing that here we are 46 years to the day since Gagarin's flight and we still know very little about one of our nearest neighbours. I somehow doubt that Mercury is the APB. Even with the bizaar theories of how mercury formed, these rocks should match the FeO characteristics we have for Mercury, surely? They are unlikely to have spent 4 billion years finding their way to earth. Amazing stuff, non-the-less. I'd love to be wrong. I can't help think they have an inkling of suspicion when they even have a name for them. Hermean meteorites? How interesting. I've never heard the term used before...but it has a certain ring to it. Rob McC --- Greg Hupe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Dear List Members, > > Yesterday I announced my new NomCom Approved Angrite > which has a different > lithology than the other known angrites. It is NWA > 4590 "Tamassint" and is a > Plutonic Angrite. For those who do not want to go to > eBay to look up the > complete information, here is the approved > classification and a link to an > abstract. This new angrite is gorgeous!! > > Link to Lunar and Planetary Science Conference > abstract on NWA 4590: > http://www.lpi.usra.edu/meetings/lpsc2007/pdf/1522.pdf > > Here is the NomCom Approved classification submitted > to the Meteoritical > Bulletin: > > == > > Northwest Africa 4590 > Morocco/Algeria > > Find: June 2006 > > Achondrite (angrite) > > > > History: Scattered fragments from a small stone > which appears to have > shattered upon landing recently were found covering > an area of ~40 m2 in the > Morocco-Algeria border zone, 21 km SSW of Tamassint > oasis and 18 km S of > Agoult, Morocco. Greg Hupé purchased all the > recovered material in June > 2006 from a Moroccan dealer in Tagounite. He then > traveled to Morocco and &
Re: [meteorite-list] NEW Plutonic Angrite - NWA 4590 "Tamassint"
Hi, Adam, List, The real "clincher" for the Mars rocks actually being Mars rocks is the isotope ratios of incorporated atmospheric gases. It's a clincher because we have the data from our probes to Mars, data produced by direct contact and from measurements made on the planet. Those ratios provide a unique "fingerprint" of Mars. Nowhere else in the solar system has those isotopes in those ratios. You find a rock with those fingerprints all over it, so to speak, you know that such a rock is a Mars rock. It's a QED, a Slam Dunk, turn it over and it has "Made on Mars" stamped on its bottom. Likewise, even though we've had much less science produced by contact with Venus, its argon isotope ratios are startling and unlike anywhere else. If you or anybody finds a rock with argon ratios similar to, or even close to, those odd proportions, you can slap it down and say "Venus rock," and we will all nod our heads and start wondering if we can afford the $42,000 per gram... But, as Rob pointed out, the crying shame is that we only flew by Mercury with one probe, decades ago, never went back, never followed up, never even photographed the entire surface, and know little more now than we did 40 years ago when we did that. No one will ever demonstrate Mercurian origin of anything without having some data from Mercury with which to compare the putative stone. Nor should they. We simply don't know enough about Mercury to be able to identify any rock as having come from there, or not. We don't even know enough about Mercury to be able to say whether they serve beer. If they do, I guess that it will be, like Britain, warm beer, or maybe, considering the 0.37 AU orbit, hot beer. Sterling K. Webb - - Original Message - From: "Adam Hupe" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Friday, April 13, 2007 2:48 AM Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] NEW Plutonic Angrite - NWA 4590 "Tamassint" Dear List, I just want to express my views on this subject and then tend to more pressing issues. It is interesting to note that similar arguments were presented when discussing SNCs. A lot of groups had a hard time believing that these series of rocks actually came from Mars. Now, you would be hard pressed to find somebody that would argue that they came from anywhere else. As far as I know, a single argument discounting Mercury as the origin for NWA 2999 was presented. This argument makes assumptions based on NWA2999 being an igneous rock. NWA 2999 was determined without a doubt to be a metamorphic rock(interlocking grains with triple junctions). Furthermore, formulas used to describe igneous processes here on Earth were used to describe a plutonic rock from a different planetary body as far as I can surmise. I guess this would be alright if the other planetary body was just like Earth with the same gravity, atmospheric pressure, water and so on. It would have been nice if the authors of this paper actually took the time to examine a piece NWA 2999. I don't think they have ever seen a piece of this meteorite. All that would have been required is to merely ask for a piece and they would have been supplied. As for it being too metal-rich, the metal was found to be introduced by the impactor. A great number of scientific heavyweights are listed as authors and coauthors representing 100s of year of combined experience so for now, they have my attention. A List debate will not suffice to sway my opinion one way or another. I think it best to keep an open mind in regards to Mercury being the PB for Angrites. Look what open minds did for the SNCs! Save the Earth, It is the only planet that serves beer. Adam --- David Weir <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hello Sterling and hopeful Hermean collectors, > > The angrites have FeO contents in the general range > of ~25 wt%, so if > they are from Mercury this does not conform to your > inverse iron core > ordering, unless the core of Mercury was not fully > differentiated before > the impact-related dissemination occurred. Some > angrites like NWA 2999 > do contain too much iron to be consistent with > representing a completely > differentiated body. As for the stable orbit, the > iron cores of early > differentiated bodies which formed near Mercury and > now stored in the > inner asteroid belt is a good point, although I was > thinking about > possible Lagrange-like regions. Storage in the the > inner asteroid belt > is definitely more reasonable. > > For Rob, here is some CRE age info: > > The results of CRE age studies (Eugster et al., > 2002) utilizing > cosmogenic nuclide data indicate that the CRE age of > D'Orbigny (12.3 > +/-0.9 m.y.) is significantly different from tha
Re: [meteorite-list] In search of a hammer
s for The Ruler. So it was that the Emperor controlled all public knowledge of the Augeries, or when necessary, concealed it, contrived it, or even destroyed it. It was just like National Intelligence is today. And as to why Augustus refused to strip Lepidus of his office of Pontifex Maximus (until he died, of course), he only did so to show his piety and respect for the office, to gain time to get control of all the auspicial functions, and to avoid the appearance of grabbing ALL power at once. But when Lepidus did die, Augustus assumed those powers, becoming Pontifex Maximus For Life, and so did EVERY Roman Emperor that followed him, even the Christian ones. To understand this political dynamic, just look forward to the time when the first President that achieves the goal of making himself Emperor comes along, will he not allow the sitting Chief Justice of the Supreme Court to die in office before appointing himself to that life-time position? I hope so. So, all those records you think were lost and disregarded because the Romans no longer believed in auspices, well, my guess is that they were preserved and understood for a very long time. This is no comfort, however, when we hope for their ultimate survival to our day. We all know what the haruspectelligence agents do when the end comes and the enemy is breaking down the doors, when the nation is finally collapsing forever and all hope is gone: BURN THE FILES. Sterling K. Webb - PS: What I want to see is the actual, unretouched photos of the liver of the goat that Donald Rumsfeld sacrified before the start of the Iraq War... -- - Original Message - From: "E.P. Grondine" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Friday, April 13, 2007 7:25 PM Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] In search of a hammer Hi Mike - My own notes on Julius work. I'm sure I have copies of the exact translation from which I worked somewhere in my papers, but I seem to have ommitted it from my note. I suppose it was the initial onset of the stroke in 2003. good hunting, Ed A FEW FACTS ABOUT THE ROLES OF POLITICAL AND RELIGIOUS FACTORS IN THE SUPPRESSION OF THE KNOWLEDGE OF IMPACTS DURING THE YEARS OF THE COLLAPSE OF THE ROMAN REPUBLIC While it is true that the Church's Platonic orthodoxy was rather strictly enforced for 1600 years or so, in point of fact that suppression of impact knowledge began long before the Church ever gained power. >From Julius (IULII: OBSEQUENTIS AB ANNO URBIS CONDITAE DV PRODIGIORUM LIBER) "Consulship of Gnaeus Octavius and Licius Cinna (87 BCE) "56a. While Cinna and Marius were displaying a cruel rage in their conduct of the civil war, at Rome in the camp of Gnaeus Pompeius [Strabo] the sky seems to fall, weapons and standards were hit, and soldiers struck dead. Pompeius [Strabo] himself was struck dead by the blast of a heavenly body." and to put it mildly, this was a hot political topic. The suppression of Etruscan astromancy and knowledge of impact lore actually thus actually began with Senate loyalist Cicero's deprecations of it in De Divinatione (70 BCE) and De haruspicum Responsis (56 BCE), works which he wrote in support of Pompeius Magnus, Pompeius Strabo's son, and against Caesar, who held the office of Pontifex Maximus, head of the haruspex. But events will take yet a stranger turn. As Julius's work represents the last real vestige of Etruscan astromancy and impact lore, establishing its date is essential. Now it is widely held that Julius himself extracted his haruspex's records from the history of Rome which was written by Titus Livy, who lived 59 BCE - 17 CE; Livy is thought to have begun writing his history around 29 BCE, and it is commonly held that Julius's wrote his work much, much later than 17 CE. But a problem with this dating scenario is that the poet and astronomer Manilius appears to paraphrase part of Julius's work in his Astonomica at IV.45-62, and Manilius is known to have written this particular work spanning the time of the Emperor Augustus's death in 14 CE. (For the date of the composition of the Astronomica definitively established by J.P. Good, see Manilius, Astronomica, J.P. Good translation, Loeb Classical Library, page xiii). Therefore Julius's work or a part of it was must have been written before 14 CE. Were Julius's own personal name "Julius" not enough, his conspicuous use of the name "Caesar" for Octavian, a usage which Julius Caesar's nephew Octavian (later known as Augustus, the first Roman Emperor) himself ferociously advocated, marks the work as having been written for the most part early in Octavian's campaign for absolute power, if not indeed even earlier. Julius's anti-Pompey bias is clearly demonstr
Re: [meteorite-list] In search of a hammer
Hi, Doug, List,
In case this gets confusing to anybody who's
reading this thread, we should explain that the dead one,
Gnaeus Pompeius Strabo (nickname: "Squinty"), is
the father of Gnaeus Pompeius Magnus ("The Great").
Some sources (not original, but contemporary ones)
say merely that the elder Pompeius was killed on the
field of battle; others that he was killed by lightning.
That is clearly a case of an historian's reading of the
text. Latin has a word for "lightning." The Romans were
familiar with lightning. Duh. If they meant "lightning,"
wouldn't they have said "lightning"?
Being struck by lightning is a familiar notion; in
mythology, Enceladus, Mimas, Menoetius, Aristodemus
and Capaneus, Idas, Iasion, and Asclepius all get struck
by lightning. It's associated with getting Zeus (or Jove)
pissed off at you.
Julius says "struck dead by the blast of a heavenly
body." It's worthwhile to note that the "blast" has its
origin in a "heavenly body." No one, not even the old
Romans, believes lightning originates in a "body." Neither
is Squinty struck BY the body. Nope, "a blast" from the
body. What do the Roman know about hypersonic shock
waves? Nothing, so how else could they describe it?
I'd call this one a good reference for impact (or airburst).
The problem is that after you've put together a list of 100
such incidents, the unconvinced remain unconvinced. It's
all annecdotal. It's vague and not specific enough. Haven't
you got any video?
Sterling K. Webb
--
- Original Message -
From: "MexicoDoug" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Meteorite Mailing List" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, April 13, 2007 5:57 PM
Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] In search of a hammer
Thanks for that gem, Ed!, List,
This Googled up from the event:
"On the morning of August 9, 48 bc, Rome's most famous general--Gnaeus
Pompeius Magnus, or Pompey the Great--apprehensively prepared his troops to
face the army of Rome's most successful general, Gaius Julius Caesar.
Pompey's unease was fueled by a meteor that had shot across the sky near his
camp the night before. To some of his soldiers it was an ill omen. After
quelling the disturbance caused by the meteor, Pompey retired to his tent.
There he dreamed of being applauded by Rome's citizens as he dedicated a
temple to the goddess Venus, Bringer of Victory. The dream must have made
the great commander nervous. Venus was the goddess from whom Caesar's
aristocratic clan, the Julians, claimed to be descended. Though unknown to
Pompey at the time, Caesar had vowed that very day that if Venus brought him
victory at Pharsalus he would build a great temple to her in Rome."
ref:
http://www.historynet.com/historical_conflicts/3030956.html
Best Wishes and Great Health,
Doug
PS from the pay Internet reference JSTOR, we have: "Pompeius Strabo met his
death by lightning"
- Original Message -
From: "E.P. Grondine" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, April 13, 2007 4:38 PM
Subject: [meteorite-list] In search of a hammer
> Hi all -
>
> Going through some notes from 2003, I found this:
>
> >From Julius (IULII: OBSEQUENTIS AB ANNO URBIS CONDITAE
> DV PRODIGIORUM LIBER)
>
> "Consulship of Gnaeus Octavius and Licius Cinna (87
> BCE)
>
> "56a. While Cinna and Marius were displaying a cruel
> rage in their conduct of the civil war, at Rome in the
> camp of Gnaeus Pompeius [Strabo] the sky seems to
> fall, weapons and standards were hit, and soldiers
> struck dead. Pompeius [Strabo] himself was struck
> dead by the
> blast of a heavenly body."
>
> good hunting,
> Ed
>
>
> __
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
> http://mail.yahoo.com
> __
> Meteorite-list mailing list
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
>
__
Meteorite-list mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
__
Meteorite-list mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
[meteorite-list] TEST -- DELETE PLEASE
TEST __ Meteorite-list mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
[meteorite-list] LOCATION of a hammer
ers. In 17, Augustus adopts Agrippa's and Julia's two sons, Gaius and Lucius, as his own sons. In 15, Tiberius and Drusus, Augustus's Claudian stepsons, defeat the Raeti and Vindelici, whose territory becomes a Roman province. In 13, Tiberius's first consulship. Augustus returns to Rome after three years in Gaul, and Agrippa after three years in the east. Agrippa's special powers are extended for five years. Lepidus dies. Augustus is elected pontifex maximus. In 12, Agrippa dies. Tiberius is forced to marry his widow, Augustus' daughter Julia. Augustus' power is pretty much complete at this point. It is not just that his rivals for power are dead, but that all the potential heirs to power are also firmly under his control; there is no child out there with a claim to similar honors being raised by some other family to someday threaten Augustus and the family he controls for power. Of course, most of them will die before they are in a position to be a threat. Most convenient. Sterling K. Webb --- - Original Message - From: "E.P. Grondine" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Saturday, April 14, 2007 2:16 PM Subject: [meteorite-list] In search of a hammer Well, Sterling, There was a difference between haruspicy and astromancy. How and when they became "secret" is the issue at hand. Were they already "mysterious" at the time of the founding of the Empire? Or did they become "secret" with the founding of the college? For the problem at hand, the important information is where that army was when it was hit. Any ideas on that? good hunting, Ed __ Meteorite-list mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] In search of a hammer
Hi, Ed, List, Where was Pompeius Strabo when he died? Pretty sure it was in the immediate vicinity of Rome itself. Encyclopedia Brit., 11th Ed., says Gnaeus Pompeius Strabo died of the "plague," and that "a mob dragged his body through the streets until a tribune interceded." The legion Strabo raised were from and were based at Picenum, and his son took them back there after the old man's death. I found this: "Gnaeus Pompeius Strabo, often referred to as Strabo or Pompey Strabo in English, was a Roman from the rural province of Picenum. He became the first of the Pompeii to achieve senatorial status in Rome, despite the anti-rural prejudice of the Roman Senate. After proving his military talent, Strabo climbed the cursus honorum and became consul in the year 89 BC, in the midst of the Social War. Strabo commanded Roman forces against the Italian Allies in the northern part of Italy. His three Roman legions were instrumental in Rome's victory. After his consulship and the war, Strabo retired to Picenum with all of his veteran soldiers. He remained there until 87 BC, when he responded to Lucius Cornelius Sulla's request for help against Gaius Marius. Strabo besieged Rome, but died before a battle was fought. Strabo's son, the famous Gnaeus Pompeius Magnus (Pompey the Great), took the legions back to Picenum once again." Says the Wiki: "Strabo had the habit of playing both ends against the middle in the intense politics of the period. Sulla arranged to remove Strabo from the command and replace him with a handpicked confederate. Strabo left camp on "personal business" while his soldiers killed the replacement." This was apparently outside of Rome (if beseiging it). Sulla's replacement, who murdered by his troops, was the consul Q. Pompeius Rufus. There seems no doubt that he was at Rome: "Strabo, whose duty [to Sulla] it was to defend Rome against Cinna and Marius, negotiates with Cinna, but dies during the general epidemic [which was in 88-87 BC]." So, there was at Rome at one and the same time, a civil war, an epidemic of type unknown, and an army-killing lightning, blast, impact, or airburst event. I'd say the omens at that moment were NOT good. As for Augustus consolidating power slowly: "In 22 BC, Augustus resigns his eleventh consulship, probably because of illness. He is awarded for life full tribunician powers, and extended imperium which gives him authority over any provincial governor and over the army (renewed for five years in 18 and 13, and for ten years in 8, and AD 3 and 13.) In 22, there's famine and plague. Augustus declines the dictatorship and censorship for life, but accepts the post of "corn supremo." He leaves for the East for three years. In 21, Agrippa is forced by Augustis to divorce his existing wife and marry Augustus's daughter Julia, whose husband Marcellus died after being married to her for two years. In 18, the Senate is reduced to a mere 600 senators. (You think 100 is bad?) Agrippa is granted special powers. In 17, Augustus adopts Agrippa's and Julia's two sons, Gaius and Lucius, as his own sons. In 15, Tiberius and Drusus, Augustus's Claudian stepsons, defeat the Raeti and Vindelici, whose territory becomes a Roman province. In 13, Tiberius's first consulship. Augustus returns to Rome after three years in Gaul, and Agrippa after three years in the east. Agrippa's special powers are extended for five years. Lepidus dies. Augustus is elected pontifex maximus. In 12, Agrippa dies. Tiberius is forced to marry his widow, Augustus' daughter Julia. Augustus' power is pretty much complete at this point. It is not just that his rivals for power are dead, but that all the potential heirs to power are also firmly under his control; there is no child out there with a claim to similar honors being raised by some other family to someday threaten Augustus and the family he controls for power. Of course, most of them will die before they are in a position to be a threat. Most convenient. Sterling K. Webb --- - Original Message - From: "E.P. Grondine" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: Saturday, April 14, 2007 2:16 PM Subject: [meteorite-list] In search of a hammer Well, Sterling, There was a difference between haruspicy and astromancy. How and when they became "secret" is the issue at hand. Were they already "mysterious" at the time of the founding of the Empire? Or did they become "secret" with the founding of the college? For the problem at hand, the important information is where that army was when it was hit. Any ideas on that? good hunting, Ed --- "Sterling K. Webb" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [meteorite-list] Boris and Natasha write about meteorite crater in ocean
Hi, Darren, List, > structure most likely formed between > the Cretaceous and Paleogene. > And then scientists have suddenly > remembered the hypothesis about > Earth's collision with a giant meteorite, > happened some 65 million years ago... Article not so good. In KT times, sealevels were not 2 kilometers lower than today but between 500 and 1000 meters HIGHER. Present-day sealevels are lower than almost all the sealevels of the last half billion years. 65 mya there was considerable oceanic transgression of the continents. However, NE Siberia and Beringeria were land, while southern Siberia was under water because of changes in continental elevation. It's a really complicated problem, because ocean-floor spreading moves the seabottom toward the subduction zones. Figuring out where the seabottom that presently contains the astrobleme was 65 mya (million years ago) is a nightmare problem. In fact, the location seems to be perched right on the edge of a subduction zone. A 500 meter impactor is about 1/25th of the volume of Big Chicxy. If you look at it that way, this could be a secondary crater. Technically, the term "secondary crater" means a crater from the impact of a piece of a larger impactor: "An impact crater produced by the relatively low-velocity impact of fragments ejected from a large primary crater. Also known as satellitic crater." Enough data about the morphology of this crater should be able reveal if it is a lower-velocity crater. If a secondary crater, the impactor might be bigger than the 500 meter estimate which I'm sure was made on the assumption of cosmic velocity. A 1000 meter impactor would be only about 1/3th of the valume of Chicxulub. A tiny chip off the big hammer. That would be a neat discovery which not even Moose and Squirrel could spoil. Sterling K. Webb - - Original Message - From: "Darren Garrison" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: Tuesday, April 17, 2007 10:09 AM Subject: [meteorite-list] Boris and Natasha write about meteorite crater inocean Article good, English not so good. Much catch Moose and Squirrel for Fearless Leader. http://www.russia-ic.com/education_science/science/breakthrough/450/ Meteorite Traces Deep In The Ocean A theory suggests a giant meteorite falling on Earth 65 million years ago and killing all dinosaurs. Russian scientists have found traces of this meteorite. During a marine expedition, organized by the Institute of Marine Geology and Geophysics (Russian Academy of Sciences) and aimed at ocean studies, the crew of the science and research ship "Morskoy Geofizik (Marine Geophysicist)" discovered an astroblem - a circular structure, which usually forms after a celestial body falls down from the sky - at the bottom in north-west of the Pacific. Researchers gave found astroblem the name "Sakhalinka". . The processes that take place after celestial bodies fall into the ocean are studied very poorly, because scientists know location of very few underwater craters on our planet, and the fact that every new astroblem causes a tide of scientific interest and curiosity is not surprising at all. The "Sakhalinka" astroblem is unique, since it is located very deep at the ocean bottom. All known underwater craters - Chicxulub of Mexico, Mjølnir impact structure in the Barents Sea and Lockne of Sweden are located between 200 and 400 m, whereas Pacific astroblem lies as deep as 6 thousand meters. During the expedition discovered crater was investigated by means of CSP (continuous seismic profiling), thus its exact contours and some other parameters were detected. Crater's diameter at 5900 m depth is 12 km, and its depth in basement topography is 7 hundred meters. Crater's centre has following geographic coordinates - 30 degrees and 15 minutes of north latitude and 170 degrees 3 minutes of east longitude. Scientists have thought over possible conditions, which led to "Sakhalinka" astroblem formation, and their calculations suggest meteorite's diameter to reach 500 m. Statistics of meteorite falling claims that such large objects approach our planet only once in 100 thousand years. When such a meteorite falls into the ocean, it generates tsunamis with waves, higher than 10 m, 1 thousand km away from the epicenter, or the impact point in other words. However, no matter what a splash a giant celestial body makes, when it falls to the ocean, it forms no crater, when the ocean in the point of impact is deeper than 4 thousand meters. Therefore, "Sakhalinka" astroblem appeared at those times, when the ocean was much shallower than it is today. Russian think-tank has performed a reconstruction of paleooceanologic environment, which brought researchers to a conclusion that during the Cretaceous period ocean leve
Re: [meteorite-list] Harper's Mag 1850 - article on meteorites
Hi, Dave, Thanks for the "Blast From The Past"! I expected most of the things I found there, the Great Leonids of 1833, L'Aigle, and so forth, but there was one thing completely new to me: the determination of the height of meteors by Brandes and Benzenberg (while still students!) in 1798, using long base-line observations by coordinated observers to triangulate meteor altitude by parallax. I had never heard of this being done so early, and it's a damned clever technique. I Googled the clever students and found: http://www.worldwideschool.org/library/books/sci/history/AHistoryofScienceVolumeIII/chap36.html I found whole story at: http://www.lpi.usra.edu/meetings/metsoc2000/pdf/5008.pdf Brandes and Benzenberg's professor, one Lichtenberg, set them up in the experiment to measure the exact height of meteors. They chose a baseline suitable to measure a meteor height of ONE mile, because meteors were believed to be an atmospheric phenomenon, like lightning. I mean, Aristole said so! Must be right... Lichtenberg wobbled back and forth between Aristole and Chladni, so he did what any good scientist would do -- he sent some grad students out into the fall weather to freeze their butts off all night gathering data! It was immediately obvious that their baseline was too short and that the meteors were much higher than one mile. Eventually, they used a 15,625 meter baseline and observed meteors as high as from 30 km altitude up to 170 kilometers, moving at speeds of 30 to 44 km/s, remarkably consistent with what we know today. At any rate, it seems to me a remarkable achievement for the time and I was surprised to have never heard of it (maybe it's just me). They published their results in 1800, but apparently other scientists did not know how to interpret the results, and it was not until about 1830 that they were well understood. Thanks again, Dave. Sterling --- - Original Message - From: "Dave Harris" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: "metlist" Sent: Wednesday, April 18, 2007 4:46 PM Subject: [meteorite-list] Harper's Mag 1850 - article on meteorites Hi, I have just uploaded pics of a nice article in Harper's for 1850 for your perusal I think I have numbered the pages in order, but I would recommend you download the images to read them anyway! http://picasaweb.google.com/Entropydave1/ thanks! Dave IMCA #0092 Sec.BIMS www.bimsociety.org __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] help with email
Joe, This message of yours, this one here below, was sent in a Rich Text or HTML format. Those are the messages that have to be held for inspection. To reply promptly, I just switched it back to Plain Text. To be posted right away, you have to send your messages in PLAIN TEXT. To do that, you have to set your email preferences in your email program to sending in PLAIN TEXT as the default. Then, whatever you sent to the List will be posted right away. Switch your email to PLAIN TEXT. Sterling K. Webb --- - Original Message - From: Joe To: meteorite list Sent: Monday, April 16, 2007 10:44 PM Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] help with email Me to, why is that. this is being written at 10:42 central time (USA) we will see just how long this takes, I have had them take almost 36hrs maybe more. This is the reason that I do not post as often. I do not want people to think I am just repeating what everyone else has said "before me" I have noticed that farmer and chi-town steve have very little if any delay. Could it be due to us not having enough posts and need to have our messages reviewed before they are posted? This is the only thing I can think of. If this is the case, I will post many "Test" messages. Does anyone else have any solutions? Thanks, Joe Kerchner - Original Message From: mike morgan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com Sent: Monday, April 16, 2007 8:27:54 PM Subject: [meteorite-list] help with email Am I the only that it takes over 24hr for there e-mail to post here? I went and got a google e-mail account and sent a e-mail and it has been over 9hr now and it has still not posted. am I doing something wrong? Thanks Mike Ahhh...imagining that irresistible "new car" smell? Check out new cars at Yahoo! Autos. __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list Ahhh...imagining that irresistible "new car" smell? Check out new cars at Yahoo! Autos. __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] new formation mechanism
Hi, Ed, List, The only "new" part is the notion that these early planet-sized bodies get all their crusty mantles knocked off their cores right away. Think of it as the "Naked Core Theory"! General consensus, dating all the way back to Wetherill and demonstrated by more recent computer simulations, is that the inner solar system requires the following minimum set of ingredients: 1000 1000-kilometer planetesimals 100 3000-kilometer planetesimals (Moon-sized) 10 5000-kilometer planetesimals (Mercury-sized) 2-38000-kilometer planetesimals (Mars-sized) Directions: STIR WELL! The truth is, if you start your computer simulation with only 1000 1000-kilometer planetesimals, you may not get a solar system at all -- too puny. It's usual to start with about 10,000 1000-kilometer planetesimals! Picture all 1000 or 5000 or more, all bigger than the Dwarf Planet 1 Ceres, careening around the inner solar system, bonk, bonk, bonk! like a pinball game! Would you be surprised if a lot of them lost all or most of their crust and mantle to impacts? In fact, if we going to take this Naked Core Planetesimal Theory seriously, why do we need ANY special case, like a Big Whack, to explain why Mercury has such a big core and such a small mantle? Couldn't it have accreted directly from these planetesimals that are mostly core? It's always better when some puzzle is explained as a direct result of the prevailing conditions and doesn't need a special mechanism to account for it! Sterling K. Webb --- - Original Message - From: "E.P. Grondine" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: Thursday, April 19, 2007 9:45 PM Subject: [meteorite-list] new formation mechanism Hi - And just to think, only a few years ago I constantly got reminded about McSween's Meteorites and Their Parent Bodies whenever I brought the topic of a larger parent body up. Now we have the LPBE, that was 3.8 or 4.2 Gya, or both? <http://www.hawaii.edu/cgi-bin/uhnews?20070418141659> good hunting all, Ed __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] Osmium and the size of parent bodies
Hi, Ed, List, "More" work? More than who, what, when? Are you referring to the indications of an early cooling of the cores of irons, demonstrated by their 187Rhenium/187Osmium ratios? As shown in this: http://www.geol.umd.edu/pages/faculty/WALKER/walker_homepage/meteorites.html "Some iron meteorites (the so called "magmatic" irons) likely are pieces of asteroidal cores. As such their study can provide valuable insights to planetary core formation and crystallization processes. The highly siderophile elements (HSE: "iron-loving", including Re, Os, Ir, Ru, Pt and Pd) are useful in elucidating crystallization sequence, so these elements have been the focus of much of our work on irons. We recently completed a 187Re-187Os and 190Pt-186Os isotopic and elemental study of the two largest magmatic iron meteorite groups, IIAB and IIIAB (Cook et al., 2004). That study revealed that the cores these meteorites sample crystallized very early in solar system history (approximately 4.5 billion years ago)... However, complex trace element behavior for Re, Pt and Os in these groups, particularly group IIIAB proved difficult to explain. During the past several years we have extended our study to the magmatic groups IVA and IVB (each of the groups presumably sample the cores of different asteroids)." More by the same researcher: http://www.lpi.usra.edu/meetings/epd2006/pdf/4008.pdf Crystallization age is "when it cooled" and that is related to the size of the body but also the time of formation. Some irons are "younger" than most: Kodaikanal (a IIE iron) has a crystallization age of only 3.8 billion years, something that's really hard to explain. Anyway, it's a long piece with lots of details and a substantial bibliography on osmium and its siderophile buddies in iron meteorites. Osmium plays a role in this: http://www.psrd.hawaii.edu/Mar04/fossilMeteorites.html Headline reads: Tiny Traces of a Big Asteroid Breakup! Fossil meteorites and chromite grains record a hundred-fold increase in the number of meteorites that fell 480 million years ago compared to the meteorite influx today. They used chromite instead of osmium for their analysis because there was more of it, but the pattern was the same. (I threw this in, E.P., because you're always interested in Big Asteroid Breakups, right?) Sterling K. Webb - - Original Message - From: "E.P. Grondine" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: Saturday, April 21, 2007 3:53 AM Subject: [meteorite-list] Osmium and the size of parent bodies Hello list - I wonder if any more work has been done on the osmium ratios in irons? good hunting all, Ed __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] Shatter-cones on Itokawa
Hi, Chuck, List, A shatter cone is a solid rock that has been cracked, creviced, fissured by a shock wave that originates at a single point, so all the cracks are aligned so that they point to the source of the shock wave. The rock may not be completely shattered or if it is, it may be re-fused by the heat and pressure after it is cracked. But the pattern shows a convergence. The surface of Itokawa is jillions of little pieces (and medium and big pieces, too) that align with the local weak gravity to point (as I understand it) toward the deepest parts of the "saddle," where gravity is weakest, the local "downhill." In both cases, the pattern is a converging one. http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?articleid=0AF96E7F-E7F2-99DF-3BA6B5CA9530FEC8&chanId=sa026 "In other signs of downhill movement, the pea-size grains tended to point sideways, as though they had been rolling, and boulders had clusters of the small ones piled behind them, implying that big rocks blocked the movement of smaller ones." Being jiggled by even a one-centimenter impactor, Itokawa must quiver all over, like an asteroid with a chill! In both cases, we have features that demonstrate alignment with a force that originates in a point: the impact point in the case of a shatter-cone, and the effective focus of a celestial body's gravity. On tiny Itokawa, we can see that gravity converges to a point. On Earth, we have the illusion that "down is down" because the planet is so large. For centuries, opponents of a "round" Earth, pointed out that folks on the opposite side of the planet from sensible folk would, of course, fall right off the world (like Australians)! It was called the Problem of The Antipodes. The obvious solution is that gravity is a Central Force Field, an answer that didn't occur to anyone for millennia. But if you were standing in London with a plumb bob pointing straight down and I were standing in my Illinois house with a plumb bob pointing straight down, watching each other connected by closed circuit TV, we would agree that both plumb bobs were effectively parallel. But in reality, they would be at a 90 degree angle to each other. On Itokawa, if we were near the saddle, we could see that we were standing at various funhouse angles to each other. It's a Small World! Sterling K. Webb --- - Original Message - From: Charles O'Dale To: meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com Sent: Friday, April 20, 2007 6:56 AM Subject: [meteorite-list] Shatter-cones on Itokawa http://www.space.com/php/multimedia/imagedisplay/img_display.php?pic=070419_ito_rocks_02.jpg&cap=A+close-up+of+larger+sized+regolith+on+the+surface+of+Itokawa.+They+are+weakly+organized+in+a+way+that+points+toward+the+upper-right+corner+of+the+image.+Credit%3A+Univ+Tokyo%2FJAXA Some of these rocks "look like" they have the shatter-cone pattern on them. Compare to a Manicouagan shatter-cone. http://www.ottawa.rasc.ca/articles/odale_chuck/earth_craters/manicouagan/21_memory_bay_south_1a.jpg Chuck Charles O'Dale President Ottawa RASC http://www.ottawa.rasc.ca/index.php http://www.ottawa.rasc.ca/articles/odale_chuck/earth_craters/index.html -Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2007 18:03:40 -0400 From: Mal Bishop <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: [meteorite-list] Asteroid Jiggles Like a Jar of Mixed Nuts To: meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset=us-ascii "Like a jiggled jar of mixed nuts, shaking on the near-Earth asteroid Itokawa is sorting loose rock particles on its surface by size, causing the smallest grains to sink into depressions, a new study suggests. ..." http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/070419_shaking_asteroid.html __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] Scientists find most Earth-like planet yet
rather than the atmosphere. Any "continental" rises would be underwater. So a bigger Earth is not just a bigger Earth. Knowing that somebody will ask how big a bigger Earth has to be before there's no land at all, just oceans, the answer is: somewhere between 2-1/2 and 3 Earth masses is the point where the median ocean depths equal the height of the highest possible mountain. At a mass of 5 Earths, the surface of Gliese 581c is almost certain to be ocean, 100% water. And at 2.2 gravities, wave heights would be less than half those of the Earth's ocean. So, to summarize Gliese 581c: sunglasses, bulky support hose, and lousy surfing. Sterling K. Webb --- - Original Message - From: "Darren Garrison" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: Tuesday, April 24, 2007 10:44 PM Subject: [meteorite-list] Scientists find most Earth-like planet yet http://www.cnn.com/2007/TECH/space/04/24/exoplanet.reut/index.html WASHINGTON (Reuters) -- European astronomers have spotted what they say is the most Earth-like planet yet outside our solar system, with balmy temperatures that could support water and, potentially, life. They have not directly seen the planet, orbiting a red dwarf star called Gliese 581. But measurements of the star suggest that a planet not much larger than the Earth is pulling on it, the researchers say in a letter to the editor of the journal Astronomy and Astrophysics. "This one is the first one that is at the same time probably rocky, with water, and in a zone close to the star where the water could exist in liquid form," said Stephane Udry of the Geneva Observatory in Switzerland, who led the study. "We have estimated that the mean temperature of this super-Earth lies between 0 and 40 degrees Celsius, and water would thus be liquid." Most of the 200 or so planets that have been spotted outside this solar system have been gas giants like Jupiter. But this one is small. "Its radius should be only 1.5 times the Earth's radius, and models predict that the planet should be either rocky, like our Earth, or covered with oceans," Udry said in a telephone interview. It appears to have a mass five times that of Earth's. The research team includes scientists credited with the first widely accepted discovery of a planet outside our solar system, in 1995. Many teams are looking for planets circling other stars. They are especially looking for those similar to our own, planets that could support life. That means finding water. X marks the spot "Because of its temperature and relative proximity, this planet will most probably be a very important target of the future space missions dedicated to the search for extra-terrestrial life," Xavier Delfosse, a member of the team from Grenoble University in France, said in a statement. "On the treasure map of the universe, one would be tempted to mark this planet with an X." Gliese 581 is among the 100 closest stars to Earth, just 20.5 light-years away in the constellation Libra. A light-year is the distance light travels in a year, about 6 trillion miles (10 trillion km). It is smaller and dimmer than the sun, so the planet can be close to it and yet not be overheated. "These low-mass stars are the ones where we are going to be able to discover planets in the habitable zone first," said planet-hunter David Bennett of the University of Notre Dame in Indiana, who was not involved in the research. Bennett cautioned that current temperature alone does not mean water still exists on the planet. It could have burned off ages ago, when the star was hotter than it is now. Udry's team uses a method known as radial velocity, using the European Southern Observatory telescope at La Silla, Chile. The same team has identified one larger planet orbiting Gliese 581 already and say they have strong evidence of a third planet with a mass about eight times that of the Earth. Future missions, perhaps in 20 to 30 years, may be able to block the light from the star and take a spectrographic image of the planets. The color of the light coming from the planet can give hints of whether water, or perhaps large amounts of plant life, exist there. __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] Scientists find most Earth-like planet yet
Hi, Mark, List,
> would have been through hell in the
> past, (since the star is now a dwarf)
A red dwarf is a main sequence star: once
a dwarf, always a dwarf. It's just a low-mass
star with a longer lifetime (25 billion years?)
than our Sun (10 billion years?). At a third
of a solar mass, it's got a respectable little
"heliosphere" and all the usual solar (or stellar)
apparatus, just less extensive than a G0 dwarf
star like us. But it doesn't have as big a system
to fend outside radiation away from. In general,
M-class star systems seem to be quiet places.
Some theorists regard smaller stars as safer
places (sort of like being a stellar mouse;
just keep quiet and no one will notice you).
M-class dwarfs are very, very common and
often very old, but their age is often hard to
determine. [Their stellar atmosphere is full of
diatomic molecules and their spectra are, like,
scrambled eggs!]
Since I wrote my first post, I've looked
for information on the star itself, Gliese 581:
http://www.solstation.com/stars/gl581.htm
"Gliese 581 is a cool and dim, main sequence
red dwarf (M2.5 V). The star has almost a third
(31 +/- 2 percent) of Sol's mass, possibly 29
percent of its diameter, and a bit more than one
percent (around 0.013) of its visual luminosity..."
This means the sunlight there is "only" twice
as bright as sunlight here on Earth. (I'm still taking
the sunglasses.) Accounting for all the factors,
the solar energy at the planet should be about twice
the Earth's also.
The composition of the Super Earth may be
different, too. "The star appears to be only
around 47 to 56 percent as enriched as Sol in
elements heavier than hydrogen ("metals")...
Its kinematic characterisitcs, magnetic activity,
and sub-Solar metallicity indicate that Gliese
581 is at least two billion years old. Gliese 851
is a variable star with the designation HO Librae."
I don't like that "variable" part, do you?
The earlier discovered planet is a "hot"
Neptune closer in to the star, with an estimated
temperature about like Venus. The not-so-standard
theory would be that this system formed so
slowly that the big one spiraled in because the
nebula stayed dusty and exerted drag on it. This
slow formation suggests a small nebula producing
a small star. But there's always plenty left over
for planets!
Humorously, the authoritative website I just
quoted says the larger planet "would have
disturbed the development and orbit of a nearby
earth-type in the habitable zone..."
Well, we all make wrong guesses, don't we?
With its gravity, Gliese 581c can hold its
atmosphere against the weaker "solar" wind
of Gliese 581. Wouldn't be surprised to learn
it could capture and hold small amounts of
hydrogen and helium, too.
Since it is likely to be more active tectonically,
there should be plenty of outgassing, but since
all the volatiles are released into the oceans rather
than the atmosphere, I would expect a carbonated
and suphurated ocean to pass dissolved gasses
into the atmosphere at a good clip.
In other words, I would guess a dense
atmosphere with most of the thermo-regulation
coming from the balances of evaporation versus
cloud cover.
Of course, I'm basing everything on averages.
What if it was volatile poor? Less oceans, maybe.
If it had half the water you'd expect, there would
be some land above water, not a lot, but some.
Maybe tectonics would build large continental
shelves around the land. Maybe that would be
a good place for life to evolve. (Seems to have
worked here!)
Of course, if the star has less heavy elements
than the Sun, that suggests MORE volatiles rather
than less. Of course, in our ignorance, it may mean
that the planets of "metal-poor" stars leave more metals
in the zone of planetary formation. We don't really
know, having only one lousy solar system to examine.
For decades, we've speculated about Earth-like
worlds close in to small M-class stars. Gliese 581c
is the first and closest thing to that we've actually
got evidence of. And it's next door, only 20 years
away by lightmobile...
Anybody got a lightmobile? (I'll chip in for the gas.)
Sterling K. Webb
-
- Original Message -
From: "mark ford" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:
Sent: Wednesday, April 25, 2007 3:10 AM
Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Scientists find most Earth-like planet yet
Hi Sterling!
Nice assessment of Gliese 581c!
Interesting to further speculate: I wonder what else would the fact
that Gliese 581 (the star) is a 'red dwarf' bring to the party? (Apart
from the sunlight being further into the red, which is a good point),
but would a red dwarf mean there is essentia
Re: [meteorite-list] Scientists find most Earth-like planet yet
Hi, Paul, List, > What necromancy > produced that result? Some pieces of magic called the inverse square law, Mr. Kepler's laws, and the mass-luminosity rule for stars, a little data, and small human stepwise reasoning. We "know" the mass of the planet from the strength of the effect by which we detected the planet. We "know" the mass of the star from the mass-luminosity rule. We "know" the period of the planet's orbit from the periodicity of the observation. From the mass of star and period of orbit, Kepler shows us we can derive the distance from the star (semi-major axis). Now that we know the distance of the planet from the star, we can calculate how much of the star's energy falls on the planet. The remaining question is: how much of that energy is absorbed by the planet and how much is reflected away again. The answer, obviously, is somewhere between a reflectivity of 0% and 100%! We can assume that the planet is what physicists call a "black ball" whose "blackness" can vary from pure black (all energy absorbed) to pure white (all energy reflected away). The reason the discovers said that its "temperature" is between 0 C and 40 C is not that has a climate! No, if it's a perfect reflector, it's at 0 C. And if it's a perfect absorber, it's at 40 C. If we perform the same naive calculation for our dear little home world, pretending we don't know anything about it, we get a temperature range that is somewhat lower than Earthly reality. Why? Atmosphere! Our atmosphere traps infrared radiation trying to escape and heats the whole planet up some. There is always more infrared radiation trying to escape than entered in the first place, because other frequencies degrade to weaker infrared photons after bouncing around reflecting off the planetary surface. This is true no manner what the planet is like. All atmospheres of sufficient density are planet heaters. The Earth must have had its reasonably dense atmosphere throughout all of its history, because without it, the planet would have quickly evolved into an irreversible Iceball billions of years ago, a very frigid world with all the oceans covered by hundreds of meters of ice and all the land covered with snow and ice, and highly reflective enough (90%+) to stay that way forever (unless vulcanism could restore a warming atmosphere eventually). We've had brushes with that outcome (go Google "snowball earth"). Back to the data. Since Gliese 581c is five Earth masses, it has more than enough gravity to hold on to gasses and volatiles. Look at what a good job Venus does of retaining atmosphere! Too dam much of a good job -- if Venus had no atmosphere at all, it would be a lot cooler that it is. We don't really know what mix of materials existed in the dust/gas cloud the Gliese 581 system formed from. We assume -- it's called the Copernican Principle -- that it wasn't all that different from our system or any other star system in the neighborhood or the rest of the Galaxy. We assume that we're typical, not special. We assume that Gliese 581 is typical, not special. > composition of the atmosphere is critical > to knowing the temperature of the planet - > think Venus vs. Mars I know global warming is all the rage these days, but the real critical difference is how much energy from the Sun the planet receives! Venus gets 4.7 times more energy per square unit than Mars because of their respective distances from the Sun. That's most of the difference. Both have unique problems, too. Mars has enough gravity to hold onto a much thicker atmosphere than it presently has. The evidence of past liquid water erosion shows it has to have had a much thicker atmosphere in the past. All those volatiles and no atmosphere? Hence, we have a lot of theories about Mars' atmosphere being "eroded" away. Venus appears to have absolutely no volatiles on its surface, yet it has this killer atmosphere (and I do mean "killer"). How can a planet with no volatiles generally have a superabundance of one and only one volatile -- carbon dioxide? Venus has more CO2 in its atmosphere than could be produced by oxidizing the entire surface carbonate inventory of the Earth! Something really nasty happened to Venus... Certainly, we can't "know" what the planet Gliese 581c is really like. We CAN guess the most likely, most "average," most common planetary outcome for a body this size this distance from this star would be. Yes, Gliese 581c could be an oddball. But that would be... odd. Sterling K. Webb --- - Original Message - From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: Wednesday, April 25, 2007 7:29 AM Subjec
Re: [meteorite-list] Scientists find most Earth-like planet yet
Hi, Francis, Paul, List, Just a genteel quarrel with the assertion that photodissociation is what removed H2O from Venus. That certainly is one proposed theory. It's really hard to get the numbers to support it though. Even though it's the oldest theory (40 years or more), a good demonstration of it has not been made. Grinspoon describes the decades of attempting to computer-model these mechanisms on Venus as "very unsatisfying." All the computer models yield an unstable climate, one in which runaway cooling is as likely as runaway heating! All tiny changes in any input results in catastrophe change of one kind or another. And the photochemical model fails to explain any of the other oddities of the atmosphere (go look at argon isotopic abundances) and actually contradicts others. Of course, it hard to get any theory to fit Venus and its numbers, whatever the theory. And there have been some wild theories. There's the "turnover" theory. That says that every billion years or so, the entire crust is "turned over" and the hot molten interior flows out and covers the surface with a brand new crust, releasing huge amounts of volatiles in the process. In between, nothing happens. It doesn't explain (contradicts) the lack of H2O, the shortage of sulfur, the high abundance of CO2, the odd noble gas ratios. Francis says: > On Earth, a Venusful of carbon dioxide is locked in > limestone--the most abundant sedimentary rock. An odd coincidence, isn't it? Just like Earth... Imagine that a warm wet world with seas and water and a "normal" atmosphere was massively bombarded during a short geological time-frame by a very large number of major impactors -- big ones, 50 km and up, lots of them, and a few really big ones, 500 km or more. Possibly it would begin with a huge hit by a very large object and finish with sweeping up most of the fragments left co-orbiting the planet. The existing atmosphere would be blasted off into space; liquid volatiles like H20 would be instantly vaporized and also blown off the planet along with the original atmosphere. Multiple big impacts would melt the crust of the planet down to a depth of many kilometers, perhaps down to the mantle. Surface materials like carbonate rocks would devolve into a massive new CO2 atmosphere, as would other volatile elements in the crust; the sheer mass of impactors would contribute a measurable amount of exotics, like odd isotopes of noble gasses to that new atmosphere... And the result would be a lot like an odd place called Venus. Sterling K. Webb --- - Original Message - From: "Francis Graham" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: Wednesday, April 25, 2007 2:15 PM Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Scientists find most Earth-like planet yet Venus became hot by loss of its water vapor. An early high convective troposphere carried Venus' water vapor to altitudes where solar UV would dissociate it, thus there was no water to dissove the carbon dioxide into oceans and then lock it in sedimentary rock. On Earth, a Venusful of carbon dioxide is locked in limestone--the most abundant sedimentary rock. Our troposphere did not extend high enough to photodissociate the water vapor. What happened on Venus cannot happen on this new planet because a red dwarf star does not produce enough UV. Still, there are many possibilities otherwise than a New Earth, so Paul's point is well taken even if he used the wrong counterexample. I would be much more salivating if they detected--as the said they may in the future--water. Francis __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] Scientists find most Earth-like planet yet
Hi! The Key Word is SPECULATE! That's all we can do while we try to get more data, but speculation refreshes the curiosity, sometimes makes us think harder about the problems, and pushes us along. Hmm. Mars is only a stone's throw? Why don't we GO there? (I'll chip in for gas...) Sterling K. Webb --- - Original Message - From: "GREG LINDH" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: "meteorite-list" Sent: Wednesday, April 25, 2007 8:59 PM Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Scientists find most Earth-like planet yet Hi Paul, I'm no scientist, but your thoughts on this are the same as mine. This star is 20 light years from us, and yet we somehow deduce that a planet going around it has "balmy temperatures". They're still trying to speculate about possible life on Mars and it's a stones throw away from us. Please! Greg Lindh __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] article of interest in "Nature"
Hi, Jerry, List, Here's the abstract: "The abundance of chlorine in the Earth is highly depleted relative to carbonaceous chondrites and solar abundances. Knowledge of the Cl concentrations and distribution on Earth is essential for understanding the origin of these depletions. Large differences in the stable chlorine isotope ratios of meteoritic, mantle and crustal materials have been used as evidence for distinct reservoirs in the solar nebula and to calculate the relative proportions of Cl in the mantle and crust. Here we show, using a new analytical procedure, that these large isotopic differences do not exist, and that carbonaceous chondrites, mantle and crust all have the same 37Cl/35Cl ratios. There is no evidence for multiple nebular reservoirs with distinct isotopic compositions. That is to say, there is no evidence to support addition to the crustal/atmospheric reservoir of late material of cometary origin. We have further analyzed crustal sediments from early Archean to Recent and find no isotopic variations with age, demonstrating that the mantle and crust have always had the same d37Cl value. The similarity of mantle, crust and carbonaceous chondrites establishes that there was no isotopic fractionation during differentiation of the Earth and no late Cl-bearing volatile additions to the crustal veneer with unique isotopic composition." Translation: "Despite the fact that there are big differences in the amount of chlorine in the Earth's crust and mantle (on the one hand) and carbonacious chondrites and the Sun (on the other hand), we think the ratio of stable isotopes everywhere in the solar system is the same (even though other folks get different measurements), and that proves that everything came out of the same cookpot, 'cause our method of measuring is better than theirs." Specifically, they want to shoot down the idea that there was a last-minute accretion of comets and such on the surface of the Earth that would explain why crust is so different than mantle. Presumably, this would also shoot down the idea that the Earth's water was brought to it largely by comets. The quarrel we call "knowledge" goes on... Sterling - - Original Message - From: "Gerald Flaherty" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: Thursday, April 26, 2007 9:33 PM Subject: [meteorite-list] article of interest in "Nature" "Chlorine isotope homogeneity of the mantle, crust and carbonaceous chondrites Z. D. Sharp et al. Nature doi: 10.1038/nature05748 First Paragraph | Full Text | PDF" I only get these text messages with no links but if anyone who has access to Nature cares to explore and "report" ? Jerry Flaherty __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
[meteorite-list] Astronomers Find Extrasolar Planet Heavyweight Champ
Hi, List, Last week, the lightest extrasolar planet; this week, the heaviest! Sterling K. Webb --- http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/070502_supermassive_planet.html Astronomers Find Extrasolar Planet Heavyweight Champ By Tariq Malik Staff Writer Astronomers have found the heavyweight champion of extrasolar planets in the form of an odd alien world slightly bigger than Jupiter, but more than eight times as massive. Dubbed HAT-P-2b, the super-dense planet is the most massive known to transit across its parent star, but the weirdness doesn't stop there. Its oval orbit is so extreme that it first bakes the planet, and then cools it off during an annual trip that takes just more than five days. "This planet is so unusual that at first we thought it was a false alarm--something that appeared to be a planet but wasn't," said astronomer Gaspar Bakos, who led the team at the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics. "But we eliminated every other possibility, so we knew we had a really weird planet." The planet is a gas giant in orbit around the star HD 147506, which is about twice the size of our own Sun and burns a bit hotter in a system 440 light-years from Earth in the constellation Hercules. Bakos and his colleagues used a series of small automated telescopes known as the HATNet to discover the planet. Their findings are detailed in a paper submitted Tuesday to the Astrophysical Journal. One weird world Astronomers have found about 230 extrasolar planets beyond our own solar system, and last week announced the discovery of an Earth-like planet could support liquid water. Every five days and 15 hours--the time it takes the planet to complete a full trip around its star--HAT-P-2b crosses in front of its stellar parent, as seen from Earth, in what astronomers call a transit. During such transits, researchers can determine the physical size of extrasolar planets by measuring how much they dim the light of their central star. Bakos and his team found that the newly discovered planet is about 1.18 times brighter than Jupiter and 8.2 times as massive. A 150-pound (60-kilogram) person on Earth would weigh 2,100 pounds (952 kilograms), or just over one ton, and experience about 14 times Earth's gravity at the visible cloud top surface of HAT-P-2b, researchers said. The planet's extremely elliptical orbit brings it within about 3.1 million miles (4.9 million kilometers) of its parent star on the inside, and swings out to a distance of about 9.6 million miles (15.4 million kilometers). For comparison, Earth orbits the Sun at a distance of about 93 million miles (150 million kilometers), but would range between the orbits of Mercury and Mars if its orbital path mimicked the extremes of HAT-P-2b. Eccentricity explained Astronomers believe that the odd eccentricity of the planet's orbit--all previous extrasolar worlds found via the transit method have circular orbits--may be due to another, outer world whose gravitational pull disturbs the path of HAT-P-2b. If the planet contained about 50 percent more mass, it could have fired up nuclear fusion and burn as a star for a short while, researchers added. "HAT-P-2b is hot, but it's not a Jupiter," CfA astronomer Robert Noyes, a co-author on the study, said, adding that previous planets found via the transit method have been billed as 'hot Jupiters.' "It's much denser than a Jupiter-like planet; in fact, it is as dense as Earth even though it's mostly made of hydrogen." __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
[meteorite-list] OT: Extrasolar Planet Heavyweight Champ
Hi, The heavyweight is about as heavy as you can get without turning into a small star: > the newly discovered planet is about 1.18 times > brighter than Jupiter and 8.2 times as massive. When they say "slightly bigger than Jupiter," they are apparently assuming it is 1.18 times brighter than Jupiter because it has that much more surface area. This would give it a diameter 1.086 greater than that of Jupiter (and a volume 1.28 greater than Jupiter). > ...it's mostly made of hydrogen. With a mass of 8.2 Jupiters in a volume 1.28 greater than Jupiter, that makes the planet's density 6.4 times greater than Jupiter's. Since Jupiter's density is about 1.33 gm/cm^3, the density of this planet is 8.1 gm/cm^3, or roughly about the density of an iron meteorite. How could it be made of hydrogen, the lightest substance in the universe? The density of hydrogen at 2,800,000 atmospheres of pressure is only 1.03, about the density of water; it's a long way from being as dense as iron. But, somewhere in that pressure range, hydrogen turns into a metal. Jupiter must have 100's of Earth masses of metallic hydrogen (since it has a vigous magnetic field), but the density of metallic hydrogen is only 1.3 gm/cm^3, still a long way from being as dense as iron. This all fits very nicely -- for Jupiter. Its density (which is 1.33 gm/cm^3) is only slightly greater than that of metallic hydrogen's, so obviously Jupiter is largely metallic hydrogen. To say that it is "metallic" hydrogen means only that the atoms are finally squeezed together so closely that hydrogen's one electron can get confused about which nucleus is "its mommy" and can wander off (and be replaced by a neighboring electron) and so conduct electricity. Solid metallic hydrogen does not compress much, but liquid metallic hydrogen is much more compressible. It will double in density if you apply a mere 4670 billion kg/m^2 of pressure. That makes it about 2000 times less compressible than water. (Everybody thinks water is incompressible, but at the bottom of the deepest ocean trenches, the density of water is more than 4% greater than at the surface!) The interior pressure of this planet must be truly phenomenal, but still it is not enough to ever squeeze all that hydrogen so tightly that their nuclei combine in fusion reactions, making it a star. At eight Jupiter masses, it's too "tiny" to be even the weakest dimmest star. That takes about 12-13 Jupiter masses. Because its star, HD 147506, is bright and not too far away, this source: http://oklo.org/ says "there will be all sorts of opportunities for detailed follow-up." We can expect a lot of big instruments to be turned its way (like the Spitzer). Some feel for the tremendous pace of these discoveries can be gained by the fact that the news of the heavyweight was still be posted at various websites when ANOTHER new extrasolar planet was discovered! http://exoplanet.eu/planet.php?p1=XO-2&p2=b Sorry, Marcin, it's not a meteorite, only another lousy planet! :=) Sterling K. Webb -------- - Original Message - From: "Sterling K. Webb" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Meteorite List" Sent: Wednesday, May 02, 2007 12:55 PM Subject: [meteorite-list] Astronomers Find Extrasolar Planet HeavyweightChamp Hi, List, Last week, the lightest extrasolar planet; this week, the heaviest! Sterling K. Webb --- http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/070502_supermassive_planet.html __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] Meteorite Hunt Pictures . . Warning GraphicPictures
Hi, The cows' names are Elsie and Elmer, like the famed Borden Milk spokescattle of yester-year. They mark out a landsailing course. See: http://www.nalsa.org/Sept_News/sala.html This organization is apparently NOT associated with PETA... Sterling K. Webb - - Original Message - From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: Wednesday, May 02, 2007 11:04 PM Subject: [meteorite-list] Meteorite Hunt Pictures . . Warning GraphicPictures Hi List, While on a recent road trip to hunt meteorites at Tungsten Mtn I decided to stop at Smith Creek Valley Dry Lake. The area looked like a possible place to hunt meteorites. After about an hour of searching I saw something in the distance that looked out of place. I decided to check out the unknown object. What I found was a large wooden pole probably 25 ft. high with a COW carcass impaled upon it. It looked like it had been there for some time. I took a few pictures and moved on. I decided to go to the opposite end of the lake and I saw another post with a large object on top. By this time I had quit hunting and drove toward the post. To my amazement there was another cow on top of this post with a Raven's nest in its belly. This goes to show that you never know what you will find in the desert. I would have camped there... but I didn't want to disrupt the evil spirits! Not that I was scared or anything! Warning some of the pictures may be offensive to some! View at your own risk! Sonny http://nevadameteorites.com/id77.htm AOL now offers free email to everyone. Find out more about what's free from AOL at AOL.com. __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] 240 pound SHREWSBURY "Meteor"
Hi, Rob, List, Loss of mass by ablation varies with the speed of the "incoming" object, the faster the more rapid the loss. This is probably why "cometary" material has never produced a meteorite on the ground that we know of. In theory, ablation should increase with the square of the velocity, but there are so many other factors, that's only an approximation. A steeper descent doesn't help; generally, it increases the ablative loss. Most of the mass of a meteoroid is going to end up in the dust trail as ablation slows it. If the meteoroid breaks up, the smaller pieces will slow down more quickly and that may reduce the total ablative loss, if the breakup is not too early nor too late. A 90% loss is probably more like the minimum... Whoops! Just saw Chris's post. I will just point at it and finish up with --- "What he said..." Sterling K. Webb - Original Message - From: rob szep To: meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com Sent: Saturday, May 05, 2007 12:30 PM Subject: [meteorite-list] 240 pound SHREWSBURY "Meteor" Pleasant greetings fellow list-members... In reading the posting to the "list" regarding the "SHREWSBURY HOME-COMING" I was a bit surprized to see the claim that according to scientists 90% of a METEOR is LOST during atmospheric passage, meaning the Shrewsbury meteor was 240 pounds in weight as it entered our atmosphere... I'm not buying it... Ablation MIGHT result in a ~15% weight loss but that hypothetical 90% guess - which is all it is - sounds a wee-bit excessive to me. Anyone else care to share their thoughts on the matter? "Zep", over & out... __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] Tornado snatches 1, 000 pound pallasite meteorite
Hi, All, Maria Haas's original post on relief efforts had a message from Steve Arnold appended to it that hasn't appeared separately on the List. In it, he says: "On a side note, if you go here: http://www.kansas.com/static/slides/050507tornadoaerials/ In photo #12, is the picture of the twisted water tower, and the Big Well building that housed the 1,000 pound meteorite. You can see what I think is the oak stand (about 2 feet high and 3 feet wide, possibly tipped over) that the 1,000 pound meteorite had sat on (in the center of the frame, about 1/6 of the way up from the bottom). If I am not mistaken, I think the meteorite is the brown object on the floor just to the right of the stand." I can't of anybody more qualified to recognize a big Brenham, so maybe it hasn't gone very far. Sterling K. Webb --- - Original Message - From: "Darren Garrison" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: Sunday, May 06, 2007 4:40 PM Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Tornado snatches 1,000 pound pallasite meteorite On Sun, 6 May 2007 13:49:07 -0500, you wrote: >I agree with Charlie. I don't think it would be moved much, if any. >I think a wind greater than the terminal velocity of the object in >free fall would be needed to lift it, and that would be several >hundred miles per hour. If it is truly missing, I would be willing >to bet on theft. I wouldn't expect theft-- yet. A chaotic situation known about only minutes in advance, destroying the entire town, and a theft needing heavy lifting equipment and transportation (even if only a engine-block lifter and a big pickup) doesn't seem too likely. I'd bet it is still in the pile of debris that was the building containing it. Unless that building is what is now on top of the well, in which case it could be at the bottom of the well. What is more of a concern (from a meteorite perspective, not to belittle all the other human an material loss) is the other meteorite collection of the town that is mentioned-- which would be much more easily lost and much harder to find. Speaking of, anyone have photos of the other meteorite collection, as mentioned in the articles? __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] Hal Povenmire Contact Info?
Hi, Everybody, Ah, this is the internet at its most typical. Before characterizing a man's work, you really ought to know something about them. Try: b. 1939; meteor observer and photographer of over 2000 fireballs; discovered the upsilon Perseids; first to map the full Georgiaite strewnfield; worked on the Baker-Nunn Satellite tracking cameras; worked for Project Apollo; and some of his bits'n'pieces are still sitting on the Sea of Tranquility; has 190 publications. Carolyn Shoemaker named asteroid (12753) Povenmire after him. http://www.astronomytoday.com/astronomy/interview3.html (also includes a summary of the lunar origin theory) Povenmire's last book, "Tektites: A Cosmic Paradox" (1997), contains a perfectly reasonable summary of tektites generally, much information about Georgiaites, on which Povenmire is something of an authority. It then has a series of essays about the origin question, first by John O'Keefe, who supported lunar origin, and another by the foremost geochemical authority on tektites, the appropriately named Billy Glass, who supports terrestrial origin. Then, we get O'Keefe's answers to Glass, and Glass's answers to O'Keefe, and back and forth again... each of whom have points the other has trouble with. The is also a completely balanced bibliography (199 items) of all the major scientific papers (up to the date of publication. Whether he's changed his mind about the origin of tektites in the last ten years, I can't say (I've changed mine about 7-8 times, altho I never liked the Moon as the culprit). He published an enlarged edition of this book in 2003. He's changed the subtitle from "paradox" to "enigma." See The Meteorite Times: http://www.meteorite-times.com/Back_Links/2003/January/Tektite_of_Month.htm which also gives his address: Hal Povenmire 215 Osage Dr. Indian Harbour Beach, FL 32937-3508 The telephone directory says his phone number is (321) 777-1303. As far as finding him goes, I get about 2000 hits on Google with his name. Shouldn't be too hard to find if you have a computer and a minimum of two fingers. As far as tektites being settled, over and done with, finished, as a puzzle, forget it. There are still plenty of unexplained inconsistencies for every theory to be embarrassed by. One problem is that what most people think of as "one" theory, like the impact theory, is really multiple impact theories. Glass's impact theory (requires silt-sized sand grains but not coarse grains) is contradictory to Melosh's impact theory (tektites derived from deep sediments) which contradicts the impact theory that derives them from surface deposits, and so on. All the impact theories are different! Sterling K. Webb --- - Original Message - From: "Mike Fowler" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Cc: "Mike Fowler" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Saturday, May 12, 2007 3:09 PM Subject: [meteorite-list] Hal Povenmire Contact Info? > [meteorite-list] Hal Povenmire Contact Info? > > Michael L Blood mlblood at cox.net > Sat May 12 15:28:44 EDT 2007 > > Previous message: [meteorite-list] Hal Povenmire Contact Info? > Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] > > > on 5/12/07 11:24 AM, Mike Fowler at mqfowler at mac.com wrote: > > > > Before the ion microprobe, isotope analysis, and actual lunar > samples > > > for comparison, the lunar origin of tektites was tenable. > > > > > > Now it is not, and I wonder how someone who clings to a disproved > > > hypothesis can be considered to be eminent in his field? > > > > > > Mike Fowler > > > Chicago > > - > Hi Mike, > Not to be argumentative, but to add some perspective, > 1) "Disproved" is relative. > 2) If everyone in science lost all credibility whenever their > perspective clashed with the majority of other scientists in > their field not only would there be a huge loss in the number > of scientists, but many of the greatest scientists in history > would have gone unheard (and many have, no doubt). > 3) Some might consider your above statement to be based > in arrogance. Certainly it is founded in a narrow definition, > if not outright misconception, of what is and what isn't > "scientifically acceptable." > 4) Some of the greatest figures of science clear back to the > Greeks held beliefs difficult to imagine. Freud, unquestionably > the "founder" of psychology dramatically over emphasized sex, > was himself a sexist & believed "psychoanalysis" was an effective > "treatment." (as a result, many still do, in spite
Re: [meteorite-list] "SNEAKY LITTLE DEVILS" NJO CONFIRMED METEORWRONG
Hi, Tracy, List No, that was the Illinois pseudo-meteorite: the BO, or Bloomington Object, not the NJO! The BO "fell" on March 5, 2007; the woodchipper was mentioned in print on March 9, 2007, and in a few days its career as a meteorite was over. Things take longer in New Jersey. The NJO "fell" or was dropped on January 3, 2007, so it's had over a five month career as a meteorite and got to do a gig at a University Museum. But it's a has-been now. Sterling K. Webb --- - Original Message - From: tracy latimer To: Darryl Pitt ; Meteorite List Sent: Sunday, May 13, 2007 1:25 PM Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] "SNEAKY LITTLE DEVILS" NJO CONFIRMED METEORWRONG Hadn't the Occam's Razor explanation of this object been that it was part of a tub grinder ejected during operations while grinding up some dead trees several hundred yards away? They showed one of these babies in operation on the Discovery Channel several weeks ago, and I could easily believe one of the chipper blades broke loose and flew on the appropriate trajectory (it looks like the Sarlacc from Star Wars, with layers of rotating teeth). It seems to me part of "research" should be asking the guys who were using the tub grinder "Hey, did you lose any of the blades out of this thing on such-and-such a date? If so, do you know where the piece went?" Also, checking to see if the composition of the "meteorite" was comparable with a tub grinder blade. Tracy Latimer To: meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Sat, 12 May 2007 06:26:42 -0400 Subject: [meteorite-list] "SNEAKY LITTLE DEVILS" NJO CONFIRMED METEORWRONG It has finally been determined by experts that the NJO is not a meteorite. In Friday's AP story, Rutgers University geologist Jerry Delaney was quoted as saying,"I was wrong. Sneaky little devil." The second sentiment is not even remotely accurate. As I mentioned to the list in January, there was absolutely nothing about the NJO which resembled a new meteorite. I advised the Newark Star Ledger, The New York Times and AP in writing that the NJO was not a meteorite. I contacted the museum at Rutgers prior to their exhibition of the object---which generated the largest attendance on a single day---that this was not a meteorite. The only "sneaky little devils" are the folks at Rutgers University. Stories are released on Friday nights so the story will miss the news cycle. It's for stories that would cause embarrassment; it's for those moments where you hope the story disappears. This is just so deplorable---and it's not an isolated instance of how an institution with something to gain---and the media---work. But for scientists to be so sloppy in THEIR work is just sodisappointing. As I wrote to the list several months ago: "While [this] may ultimately be among the most unusual freshly fallen meteorites known to exist, such an assessment cannot and should not ever have been made by simply passing it around for a casual analysis and singing kumbaya." Here is the latest storyin case you missed it. http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070511/ap_on_sc/fallen_object Depth of Field Management 1501 Broadway Suite 1304 New York, New York 10036 212.302.9200 __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] "SNEAKY LITTLE DEVILS" NJO CONFIRMED METEORWRONG
Hi, In the Illinois case, the (sharp) reporter for the Bloomington Pantograph discovered that a big woodchipper was operating in the neighborhood (well, about 1000 feet away) at the time, verified by the actual woodchippers, which makes it the almost-certain source of what analysed out as a man-made object. In the New Jersey case, it's now been proved what was only highly suspicioned then: that it's a man-made object, too. But as far as I've heard, no one has identified any specific potential source. The Big Chipper sounds good to me, though. The assertion that it's "space junk" is always possible, but I personally doubt it. Space craft are designed to minimize weight by all means possible, including the distribution of stress and the avoidance of massive strong points. In a word, space craft are rarely made out of big solid chunks of stainless steel. This chunk is irregular, so it would have to be an ablated remnant of a much larger chunk, yet it shows no particular surficial evidence of ablation (none to my eye, but I've only seen bad photos). A purely terrestrial source is almost certain, but there are no specifically suspicious sources like the (running) Bloomington woodchipper. Sterling K. Webb -- - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ; [EMAIL PROTECTED] ; [EMAIL PROTECTED] ; meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com Sent: Tuesday, May 15, 2007 8:12 AM Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] "SNEAKY LITTLE DEVILS" NJO CONFIRMED METEORWRONG I thought the woodchipper theory applied to the NJO as well? I agree that it does not appear to have features of an object that made a trip through out atmosphere (fusion crust, albation, orientation etc.) Take care, Elias -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com Sent: Tue, 15 May 2007 12:49 AM Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] "SNEAKY LITTLE DEVILS" NJO CONFIRMED METEORWRONG Hi, Tracy, List No, that was the Illinois pseudo-meteorite: the BO, or Bloomington Object, not the NJO! The BO "fell" on March 5, 2007; the woodchipper was mentioned in print on March 9, 2007, and in a few days its career as a meteorite was over. Things take longer in New Jersey. The NJO "fell" or was dropped on January 3, 2007, so it's had over a five month career as a meteorite and got to do a gig at a University Museum. But it's a has-been now. Sterling K. Webb --- - Original Message - From: tracy latimer To: Darryl Pitt ; Meteorite List Sent: Sunday, May 13, 2007 1:25 PM Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] "SNEAKY LITTLE DEVILS" NJO CONFIRMED METEORWRONG Hadn't the Occam's Razor explanation of this object been that it was part of a tub grinder ejected during operations while grinding up some dead trees several hundred yards away? They showed one of these babies in operation on the Discovery Channel several weeks ago, and I could easily believe one of the chipper blades broke loose and flew on the appropriate trajectory (it looks like the Sarlacc from Star Wars, with layers of rotating teeth). It seems to me part of "research" should be asking the guys who were using the tub grinder "Hey, did you lose any of the blades out of this thing on such-and-such a date? If so, do you know where the piece went?" Also, checking to see if the composition of the "meteorite" was comparable with a tub grinder blade. Tracy Latimer To: meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Sat, 12 May 2007 06:26:42 -0400 Subject: [meteorite-list] "SNEAKY LITTLE DEVILS" NJO CONFIRMED METEORWRONG It has finally been determined by experts that the NJO is not a meteorite. In Friday's AP story, Rutgers University geologist Jerry Delaney was quoted as saying,"I was wrong. Sneaky little devil." The second sentiment is not even remotely accurate. As I mentioned to the list in January, there was absolutely nothing about the NJO which resembled a new meteorite. I advised the Newark Star Ledger, The New York Times and AP in writing that the NJO was not a meteorite. I contacted the museum at Rutgers prior to their exhibition of the object---which generated the largest attendance on a single day---that this was not a meteorite. The only "sneaky little devils" are the folks at Rutgers University. Stories are released on Friday nights so the story will miss the news cycle. It's for stories that would cause embarrassment; it's for those moments where you hope the story disappears. This is just so deplorable---and it's not an isolated instance of how an institution with something to gain---and the media---work. But for scientists to be so sloppy in TH
Re: [meteorite-list] Questions [From Chondrule to Planet]
Hi, Greg, Mike,
Chondrules are small, round (more or less)
glassy droplets of molten rock that were "flash
fried" at high temperatures by... something. What
the "something" was, is the cause of long and nasty
arguments among cosmologists. But it was
a) very hot, and
b) very quick, and
c) cooled quickly.
When this happened to the chondrules, they
were undoubtedly free-floating in low gravity
(because of their generally round shapes) and
not in the presence of any larger bodies. It had
to have happened BEFORE they became part
of anything (like meteorites). This makes them
older than meteorites (they were here first). We
think they are the oldest things in the solar system.
And sure enough, when you pry them out
of the rock matrix they're embedded in and date
them separately, they ARE older. Just by a handful
of million of years, but older.
Since they are embedded in meteorites in pretty
much the same way fruit and nuts are embedded
in a fruitcake, this means that the meteorites themselves
were assembled in a relatively quiet fashion, around the
pre-existing chondrules, not hotly enough nor violently
enough to damage the chondrules beyond recognition...
usually.
Another clue that the meteorites were not violently
assembled is the fact that the rock has varying amounts
of metals just dissolved in the rock, or present as small
droplets. Nobody "forged" meteorites; they just formed
by "hanging out." We assume that almost all the rock
materials had chondrules in them, originally.
I said "usually" because in some (but not all) meteorites,
chondrules have been damaged, some less, some more, some
to the point where they can hardly be recognized, and in
some meteorites, they have been completely re-melted
and disappeared.
This general scale of "damage to chondrules" is called
the meteorite's "metamorphic" stage. "Metamorphosis"
means change. If the chondrules are fresh looking, easily
recognized little marbles, all different, and still look like
they did when they formed independently, the history of
that rock has been mild and peaceful (for a rock). The
chondrules haven't changed much, if any. The most
likely peaceful history for a rock is to have been a smallish
rock that never got very hot and was never involved in any
colossal collisions.
But if a rock gets swept up into a larger body, it's in
for a rough ride, the larger the body, the rougher. Large
bodies have gravity that squishes rock to high pressures;
large bodies have radioactive elements that heat it up to
the point that the rock melts, obliterating the chondrules.
If all the chondrules have vanished, the meteorite isn't
a chondrite anymore -- it's an achondrite ("a" is greek
for "not"). There is every metamorphic stage from
untouched chondrules to partly re-melted chondrules
to almost melted "ghost" chondrules to no chondrules
at all.
If the body is even larger, it gets hot enough that the
iron that is mixed freely in the rock melts and drips out to
the center of the body. You end up, in short order, with
a "Tootsie Pop" object -- an iron center, a heavy rock
body, and a light rock candy coating.
A body big enough for that to happen is called a planet!
(Please, don't anybody start "that" argument.) ALL the rock
and metals, everything that is part of a planet, has been melted,
at least once, and much of it has been melted over and over
again. There may have been countless billions of tons of chondrules
in some or all of the rocks that went into making a planet, but
they (and everything else) get melted. If you could pick the
Earth apart one BB-sized grain at a time, you wouldn't find
a single chondrule!
The melting and separation of metal and rock is called
"differentiation." The "difference" is that iron sinks and
rock floats. Some meteorites come from differentiated
bodies -- Mars, the Moon, even little Vesta (HED), chips
off the old blocks. Some meteorites, the ones with lots
of crisp fresh chondrules, must be chips from a very
small block that's been hanging around minding its own
business for most of the life of the solar system, waiting
four and a half billion years to accidently run into the Earth,
fall to the ground, be found by some crazy human who will
slice it open and say, "Wow, Look at those chondrules!"
Sterling K. Webb
---
- Original Message -
From: "mike morgan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "greg stanley" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>;
Sent: Thursday, May 17, 2007 9:24 PM
Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Questions
I can answer ? #1. In the book Rocks from Space on
page 181 it says,Chondrules, little spherical
inclusions called chondrules give the chondrite
meteorite its na
Re: [meteorite-list] Terrestrialized Meteorite Identification?
eeze and thaw cycles. I test these assumptions by searching through the NHM Catalogue of Meteorites (up through the year 2000). Iowa has 4 chondrite falls and 1 chondrite find. Kansas has 7 chondrite falls (it's 4X bigger) and 115 chondrite finds! Why? Kansas a) is a lot drier, b) has less heavy vegetative cover, and c) had Nininger. I think the "dry" part is the single most important factor; both have a freeze-thaw climate. (The rest of these states: Illinois, 2 chondrite finds and 3 chondrite falls; Indiana, 5 chondrite finds (one called "doubtful" and one that's super fresh, Lafayette) and 4 chondrite falls; Ohio, 2 chondrite finds and 2 chondrite falls.) What's a flat, wet nation with a lot of agricultural land and no great forests or mountains for meteorites to hide in, as well as a freeze-thaw climate? Well, how about the Nederland, or Holland as we used to call it? (Sorry about the flat wet remark, Piper, but... it's true). The Nederland has 7 chondrite falls and no chondrite finds. Proportioning the land area to Kansas, I can only assume that if the Nederland were dusty dry, overgrown with sunflowers, and had a Nininger, it would have about 25 chondrite finds! Sterling K. Webb - Original Message - From: "Mike Groetz" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Meteorite List" Sent: Friday, May 18, 2007 12:04 PM Subject: [meteorite-list] Terrestrialized Meteorite Identification? I have been wondering about this for some time. Here in central Ohio- weather conditions are far from the best for preservation of meteorites. Yet I keep looking in the farm fields when I get some time. This is an awkward question to ask- Is there any way to identify a former meteorite that has been terrestrialized? I understand the irons will go to shale- but how about the stoneys? One side of me also questions that no matter what rock you pick up- ultimately it's compounds have to be from terrestrialized space material from billions of years ago. Would any of you have any suggestions to identification of "recent" terrestrialized fall criteria that could be recognized? Thank You Mike Groetz Yahoo! oneSearch: Finally, mobile search that gives answers, not web links. http://mobile.yahoo.com/mobileweb/onesearch?refer=1ONXIC __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] Is this true?
Hi, Michael, List Yes, BUT... We do not actually know how much He3 the solar wind leaves behind in the lunar regolith, what the total quantities are, or how hard it is to extract. Regolith samples that have been analyzed show very small amounts of He3. The article cited by Mike Bandi says there MAY be 20 parts per billion of He3 in the regolith, but there may be only 4-5. It MAY be found in the top three feet, or the top three inches, or the top three centimeters, or... We don't know. Nor is it known how easy or hard it is to extract. The isolated fusion reaction of He3 with hydrogen produces no neutrons but only protons (so that the energy could be captured as electricity). Since He3 itself is not radioactive, nor is hydrogen, and the yield is electricity, such a reaction could be characterized as non-radioactive nuclear fusion. Sound to good to be true? It is. The reaction temperature for He3-H fusion is much higher than conventional H-H fusion or He3-He3 fusion, so once the He3-H mixture is heated, H-H fusion will produce LOTS of neutrons. Dirty, dirty. And since the ignition termperature required is so much higher, it's a lot harder to fire up. Don't Worry! There's lots of He3 in the top of the gas giant planetary atmospheres, to be scooped up and fired. We'll have all these little difficulties cleared up and be pumping out the terawatts in no time. Check with me about the year 2250 and I'll tell you how we did it. Sterling K. Webb -- - Original Message - From: "Michael Murray" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: Monday, May 21, 2007 10:27 PM Subject: [meteorite-list] Is this true? Hi List, Is this true? "Helium-3 is found in the top few feet of lunar soil". Anyone have info on this? Is this the reason so many countries are putting the pedal down to get to the moon pronto? Mike __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] British Lower Eocene London Clay Tektites
Hi, Aubrey, List Here is a photo of Australasian micro- and mini- microtektites found in the Indian Ocean: http://www.nio.org/projects/shamprasad/figure2%20.htm Note the similaritity of shapes. These are slightly (but not too much) larger than the London Clay micros. Here is a small photo of Eocene micromicrotektites from the Chesapeake Bay Crater: http://meteor.pwnet.org/img/impact_13.jpg There is a clear resemblance to the London Clay micros. Note the high frequency of the amber-colored micros. Photo of Chicxulub microtektites: http://geophysics.ou.edu/impacts/chicxulubtektites.jpg Note the surface degradation. These are "clean" samples. Eventually, microtektites of this age are altered into clay nodules and escape notice. Paper (with photos) of possible (very) small Devonian microtektites: http://www.wanfangdata.com.cn/qikan/periodical.Articles/zgkx-ed/zgkx2000/0003/000309.htm (The ones that were 100 to 200 micrometers were sectioned and the surface SEM'ed; results are shown in a table below the photo; scroll down.) First, microtektites degrade much faster than larger tektites. By faster, however, I mean tens of millions of years, though. These objects are remarkably "fresh" looking. One asks why have they not degraded in 35 million years? Answering my own question, the high transparency suggests a very high silica content. This would account for their degree of preservation. The black appearance that most of us think of as "typical" of tektites is the result of high iron content. I gather that they have been securely tucked away in the London Clay for all that time and not exposed nor over-wetted. I'm tempted to say that the shapes alone are almost sufficient to identify them as tektites; it looks like an illustration of Baker's famous paper on tektites form. However, what's needed is a) a bulk composition by SEM, and b) a determination of water content by infrared spectroscopy (which is non-destructive and much more accurate than destructive extraction; polish off two surface windows and scope through the clean interior). Even after 35 million years, a tektite glass is going to be distinctly drier than ANY volcanic glass and most impact glasses. I was frankly amazed that the finder would dismiss these as volcanic in origin. They look nothing like volcanic microspherules. If someone is in a more expensive mood, another good test would be the flourine-boron ratios, which serves as a kind of "thermometer" for the temperature of formation. This would easily demonstrate that they were non-volcanic. (Personally, I find the "volcanic" suggestion outlandish.) If I had to vote without tests, I'd vote "yes" to their being a tektite glass, but just as with mysterious iron objects that come crashing through one's roof, a test is really required. Since there is an ongoing controversy about a proposed multi-ringed impact feature in the North Sea (or is it only a salt basin?), with paper in Nature, etc., http://bromans.blogspot.com/2007/03/great-north-sea-impact-crater-vs-salt.html maybe the pro-Impactisitas would pay for some testing? Nothing like a handful of tektites to bolster your impact! Sterling K. Webb --- - Original Message - From: Aubrey Whymark To: meteorite list ; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, May 23, 2007 7:46 PM Subject: [meteorite-list] British Lower Eocene London Clay Tektites Hi I just wanted to draw attention to these possible microtektites from the Lower Eocene London Clay in England. The finder, Michael Daniels, has very kindly provided a number of images and some notes. http://www.tektites.co.uk/13.html What do people think of these possible microtektites? Are they comparable with other microtektites found? Interestingly some of the microtektites seem to have extra 'spikey' features (see photos) - is this normal? Thanks, Aubrey www.tektites.co.uk P.S. out of contact from 26th May for a bit. __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] the biggest tektite ?
Hi, Zelmir, List
Just from searching the
internet, I compiled this list
of the Biggest Tektite (excluding
layered tektites) from:
Australia.437 g.
Czechoslovakia..258.5 g.
Ivory Coast 79 g.
Malaysia.464 g.
Philippines1069 g.
I couldn't find any mention
of the largest Vietnamite, but
here's a site with a study of 203
Vietnamese tektites:
http://www.edamgaard.dk/Copy%20of%20VietnamTektites%20edj.htm
Sterling K. Webb
---
- Original Message -
From: "Zelimir Gabelica" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Aubrey Whymark" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "meteorite list"
; "norm" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, May 24, 2007 1:49 AM
Subject: [meteorite-list] the biggest tektite ?
Hi Aubrey, Norm, List
In Ensisheim (in 3 weeks from now), there will be again a substantial
selection of tektites (mostly Rizalites, Cambodianites, some "Vietnamites")
for sale (on consignment, in the consignment room) at interesting prices.
As in 2006, some Rizalite "monsters" (over 450 g) are anounced.
My 2 specific questions are more general:
- How heavy is the biggest tektite (Muong Nong not counted) known on earth ?
- How heavy is the biggest Vietnamite known on earth ?
- How heavy is the biggest Rizalite known on earth ?
For Rizalite, my best reference is the 1069 g specimen as mentioned by H.
O. Beyer ("Philippine tektites").
I could not find any "spectacular" data (i.e. over, say, 250-300 g) for
vietnamites...
Thanks and best wsihes,
Zelimir
P.S. Aubrey, very nice site! Congratulations! And these London
microtektites are really intriguing !
A 01:46 24/05/2007 +0100, Aubrey Whymark a écrit :
>Hi
>
>I just wanted to draw attention to these possible microtektites from the
>Lower Eocene London Clay in England. The finder, Michael Daniels, has very
>kindly provided a number of images and some notes.
>
><http://www.tektites.co.uk/13.html>http://www.tektites.co.uk/13.html
>
>What do people think of these possible microtektites? Are they comparable
>with other microtektites found? Interestingly some of the microtektites
>seem to have extra 'spikey' features (see photos) - is this normal?
>
>Thanks, Aubrey
><http://www.tektites.co.uk>www.tektites.co.uk
>
>P.S. out of contact from 26th May for a bit.
>
>
>Now you can
><http://us.rd.yahoo.com/mail/uk/taglines/default/nowyoucan/reading_pane/*http://us.rd.yahoo.com/evt=40565/*http://uk.docs.yahoo.com/nowyoucan.html>scan
>emails quickly with a reading pane. Get the new
><http://us.rd.yahoo.com/mail/uk/taglines/default/nowyoucan/reading_pane/*http://us.rd.yahoo.com/evt=40565/*http://uk.docs.yahoo.com/nowyoucan.html>Yahoo!
>Mail.
>__
>Meteorite-list mailing list
>Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com
>http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Prof. Zelimir Gabelica
Université de Haute Alsace
ENSCMu, Lab. GSEC,
3, Rue A. Werner,
F-68093 Mulhouse Cedex, France
Tel: +33 (0)3 89 33 68 94
Fax: +33 (0)3 89 33 68 15
__
Meteorite-list mailing list
Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com
http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
__
Meteorite-list mailing list
Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com
http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] the biggest tektite ?
Hi, All, I should have been more specific, but I tended to find results by country from their national geological surveys. The largest Moldavite is the 258.5 g one, found -- no surprise! -- in Moldavia, says the Check Geological Survey: http://nts1.cgu.cz/bulletin/contents/2002/vol77no4/04trnkafinal.pdf The largest Australite is 437 g, and the 79 g. Ivorite is the largest Ivorite from anywhere. The 464 g tektite from Malaysia is the largest non-layered one from that country, but I know) it's NOT the largest non-layered Indochinite. I found mention of a 250 g Vietnamese non-layered tektite but they did not claim it was the largest. I could not find the weight record for each and every type of Phillipinite, just the figure of 1069 g (some sources give the weight as 1070 g) for Phillipinites. I don't know the current record holder for Muong Nong tektites. Many kilos (12.8 kg?). I could not find a statement of the largest Bediasite or Georgiaite of all time. Scientific sources avoid size rank data except to give a size range of each type. Demonstrating that I am a lousy collector, I have a deep-groove Rizalite that's the size of a tennis ball, maybe 100-120 g, but I don't know the the exact weight. I never weighed it; whatever it is, Norm's got a heavier one (with deeper grooves and fancier ornamentation, and so forth). Indochinite splats get big. I've seen splatties that weighed a pound and a half. I would think "statistics" on Indochinites hard to establish as they are marketed in huge lots (up to a ton at a time) from so many countries by so many vendors who're mining those tens of millions of them, with many more tens of millions still underground (and no crater in sight). In most strewnfield locations (except possibly Indochina) the biggest, more spectacular specimens tend to be snapped up (and traded up) FIRST, just like the biggest gold nuggets and the biggest diamonds, when the field is identified as such, like this 71 kilo gold nugget from 1869: http://www.historyhill.com.au/Gold_-_The_Biggest_&_The_Best.html Sterling K. Webb - Original Message - From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; ; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thursday, May 24, 2007 8:09 PM Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] the biggest tektite ? Very interesting, Sterling. And what is the largest Moldavite known? I just acquired a big one, a nice tear-drop shape, 6.5 cm long, 39 grams exactly. Am I in the running? Anne M. Black www.IMPACTIKA.com [EMAIL PROTECTED] President, I.M.C.A. Inc. www.IMCA.cc ** See what's free at http://www.aol.com. __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] Isotopes in Meteorites Suggest Solar System Formedin a Rough Neighborhood
Hi, Yeah, that's us. From a Rough Neighborhood, product of a Broken Home Star. Oh, Yeah, we're Bad... Sterling K. Webb -- - Original Message - From: "Ron Baalke" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Meteorite Mailing List" Sent: Thursday, May 24, 2007 6:01 PM Subject: [meteorite-list] Isotopes in Meteorites Suggest Solar System Formed in a Rough Neighborhood http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/316/5828/a Science 25 May 2007: Vol. 316. no. 5828, p. DOI: 10.1126/science.316.5828.a News of the Week GEOCHEMISTRY: Isotopes Suggest Solar System Formed in a Rough Neighborhood [article omtted] __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] The Biggest Tektite?
Hi,
I wasn't gonna say it, but... Add me to the
Muong-Nong Heretic List. I would guess that
the layering planes are more or less parallel to Top
and Bottom as indicated by the cube, and seem
most visible in the lefthand shadowed side of the
Angle 1 photo.
The horror is that the only way to be sure is to
damage the item, I suspect.
Sterling K. Webb
---
- Original Message -
From: "Norm Lehrman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Michael L Blood" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "Meteorite List"
Sent: Friday, May 25, 2007 7:39 PM
Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] The Biggest Tektite?
Michael,
This may be heresy, but the broad rounded grooves and
tiny pits look Muong-Nongy to me. 3 kilos is a
MONSTERous departure from any splashform known. Give
it a close look. Not all Muong Nongs are
conspicuously layered---
I betting Muong Nong.
Cheers,
Norm
http://Tektitesource.com
--- Michael L Blood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> As per requests I have put up some photos of my
> 3,255.6g Indochinite Tektite.
>
> Those interested can have a look see at:
>
http://www.michaelbloodmeteorites.com/GiantTektite.html
>
> I believe it is only one of the largest 5 in the
> world - but I
> think it may be the one in best ("flawless")
> condition of those 5.
> Best wishes, Michael
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> __
> Meteorite-list mailing list
> Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com
>
http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
>
__
Meteorite-list mailing list
Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com
http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
__
Meteorite-list mailing list
Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com
http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] More on London Clay Microtektites
Hi, Addresing not Aubrey, but his informant... Why is this so familiar? Is there a Mystery Object Protocol that demands that things be presented obliquely, incompletely, and confusingly? > The tektites have a high Ca content and this factor > through [THROWS?] those who expect them to > show substantial silica in their make up. But the people > that found difficulty with such a composition, in my view, > simply had an inability in grasp that some things in heaven > and earth are literally beyond the powers of human understanding. So, they have been analysed for bulk composition, then? Calcium is high. How high? Provide percentages, please. They don't show "substantial" silica? How much silica? NUMBERS, please. In fact, how about the entire bulk composition results? What is their chief constituent? If they're "glass" as claimed, they must contain a more than measurable amount of silicon dioxide. That's what glass is. If they're tektites, it is inconceivable that they would be silica-free. The only thing that's beyond my "powers of human understanding" is what he thinks he's doing with this idiotic babble about dataless compositions and vague mysticism. Does he have data or not? Sounds like a complete flake. I suppose another source can be added to the list of possible origins: a night in the lab with bunsen and pipette and some nice glass stock. Shame. If they were real and from the beginning of the Eocene (55 mya) instead of the end of the Eocene (35 mya), they might be evidence from an enigmatic event: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paleocene-Eocene_Thermal_Maximum Aubrey, why don't you ask him if he actually has any real data, how he got it (who did the tests), and such like questions, as, would he show it to you or let you put it on your website? And, finally, despite the visual resemblance to microtektites, there is one other substance which these objects could be: Amber. Amber was formed largely 50+ mya, is often found in early Eocene deposits, is suitably durable, is extensively transported by water, assumes fluid forms, and so forth. Amber can absorb considerable calcium (buried with bird bones you said). If the chief element of its composition is Carbon, you might have amber... Sterling K. Webb --- - Original Message - From: Aubrey Whymark To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ; meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com Sent: Friday, May 25, 2007 4:51 PM Subject: [meteorite-list] More on London Clay Microtektites Hi Michael Daniels, who discovered the London Clay tektites has recently emailed me a little more information, which I'd like to pass on: When it comes to your correspondent's doubts, which they are fully entitled to submit, particularly suspicions raised about the possibility of contaminates, origins connected with fly-ash and power stations, volcanics, yes, they are all familiar observations con- cerning the particles. And, as before, I just make the suggestion that for those more doubtful, they come down here and I will gladly conduct them to the Naze when I shall be more than appreciative to hear their explanations as to where I may have, in my enthusiasm, become a little adventurous in my concept and having unquestioning belief in the antiquity of the little glassy objects. That might be for me an acid test, but actually I think when they have better appreciation of the conditions prevailing at this lower London Clay locality, I think I can win over a few potential critics. Just to deal with a couple of questions raised by those who have written. I have today once more checked the particles and none show any magnetic properties. Some do have voids and there is a little evidence of impurities, but if that is confirmed then just might be tiny specs of dirt or plant debris. As for their pristine state, no sign of them suffering any ablation. Many of the fossil bird bones that I have collected from the Walton site are in such a remarkable condition that I have had to be careful when comparing them with modern avian elements, so perfect are they that confusion over which is which could arise. This is because once the relics came to rest on the sea bed and were fast covered with sediment, there they remained down 55 (not 35!) million years until they were caused to emerge when I dug up the pocket, composed mainly of plant material, in which they were lodged and so reveal them once more to the light of day! The tektites have a high Ca content and this factor through those who expect them to show substantial silica in their make up. But the people that found difficulty with such a composition, in my view, simply had an inability in grasp that some things in heaven and earth are literally beyond the powers of human understanding. Have a pleasant
[meteorite-list] NEW 'NATURAL HISTORY" MUSEUM IS OPENING
Hi, List, Yes, the entrance gates here are topped with metallic Stegosauruses. The grounds include a giant tyrannosaur standing amid the trees, and a stone-lined lobby sports varied sauropods. It could be like any other natural history museum, luring families with the promise of exciting and educational dinosaur adventures, but it's the brand new $27 million Creation Museum's Grand Opening this very holiday weekend, on 28th of May. http://www.creationmuseum.org/ Located within a day's drive of two-thirds of the US population in Petersburg, KY, near Cincinnati, interstates and an international airport. In the dioramas, two prehistoric children play near a gurgling waterfall, while dinosaurs cavort nearby. Dinosaurs are also seen boarding Noah's Ark. Outside the museum, scientists may assert that the universe is billions of years old and fossils are the remains of animals living hundreds of millions of years ago, that life's diversity is the result of evolution by natural selection, but inside the museum, no, the Earth is barely 6,000 years old and the dinosaurs were created on the sixth day of Creation. The Creation Museum makes extensive use of the latest in scientific technology to convince you that Science is A Lie, with high-tech displays and animatronic dinosaurs: http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/nationworld/bal-te.creationist20may20,0,7993512.story?coll=bal-nationworld-headlines Especially impressive, I'm told is the interactive exhibit that shows how The Flood cut the Grand Canyon. Who knew? So, if you know of any children whose minds you'd like to rot, what better place to take them on vacation? Here's a virtual walk-through on-line: http://www.answersingenesis.org/museum/walkthrough/ More news... http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/programmes/from_our_own_correspondent/6549595.stm http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/05/26/AR2007052600908.html http://uk.reuters.com/article/wtMostRead/idUKN2621240720070526 It does simplify some thorny issues. How old is this primitive achondrite? 6000 years. How old is the Sun? 6000 years. How old is the Universe? 6000 years. What's the maximum amount of time a meteorite can take to get to the Earth? 6000 years. Just fill in all the blanks with the same answer. How old is humanity? 6000 years. Dinosaurs? 6000 years. Single-celled life? 6000 years. See. it's easy... How long does it take photons to travel from the Big Bang to the Earth? 6000 years. See, nothing to it. I wonder if they've got a diorama where Adam wrastles The Raptor? That would be entertainment! I sure hope they've taken all the appropriate precautions to ensure those big animatronic dinosaurs don't escape their enclosures and eat the Christians. I'd say more, but I'm pretty much speechless. (Is that a first?) Sterling I. Webb __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] freebies and mini gao sales<--AD?????
List, The reason Americans talk about baseball is that it provides a subject of endless discussion without talking about SEX, POLITICS, or RELIGION. If America hadn't invented baseball, we would never have survived as a nation. In a pinch, meteorites will also serve. Sterling K. Webb --- - Original Message - From: "Bill" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: Sent: Sunday, May 27, 2007 1:12 AM Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] freebies and mini gao sales<--AD? Darren, This crap is uncalled for on the met-list. Your fourth grade summation of political cosmology is pretty trite. Take it to the atheistic commy pinko list you were spawned in :) Bill PS: Thanks to everyone for feeding the never ending, always needy goof machine... > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Sun, 27 May 2007 00:44:12 -0500 > To: meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com > Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] freebies and mini gao sales<--AD? > > On Sat, 26 May 2007 21:24:28 -0700, you wrote: > >> Hi Darren, >> >>What you wrote is true, but it is *shame*, and I use that word > >literally. >> > > See, to me, it isn't. In no way do I belittle what has been accomplished > by > American veterans (postive in the defensive wars fought by the US, > negative in > the multiple wars of conquest and occupation fought by the US). But > having the > government pick out one day on a calendar and tell everyone that they are > to > think of subject "x" on that day and show subject "x" the reverence that > those > who pushed to have the holiday made official felt one should feel about > subject > "x" on said holiday just rings very hollow to me. I'm not into rituals > or > ceremonies (and am very not religious), and having a specific day told to > me > that I need to act in such and such a way and have such and such a > feeling just > doesn't work for me. If you want shame, don't feel shame for people not > foloowing the government instructions for how to feel on a specific day-- > feel > shame for the government sending people to die and be maimed in vain in > unneccesary wars. __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
[meteorite-list] SCIENTIFIC VALUE OF (SOME) HAMMER STONES
Hi, All, > ...because where a meteorite lands and what it hits > has no scientific value or importance whatsoever. Actually, when accurately reported and verified, such falls have a great scientific value. Recorded over a period of time, data like the number and frequency of cars hit by meteorites can be used to calculate the total number of meteorites that fall per year over the entire Earth, an essential datum that is in some dispute. It is possible (and not that difficult) to find out how many cars (and trucks) are registered in the US from year to year, for many decades. Since cars, old or new, have roughly the same "footprint" on the planet, it's easy to calculate the total area of all cars added together (trucks are done separately and added in). The thing about the area of a "target" for a random bombardment is that it makes no difference to the math of it whether the "target area" is all collected together in one spot (like a plot of a hundred square miles in Arizona) or spread out over the entire nation (like cars). It's all the same; area is all the counts. By observing the frequency of meteorite hits on cars, we can derive a very accurate figure for the number of meteorite falls per unit area per year. The same approach can be used with other distributed items: meteorite hits on ships, meteorite hits on buildings, meteorite hits on people, and so forth. There are problems with some of these possible indicators. People are too small, despite their numbers -- they don't get hit very often. Meteorite hits on buildings often go unnoticed. Ships, large, ocean-going, possess a very small target area compared to US cars but have recorded enough hits to suggest a even higher rate than cars do. Doing the math, car hits suggests that the traditional MORP value of 25,000 meteorites falling to Earth per year grossly underestimates the Fall Rate which seems to be, using conservative assumptions, between 60,000 and 80,000 per year for the planet as a whole. Record the hits, please. Sterling K. Webb - Original Message - From: "Michael L Blood" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "Meteorite List" Sent: Sunday, June 03, 2007 7:04 PM Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Rosetta Stone Analogy on 6/3/07 3:16 PM, Darren Garrison at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > I don't see why calling it A "Rosetta stone" (not THE "Rosetta stone") is > a > "marketing term", as much as a description of the significance of the > find. > Now, "hammer stone", THAT is just a marketing term to me, because where a > meteorite lands and what it hits has no scientific value or importance > whatsoever. Hi Darren, The derivation of "hammer stone" is a bastardization of "hammer," a name I coined in reference to meteorites that "nailed" something. Rather than "a marketing ploy," it was more along the lines of having fun, like calling Valera "the Venesualen Butcher." (a name coined by ET who did NOT own any of the material, therefore, could in no way be accused of using the term as "a marketing ploy." I have also referred to hammers as "bashers, maulers, crushers, beaters, etc a real 'Murderers' Row' of the meteorite world," because of the delight they bring me, rather than "a marketing ploy." As for "scientific value" being used as a criterion for validating such terminology, that implies that all collectors collect BECAUSE of the scientific significance of meteorites - or at least they SHOULD collect for said reason. In fact, many collect based ONLY on witnessed falls, others on geographic "touchdown," others on esthetic appeal, etc. Just who is it that heads the Supreme Court of "legitimate" interest in meteorites? As for naming NWA meteorites, it seams to me there have been precious few, starting, I believe with "Twisted Sister" . again, something I believe was inspired by appreciation rather than profit motive, while two separate falls have been referred to as "the Rosetta Stone" - both have scientific origins and merit. However, I am always amazed at the cynicism of such a large segment of the collecting community when it comes to such things. Too bad, it does seam phenomenally ironic that some of the more playful lot of collectors can be found among dealers, themselves, while so many other collectors find all their actions suspicious and are ready to hold them in contempt at every step. So, go ahead, mean while I will delight in my own collection of hammers (by the way, I find the term, "hammer stone" most unappealing - at best). Be
Re: [meteorite-list] OT- Rethinking Moqui Marbles??
Hi, All, I think these "Fossilized UFO's" are concretations. Moqui Marbles seem to be hematite concretations: http://www.newarkcampus.org/professional/osu/faculty/jstjohn/Moqui%20Marbles/Moqui%20Marbles.htm Such concretations are always much younger than the strata they are found in. Their shape is determined by the water-cut cavities they form in. Karst-y China is a perfect place to find them, too. Looking for one thing, you often find another. The same website has a picture page with four objects that all look pretty much the same but are all different. Take a look at the four "tektites," only one of which really is a tektite. http://www.newarkcampus.org/professional/osu/faculty/jstjohn/Looking-the-Same/Looking-the-Same.htm Sterling K. Webb --- - Original Message - From: "Mike Groetz" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Meteorite List" Sent: Wednesday, June 06, 2007 12:43 PM Subject: [meteorite-list] OT- Rethinking Moqui Marbles?? Check out the last photo in this article- it (and somewhat the others) resembles the Moqui marbles I have. Except these are in pounds- not grams or ounces. http://en.epochtimes.com/news/7-6-5/56130.html Have a good afternoon Mike Ready for the edge of your seat? Check out tonight's top picks on Yahoo! TV. http://tv.yahoo.com/ __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] cleveland, ga
Harlan, List, Cleveland is a synonym for East Tennessee, or Bradley County, or the Lea Iron. A portion of this Tennessee meteorite was found in Whitfield County, GA after the DALTON meteorite: "In 1879 a rounded mass of 117lb (53.1kg) was ploughed up 14 miles NE of Dalton, C.U. Shepard (1883). Analysis, 7.57 %Ni, G.P. Merrill (1916). Further analysis, 7.35 %Ni, 18.4 ppm.Ga, 33.1 ppm.Ge, 9.6 ppm.Ir, E.R.D. Scott et al. (1973). A 13lb mass 'Whitfield County', found in 1877, was originally assigned to Dalton. G.P. Merrill (1916) doubted this relationship. This mass is now assigned to Cleveland ( q.v._ ); description, V.F. Buchwald (1975). Trapped melt, J.T. Wasson (1999)." So sayeth the NHM Catalogue of Meteorites. It's a IIIAB. Just look up the CLEVELAND (Tennessee) meteorite Sterling K. Webb - Original Message - From: harlan trammell To: meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com Sent: Thursday, June 07, 2007 7:04 PM Subject: [meteorite-list] cleveland, ga is there a cleveland, ga (from whitfield) meteorite? can anyone out there look this up in a skyrox data base? all info appreciated. i will be gradually switching over to yahoo mail (it has 100 FREE megs of storage). please cc to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Picture this - share your photos and you could win big! __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] cleveland, ga
Harlan, List, My guess would be: if a specific piece of Cleveland was cut from the Whitfield County mass, you could righfully and with full justice call it a "Georgia meteorite" since it originally fell on and was embedded in Georga soil, and has never been to Tennessee -- no matter how many relatives it may have in Tennessee! Sterling K. Webb --- - Original Message - From: harlan trammell To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ; meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com Sent: Thursday, June 07, 2007 8:51 PM Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] cleveland, ga > thank you all for the quick and accurate info! From: "Sterling K. Webb" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "harlan trammell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] cleveland, ga Date: Thu, 7 Jun 2007 20:47:33 -0500 >Harlan, List, > > Cleveland is a synonym for East Tennessee, or Bradley County, >or the Lea Iron. A portion of this Tennessee meteorite was found in >Whitfield County, GA after the DALTON meteorite: > "In 1879 a rounded mass of 117lb (53.1kg) was ploughed up >14 miles NE of Dalton, C.U. Shepard (1883). Analysis, 7.57 %Ni, >G.P. Merrill (1916). Further analysis, 7.35 %Ni, 18.4 ppm.Ga, >33.1 ppm.Ge, 9.6 ppm.Ir, E.R.D. Scott et al. (1973). A 13lb mass >'Whitfield County', found in 1877, was originally assigned to Dalton. >G.P. Merrill (1916) doubted this relationship. This mass is now >assigned to Cleveland ( q.v._ ); description, V.F. Buchwald (1975). >Trapped melt, J.T. Wasson (1999)." > So sayeth the NHM Catalogue of Meteorites. It's a IIIAB. Just >look up the CLEVELAND (Tennessee) meteorite > > >Sterling K. Webb > >- Original Message - >From: harlan trammell >To: meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com >Sent: Thursday, June 07, 2007 7:04 PM >Subject: [meteorite-list] cleveland, ga > > >is there a cleveland, ga (from whitfield) meteorite? can anyone out there >look this up in a skyrox data base? all info appreciated. > > > >i will be gradually switching over to yahoo mail (it has 100 FREE megs of >storage). please cc to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > >Picture this - share your photos and you could win big! > > > >__ >Meteorite-list mailing list >Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com >http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list > >__ >Meteorite-list mailing list >Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com >http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list Picture this - share your photos and you could win big! __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] Three New Papers on Mythology and Meteorites
Hi, Paul, Thanks for pointing out these papers. Fascinating downloads. Lots of other interesting stuff in there besides these three. Ok, I confess -- I downloaded the whole book... Thanks again. Sterling K. Webb --- - Original Message - From: "Paul" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: Friday, June 08, 2007 2:58 PM Subject: [meteorite-list] Three New Papers on Mythology and Meteorites Dear Friends, The Geological Society of London has a new book concerning the potential of myth to yield clues to geologic processes and past geologic events. It is: Piccardi, L., and W.B. Masse, 2007, Myth and Geology. Geological Society of London Special Publication no. 273. http://sp.lyellcollection.org/content/vol273/issue1/ 10-Digit ISBN: 1-86239-216-1 13-Digit ISBN: 978-1-86239-216-8 Three of the papers in this book are related to mythology and either meteorites of extraterrestrial impacts. They are: 1. Myth and catastrophic reality: using myth to identify cosmic impacts and massive Plinian eruptions in Holocene South America by W. Bruce Masse1 & Michael J. Masse. http://sp.lyellcollection.org/cgi/content/abstract/273/1/177 2. Cosmogenic mega-tsunami in the Australia region: are they supported by Aboriginal and Maori legends? by E. Bryant, G. Walsh & D. Abbott. http://sp.lyellcollection.org/cgi/content/abstract/273/1/203 3. Meteorite records in the ancient Greek and Latin literature: between history and myth by Massimo D'Orazio http://sp.lyellcollection.org/cgi/content/abstract/273/1/215 The PDF files of these articles can be downloaded for free until June 18th. Best Paul H. Moody friends. Drama queens. Your life? Nope! - their life, your story. Play Sims Stories at Yahoo! Games. http://sims.yahoo.com/ __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] Arrow head found in box of Moroccan Meteoritefragments.
Hi, Tom, List Dean Bessey used to (may yet) sell neolithic arrowheads from NWA. Most are probably 9000 to 13,000 years old, from the time that the Sahara was a well-watered grassland with scattered forest stands and lots of big game, well illustrated in the rock drawings the neolithic peoples left behind: http://images.google.com/images?gbv=2&hl=en&safe=off&q=+site:images.jupiterimages.com+petroglyphs+sahara You just got a freebie. Sterling K. Webb -- - Original Message - From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: Friday, June 08, 2007 11:35 PM Subject: [meteorite-list] Arrow head found in box of Moroccan Meteoritefragments. Hi List, You all will think I am nuts. I was going through a box of small meteorite fragments sorting out interesting pieces and attractive individuals. It was out of 20 Kg. small stuff, all unsorted and very dirty and I found an arrow head. Nice shape. About 1 inch total length. Are there any arrow heads found in the region where meteorites would be shipped from Morocco? Thanks, Tom ** See what's free at http://www.aol.com. __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] Papers on Desert and Other Meteorites AvailableOnline Until June 18th
Hi, Paul, List, Thanks again to Paul for pointing this out. ALL of Vol. 256 is worth having; at least I thought so. It contains some very interesting pieces about Tektites. Also, take a look at 1998's Vol. 140 (edited by Monica Grady) entitled "Meteorites: Flux with Time and Impact Effects," also worth having all of. http://sp.lyellcollection.org/content/vol140/issue1/ Apparently, The Geological Society, London is putting themselves on line, all of their history of publication, all their books, etc. It will cost you to use it, but they are testing (or advertising) the site as they build it, by allowing free access up through June 18. Yes, there IS a free lunch, at least for a while. I've been making a pig out myself at the free food tables: four books, over a gigbyte, but had one bandwidth enough and time, there seems to be a library of many more gigabytes. For example, if you interested in fossils (and I know there are fossil-people on the List), Vol. 217 is "Evolution and Palaeobiology of Pterosaurs." Vol. 199 is on "The Early Earth." I would feel bad about urging the looting of of a temporarily free resource, but the day that any real damage is done by the frantic stampede to acquire knowledge is probably a day none of us will ever live to see. Sterling K. Webb - Original Message - From: "Paul" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: Saturday, June 09, 2007 8:51 AM Subject: [meteorite-list] Papers on Desert and Other Meteorites AvailableOnline Until June 18th Dear Friends, The PDF version of an article about desert meteorites is available online until June 18, 2007. It is: Desert meteorites: a history by A. W. R. Bevan Geological Society, London, Special Publications; 2006; v. 256; p. 325-343; http://sp.lyellcollection.org/cgi/content/abstract/256/1/325 This part of "The History of Meteoritics and Key Meteorite Collections: Fireballs, Falls and Finds edited by G. J. H. McCall and A. J. Bowden. Other PDF files in this book can be found at: http://sp.lyellcollection.org/content/vol256/issue1/ The PDF versions of the above and other papers in this volume will be free to download until June 18, 2007. This applies to the other papers in the Lyell collection at: http://www.lyellcollection.org/ Best Regards, Paul H. Be a better Heartthrob. Get better relationship answers from someone who knows. Yahoo! Answers - Check it out. http://answers.yahoo.com/dir/?link=list&sid=396545433 __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] Global Warming - Scientifically proven or a farce
m. Well, actually, he does say that, doesn't he? Hey, I'm not bitching about Michael that specifically; a great number of people act that way. The time for debate is over, they say. It's irresponsible to argue about the science when confronted by disaster. Just go along... Accept it. Whenever people say that there can be NO reasoned argument -- don't go there -- you are being sold a bill of goods, and truth is not among those goods. It is no accident that global warming funders are politicians, bureaucrats, activists, and a long list of people who like trying to control things (and people). It is NOT, as some people have asserted on this List, a left-wing or a right-wing thing. It cuts completely across old political divisions. Fox News pushes Global Warming and Rupert Murdock drives a hybrid car. (It's a Lexus, but it's a hybrid Lexus...) The Left did NOT invent global warming; the Right did, but it doesn't matter now. The next few years will show lots of ideological shifts, as Warmism becomes more universally believed (unfortunately) and more ways are found to make money from it. Global warming's rise to become a dominant doctrine is a case of cascade failure. There now exists a "global warming industry" that employs 60,000 to 100,000 people in science, government, and the media. Budgets have snowballed from tiny "worry" grants to billions in every major nation, and those people whose livelihoods depend on the threat of global warming are the same ones who are relied upon to prove it is so and to arouse the populace to its "dangers." They have succeeded and their jobs are safe. Will the media get more viewers by claiming disaster looms than they will by saying "weather changes all the time"? The latter, though true, is not very exciting. It will not sell soap nor soup. There are lots of scientists who understand that Warmism, if not utter tripe, is at best highly questionable, but it's not worth saying -- out loud. Not if you like getting the grants, not if you plan on becoming Department Chairperson someday, not if you want to "advance." What you really want is to study scavenging efficiency in squirrels. Ask for money for that, and you're going nowhere. Ask for money to study "The Effects of Global Warming on the Scavenging Efficiency of Squirrels in Appalachia," and you are having a great summer vacation watching your favorite rodent, which is all you wanted to do in the first place. It's easy. Just keep your mouth shut. The major change is recent. The media have now "turned" the population at large to Majority Warmist, paradoxically by persuading those who consider themselves the most "informed" first. Like the Captain. Of course, everybody is "informed" (everybody who watches television) nowadays. People have now reached a state of unreasoned belief that they hold to with a religious passion. To behave contrary to their expectation is not to disagree; it is to be a "bad person." To not believe in Warmism is to ask for Big Trouble. Rob said he thought warming might be cyclical (it is), and Michael's "feelings" were "outraged" because Rob's opinion was threatening "the survival of not only everyone I love, but of the majority of life forms on the planet." Whoa, Dude! Take another 'lude. Chill. Can't we all just get along? The Truth: 1, There is no unequivocal evidence that the Earth is warming, but it may be. If it has warmed, the climate has warmed and cooled by similar amounts in cycles of a few hundred years over the last millennium or more. It is not as warm now as it was 1000 years ago. IF warming continues at this pace until 2050, it will be as warm as it was 1000 years ago. I will point out that our ancestors and "the majority of life forms on the planet" got through that time 1000 years ago with no trouble . 2. There is NO evidence that carbon dioxide is a primary cause, or driver, of climate change. Period. Not now. Not ever. There are a few episodes of sudden warming (and many more of sudden cooling) in geological history, but by and large there is no chance they have been caused by carbon dioxide. (There are some impact-related "spikes" that are suspicious in a few cases.) 3. There is even less evidence that man-made carbon dioxide, a tiny fraction of the carbon dioxide total, is climatically significant in any way. (It's hard to have less evidence than NO evidence, so I guess that's just for emphasis.) 4. Nevertheless, Climate does change. In fact, Climate IS change. On long time scale, it's a serious problem. But not Warming. For 41 million years, it's been cooling. We're in an Ice Age. Global Warming would be nice, in my opinion, but it ain't happening. Change is not without
Re: [meteorite-list] Global Warming - Scientifically proven or afarce
Michael, It's a deal. If I have to hitch a ride in Kevin Cosner's WaterWorld boat to get to Tuscon, boy, will my face be red! Sterling --- - Original Message - From: "Michael L Blood" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Sterling K. Webb" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "Meteorite List" Sent: Sunday, June 10, 2007 2:36 PM Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Global Warming - Scientifically proven or afarce Hi Sterling, First of all, I would like to thank you for being a gentleman in presenting your perspective in a relatively rational and respectful manor. Make no mistake, I certainly see the situation differently and feel a bit like I did when hearing Tom Cruise declare mental illness a myth. However, as someone suggested, we should make a bet. Instead of $10,000, I suggest that you and I get together in Tucson in 2017. I suspect by then one of us will agree he was wrong. That person has to buy the other's drinks at the 2017 Birthday Bash. Personally, I hope it is I who buys your drinks. I would much rather be wrong on this one. Best wishes, Michael __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] Global Warming -- My Last Word
century. Personally, I could do without those glaciations. Seriously. Since this is OFF topic, I'm going to get all the little replies in at once. For Darren, yes, ice ages are dry, desiccated times, jungles die (the Amazon was a grassland with no Amazon river 12,000 years ago, China was nearly desert) -- a lot of water is tied up in the ice. It's also an excessively windy time because of the high temperature gradient, equator to pole. For Trace and Dean: You know we are ALL waiting for the opening season of the Canadian Riviera! The nude beach in Labrador, the great water skiing in Churchill... To Martin: the life of a farmer is to be at the mercy of the world; just ask any farmer. Some will benefit, some will suffer, when change comes. Millions of US farmers were driven off the land of the Great Plains when they became hot and dry 1920-1940. Millions of US farmers found lands that used to be too cold and wet became productive. Not the same millions, unhappily. (Secretly, some English want the Warming because there will be vineyards again in Britain!) Neither Allan nor I are writing these posts because we think we're going to change each other's minds. No, we're writing for the listening Listees (if there's any left, that is). So, These Links are for You! Is CO2 the climate driver for the Earth? For the longest long-term chart of CO2 vs. temperature: http://mysite.verizon.net/mhieb/WVFossils/Carboniferous_climate.html NO, I repeat, NO obvious relationship of CO2 and climate on this planet. Measured recent troposphere and low stratosphere temperatures. http://hadobs.metoffice.com/hadat/images/update_images/tropical_upper_air.png Long-term temperatures graphed for students at the University of Arizona WITHOUT Mann's erroneous "hockey stick" http://www.atmo.arizona.edu/students/courselinks/fall04/atmo336/lectures/sec5/holocene.html Another long term graph (2000 years) WITH Mann's erroneous "hockey stick" http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:2000_Year_Temperature_Comparison.png A multitude of charts and graphs, very pretty but what does it all mean is not always answered: http://www.globalwarmingart.com/ Arctic warming, past and present (with professional references): http://www.worldclimatereport.com/index.php/2006/05/25/more-evidence-of-arctic-warmth-a-long-time-ago/ The American Institute of Physics has put the whole of Spencer Weart's excellent book, "The Discovery Of Global Warming," on-line (and it's hyperlinked and downloadable): http://www.aip.org/history/climate/index.html That's all the List space for me (off-list is OK). Sterling K. Webb -- - Original Message - From: "Treiman, Allan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: Sunday, June 10, 2007 9:45 AM Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Global Warming - 'Facts' Hi, meteorite-lovers – Too much heat and not enough fact on global warming! Your politics are your own, but I want to correct a few fact issues in Harlan Trammel’s email. Not to dump on Harlan – at least he went beyond name-calling and based his letter on data as he understands them. Harlan has four ‘facts’ at the bottom of his email, and they are incorrect or incomplete. #1 “There is no unequivocal evidence that the Earth is warming …” There is clear, unequivocal evidence from many sources that the Earth’s climate has warmed, overall, about 1.5 degrees C in the last two centuries. And the rate of change is faster since about 1930 or so. Here are links to three graphics, first with multiple lines of evidence (my favorite being borehole temperatures), second with average air temperatures, and the third (from my wife) showing that gardening planting zones have moved north because of higher temperatures. 1a. http://maps.grida.no/go/graphic/temperatures-over-previous-centuries-from-various-proxy-records 1b. http://www.cru.uea.ac.uk/cru/info/warming/ 1c. http://www.arborday.org/media/zones.cfm & http://www.arborday.org/media/map_change.cfm #2. “There is NO evidence that carbon dioxide is a primary cause, or driver, of climate change. Period. Not now. Not ever.” In fact, human emissions of carbon dioxide track the atmosphere’s increase in carbon dioxide pretty well, and both track the change in global temperatures pretty well. See the graphs above and these two. 2a. http://maps.grida.no/go/graphic/co2_emissions_in_the_world_and_in_latin_america_and_the_caribbean 2b. http://www.grida.no/climate/vital/07.htm These graphs show a correlation between carbon dioxide and temperature, and greenhouse warming is a known mechanism that relates the two. Primary cause - who can say? Some reasonable people would say the correlation showing cause. #3. “There is even less evidence that man-made carbon dioxide, a tiny fraction of the carbon
Re: [meteorite-list] something else to consider [global warming]
Hi, It's been so long since the validity of the Milankovich cycles was proven by Imbrie, Hays, Shackleton, Emiliani, and others whose names I can't remember (or spell) in the 1970's, shortly after continental drift was proven too, so long that a lot of people have forgotten that they WERE proven and think they're just one more whacky theory. Nope. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milankovitch_cycles Malutin Milankovich picked solving the calculation of these cycles and then the curves of insolation because it was the most difficult problem then known in science. He was a young returned war veteran when he started and it took decades to "do the math." No computers were available then; it was pencil and paper and ten million equations (per year). After he finished with the equations for the Earth's orbital history, he turned right around and started in on (and finished) the same task for Mars! He was widely regarded, at the time, as a scientist who wasted his life because it was assumed that even if he was right, no one could ever prove it. He was close friends with another scientific outcast everybody thought was completely crazy, a guy named Alfred Wegener who had the whacky notion that continents moved around on the planet's surface. Just a couple of wild and crazy guys... Sterling K. Webb -- - Original Message - From: "Jerry" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: Monday, June 11, 2007 10:36 AM Subject: [meteorite-list] something else to consider [global warming] http://www.homepage.montana.edu/~geol445/hyperglac/time1/milankov.htm Then there's the relatively recent study of the cycles of Solar activity [Sun Spots] which is poorly understood. Jerry Flaherty __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] 7 plagues
Give me The Rain Of Frogs anyday! Sterling (PS: Toads will do if you're short of frogs) --- - Original Message - From: "Michael L Blood" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Allan Treiman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "Meteorite List" Sent: Monday, June 11, 2007 4:45 PM Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] 7 plagues on 6/11/07 2:11 PM, Allan Treiman at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Burning ice??? Is that in the Bible? - One of the 7 plagues of Egypt - Moses was one of those "by any means necessary" dudes. They were being held as slaves, you know. Lets see, they had: frogs grasshoppers Nile turned red Rained burning ice & couple of others, including the cincher, which was the death of the first born son of every house - which is the basis of "Passover," when the Jews painted their doors with the blood of a lamb to insure protection from same. I can understand if you didn't read the book, but didn't you see the movie?!! They show it on TV every Easter. Michael > Could they have found some methane clathrate? > > aht > > Allan Treiman > Lunar and Planetary Institute > 3600 Bay Area Boulevard > Houston TX 77058 USA > > 281-486-2117 > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > On Jun 11, 2007, at 3:41 PM, Michael L Blood wrote: > >> Hi Martin, >> Actually, many meteorites are reported to have killed >> people >> but none I know of that are available or close to having a solid >> provenience. One was discussed at length on the list just a couple >> of months ago - some Roman officer and a bunch of his men. I >> believe the Bible has more than one incident reported as well. >> Hell, I would like to have one of the frogs in formaldehyde from >> the 7 plagues of Egypt, not to mention the burning ice. >> A documented KILLER meteorite? I would buy all I could! >> (By the way, Dr. Deits, one of the first to propose >> "continental >> drift" in the early 1900s was quoted as saying he wanted to die >> being struck by a meteorite, then fossilized and recovered by future >> generations). >> Best wishes, Michael >> >> on 6/11/07 1:09 PM, Martin Altmann at [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> wrote: >> >>> Forwarded from Andi Gren, who doesn't come through neither >>> (well Andi, at least I would pay a good price for that L6, if it >>> will hit a >>> certain person in Illinois...just a joke): >>> >>> >>> Hi Tim , List , all involved in this interesting treat, >>> >>> Your suggestion about the Asteroid wiping out half of the planet >>> and then be >>> sold on e bay brings me back to Meteorites. >>> When I have seen the first time a picture from the Lady hit by the >>> Sylacauga Meteorite, I was happy to know it's not reported a >>> Meteorite ever >>> kills a person. It makes our hobby in some way more peaceful. But >>> I always >>> asking my self what would happen if a Meteorite would kill a >>> person? The >>> Hammers and Cow killers are well paid and I know Sylacauga was >>> very very >>> well paid at a meteorite auction this year at the Tucson show. >>> So would the Meteorite be the most expensive L6 ever been sold? >>> Ore would >>> nobody like to own a slice of a human killer hammer? Ok, I'm sure >>> everybody >>> would agree an impact kit is out of respect, but what's about the >>> Meteorite, >>> who would like to own a human killer Hammer? >>> >>> best greetings >>> Andi >>> >>> >>> We are a society that starves our grandchildren to feed our children. >>> >>> All the signs are there to prove that Mother Earth cannot take >>> anymore of >>> the pollution and the destruction we throw at her. >>> We are seeing increasing numbers of Tsunami's, Volcanic eruptions and >>> Earthquakes even here in England we are experiencing this. >>> >>> One really sad thing I see is one day an Asteroid comes and hits >>> us and >>> wipes out half the planet I see unfortunately some humans would >>> try and >>> drag the remnants of it away and attempt to sell it on Ebay >>> because cash >>> is all that is worshipped. >>> Mike, Look at the positive side of this for our hobby and business... With Global Warming (that some doubt) the Arctic will have less ice, and our grass and farmlands lands will become deserts. Just imagine all the new meteorites that will become exposed and available to us collectors. And the prices will go down, too. But all of these benefits will be far outweighed by the economic impact of Global Warming that the Republican "Bushites" doubt. A natural cycle, some say, but look at the ice in the Arctic that environmental scientists are coring. It certainly shows a vastly greater increase in carbon dioxide emissions over the last 150 years that corresponds directly to human activity during our Industrial Revolution. The greatest increase in 900,000 years. And just think, 600,000 years ago Yellowstone caldera supervolcano erupted,
Re: [meteorite-list] So many parent bodies, so few samples
Hi, Darren, List, > exact solar system analogs and we wouldn't know it because > we haven't been able to take data for long > enough to actually find their planetary systems... I'd like to be wrong, but I think it's going to be a long wait. Let's say you're dozens of light years away from us and luckily, you're in the plane of the planets. You set up your automatic giant telescope system and wait for the Earth to cross in front of The Sun. The Earth is only 1/100th of the diameter of the Sun and so only blocks 1/1th of the Sun's light. So you're waiting for up to 365 days for the Sun to dim by 0.01%. Of course, there are sunspot clumps that dim the Sun that much but they take days to cross the Sun. So, you can distinguish between a big sunspot and a terrestrial planet no matter how far out it is. The Earth will only take less than thirteen hours to cross the Sun's disc when viewed from far away. But the problem of "spotting" the Earth is nothing when compared to catching Mercury! Mercury will only dim the Sun by about a 1/10th of the amount the Earth will, or 0.001% for less than eight hours. Good luck, alien planet hunters! Fortunately for you, there's bigger game to hunt. Yes, it's the Solar System's Big Boy -- Jupiter -- that catches all the attention. It will dim the Sun by almost 1% and the dimming transit will last 30 hours. Jupiter will be the Catch of the Day for an alien planet hunter. But it may not be the first to be discovered because our poor alien will have to wait for up to almost 12 years for Jupiter to show up in his 'scope... the first time. Just like our planet hunters, They will go through a few full cycles of the whole system, to be sure. That will kill most of a century. I hope we're worth it. Since the technique requires only big telescopes (in orbit would be nice), simple automated machinery, and LOTS of patience... Well, OK, you need to be near the plane defined by the planetary plane of the solar system -- that's about 3% of the stars within a given volume. How many is that? Well, there's about 14,000 stars with 100 light years (3% = 420). Hipparchos says 22,010 stars within 326 light years (3% = 660). There are 3919 Sun-like stars (spectral type F8 through K3) within 100 light years. These are stars very much like the Sun; if you were standing on Earth-like planet (and were not distracted by being on an alien planet), it would be indistinguishable from the Sun at first glance. Of those 3919 stars, about 120 of them are in a place where they can spot Our Solar System EASY -- it's like shooting planets in a barrel... or something like that. Out to 200 light years, that is A THOUSAND Sun-like stars (and their planets and their aliens) that can easily find us with such simple means as these. With a big orbital telescope farm and the steadfastness we all need, detection within 1,000 light years is no problem. There are 120,000 Sun-like stars in that volume well-placed to find and catalog our Solar System in detail. No doubt the systems that have suitable planets in what They think is the habitable zone are referred to Their Big Eye scope for some spectroscopy and visualization. Perhaps suitable candidates go on the list for a light-sail fly-by probe. Let's all be on our best behavior. Who knows? THEY may be watching. Or is it THEM? Sterling K. Webb -- - Original Message - From: "Darren Garrison" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: Monday, June 11, 2007 2:52 PM Subject: [meteorite-list] So many parent bodies, so few samples http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/070611_mm_planet_floodgates.html Trickle of Planet Discoveries Becomes a Flood By Jeanna Bryner Staff Writer posted: 11 June 2007 07:10 am ET Alien worlds, once hidden from knowledge, are now being discovered in droves, stunning astronomers with their unique features and sheer numbers. The discoveries are so common that more and more don't even get reported outside scientific circles. Take the announcement at the end of May of a massive planet, dubbed TrES-3, that zips around its star in an amazingly rapid 31 hours, giving the planet a 1.3-day year. Astronomers issued a press release, but you might not have heard about it because the discovery was so overshadowed by other planet announcements and barely received news coverage. "It's pretty routine now," said Alan Boss, a planet formation theorist at the Carnegie Institution of Washington. "Most planets that are found are not deemed worthy of a press release because they are sort of becoming 'one more planet.'" The total is now more than 200 extrasolar planets confirmed. And this is the tip of the iceberg in planet finds. Astronomers have more tools than ever, and
Re: [meteorite-list] 7 plagues
Darryl (and the Plague Interest Group), In the movie, the hailstones are burning without being consumed (a well-known stage trick using mixture of carbon disulfide and carbon tetrachloride that burns impressively but is ice-cold). As in the movie, so in The Script: Ex 9,23: And Moses stretched forth his rod toward heaven: and the LORD sent thunder and hail, and the fire ran along upon the ground; and the LORD rained hail upon the land of Egypt. Ex, 9,24: So there was hail, and fire mingled with the hail, very grievous, such as there was none like it in all the land of Egypt since it became a nation. Ex 9,25: And the hail smote throughout all the land of Egypt all that was in the field, both man and beast; and the hail smote every herb of the field, and brake every tree of the field. The rain of meteorites that kills many of the five armies of the Amorites does not come until Joshua 10,11: And it came to pass, as they fled from before Israel, and were in the going down to Bethhoron, that the LORD cast down great stones from heaven upon them unto Azekah, and they died: they were more which died with hailstones than they whom the children of Israel slew with the sword. Now, if a meteorite was cold enough to become totally covered with rime ice, would they have called it a "hailstone"? Sterling K. Webb - Original Message - From: "tett" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Michael L Blood" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "Allan Treiman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "Meteorite List" Sent: Monday, June 11, 2007 6:12 PM Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] 7 plagues Hummm, there were 10 plagues Nile River turned into a river of blood Frogs Dust turning to lice Biting flies Animals dieing Boils and Sores Hailstones Locusts 3 days darkness Plague on the first born. Cheers, Mike Tettenborn - Original Message - From: "Michael L Blood" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Allan Treiman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "Meteorite List" Sent: Monday, June 11, 2007 5:45 PM Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] 7 plagues on 6/11/07 2:11 PM, Allan Treiman at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Burning ice??? Is that in the Bible? - One of the 7 plagues of Egypt - Moses was one of those "by any means necessary" dudes. They were being held as slaves, you know. Lets see, they had: frogs grasshoppers Nile turned red Rained burning ice & couple of others, including the cincher, which was the death of the first born son of every house - which is the basis of "Passover," when the Jews painted their doors with the blood of a lamb to insure protection from same. I can understand if you didn't read the book, but didn't you see the movie?!! They show it on TV every Easter. Michael > Could they have found some methane clathrate? > > aht > > Allan Treiman > Lunar and Planetary Institute > 3600 Bay Area Boulevard > Houston TX 77058 USA > > 281-486-2117 > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > On Jun 11, 2007, at 3:41 PM, Michael L Blood wrote: > >> Hi Martin, >> Actually, many meteorites are reported to have killed >> people >> but none I know of that are available or close to having a solid >> provenience. One was discussed at length on the list just a couple >> of months ago - some Roman officer and a bunch of his men. I >> believe the Bible has more than one incident reported as well. >> Hell, I would like to have one of the frogs in formaldehyde from >> the 7 plagues of Egypt, not to mention the burning ice. >> A documented KILLER meteorite? I would buy all I could! >> (By the way, Dr. Deits, one of the first to propose >> "continental >> drift" in the early 1900s was quoted as saying he wanted to die >> being struck by a meteorite, then fossilized and recovered by future >> generations). >> Best wishes, Michael >> >> on 6/11/07 1:09 PM, Martin Altmann at [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> wrote: >> >>> Forwarded from Andi Gren, who doesn't come through neither >>> (well Andi, at least I would pay a good price for that L6, if it >>> will hit a >>> certain person in Illinois...just a joke): >>> >>> >>> Hi Tim , List , all involved in this interesting treat, >>> >>> Your suggestion about the Asteroid wiping out half of the planet >>> and then be >>> sold on e bay brings me back to Meteorites. >>> When I have seen the first time a picture from the Lady hit by the >>> Sylacauga Meteorite, I was happy to know it's not reported a >>> Meteorite ever >>> kills a person. It makes our hobby in some way more peac
Re: [meteorite-list] Alarmists are not new.
Hi, Greg, Dr. Ehrlich is alive and well and on the faculty of Stanford, which he has been since 1959. He is head of the Center for Conservation Biology there (he's a entomologist, you know, specializing in butterflies). Well, here. Check it out yourself... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_R._Ehrlich He could have been completely right when he wrote "The Population Bomb" in 1968. There were no great results coming from old or new food yield genetic technologies despite decades of promises, promises. Then it exploded in the 70's and continues to do so. Whoops! He did not believe that technology could get you out of all difficulties; some he thought, you were just stuck with; you had to accept limitations. Of course, he knew people didn't want to hear that, but he thought that was because it was an inconvenient truth people didn't want to face. In the case of his cause, it just appears simply to have not been true. Sterling K. Webb --- - Original Message - From: "GREG LINDH" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "meteorite-list" Sent: Monday, June 11, 2007 9:12 PM Subject: [meteorite-list] Alarmists are not new. To all, In view of all the talk about global warming, does anyone remember Paul Ehrlich? You knowthe great "authority" who wrote the book, "The Population Bomb" in the late 1960s. The world was up in arms due to his book. There was going to be *mass famine* all over the earth by the late 1970s or by the mid-1980s at the latest because of the "inevitable" explosion of the world's population. According to Ehrlich, nothing could stop it. What happened to Ehrlich's vision of our planet? What ever happened to Ehrlich? Funny how the absolutely "fool proof science" of today is really not that fool proof at all. Greg Lindh __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] Global Warming and METEORITES
Hi, Dave, List Too late, Dave; it's already dead and gone. There's an occasional snip or comment popping up like flotsam after a shipwreck, but the boat has sunk. It's long over with. I wrote the most and if I never look at another graph, it'll be too soon. I promised a post on Global Warming AND Meteorites, and here it is. Back at the turn of the last century, one of the great mysteries of science was: What kept the Sun hot? We knew then that the Earth was quite old (the daring guessed a billion years or more!). If the Sun was just a ball of hot gas radiating its heat away, why wasn't it cold by now? How long would it last? There were lots of theories, most of them pretty whacky. Lord Kelvin gave a speech in which he said that "modern physics" was a theory that explained almost everything. He excluded the ultraviolet problem and the solar heat problem (which would be quantum theory and nuclear reactions)) We tackled the problem of the Sun, though. It turned out that a ball of hot gas that heavy would cool to black in only 25 million years, and we knew that was too short a time, so there had to be something heating up the Sun all the time. What could it be? METEORITES! An astronomer named H. A. Newton (who was obviously no relation to Sir Isaac!) calculted how many meteors, falling in from intergalactic space, it would take to keep the Sun from cooling off. All of the kinetic energy of the meteors would be dumped into the Sun as heat energy, so he calculated back to figure out how many meteors it would take to keep the Sun hot. It was a truly gigantic number, millions per day, but it was just barely conceivable. In the 1902 edition of his text on celestrial dynamics, the great Forest Ray Moulton wasted two pages gutting Newton's theory. He pointed out that some of those meteors would strike the Earth as they fell toward the Sun, that you calculate how many, and then figure out how much heat they delivered to the Earth. If there were as many meteors as Newton thought, the ones that hit the Earth would be enough to more than DOUBLE the temperature of the Earth, so obviously Newton's meteors didn't exist and couldn't keep the Sun hot. There you have it, METEORITES as a cause of Global Warming! The idea of heating by meteorite was not new; it had been suggested for the Sun earlier in the 1800's by Mayer. But you don't have to feel guilty for your meteorites. Don't send the guilty ones to Al Gore! Using Dr. Moulton's mathematical analysis I calculate that each kilogram of meteorite falling to Earth releases 194,134 calories of heat. That's what they used in 1902 -- calories; forget your joules. You convert it. Whatever causes Global Warming, I'm pretty sure it isn't Meteorites... Sterling K. Webb - Original Message - From: "Dave Carothers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: Monday, June 11, 2007 9:17 PM Subject: [meteorite-list] Global Warming I'd like to suggest that this entire thread be taken to a more appropriate list: alt.global-warming Dave __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] Sky detonation video
Hi, Chris, List,
Wouldn't want to depress you further, Chris,
but the YouTube commentators you single out
are not the bottom of the barrel, in fact, they are
the relative cream of the populace at large.
Their errors are scaling errors, nothing more.
They have never learned to think quantitatively.
This something they share with 98% or maybe
99% of the population.
They appear to have a rough idea of what a
supernova, red giant, or galaxy is, instead of
just saying "Super What?" or thinking it's a
hopped-up old Chevy, or that the Red Giant
is a figure in a video game...
All three items explode, and they appear to
be making scale-free identifications based on a
visual image from a video source, which would
mean they've watched PBS or lots of space
opera movies. That's the cream.
In 1950, a Gallup poll showed that 86% of
Americans knew the Earth went around the Sun.
In 1994, it was down to 53%, and I imagine it
has dropped further since. Of those 53%, less
than half knew that it took the Earth one year
to do it. 65% did not know (or believe) that the
last dinosaur died before the first human was
born. 57% believed that electrons are bigger
than atoms. And on, and on, and on...
If you ask Americans if they believe that
human beings came into being by developing
from less complicated forms of life by a natural
process without any intervention, 7% say Yes.
(In China, the figure is 70%.) That was in 1994.
Again, I'm willing to bet the US figure has
dropped since.
Someone who teaches an undergraduate
astronomy class in a prestigious Ivy university
(no names, please) says he still runs into students
who do not know that stars rise and set (which
would imply they don't know of or connect to the
Earth's rotation) nor do they know that the Sun
is a star. This is the cream of the cream of the
cream, right?
If Darren is right that these are most likely
12-year-olds, well, that's a good sign... isn't it?
Or maybe they just grow up to be dumb.
Eppure si muove...
Wonderful Google. We always do better when
we're given clear-cut choices. The latest data from the
General Social Survey (2006):
Question: Now, does the Earth go around the Sun,
or does the Sun go around the Earth?
Earth around sun 73.6%
Sun around earth 18.3%
Don't Know 8.0%
Refused 0.1%
Followup Question: How long does it take for the Earth
to go around the Sun: one day, one month, or one year?
One day 19.0%
One month 1.1%
One year 71.2%
Other time period 0.1%
Don't Know 8.5%
Refused 0.1%
It is not known if anyone has attempted to measure
the rotational rate of Mr. Galileo in his grave...
Before we leap to the conclusion that it's just dumb
Americans, we're actually doing better than Europe:
http://www.nsf.gov/statistics/seind06/c7/fig07-07.htm
These surveys are highly variable, and the questioning is
lousy! The followup question implies a correct answer to
the question that precedes it, so that the responder can
deduce an answer more likely to fit the implied correct
answer to the previous question. Neither does the GSS
correlate the "Earth go round the Sun" answers with the
"1 day" answers. Are they the same people? Different
people? No way to know. And the GSS is considered
the premiere survey...
See, everybody is dumb, even the people doing the
surveys to find how dumb we are.
Sterling K. Webb
--
- Original Message -
From: "Chris Peterson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:
Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2007 2:00 PM
Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Sky detonation video
Gosh, I hope my comment didn't come across as criticism of the posts
made here on this list. It was the comments on the YouTube site- stuff
like
-this is a red giant
-this is a supernova (or not, because supernovas are a few thousand km
away and couldn't be seen, or not, because if it were a visible
supernova we would all be killed by the radiation)
-this is an exploding galaxy
and lots of other stuff that nobody with even a basic education should
be saying. Personally, I find it kind of depressing, considering how
important general scientific knowledge is in today's world.
I can't agree that all opinions on matters like this have equal weight.
Critical thinking requires the ability to distinguish between good and
bad opinions.
Chris
*
Chris L Peterson
Cloudbait Observatory
http://www.cloudbait.com
- Original Message -
From: "Mike Groetz" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Chris Peterson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>;
Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2007 12:41 PM
Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Sky detonation video
Chris-
I think you may want to watch how you make this
statement. I have found the majority of people on this
list very knowledgeable of sc
Re: [meteorite-list] Meteorite-list Digest, Vol 43, Issue 38
Strefani, To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to [EMAIL PROTECTED] You can reach the person managing the list at [EMAIL PROTECTED] - This is the only way one can un-subscribe from the List -- on-line or by email. We are mere Listoids. De-Listing is too potent a Weapon of Mass-Mail Destruction to be proliferated among a World of unruly Listoids! Sterling K. Webb - - Original Message - From: stefani Johnson To: meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com Sent: Wednesday, June 13, 2007 11:06 AM Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Meteorite-list Digest, Vol 43, Issue 38 please take me off your list. Stefani Johnson From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com To: meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com Subject: Meteorite-list Digest, Vol 43, Issue 38 Date: Wed, 13 Jun 2007 12:01:45 -0400 Send Meteorite-list mailing list submissions to meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to [EMAIL PROTECTED] You can reach the person managing the list at [EMAIL PROTECTED] When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than "Re: Contents of Meteorite-list digest..." __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
[meteorite-list] OCEANS ON MARS
When Viking got to Mars, it found what looked like clear evidence of the shoreline of a vast ancient sea. Exciting. Later, closer looks show that the "shoreline" was not level; it "waved" up and down. Shorelines don't do that -- goodbye to the Seas of Barsoom. Geophysicists at UC Berkeley have created a simple model that explains the "wavy" wrinkled shoreline, and now it looks like the Ancient Seas of Mars are possible, even likely. This Ocean would have covered a goodly fraction of the planet and been 4000 to 6000 feet deep! Needless to say this is way too much water to have been lost to space by leaking out of the atmosphere, so the question is, "Excuse me, but where are you hiding the ocean?" Mars Probably Once Had A Huge Ocean: http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/06/070613131912.htm The full paper will appear in the journal Nature tomorrow, if anyone who wants it has access. Meanwhile, we can put a sedimentary Martian Meteorite on the list of things we want the universe to give us for Christmas. Sterling K. Webb __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] OCEANS ON MARS
And, like a fool, I forgot to ask for a sedimentary Martian meteorite with FOSSILS! I mean, as long as you're asking, what harm could it have done? Sterling K. Webb - Original Message - From: "samc" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Rob McCafferty" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: "Sterling K. Webb" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Sent: Wednesday, June 13, 2007 4:47 PM Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] OCEANS ON MARS I get more convinced as time passes, that we *will* find either active or fossil life forms on Mars in my lifetime. Great spot Sterling, thanks. Mark Rob McCafferty wrote: >Fascinating article from both yourself and Ron. >It left me thinking "I could have thought of that if >only I were a little bit smarter" as I knew all the >mechanisms involved. >To see what is right in front of your face is a >constant challenge > > > >>Meanwhile, we can >>put >>a sedimentary Martian Meteorite on the list of >>things we want >>the universe to give us for Christmas. >> >> >> __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] OCEANS ON MARS
AUTOBIOGRAPHY: > random chemical production of complex > amino acids is one thing but DNA is quite the other > and how it manages to develop from a molecule to > sentience is off any scale I don't see the problem. Structures are inherent in all matter, not just any structure: specific structures. In the case of carbon, they are complicated but just as determined by binding energies and electron orbits. >From the beginning of the universe, they're BUILT IN, even DNA. The universe is just made that way. DNA is a polymer. Molecules polymerize all by themselves when exposed to energy, light, heat, dessication, a host of circumstances. Sugars and phosphates gum up, dry out, solidify, polymerize -- now they're chains. Aminos like to shelter in the lee of five-sided sugars, so chains of polymerized pentose phosphate collect aminos. All the chains are glopped up together -- if the aminos on one chain FOR A SHORT STRETCH match up with their opposite numbers, a section of two chains is joined as a 2-chain. The loose ends get broken off; short 2-chains bump into each other, join end-to-end; 2-chains get longer. Some long 2-chains don't have a good match between aminos; they don't last long; others do. Some, a few of the long 2-chains, have good enough matches that if they're torn apart, they re-create the missing half from around them. They have replicated. Some 2-chains, a few, can DO things, little meaningless things, that make them persist longer than other 2-chains. Those 2-chains persist and replicate while other patterns disappear. Some of these 2-chains collect highly polar molecules that are attracted to water at one end and repulsed by water at the other end. Soon, the 2-chains are surrounded by a rough sphere of polar molecules which crudely protects the 2-chains from the general environment while allowing some other smaller molecules to pass both ways. Some rough spheres allow more than one kind of 2-chain, even other active molecules, to occupy the protected volume, each doing some little meaningless chemical operation just happens to make them persist longer together than apart and longer than those that don't do as much, sometimes for hours, and then sometimes for DAYS by doing more meaningless little things all the time, and this just keeps going on and on and on, getting more complicated all the time, for the next, say, 10^17 seconds, and HERE I AM. Sterling K. Webb - Original Message - From: "Mark Crawford" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Rob McCafferty" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: ; "samc" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Wednesday, June 13, 2007 6:06 PM Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] OCEANS ON MARS >>I get more convinced as time passes, that we *will* >>find either active or fossil life forms on Mars in my lifetime. >> >> >> >Don't kid yourself Mark, > >Did you ever do that calculation in physics where you If not, it works out >that the chances are that you >have to leave the box for something like 10^20 times >longer than the universe has been around for to have a >chance of it happening or something ridiculous like >that. My point is that random chemical production of complex >amino acids is one thing but DNA is quite the other >and how it manages to develop from a molecule to >sentience is off any scale. > > Completely agree - but we're here to argue about it, right? So, given the universe has a greater than zero chance of life emerging (which I hope we can all agree on, even on metlist), it either happens in a tiny fraction of potential cases, or we're unique. Since I specifically mentioned Mars, I'd argue that the chances are somewhat higher than (arbitrarily) 10^20, because we share a common environment. I'm not positing panspermia (nor ruling it out); just noting the fact that we have a stable single star, a habitable zone which extended further out in geological time, and demonstrably a place where the right stuff emerged to do it at least once. I think Mars is a hot bet, and getting hotter by the year :) >A group of British scientists predicted finding life >on extrasolar planets in the next 10 years in the last >week. How presumptious is this??? > Probably pretty presumptious, I agree; but this species does tend to get a little excitable on this topic. I offer myself as a type specimen in evidence ;) >You really have to believe that life will form wherever it can which is not >the >same as life finding a way to hang on > > Personally, I do believe that life will form, a lot of the time, in an environment where the conditions are right. You're completely right in about 'forming' vs 'hanging on' in a place where it's close to extant life, like sulphur vents vs rainforests
Re: [meteorite-list] Martian Cave Entrance Detail
Hi, Kevin, List When I looked at your processed image and mentally subtracted the stitchlines and the periodic noise, what I saw was vague dark arcs nested inside each other toward a darker center. So I took your image and fiddled with it in the manner you described (luminance, contrast). Your processed image definely has a darker center. As you stretch the contrast, the center darkens more than the rest and so on, for a bigger and bigger dark center. Now, if this was a vast cavern under the surface and the hole was a "skylight" break-through, even if the "floor" was thousands of feet down, the center under the skylight would be faintly brigher than the edges, brightest at the center, the opposite of this. IF (that was a big "if") the center is darkest and the circle near the center is next darkest and so on, it can only be interpreted as our looking down a very deep, relatively straight tunnel or pipe. Why would Mars have a vertical tunnel miles deep? A.) This feature is located on the slopes of a big volcano. Volcanoes frequently have side vents, vent pipes, lava tubes, a variety of geological "plumbing" extending from them that release volcanic gasses. B.) Please note that in the unprocessed photo of the "hole," there is clearly a whitish "stain" or discoloration of the terrain that is plume-shaped and that extends away from the "hole." Hot CO2 or H2O vapors might have produced the plume, but I think a sulfurous gas more likely (as frequently seen in Earthly volcanoes). Is there infrared spectroscopy available on this small scale? It would be worthwhile to identify the substance because we could then estimate long it would persist on the surface and correspondingly get an idea how recent the activity that deposited it was. Sterling K. Webb -- - Original Message - From: "Kevin Forbes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: Wednesday, June 13, 2007 9:39 PM Subject: [meteorite-list] Martian Cave Entrance Detail Hello all, Regards the images and test on this page relating to new HiRise image from Mars. http://www.planetary.org/blog/article/0984/ I reckon it's strange so many took someones word that there is NO detail in the BLACK part of the image without attempting to process the image themselves. Why there is a NASA statement that says NO detail visible in the black, when there clearly IS detail after processing is beyond me. This was done in a 2 step forward 1 step back process. All I manipulated were brightness, contrast, density. Here are the final two processed images. This data is from the full resolution 440 mb JP2 download. It appears that the camera scan lines are now visible as dark diagonal lines, there is a little more there as well, noise, dark image, Something anyway, not nothing. http://www.mediamax.com/vk3ukf/Hosted/KsBlackHole001.JPG and, http://www.mediamax.com/vk3ukf/Hosted/KsBlackHole002.JPG Regards Kevin. __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] Martian Cave Entrance Detail
Chris, List, > it's presumed that Mars has been volcanically > inactive for a very long time... Presumptions were Born To Be Tested. Which is not to say that you (and it) are wrong, by any means, but since we are presumably going to poking about these curious apertures (instrumentally at least), it could be done if there's a multiband instrument suitable (I don't know). As for the albedo shift, I think it's real. I'm looking at it at the scale of 25 cm per pixel. As for the dunes, I see several light dunes that run right out of the bright and continue without a break into the darker area -- where they are dark, the same dunes. They may be more eroded and rounded over so that their shadows are not as pronounced but even so the peak of the dunes in the light area are noticeably brighter than any other feature in the photo except for the illuminated rim of the "hole." It could be very light frost from water vapor coming from the hole, or a dusting of sulfur, or a chemical alteration of the soil, or ground that was trampled by the boots of a crowd of spelunking Martians... well, no, not that. The most annoying thing about Mars (going to bitch about a planet, now?) is that you see something interesting but what you don't know, can't know, really want to know, is did this happen yesterday, 10 years ago, a century, a millennium, a million years, a billion? Don't know what you meant by "a very long time," but: http://www.universetoday.com/am/publish/mars_volcanoes_active.html "The timeline proposed from studying the complex Olympus Mons caldera suggests there have been lava flows from intense volcanic activity within the past 2 million years." A puff of steam isn't that intense. Sterling K. Webb -- - Original Message - From: "Chris Peterson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: Wednesday, June 13, 2007 11:35 PM Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Martian Cave Entrance Detail > B.) Please note that in the unprocessed photo of the > "hole," there is clearly a whitish "stain" or discoloration > of the terrain that is plume-shaped and that extends > away from the "hole." Hot CO2 or H2O vapors might > have produced the plume, but I think a sulfurous gas > more likely (as frequently seen in Earthly volcanoes). I'm not at all certain that's the case. Certainly, if you look at a lower resolution image that's the impression. Look closely, however, and you'll see that the area above the hole is actually a different texture- apparently sand dunes on a ~10m scale, quite different from the surrounding area. My guess is that these are the product of a complex wind flow around the hole. I don't see anything to suggest that a plume from the hole is responsible (and it seems likely that the ever shifting sands would have long ago covered up a true material plume, since it's presumed that Mars has been volcanically inactive for a very long time). I have my doubts that the processed image is showing anything other than noise. The HiRISE team, working with ~14-bit data, couldn't stretch it enough to pull out anything above the noise floor (a parameter I'm sure they are familiar with). I certainly wouldn't expect that real details would be present in the much lower dynamic range JPEG2000 image. But even if there is some faint detail, there would be nothing surprising about it. The hole is probably an opening onto a lava tube, so it's likely the floor is not more than a few hundred meters down. Even at the low (38°) Sun angle, it's possible that enough light is making it down to allow for a tiny signal to be recorded. Chris * Chris L Peterson Cloudbait Observatory http://www.cloudbait.com - Original Message - From: "Sterling K. Webb" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Kevin Forbes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Sent: Wednesday, June 13, 2007 10:02 PM Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Martian Cave Entrance Detail > Hi, Kevin, List > >When I looked at your processed image and mentally > subtracted the stitchlines and the periodic noise, what I > saw was vague dark arcs nested inside each other toward > a darker center. So I took your image and fiddled with it > in the manner you described (luminance, contrast). Your > processed image definely has a darker center. As you stretch > the contrast, the center darkens more than the rest and so > on, for a bigger and bigger dark center. > >Now, if this was a vast cavern under the surface and the > hole was a "skylight" break-through, even if the "floor" was > thousands of feet down, the center under the skylight would > be faintly brigher than the edg
Re: [meteorite-list] Martian Cave Entrance Detail
Hi, Mark, List Well, since your processing pulled out exactly what I thought I saw, only in greater detail, I naturally think you did a great job! Seriously, there are artifacts: the two "stitch lines" show up just as they did in Kevin's processed image, and of course, contours re-enforce the suggestion of depth. Still, center-darkness is clearly THERE. Sunlight is coming from just below the left horizontal axis of the photo, yet near the illuminated (right) side of the "hole" is another very dark area which ,since it is adjacent to the illuminated rim, must be very far below it. The World Cave Database: http://www-sop.inria.fr/agos-sophia/sis/DB/world.bydepth.html says the deepest cave on Earth is over 2000 meters! Don't even ask about the longest cave on Earth, which stretches for 580 KILOMETERS under the Earth (Mammoth). Apart from the possibility of caves too deep to have an access to the surface, the chief limit on cave depth is gravity. Mars could have much deeper caves than the Earth does (it has mountains three times higher). Would you believe a five-kilometer- deep hole? There's a great future exploration! Sterling K. Webb -- - Original Message - From: "mark ford" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Sterling K. Webb" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Sent: Thursday, June 14, 2007 4:25 AM Subject: RE: [meteorite-list] Martian Cave Entrance Detail Hi, I have had a go at reprocessing the Martian cave detail, see http://www.freewebs.com/fordmeteorites/martiancaveentrance.htm There is certainly something there that is more than noise (well not normal random thermal noise anyway) Looks like a dark spot in the centre which is probably where the light fades out as it goes down futher. Wow - It's a big hole! Mark -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Sterling K. Webb Sent: 14 June 2007 07:02 To: Chris Peterson; meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Martian Cave Entrance Detail Chris, List, > it's presumed that Mars has been volcanically > inactive for a very long time... Presumptions were Born To Be Tested. Which is not to say that you (and it) are wrong, by any means, but since we are presumably going to poking about these curious apertures (instrumentally at least), it could be done if there's a multiband instrument suitable (I don't know). As for the albedo shift, I think it's real. I'm looking at it at the scale of 25 cm per pixel. As for the dunes, I see several light dunes that run right out of the bright and continue without a break into the darker area -- where they are dark, the same dunes. They may be more eroded and rounded over so that their shadows are not as pronounced but even so the peak of the dunes in the light area are noticeably brighter than any other feature in the photo except for the illuminated rim of the "hole." It could be very light frost from water vapor coming from the hole, or a dusting of sulfur, or a chemical alteration of the soil, or ground that was trampled by the boots of a crowd of spelunking Martians... well, no, not that. The most annoying thing about Mars (going to bitch about a planet, now?) is that you see something interesting but what you don't know, can't know, really want to know, is did this happen yesterday, 10 years ago, a century, a millennium, a million years, a billion? Don't know what you meant by "a very long time," but: http://www.universetoday.com/am/publish/mars_volcanoes_active.html "The timeline proposed from studying the complex Olympus Mons caldera suggests there have been lava flows from intense volcanic activity within the past 2 million years." A puff of steam isn't that intense. Sterling K. Webb -- - Original Message - From: "Chris Peterson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: Wednesday, June 13, 2007 11:35 PM Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Martian Cave Entrance Detail > B.) Please note that in the unprocessed photo of the > "hole," there is clearly a whitish "stain" or discoloration > of the terrain that is plume-shaped and that extends > away from the "hole." Hot CO2 or H2O vapors might > have produced the plume, but I think a sulfurous gas > more likely (as frequently seen in Earthly volcanoes). I'm not at all certain that's the case. Certainly, if you look at a lower resolution image that's the impression. Look closely, however, and you'll see that the area above the hole is actually a different texture- apparently sand dunes on a ~10m scale, quite different from the surrounding area. My guess is that these are the product of a compl
Re: [meteorite-list] Martian Cave Entrance Detail ADDITIONAL
Hi, All, Since it would seem likely to be a lava tube rather than a Earth-conventional cavern, the comparison should be to lava tubes on Earth. The largest (longest) is Kazumura Cave in Hawai'i: http://www.caverbob.com/lava.htm It's 65.5 kilometers long (40.70 miles) at a depth of 1101.5 meters (3614 feet). The next three longest lava tubes on Earth are also on Hawai'i; there are nine known to a length of more than 10 kilometers. The world's deepest vertical pit is at Vrtoglavica, Slovenia and is 603 meters (1816 feet) straight down. That could be a mile deep in Mars' gravity. The largest single chamber in a cave on Earth is 162,700 m2 (600 x 415 x 100 meters). Also would be bigger on Mars. There are lots of lava channels on the surface of Mars. Channels are lava tubes that have collapsed. Flowing lava always cools on top, forming a solid "roof" over the molten stream which drains and leaves the tube behind. Here are Surveyor images: http://www.highmars.org/niac/motubes.html Martian lava tubes on the surface are even bigger than the scaling of the gravity would suggest: http://www.astrobio.net/news/article1304.html "...on Mars they're hundreds of kilometers long. And the diameters are equally great. On the average they're 3 to 10 times the size of the average diameter on Earth. They are truly enormous." (The gravity ratio squared is about 6.9.) Using such caves on Mars as protective habitats for human explorers is an old idea: http://www.marssociety.org/portal/TMS_Library/Clifford_1997/view It was also proposed for the Moon, back when we thought the Moon had volcanoes. Sterling K. Webb ------ -- Original Message - From: "Sterling K. Webb" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Cc: "Kevin Forbes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "mark ford" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thursday, June 14, 2007 1:59 PM Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Martian Cave Entrance Detail Hi, Mark, List Well, since your processing pulled out exactly what I thought I saw, only in greater detail, I naturally think you did a great job! Seriously, there are artifacts: the two "stitch lines" show up just as they did in Kevin's processed image, and of course, contours re-enforce the suggestion of depth. Still, center-darkness is clearly THERE. Sunlight is coming from just below the left horizontal axis of the photo, yet near the illuminated (right) side of the "hole" is another very dark area which ,since it is adjacent to the illuminated rim, must be very far below it. The World Cave Database: http://www-sop.inria.fr/agos-sophia/sis/DB/world.bydepth.html says the deepest cave on Earth is over 2000 meters! Don't even ask about the longest cave on Earth, which stretches for 580 KILOMETERS under the Earth (Mammoth). Apart from the possibility of caves too deep to have an access to the surface, the chief limit on cave depth is gravity. Mars could have much deeper caves than the Earth does (it has mountains three times higher). Would you believe a five-kilometer- deep hole? There's a great future exploration! Sterling K. Webb -- - Original Message - From: "mark ford" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Sterling K. Webb" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Sent: Thursday, June 14, 2007 4:25 AM Subject: RE: [meteorite-list] Martian Cave Entrance Detail Hi, I have had a go at reprocessing the Martian cave detail, see http://www.freewebs.com/fordmeteorites/martiancaveentrance.htm There is certainly something there that is more than noise (well not normal random thermal noise anyway) Looks like a dark spot in the centre which is probably where the light fades out as it goes down futher. Wow - It's a big hole! Mark -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Sterling K. Webb Sent: 14 June 2007 07:02 To: Chris Peterson; meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Martian Cave Entrance Detail Chris, List, > it's presumed that Mars has been volcanically > inactive for a very long time... Presumptions were Born To Be Tested. Which is not to say that you (and it) are wrong, by any means, but since we are presumably going to poking about these curious apertures (instrumentally at least), it could be done if there's a multiband instrument suitable (I don't know). As for the albedo shift, I think it's real. I'm looking at it at the scale of 25 cm per pixel. As for the dunes, I see several light dunes that run right out of the bright and continue without a break into the darker area -- where they are dark, the same dunes. They may be more eroded and rounded over so that their shadows are not as pronounced but even so the peak of the dune
Re: [meteorite-list] The Dwarf Planet Known as Eris is Bigger, More Massive than Pluto, New Data Shows
Hi, New-Comers to Eris, Eris at 97 AU receives 1/9409th of the sunlight of Earth. Direct sunlight on a very clear day in a desert on Earth can be 150,000 lux, so a bright day on Eris is about 16 lux. See the list below. Twilight is 10 lux. Eris is brighter than than, maybe like the first beginning of twilight. The steep changes in light intensity are scaled by the fact that the human eye has an automatic iris-controlled exposure system. Deep twilight is only 1 lux and a full moon, the brightest you've ever seen, is just 0.1 lux. So on Eris the Sun is 160 times brighter than a Full Moon on Earth. That's at 97 AU. At 38 AU, Eris gets 1/1444th of full daylight, or 104 lux. That's the same as a really cloudy day, not a big problem. The human eye is connected to a very good data processor. After you've spent some time in low light conditions, the brain is routinely amp'ing the luminance for you and things look relatively "normal." We humans are big on "normal." Direct sunlight 100,000 - 150,000 lux Full daylight, indirect sunlight 10,000 - 20,000 lux Overcast day 1,000 lux Indoor office 200 - 400 lux ERIS AT 38 AU - 104 LUX Very dark day 100 lux ERIS AT 97 AU - 16 LUX Twilight 10 lux Deep twilight 1 lux Full moon 0.1 lux Quarter moon 0.01 lux Moonless clear night sky 0.001 lux Moonless overcast night sky 0.0001 lux The lux is a unique unit designed to fit the way the human eye sees. It is based on the light intensity of only those frequencies we see and only in proportion to the strength with which we evaluate them. But, if you're going to Eris, a couple of good flashlights wouldn't be a bad idea... It's still cold, though. Sterling K. Webb --- - Original Message - From: "Darren Garrison" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Meteorite Mailing List" Sent: Thursday, June 14, 2007 3:11 PM Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] The Dwarf Planet Known as Eris is Bigger,More Massive than Pluto, New Data Shows On Thu, 14 Jun 2007 11:58:58 -0700 (PDT), you wrote: >Eris hovers at temperatures well below 400 degrees Fahrenheit and is >pretty dark. That's a pretty safe bet. :-) __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] Seven Plagues and Killer Meteorites
WHAT! Let me get this straight. Are you trying to suggest that Spiderman ISN'T REAL? Sterling K. Webb - - Original Message - From: "Darren Garrison" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "meteoritelist" Sent: Sunday, June 17, 2007 2:51 PM Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Seven Plagues and Killer Meteorites On Sun, 17 Jun 2007 15:27:36 -0400, you wrote: >It seems to me the History Channel or TLC, maybe even Discovery Channel, >one >of them, cover all the plagues and they were/are natural yearly events that >the ancient peoples of Egypt lived with. Why turn them into fables and >myths? But that's all a form of apologetics. It is looking far and wide to try to find an explanation that COULD be true, and trying to give it as an explanation for an event. Yes, sometimes there are locusts in Egypt. Sometimes frogs in Egypt. Sometimes kids die in Egypt. Rivers could possbily turn red in Egypt from dinoflagellates or some such. People could get boils. But how meaningful is that? Of course there can be natural reasons be given for described conditions and not just an entirely new malody be made up from pure imagination (nobody claimed a plague of attacks of three headed talking cariboo, after all). What is in question is-- did that series of "plagues" happen in that order, close together, after having a guy tell a pharoh that if he didn't release the Israelites they would happen? Did he then release the Israelites, who parted the Sea of Reeds, after which that pharoh and his army was wiped out? THAT is what "historical accuracy" is about, not wherther or not problems described are actual problems that can take place. Let's shift it forward a bit. A few thousand years. Say that the alarmists are right, major global warming happens, and all costal cities are wiped out. All the evidence future archeologists have for the existance of New York is a copy of the movie Spiderman. Scholars debate on wherther Spiderman is a historical figure or just a mythical hero. Then, one year, some divers find the ruins of Manhattan. New York was real! Does that, then, prove that Spiderman was a historical figure? After all, it turns out that there really was a New York, and Spiderman was supposed to live in New York... __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] Global warming? Blame Tunguska
Rob wrote: > Why do we instinctively modify > innocuous technology to kill? Millions of years of practice. Sterling K. Webb -- - Original Message - From: "Rob McCafferty" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: Thursday, June 21, 2007 5:36 PM Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Global warming? Blame Tunguska > In a message dated 6/20/2007 3:51:07 AM Eastern > Daylight Time, > [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > this 'NEO deflection technology' that is > being developed, could it not potentially also be > (technically at least) > used to steer an impact to occur onto a 'foreign > power's country'? > perhaps even with smaller rocks - A sort of 'natural > nuke'?... > What is wrong with this species??? :) Why do we instinctively modify innocuous technology to kill? I am increasingly coming to the opinion that the pencil was initially designed as a stabbing tool which gave the victim lead poisoning. When someone realised that it could be used to write with they probably thought "cool, you can use it to write the instructions on how to stab someone with it" (Yes I know pencils don't really contain lead) Building a website is a piece of cake. Yahoo! Small Business gives you all the tools to get online. http://smallbusiness.yahoo.com/webhosting __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] Centimeter cubes on the cheap
Hi, All, While waiting for the "real thing" to come along, besides the cheap multi-colored centimeter cubes for kiddies that are sold on eBay, there are these: http://cgi.ebay.ie/LARGE-BAG-OF-500-SIZE-CUBES-new-unopened-size-10_W0QQitemZ330025235543QQihZ014QQcategoryZ46701QQcmdZViewItem It seems the EU insists on a standardized marker to indicate women's dress size on garments sold in the aforementioned EU. It must be black, must be one centimeter, and must have the dress size in white on all four sides. Size 10 cubes are 10 millimeters on a side, conveniently, and at least one UK dealer in meteorites uses them in his photos. They are about 5 cents apiece. On the minus side, they have no bottoms and a flexi- hole in the top. (Could you cut up a spare cube and add the two missing faces?) Sterling - - Original Message - From: "Paul" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: Thursday, June 21, 2007 10:55 PM Subject: [meteorite-list] Centimeter cubes Does anyone know why the specific letters, which are found on a standard centimeter cube, were originally chosen? Svend wrote: >thanks for your kind words on the scalecube story. No, >the cubes circulating with the broad engravings and >the "1cm" gimmick are a follow up product done by >someone else. They also use a different font than the >original NASA type cubes. I have to wonder if ten years from now, there will be people collecting the different types of scalecubes / centimeter cubes as people on this list are collecting meteorites. I can just see people searching for a Drake centimeter cube for their collection as a person would look for either a Thuathe or a Brahin for their collection. >However, every cubeless collector is free to choose >what product serves best his duties. And we encourage >everyone who whants to give it a try to produce his or >her own cubes. Its a free market, and hey, in the end >its just a cube ;) Maybe someone can convince the Geological Society of America to make and sell them as they sell grain-size cards, field photoscales, field notebooks, and other stuff used by geologists. It seems to me that geologists, paleontologists, and even archaeologists would benefit by using the centimeter cube instead the bizarre collection of coins, keys, photoscales, and other objects used as a scale in pictures of rocks, fossils, and artifacts. I will be using centimeter cubes for scale in the pictures of rocks, fossils, and artifacts, which I take to illustrate articles and papers. Best Regards, Paul Luggage? GPS? Comic books? Check out fitting gifts for grads at Yahoo! Search http://search.yahoo.com/search?fr=oni_on_mail&p=graduation+gifts&cs=bz __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] Centimeter cubes on the cheap
Hi, Mark, List, I was hasty posting this; the eBay.ie listing says the cubes are 13 millimeters on a side, not 10 as I thought. I got the "information" that dress cubes were 1 cm from a posting by the UK meteorite dealer David Bryant (on a forum I can't find now) who said that a size 10 cube was exactly 1 centimeter. Here's his site: http://www.spacerocksuk.com/stones.html The picture at the bottom of that webpage shows a dress cube in use. It looks pretty good as a scale cube. So, based on his remark, I just went hunting EU dress size cubes and didn't read the text of the eBay.ie listing thoroughly enough. But perhaps they are made in a variety of sizes, since the ones I found are 13 mm and Bryant's are 10 mm. Sterling K. Webb -- - Original Message - From: "mark ford" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Sterling K. Webb" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Sent: Friday, June 22, 2007 5:51 AM Subject: RE: [meteorite-list] Centimeter cubes on the cheap Now that's Genius ! I hadn't even considered using them as 10cm cubes. I would suggest pouring some black epoxy potting compound into the base, and the ones I have seen have the sizes 'printed on', so some solvent would get rid of the text easily enough, and voila all the 10cm cubes you can eat, and they come in loads of colours too! Cheers, Mark -Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Sterling K. Webb Sent: 22 June 2007 05:10 To: meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Centimeter cubes on the cheap Hi, All, While waiting for the "real thing" to come along, besides the cheap multi-colored centimeter cubes for kiddies that are sold on eBay, there are these: http://cgi.ebay.ie/LARGE-BAG-OF-500-SIZE-CUBES-new-unopened-size-10_W0QQ itemZ330025235543QQihZ014QQcategoryZ46701QQcmdZViewItem It seems the EU insists on a standardized marker to indicate women's dress size on garments sold in the aforementioned EU. It must be black, must be one centimeter, and must have the dress size in white on all four sides. Size 10 cubes are 10 millimeters on a side, conveniently, and at least one UK dealer in meteorites uses them in his photos. They are about 5 cents apiece. On the minus side, they have no bottoms and a flexi- hole in the top. (Could you cut up a spare cube and add the two missing faces?) Sterling - - Original Message - From: "Paul" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: Thursday, June 21, 2007 10:55 PM Subject: [meteorite-list] Centimeter cubes Does anyone know why the specific letters, which are found on a standard centimeter cube, were originally chosen? Svend wrote: >thanks for your kind words on the scalecube story. No, >the cubes circulating with the broad engravings and >the "1cm" gimmick are a follow up product done by >someone else. They also use a different font than the >original NASA type cubes. I have to wonder if ten years from now, there will be people collecting the different types of scalecubes / centimeter cubes as people on this list are collecting meteorites. I can just see people searching for a Drake centimeter cube for their collection as a person would look for either a Thuathe or a Brahin for their collection. >However, every cubeless collector is free to choose >what product serves best his duties. And we encourage >everyone who whants to give it a try to produce his or >her own cubes. Its a free market, and hey, in the end >its just a cube ;) Maybe someone can convince the Geological Society of America to make and sell them as they sell grain-size cards, field photoscales, field notebooks, and other stuff used by geologists. It seems to me that geologists, paleontologists, and even archaeologists would benefit by using the centimeter cube instead the bizarre collection of coins, keys, photoscales, and other objects used as a scale in pictures of rocks, fossils, and artifacts. I will be using centimeter cubes for scale in the pictures of rocks, fossils, and artifacts, which I take to illustrate articles and papers. Best Regards, Paul Luggage? GPS? Comic books? Check out fitting gifts for grads at Yahoo! Search http://search.yahoo.com/search?fr=oni_on_mail&p=graduation+gifts&cs=bz __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] Will this change mereorite research
Hi, JWB, List, You can dial back some of the boggle. While it is true that stars from the disrupted Sagittarius Dwarf Spherical Galaxy are streaming through the plane of the Milky Way at a right angle to the Galactic Plane, our little Sun is not one of them. The SDG stars are traveling at more or less right angles (OK, about 70 degrees) to the path of the Sun. The SDG stars are just like cars trying to fly through a cross-street intersection on a busy highway at high speed without even stopping. Fortunately, space is roomy enough... I hope. The notion that We're From There is the irrational concoction of a musician named M. P. Erwin: http://curezone.com/blogs/m.asp?f=1207&i=2 If you want to check the facts that lead me to suggest Erwin is a Certified Grade AAA Whacko, look up what's called the Solar Apex. That's the point in the sky that the Sun is "traveling toward." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_apex If the Sun were moving with the SDG stars, it would be pointing toward the Galactic Pole (90 degrees South), but instead, it's pointing toward galactic coordinates 56.24° longitude, 22.54° latitude, as it wobbles its way around the disc of the Milky Way. Reality is interesting enough. The Sagittarius Dwarf Galaxy (the elliptical or spheroidal, not the irregular one) was discovered in 1994. The Milky Way is in the process of Eating It. Using the 2Mass Sky Survey, it was imaged in 2003 in great detail just by tracking the M Giant stars common in the older SDG and rare in the Milky Way. See: http://www.astro.virginia.edu/~mfs4n/sgr/ On that webpage, there is a nice 4.5 Mb movie of the interaction of the two galaxies, worth looking at (if you've got broadband or patience). Sterling K. Webb --- - Original Message - From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: Tuesday, June 26, 2007 11:37 PM Subject: [meteorite-list] Will this change mereorite research By now you have all heard that our solar system is actually a part of the Sagittarius Dwarf Galaxy, not the Milky way. Could it lend credence to the wingstars? Could meteorites from two different galaxies have differences? This new data is mind boggling! I have read back in 1961 that the Milky way had collided with another galaxy but no one knew that it was still here! What do you all think about this new info? And how will it affect meteorite research? Jim B __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] Question from epb471
Hi, To change your email address for the List, go to: http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list Then scroll down to the last item on the page and enter your current (old) email address, which will take you to: http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/options/meteorite-list There, you have to enter your password. If you can't remember or don't know your password, there's a button to request it be emailed to you. Of course, that will be at your old email address. But it only takes a few seconds to get the password, assuming you still have access to your old email address... And with your password, you can get to a page where you can change your email address for the List. THAT should switch you to your new address. It takes less time to do than it does to explain... Sterling K. Webb --- - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com Sent: Monday, July 02, 2007 10:59 PM Subject: [meteorite-list] Question from epb471 Hello! Sorry about the bounce backs, I have been busy and did not clean my email account. I wanted to shift to a new account that I created for the meteorite list. It is [EMAIL PROTECTED] How can I transfer to there? I tried before with [EMAIL PROTECTED] but still get the messages to aol. Please help! I enjoy your service very much and have learned some nice new information in addition to making many nice contacts in this hobby. Take care, Elias See what's free at AOL.com. __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] EBAY Slag for sale
Hi, Randy, List, Starting out with a big disclaimer that this is all inexpert speculation, of course, I believe the source of nickel in Missouri slag meteor-wrongs could be the mineral millerite. Smelting is the reduction of iron ores with carbon as the reducing agent. Impurities in the ores are removed by the addition of a flux, usually limestone. In rural Missouri (and anywhere in the Midwest), it's pretty safe to say the flux is always limestone. The resulting slag will, of course, contain whatever was in the limestone, particularly if the material likes to combine with iron. Millerite is nickel sulfide, NiS. Quoting the Peterson's Rock and Mineral Guide: "Millerite is sometimes valued as an ore of nickel when present in minor quantities in association with other metallic sulfides in middle-temperature veins, as in Germany and the massive Sudbury, Ontario, sulfide complex. Locally it is sparsely distributed through limestones in central Mississippi Valley limestone quarries, particularly near St. Louis, Missouri, and Keokuk, Iowa. At these places long millerite hairs are found in cavities lined with crystals of calcite, dolomite, and fluorite. (An interesting, if improbable, speculation suggests the original source of this nickel might be a heavy Paleozoic meteor shower.) Coarser millerite needles have been found with hematite in Antwerp, New York, and in Alamos, Mexico." The use of limestone flux would likely concentrate all its nickel in the slag, and you would use more flux with poor ores, which are the ones likely to be used in a "backwoods" operation. Missouri has a lot of lead/zinc/copper/cobalt/iron sulfide ore belts, very extensive but low-grade localized deposits, called Olympic Dam deposits. The iron mine at Pea Ridge, Missouri, is a known Olympic Dam-type ore deposit. It would appear that rural Missouri would supply many low-grade local ores with mixed contents. (I found lots of references, all far too "geological" for me!) My half-cent's worth. Sterling K. Webb --- - Original Message - From: "Randy Korotev" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: Friday, July 06, 2007 9:52 AM Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] EBAY Slag for sale At 14:59 05-07-07 Thursday, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >I don't know why this slag tests positive for nickel, but it does! People have been making iron and disposing of the waste for several hundred years in this area and much of the US. The most common kinds of local meteorwrong I encounter are hematite nodules - iron ore - that weather out of the local limestone. This stuff has been used as feed stock for mom-and-pop iron smelting operations in the Ozarks since the 1800's. As Tom Phillips said, the processes were not as efficient as today, so a lot of iron metal was left behind. People have brought us all kinds of glassy stuff with metal in it, one of which even had the imprint of a bolt: http://meteorites.wustl.edu/meteorwrongs/m026.htm Two months ago a fellow came to my office with the ugliest 60-lb chunk of iron I've ever seen. He'd dug it up while "grub hoeing" in south St. Louis Co. There was no smooth surface, it was very rusty, and it was full of cavities. It didn't "look like" an iron meteorites to me, but I have no experience with iron meteorites that have been in the ground for 100's to 1000's of years, so I really don't know what to expect. In a post 2 months ago, Eric Twelker said "Those of us who are lucky enough to have hundreds or thousands of meteorites pass through our hands possess a store of knowledge that has real value to academics that haven¹t had this experience." I agree, and I wish I had that knowledge! I neglected to get a photo of the thing. I did a quick nickel test, though, with one of those nickel allergy test kits and got a positive result*. So, I cut a piece off and analyzed it for the Fe, Ni, Co, Au, and Ir. Strange results: >Fe 89% >Ni 600 ppm >Co 62 ppm >Ir1 ppb >Au 12 ppb The object cannot be a meteorite because the concentrations of Ni and Co are 100x too low for metal in any kind of meteorite. Yet, the concentrations of Ni, Co, Ir, and Au are all higher that I would expect for iron smelted from iron ore. More weird is that the relative concentrations of those elements (ratios) are not out of line for an iron meteorite. It's as though the metal is 1% iron meteorite and 99% pure iron. I don't know what this thing is. Similarly, a fellow from Colorado sent this photo and a small sample a couple of years ago: http://meteorites.wustl.edu/meteorwrongs/m122.htm It is also a a man-made piece of iron, but one with far more Ni and Co than in any iron oxide ore I've ever analyzed. >Fe 90% >Ni 2590 ppm >Co 131 ppm >Ir <14
Re: [meteorite-list] Isotopes in Meteorites Suggest that the SunFormedin a Dense Cluster of Stars
Martin, List, According to the cosmologists, we are living in an INFLATABLE universe already. I'm not sure how you make an inflatable model of something that is inflatable to begin with. Is there any material stretchy enough? Deutsch: http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inflation%C3%A4res_Universum English: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cosmic_inflation Of course that problem *shrinks* by comparison to the difficulties of going through life as a scientist named "Dr. Bizarro"! Sterling K. Webb - - Original Message - From: "Martin Altmann" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: Monday, July 09, 2007 11:49 AM Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Isotopes in Meteorites Suggest that the SunFormedin a Dense Cluster of Stars Is this Dr.Bizzaro? http://www.spacetoys.com/prodimages/b_TIF11.jpg.jpg Just a joke... But that's so cool and INFLATABLE SOLAR SYSTEM !!! http://www.physlink.com/estore/cart/item_images/637_xl.jpg http://www.edex.com.au/images/p0017107c.gif Anyone experiences with this product, whether it's suitable for the beach? I need it, Or even better, an INFLATABLE UNIVERSE! Buckleboo! -Ursprüngliche Nachricht- Von: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Im Auftrag von Ron Baalke Gesendet: Montag, 9. Juli 2007 18:14 An: Meteorite Mailing List Betreff: [meteorite-list] Isotopes in Meteorites Suggest that the Sun Formedin a Dense Cluster of Stars http://www.psrd.hawaii.edu/July07/iron-60.html The Sun's Crowded Delivery Room Planetary Science Research Discoveries July 6, 2007 This suggests to Bizzarro and his colleagues that 60Fe was added to the cloud of gas and dust surrounding the primitive Sun (the protoplanetary disk) about 1 million years after the Solar System formed. __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] Magnetite/Glass Meteorite Balls
Hi, Mike, List, The Seller believes this material to be "Jurassic" in origin because he finds it in sand produced from Jurassic strata, but while he's wrong about that, he may be right about it being meteoritic! When a meteorite ablates in the atmosphere, the majority of its mass is turned into a dust of tiny fused droplets. Eventually, that meteoritic dust will fall to earth; some will land on water, sink to the stream and lake bottoms and become incorporated in the sand (or mud). Meteoritic dust or cosmic dust: put a flat white plastic pan or small "splash pool" of water out away from the trees on the peak night of a meteor shower, and in the morning you will be rewarded with a black dust on the bottom of the pool, that could well be interpreted as: "Meteorite balls, glass balls, zircons, garnet, magnetite and some other minerals... The balls are magnetite balls. Somethimes with the white transparents glass balls you can find some green balls that look like moldavite or olivina fused samples..." Much more fun to collect your own than to buy it on eBay, though. Sterling K. Webb - Original Message - From: "Mike Groetz" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Meteorite List" Sent: Thursday, July 12, 2007 6:48 PM Subject: [meteorite-list] Magnetite/Glass Meteorite Balls Anybody know or want to guess what the "meteoritic jurassic balls" (as the lister call them) are in this auction? http://cgi.ebay.com/Meteorite-balls-sand-concentrate-microscope-rare-sample_W0QQitemZ200126606038QQihZ010QQcategoryZ3239QQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem I'm not trying to be funny or sarcastic; the photo with the auction is pretty interesting. Would sand actually round and polish itself this well in a stream bed? I believe this is not meteorite related- but what really is this material? Thank You Mike Fussy? Opinionated? Impossible to please? Perfect. Join Yahoo!'s user panel and lay it on us. http://surveylink.yahoo.com/gmrs/yahoo_panel_invite.asp?a=7 __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] Magnetite/Glass Meteorite Balls
Hi, Chris, List, http://www.sciencenewsforkids.org/articles/20030813/Feature1.asp (Scroll down past the Stardust Mission...) True, micron stuff from "shower" meteors takes a long time to drop, which is why it's falling all the time. The much larger, heavier, and vastly rarer low altitude meteor ablation product falls much more rapidly, but you have to have a meteor burn along overhead! The eBay stuff, collected from a mountain stream, is a cumulate record of 100's (1000's?) of years (depending on how fast the sand is flushed). Collected pond muck, or the goop in the bottom of your gutters, can be harvested of meteoritic dust by mixing it with clean water and stirring with a magnet. Years and years ago, somebody here on the list recounted their successful retrieval of micrometeoroidal dust from their gutters this way but I can't remember who it was. And another list member told of leaving a water collector out during "shower times" as a kid and collecting residue, but you're quite right -- it couldn't have been contemporaneous dust! Sterling K. Webb --- - Original Message - From: "Chris Peterson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Meteorite List" Sent: Thursday, July 12, 2007 9:41 PM Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Magnetite/Glass Meteorite Balls > Meteoritic dust or cosmic dust: put a flat white > plastic pan or small "splash pool" of water out away > from the trees on the peak night of a meteor shower, > and in the morning you will be rewarded with a black > dust on the bottom of the pool... Have you actually done this? Because the sort of micron-scale dust produced by meteors has an atmospheric lifetime measured in months. While there's certainly meteor dust falling all the time, you won't find any in the morning from the previous night's shower. Chris ***** Chris L Peterson Cloudbait Observatory http://www.cloudbait.com - Original Message - From: "Sterling K. Webb" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Mike Groetz" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "Meteorite List" Sent: Thursday, July 12, 2007 8:23 PM Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Magnetite/Glass Meteorite Balls > Hi, Mike, List, > >The Seller believes this material to be "Jurassic" > in origin because he finds it in sand produced from > Jurassic strata, but while he's wrong about that, he > may be right about it being meteoritic! > >When a meteorite ablates in the atmosphere, the > majority of its mass is turned into a dust of tiny fused > droplets. Eventually, that meteoritic dust will fall to > earth; some will land on water, sink to the stream and > lake bottoms and become incorporated in the sand > (or mud). > >Meteoritic dust or cosmic dust: put a flat white > plastic pan or small "splash pool" of water out away > from the trees on the peak night of a meteor shower, > and in the morning you will be rewarded with a black > dust on the bottom of the pool, that could well be > interpreted as: >"Meteorite balls, glass balls, zircons, garnet, magnetite > and some other minerals... The balls are magnetite balls. > Somethimes with the white transparents glass balls you > can find some green balls that look like moldavite or > olivina fused samples..." > >Much more fun to collect your own than to > buy it on eBay, though. > > > Sterling K. Webb __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] Magnetite/Glass Meteorite Balls
Hi, Bill, Pete, List The issue of classification only applies to macro-sized objects, not dust. Certainly, any number of scientists have worked on retrieving micro-meteoroidal dust in various ways. NASA used to fly a U2 with cosmic dust collectors under the wings; the ocean sediments have been cored for cosmic dust records. There was a long dispute over the volume of infalling dust, with estimates from millions of tons down to a few thousand tons per year being calculated (the smaller figures were right, it turns out, about 3,000 tons per year, or about 6 grams per km2 per year). And certainly "cosmic dust" has been analyzed to a fair-thee-well for isotopes, but as a bulk material. Once something gets down to micron sizes (one cc of one-micron particles = one billion objects), we cannot identify the origin of each particle, hence classification is meaningless. Brownlee (head of the Stardust Mission team) is the top man in cosmic dust. Read the article at the URL in my post: http://www.sciencenewsforkids.org/articles/20030813/Feature1.asp I didn't know about shingles having magnetic particles, though. That means that "gutter dust" is worthless. Now, if you found a little 0.5 gram rock in your gutter that, when sliced, showed a bleb of metal... That would be a different story! Nobody I know is that lucky! Sterling K. Webb --- - Original Message - From: "Bill" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Pete Pete" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: Sent: Friday, July 13, 2007 12:58 AM Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Magnetite/Glass Meteorite Balls This subject has been mentioned so many times. Is there a single classified particle from this method of collection? Bill > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Fri, 13 Jul 2007 00:42:54 -0400 > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], > meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com > Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Magnetite/Glass Meteorite Balls > > >>somebody here on the list recounted > their successful retrieval of micrometeoroidal dust from their > gutters this way... > > > Hi, all, > > I suggest you don't attempt to gather celestial dust near a building - a > lot > of asphalt shingles have granules with magnetic qualities. > I attempted this recently, and collected what was obviously from my own > rooftop. > > Cheers, > Pete > > From: "Sterling K. Webb" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "Chris Peterson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,"Meteorite List" > > Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Magnetite/Glass Meteorite Balls > Date: Thu, 12 Jul 2007 22:52:22 -0500 > > Hi, Chris, List, > > http://www.sciencenewsforkids.org/articles/20030813/Feature1.asp > (Scroll down past the Stardust Mission...) > > True, micron stuff from "shower" meteors takes > a long time to drop, which is why it's falling all the time. > The much larger, heavier, and vastly rarer low altitude > meteor ablation product falls much more rapidly, but > you have to have a meteor burn along overhead! > The eBay stuff, collected from a mountain stream, > is a cumulate record of 100's (1000's?) of years (depending > on how fast the sand is flushed). Collected pond muck, > or the goop in the bottom of your gutters, can be harvested > of meteoritic dust by mixing it with clean water and stirring > with a magnet. > Years and years ago, somebody here on the list recounted > their successful retrieval of micrometeoroidal dust from their > gutters this way but I can't remember who it was. And another > list member told of leaving a water collector out during "shower > times" as a kid and collecting residue, but you're quite right -- > it couldn't have been contemporaneous dust! > > > Sterling K. Webb > --- > - Original Message - > From: "Chris Peterson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "Meteorite List" > Sent: Thursday, July 12, 2007 9:41 PM > Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Magnetite/Glass Meteorite Balls > > > > Meteoritic dust or cosmic dust: put a flat white > > plastic pan or small "splash pool" of water out away > > from the trees on the peak night of a meteor shower, > > and in the morning you will be rewarded with a black > > dust on the bottom of the pool... > > Have you actually done this? Because the sort of micron-scale dust > produced by meteors has an atmospheric lifetime measured in months. > While there's certainly meteor dust falling all the time, you won't find > any in the morning from the previous night's shower. >
Re: [meteorite-list] MIND BLOWING
Hi, Pete, Michael, List, The first thing I thought of was... Mars, just like you. But the air thereabouts is awful thin. I guess it's calculator time. The density (or pressure) of the Mars atmosphere is only about 1/100 of the Earth's. How a wind "feels" to an object in its path is dependent on the density of the wind (the number of molecules per unit volume) and the velocity of the wind. The momentum of the wind is the density (really the mass of the molecules in the wind added together) times the velocity of the wind. So, an object on Mars will encounter wind with 1/100 the momentum of wind on the Earth traveling at the same velocity. That means the wind on Mars has to be traveling a 100 times faster than the wind on Earth to have the same momentum. However, the kinetic energy content of the wind is dependent on the velocity of the wind squared (or E = (M x V x V)/2, so the wind on Mars only has to travel about 10 times as fast to make up for the difference in density. Mars atmosphere is mostly CO2, a heavy molecule. It's not the same as the Earth's atmosphere. The details are the density of the atmosphere at the surface of Mars is only 81 times smaller than Earth's. Therefore, to "feel" the force of a breeze on Mars of the same force as on Earth, we would require 9 times the wind velocity (square root of 81). For example, to "feel" a light breeze of about 10 miles/hr on Earth, would require "hurricane speed" winds on Mars of 90 miles/hr. It's obvious from the video that these walkers require as much wind as they can get, here on Earth, or they wouldn't be walking on a windy beaches! Here's another complication. The gravity on Mars is only 38% of Earth's, so it only takes 38% of the force to lift a "foot" up. The walker only "weighs" 38% of what it would on Earth. Maybe a "Mars Walker" would only require a wind about 5.5 times faster than an Earth wind to get the same motive force. [The "mass" is the same but the force of Martian gravity only resists its motion 38% as much as Earth's gravity does. However, the inertia is the same on both planets, something to remember when you go for a walk on Mars.] The gravity may be less, but a Mars Walker would need to carry a lot of extra mass: solar panels for the cameras, radios, experiments, and other instruments, and weigh means more force and energy is needed. My guess is that a Mars Walker is a difficult and marginal thing. What I need now is a long term weather report on Martian wind speeds... from all over the planet. Sterling K. Webb -- - Original Message - From: "Pete Pete" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Sent: Saturday, July 14, 2007 5:32 PM Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] MIND BLOWING Very cool, Mike, and I see a relevance to the List - lightweight, wind powered...NASA should drop dozens of these all over Mars for surveillance of any type! Cheers, Pete From: Michael L Blood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Meteorite List Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] MIND BLOWING Date: Sat, 14 Jul 2007 13:48:35 -0700 Dear meteorite friends, This is so mind blowing I am sending it to the meteorite list even though it is not related to meteorites. I encourage you to check it out! My apologies to anyone offended by a non-meteorite related post - but before you start kicking and screaming, please check this out: http://www.glumbert.com/media/kineticsculpture Best wishes, Michael __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] MIND BLOWING
Hi, Chris, Michael, Pete, List, and any interested Martians... The mass of the air collected by the vane or the mechanical collecting element of any wind-driven device is a function of the area A of the collector times the velocity V of the wind bringing the air to the vane times the density D of the atmosphere, or M = A x V x D The kinetic energy of any moving mass is E = ( M x V x V ) / 2. Substituting in the above equation, we see E = (A x D x V x V x V ) / 2 Yes, the energy scales as the cube of the velocity AND directly as the area of the collector AND directly as the density of the atmosphere. Since the effective density of the Martian atmosphere is 1/81 of the Earth's, IF we made the collector vane area 81 times bigger than we would on Earth, the device would have the SAME power available at the SAME wind velocity on both Mars and the Earth. This was essentially Michael's point, which I will summarize as "Just make the sucker bigger!" All we have to do is design the Mars Walker to be suitable for Mars, but it's just engineering adjustments, no big deal. As for the actual wind speeds on Mars, guess what, not much in the way of measurement has been made: "The landers based on flat areas observed normal light 'night time' winds of 2m/s, and stronger noon winds of 6-8 m/s, but they are nothing compared with quite common winds generated near mountain slopes, at maximum these can reach 20 m/s speeds. However, during dust- devils and storms an exposed surface on Mars can really be sand blasted: Viking lander 1 saw a local dust storm with peak wind speed values of 20-30m/s, and other observations have found speeds up to 50 m/s." However Pathfinder experienced strong winds only at night and very light winds in the daytime. Here's a discussion of the LACK of windspeed data from the Phoenix Mars Mission Blog: http://foreleast.lpl.arizona.edu/blogsPost.php?bID=54 In a word, we don't know by direct measurement what the wind speeds are, but we do know the dust storms are nasty. The Mars Walker had better be tough. However, it can protect itself from high winds by re-positioning its wind collectors to minimum resistance positions and then hunkering down on its multitude of legs to reduce its cross section. The Walkers in the video are very well-engineered for "art devices" but I suspect the use of high-tech materials and lots (a couple of hundred) of localized microprocessors for each leg and each collector and steering and searching would produce an awesome machine. These machines walk "with the wind," but they could easily be made to go against the wind or in any direction, to maneuver. It could look for Martian meteorites, among the long list of things to look for on Mars. Sterling K. Webb -- - Original Message - From: "Chris Peterson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: Saturday, July 14, 2007 10:26 PM Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] MIND BLOWING Hi Sterling- If you give it some more thought, you'll probably figure out that the potential energy of wind scales as the cube of velocity, not the square. Chris * Chris L Peterson Cloudbait Observatory http://www.cloudbait.com - Original Message - From: "Sterling K. Webb" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Pete Pete" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Sent: Saturday, July 14, 2007 6:28 PM Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] MIND BLOWING > Hi, Pete, Michael, List, > >The first thing I thought of was... Mars, just like > you. But the air thereabouts is awful thin. I guess > it's calculator time. >The density (or pressure) of the Mars atmosphere > is only about 1/100 of the Earth's. How a wind "feels" > to an object in its path is dependent on the density of > the wind (the number of molecules per unit volume) > and the velocity of the wind. The momentum of the > wind is the density (really the mass of the molecules in > the wind added together) times the velocity of the wind. > So, an object on Mars will encounter wind with 1/100 > the momentum of wind on the Earth traveling at the > same velocity. That means the wind on Mars has to be > traveling a 100 times faster than the wind on Earth to > have the same momentum. >However, the kinetic energy content of the wind is > dependent on the velocity of the wind squared (or > E = (M x V x V)/2, so the wind on Mars only has > to travel about 10 times as fast to make up for the > difference in density. >Mars atmosphere is mostly CO2, a heavy molecule. > It's not the same as the Earth's atmosphere. The details > are the density of the atmosphere at the surface of Mars > is only 81 times smaller than Earth's. Therefore, to &q
[meteorite-list] Forest Fire Leads to Discovery of Sudbury Impactite
Hi, Forgive me for being less sensational than the AP. This story had been in the news before, so I guess the real news is that the AP saw fit to make it a story. Always glad to have a meteorite make the news, even if it takes almost two billion years to do it. Sterling K. Webb --- http://www.space.com/news/070715_ap_minn_meteorite.html Forest Fire Leads to Ancient Meteorite Discovery By Associated Press -- 15 July 2007; 08:25 pm ET GRAND MARAIS, Minn. (AP) -- A forest fire has led to a chance discovery of debris from the impact of a meteorite 1.85 billion years ago, more than 450 miles away at Sudbury, Ontario. Geologists had scheduled a field trip in May along the Gunflint Trail in northeastern Minnesota, but most areas they wanted to explore were closed because of a wildfire that charred more than 118 square miles. Geologist Mark Jirsa of the Minnesota Geological Survey went up the trail to scout new locations and, in a spot he had never visited before, stumbled across debris now linked to the Sudbury impact. That impact created a crater more than 150 miles across, scattering rock and dust over nearly a million square miles. "It's fairly dark rock,'' Jirsa said. "They look like concrete, but in this concrete you would throw pieces of rock of all sizes and shapes and in all possible orientations.'' Previously, material thrown out by the impact had been found as far from Sudbury as Hibbing, about 125 miles farther to the southwest from Grand Marais. However, the tiny fragments at Hibbing were found in core samples from 800 to 1,000 feet below the surface, while the rock layer containing larger chunks at the Gunflint site lies exposed. "I think the excitement for the people of Minnesota is that we are one place in the world where you can see evidence of an ancient meteorite impact,'' said University of Minnesota geology professor emeritus Paul Weiblen, who is studying the debris. "This is the second-oldest and second-largest impact crater in the world.'' __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
[meteorite-list] Mystery Object From Sky Identified as Woodchipper Part
Hi, A meteor-wrong from New Jersey identified so quickly, there's no prolonged dicussion. The "other" case they're referring to is the Bloomington, Illinois Object from last March, which took over a week to be identified as a woodchipper part. They don't mention the equally unlikely New Jersey Object of last winter. In this case, the hexagonal holes in the object make it a dead giveaway, I would think. Sterling K. Webb --- http://www.space.com/news/ap_070718_bayonne_update.html Mystery Object From Sky Identified as Woodchipper Part By The Associated Press, 18 July 2007, 4:27 p.m. ET BAYONNE, N.J. (AP) -- A hunk of metal that crashed through the roof of a home had NASA and Federal Aviation Administration officials scratching their heads. It didn't look "very space-y,'' said Henry Kline, a spokesman for NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory in Pasadena, Calif. "It's obviously made for something ... But we wouldn't know what to do with it.'' It didn't appear to be an airplane part either, the FAA said. Finally, FAA spokesman Jim Peters said Wednesday, a colleague in his office solved the mystery: It was part of a commercial woodchipper. The same part from another woodchipper's grinder had caused similar confusion last year, he said. How it got on a Bayonne roof was anyone guess, but Peters had a theory. The grinder piece moves very fast and, apparently, it can launch into the air if something goes wrong. The man who lives in the house was watching television Tuesday when he heard a crash and saw a cloud of dust. In the next room, he found the hunk of gray metal, 3 1/2 inches by 5 inches, with two hexagonal holes in it. The part was being returned to Bayonne Police on Wednesday, Peters said. "It belongs to somebody,'' Police Director Mark Smith said. __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] Smallest Possible Earth Impact Crater?
Hi, Charles, List The three most important characteristics an incoming body needs if it wants to get to the surface in one piece are a) slow entry speed, b) a shallow entry angle, and c) an aerodynamic (flattened) shape. Calculations performed by John S. Lewis suggest that, with a shallow entry just above escape velocity, an an iron of 30 to 100 tons can "land" without making a crater. HOBA is a perfect example at 60 tons. It sits on a flat surface surrounded by red rusty soil that may contain 25 or more tons of degraded iron shale residue. The same calculations for a stone meteorite give an upper weigh limit of around 40 tons, however there are no stones known that come anywhere near this mass. Stones are too fragile; they fragment too easily. (JILIN has the record at 1.77 ton.) However, if anyone finds a ten-foot diameter stone meteorite, it's fine with me. Of course, with a higher incoming speed and a more usual angle, that 100 ton iron would make a lovely crater. Using the excellently handy LPL Impact Calculator: http://www.lpl.arizona.edu/impacteffects/ we see that (theoretically at least) a 10 cm (4 inch) iron ball entering the atmosphere at 15,000 m/sec at a 45 degree angle reaches the surface at about 800 mph with a force of about 200 pounds of TNT and would make a four-foot crater in sedimentary rock; the crater would be about 15 inches deep with five inches of broken rock in the bottom. Oh, and the iron ball would survive intact! That is what a good computer model says. Whether this actually happens in real life is another matter. The computer model only calculates target surfaces of water or sedimentary or crystaline rock. Small craters in which the impactor survives are technically not impact craters -- they are impact pits. An impact pit has the rock or dirt removed by mechanical force, not by an explosive event. It takes an explosive event to make a technically "true" crater. There are a small number of examples of meteorites recovered from impact pits in dirt, though. What is the size of Merewether? From the look of the picture it must 100's of feet across. I took my previous example from the impact calculator and re-ran it with larger and larger iron balls and got bigger and bigger craters, over 300 feet in diameter, until I reached the size where the impactor fragments, after which I get crater fields from the fragments. Of course, that's with one limited set of parameters; other parameter, other results. The small "craters" (less than 20-30 feet) were all shallow impact pits with a surviving object. Above a certain size, they were all explosive craters, with that characteristically deeper profile. Merewether is certainly more than big enough to be an explosive crater. This does not say that it is, but if there's an objection that it is "too small" to be an explosive crater, that's a mistake. Sterling K. Webb - - Original Message - From: Charles O'Dale To: meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com Sent: Tuesday, July 17, 2007 8:58 AM Subject: [meteorite-list] Smallest Possible Earth Impact Crater? I am seeking advice on a "small" problem. I am trying to determine what the smallest possible impact crater on earth would be. In other words, we have to determine the smallest size of a bolide that would impact earth at cosmic velosities (>12 km/sec) to create such a structure. Or, the largest size of a bolide that would be slowed to terminal velosity by our atmosphere (and not creating a "crater"). The answer may help in adding information to the "enigma" of the Merewether structure, could it be an impact related crater? http://epod.usra.edu/archive/epodviewer.php3?oid=315776 Chuck http://www.ottawa.rasc.ca/articles/odale_chuck/earth_craters/index.html __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] FOLLOWUP TO Smallest Possible Earth Impact Crater?
Hi, Charles, List, I just went and read your excellent article on Merewether: http://ottawa.rasc.ca/articles/odale_chuck/earth_craters/merewether/index.html so now I know Merewether is 200 meters across. However, the key data is that the crater is NOT in a rock surface, but a glacial morraine of boulders gobbed up with sand and clay. That fact alone would explain the absence of a rim upturn. Rims are formed by the explosion "pushing" upward against horizontal strata that are significantly rigid and "resist" being pushed with a strength beyond the mere weight of the material. A conglomerate of boulders and mud is not rigid, hence no tilted rim is produced. Sterling K. Webb -- - Original Message ----- From: "Sterling K. Webb" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Charles O'Dale" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Sent: Thursday, July 19, 2007 2:30 PM Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Smallest Possible Earth Impact Crater? Hi, Charles, List The three most important characteristics an incoming body needs if it wants to get to the surface in one piece are a) slow entry speed, b) a shallow entry angle, and c) an aerodynamic (flattened) shape. Calculations performed by John S. Lewis suggest that, with a shallow entry just above escape velocity, an an iron of 30 to 100 tons can "land" without making a crater. HOBA is a perfect example at 60 tons. It sits on a flat surface surrounded by red rusty soil that may contain 25 or more tons of degraded iron shale residue. The same calculations for a stone meteorite give an upper weigh limit of around 40 tons, however there are no stones known that come anywhere near this mass. Stones are too fragile; they fragment too easily. (JILIN has the record at 1.77 ton.) However, if anyone finds a ten-foot diameter stone meteorite, it's fine with me. Of course, with a higher incoming speed and a more usual angle, that 100 ton iron would make a lovely crater. Using the excellently handy LPL Impact Calculator: http://www.lpl.arizona.edu/impacteffects/ we see that (theoretically at least) a 10 cm (4 inch) iron ball entering the atmosphere at 15,000 m/sec at a 45 degree angle reaches the surface at about 800 mph with a force of about 200 pounds of TNT and would make a four-foot crater in sedimentary rock; the crater would be about 15 inches deep with five inches of broken rock in the bottom. Oh, and the iron ball would survive intact! That is what a good computer model says. Whether this actually happens in real life is another matter. The computer model only calculates target surfaces of water or sedimentary or crystaline rock. Small craters in which the impactor survives are technically not impact craters -- they are impact pits. An impact pit has the rock or dirt removed by mechanical force, not by an explosive event. It takes an explosive event to make a technically "true" crater. There are a small number of examples of meteorites recovered from impact pits in dirt, though. What is the size of Merewether? From the look of the picture it must 100's of feet across. I took my previous example from the impact calculator and re-ran it with larger and larger iron balls and got bigger and bigger craters, over 300 feet in diameter, until I reached the size where the impactor fragments, after which I get crater fields from the fragments. Of course, that's with one limited set of parameters; other parameter, other results. The small "craters" (less than 20-30 feet) were all shallow impact pits with a surviving object. Above a certain size, they were all explosive craters, with that characteristically deeper profile. Merewether is certainly more than big enough to be an explosive crater. This does not say that it is, but if there's an objection that it is "too small" to be an explosive crater, that's a mistake. Sterling K. Webb - - Original Message - From: Charles O'Dale To: meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com Sent: Tuesday, July 17, 2007 8:58 AM Subject: [meteorite-list] Smallest Possible Earth Impact Crater? I am seeking advice on a "small" problem. I am trying to determine what the smallest possible impact crater on earth would be. In other words, we have to determine the smallest size of a bolide that would impact earth at cosmic velosities (>12 km/sec) to create such a structure. Or, the largest size of a bolide that would be slowed to terminal velosity by our atmosphere (and not creating a "crater"). The answer may help in adding information to the "enigma" of the Merewether structure, could it be an impact related crater? http://epod.usra.edu/archive/epodviewer.php3?oid=315776 Chuck http://www.ottawa.rasc.ca/articles/odale_chuck/earth_crat
Re: [meteorite-list] Amazing daylight fireball
Hi, Giovanni, List, Thanks for the video. This is one of the very best fireball films I've ever seen! Truly spectacular! In the first interview with an astronomer in the news report, I was able to pick out only two words (or maybe it was one word): SUPER-BOLIDE. I suspect it was massive enough to have gotten some remnants to the ground. The arc and the late, low-level fragmentation also suggest a slower than usual entry speed, another factor that aids getting fragments to the ground. It's a great video. Sterling K. Webb - Original Message - From: "giovannisostero" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "meteorite-list" Sent: Friday, July 27, 2007 11:18 AM Subject: [meteorite-list] Amazing daylight fireball Hi all, on 2007, July 25, 12h 07m local time (almost noon) a bright daylight fireball has been observed in eastern Italy, Slovenia and Croatia region. Magnitude has been estimated near -20. Here is a movie: http://tinyurl.com/yt6jsj Cheers, Giovanni -- Leggi GRATIS le tue mail con il telefonino i-modeT di Wind http://i-mode.wind.it/ __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] Amazing daylight fireball
Hi, All, Media creativity. My congratulations to the TV industry of Croatia (Hrvatska) for a SUPER-FAKE, from one of the suckers. Didn't it look good at a first casual glance? Nothing like the assumption of honesty to dull your perceptions. Sterling K. Webb - Original Message - From: "Michael Farmer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "giovannisostero" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "meteorite-list" Sent: Friday, July 27, 2007 12:35 PM Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Amazing daylight fireball This can not be true, I saw this vide on YouTube while in Colombia on the night of the 24th. It is not a meteorite, it is a rocket or firework. You can clearly see that it is low, below the clouds, it is arcing, and you can see a black object at the front, between the bright flashes. All impossible for a meteorite fall. This is a scam. Mike Farmer --- giovannisostero <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi all, > on 2007, July 25, 12h 07m local time (almost noon) a > bright daylight fireball has been observed in > eastern Italy, Slovenia and Croatia region. > Magnitude has been estimated near -20. > Here is a movie: > http://tinyurl.com/yt6jsj > Cheers, > Giovanni > > > -- > Leggi GRATIS le tue mail con il telefonino i-modeT > di Wind > http://i-mode.wind.it/ > > __ > Meteorite-list mailing list > Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com > http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list > __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
