[meteorite-list] Portales Valley (H6) Slices with Fantastic Lightning Bolt Metal - Found by SKIP WILSON!
Hi all, After I placed my last Denver Blow Out Sale ad I received so much response that I thought I'd list an update. Even though I said I was all packed and really didn't want to unpack to make sales before Denver, I had no choice. There was just too much demand for my specimens at these LOW prices. I sold a lot so If you were interested in something you'd better re-check the list to see if it's been sold. UPDATE: I just received a few outstanding Portales Valley (H6) Slices with Fantastic Lightning Bolt Metal that I'll also have for sale in Denver. These were prepared by Marvin Kilgore and the stone was found by SKIP WILSON! For those of you that don't know who Skip Wilson is let me explain. He's only the most successful American meteorite hunter ever! This prolific hunter has found - and had classified - over one hundred and twenty five meteorites! These include two urelites, one achondrite and several beautiful Portales Valley meteorites - one that nearly struck his house. For nearly forty years Skip has been scouring remote areas of New Mexico for extra-terrestrial treasure. An amazing fact about Skip is that he's found an incredible two hundred and eleven meteorites total (99 % were cold finds) and all were made in New Mexico. One meteorite came from De Baca County, three from Lea County, four from Curry County and the remaining two hundred and three coming from within Roosevelt County! Act soon and don't miss this opportunity to have one of his VERY collectable finds in your collection - as I'll only have 3 - 4 specimens for sale! Call or email with any questions, directions while in Denver, or just to say hi - 602 481 9780 Allende (Larger sized 100 gram - 200 gram) Fragments with crust! 8 kilo crusted NWA stony @ .25 per gram Ash Creek (L6) end cut and individuals Bassikounou (H5 ) individuals Brenham (PAL) slices large and small Bondoc large fragments Buzzard (H4) individuals, slices Campo (Iron) slices, and individuals Cat Mountain (Imp-melt) slices Chergach (Mali) individuals Cleo Springs (H4) slices Cocklebiddy (H5) slices Dimmitt (H4) slices El Hammami (H5) slices Franconia (H5) slices, fragments and individuals Galatia (L6) slices Gebel Kamil (Iron Ung) individuals Ghubara (L5 ) slices Gibeon (Iron ) individuals Glorieta (PAL) slices (siderite) and individuals (pallasite) Gold Basin (L6 ) slices, fragments and individuals Henbury (Iron) individuals Holbrook (L/LL6) individuals Imilac (PAL) small individuals JAH (H5) slices Juancheng (H5) slices La Criolla (L6) slices Monze (L6) slices Millbillillie (Euc) individuals Mundrabilla (Iron) individuals Muonionalusta (Iron) slices large and small Nantan (Iron) small crystal individuals NWA 869 (L4-6) “ NWA 2932 (Meso) “ NWA 4502 (CV3) “ Palo Verde Mine (L6) “ Portales Valley (H6) “ slices Richfield (LL3.7) “ SAU 001 Sahara 98094 (H5) slices Seymchan (PAL) “ iron slices and 100% pallasite slices Sikhote Alin (Iron) individuals Toluca (Iron) slices and end cut Thika (L6) Thuathe (H4-5) individuals Wagon Mound (L6) slices White Court (Iron) individuals Zag (H3-6) slices -- Rock On! Ruben Garcia __ Visit the Archives at http://www.meteoritecentral.com/mailing-list-archives.html Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
[meteorite-list] Portales Valley slice -ebay AD
Hi folks, the last few hours for the 29g full slice of PV... http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItemssPageName=STRK:MESELX:ITitem=270310190635 thanks dave IMCA #0092 Sec.BIMS. www.bimsociety.org __ http://www.meteoritecentral.com Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
[meteorite-list] Portales Valley AD
Hi, I have a 28.6g slice of PV for sale - wonderful thick metallic veins and superb matrix! It's also crusted and generally rather fab! I would like OIRO $500 for it - to be paypalled to me! http://picasaweb.google.co.uk/entropydave2001/PortalesValley# email me if interested thanks dave IMCA #0092 Sec.BIMS. www.bimsociety.org __ http://www.meteoritecentral.com Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
[meteorite-list] Portales Valley
Portales Valley was my first hunt for a fresh fall. Mike Farmer called to tell me about the fall. I wasn't able to get away immediately, but I borrowed a bunch of cash and a couple days later met Mike and Jack and Devon Shrader in southern New Mexico and followed Mike back to the fall site. I wound up sharing a hotel room with Mike and the first night there 2 locals showed up with a couple stones looking for Mike.Mike graciously allowed me to buy one of the stones. As I recall it was a very metal rich 212 gram stone purchased for $1500. The next day Mike told me he had a buyer for the stone for $2500. Since I was working with borrowed money I took the sale and over the years have regreted it many times. I never found a piece myself, but from descriptions of later finds I was within 50 meters of a number of pieces. I met Skip Wilson and spent several hours talking with him at his house. Mike and I got to look over the meteorites Skip had found over the years and through Skip, Mike and I were able to purchase and split what came to be known as Roosevelt County 102. Aside from being hot it was a very enjoyable time. Can't wait for the next fall. -- Eric Olson 7682 Firethorn Dr Fayetteville, NC 28311 http://www.star-bits.com __ http://www.meteoritecentral.com Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
[meteorite-list] Portales Valley
Hello and good day list, I am thinking of searching the Portales Valley area. I have never been there and don't have a clue of the area or where to look. Can anyone help me, please? Thanks and best to all, Griff Floyd Griff Griffith Parker, Colorado USA IMCA 2510__ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
[meteorite-list] Portales Valley Ad
Hello List, It has been a while since I last made a post about our few remaining pieces of Portales Valley, and Dhofar 1180. The supply of both is even lower now. So, if you still haven't added either/both to your collection, now might be a good time to do so. To check out some of the dwindling number of pieces left, including some killer specimens, check out the site here: (PV) http://www.portalesvalleymeteorites.com or here: (lunar) http://www.portalesvalleymeteorites.com/Lunar.htm We would be happy to work with any of you who might be interested. Just email me offline if you wish. Sincerely, Robert Woolard Never Miss an Email Stay connected with Yahoo! Mail on your mobile. Get started! http://mobile.yahoo.com/services?promote=mail __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] Portales Valley Q
Does anyone on the list know the current status of classification for Portales Valley? When it first fell, I believe it was merely classified as (H6), which I thought was insulting to one's logic. Then, I heard the classification had been changed (about time). However, I recently saw a Michael Cottingham card that read, (H7)? That seemed to me to be, indeed, odd. So, does anyone KNOW? Also, is there a DIFFERENT classification for the low metal vs high metal forms - or did the new classification address that? I am sure many list members would be interested to know. Thanks, Michael __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] Portales Valley Q
Hello Michael and List, I don't have a final, definitive answer to your question. It is one that I, too, have been seeking an answer to for a long time. Here is a link to a fairly recent article that raises some good points: http://www.psrd.hawaii.edu/Sept05/PortalesValley.html Robert Woolard __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] Portales Valley Q
Michael, This was the subject on the list just a year ago. I had expressed my favor of the journal article by A. Ruzicka et al. (2005), which referred to PV by a new term -- H-chondrite, metallic-melt breccia. Jeff Grossman posted the following in reply, which actually does seem like a completely logical classification based on the petrogenesis proposed in the above paper: -- Obviously there is disagreement among scientists on what to call PV. I personally see no reason to call it type 7, a primitive achondrite, an achondrite OR to coin a new term. If I take the conclusions of the Ruzicka study as a given, that you had H6 material near its peak metamorphic temperature, which additional shock heating and mobilization of metal-rich melt, then I see no reason not call it an H chondrite impact melt breccia in which the clasts are dominantly type 6. jeff - David __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] Portales Valley: Not Just Another Ordinary Chondrite
In Roberl Woolard site its write this: H7, Metallic Melt Breccia (Primitive Achondrite) Its ok? Matteo --- Frank Cressy [EMAIL PROTECTED] ha scritto: Matteo and all, I believe it is now classified as a Metallic-melt Meteorite Breccia. Cheers, Frank M come Meteorite Meteorites [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: ok...in conclusion what new classification is portales valley? Matteo --- Ron Baalke ha scritto: http://www.psrd.hawaii.edu/Sept05/PortalesValley.html Portales Valley: Not Just Another Ordinary Chondrite Planetary Science Research Discoveries September 30, 2005 --- A melted meteorite gives a snapshot of the heat and shock that wracked an asteroid during the first stages of differentiation. Written by Alex Ruzicka and Melinda Hutson Department of Geology, Portland State University Soon after the Portales Valley meteorite fell in 1998, it was classified as one of the most common types of meteorites, an H6 ordinary chondrite. Although researchers quickly recognized that Portales Valley is not a typical H6 chondrite, there was little agreement about how the meteorite formed. A recent study of Portales Valley by Ruzicka and colleagues suggests that the textures, mineralogy, and chemistry of the meteorite are best explained as the first good example of a metallic melt breccia. This meteorite represents a transitional stage between chondrites and various classes of differentiated meteorites, and offers clues as to how differentiation occurred in early-formed planetary bodies. Reference: * Ruzicka, A., Killgore, M., Mittlefehldt, D.W. and Fries, M.D (2005) Portales Valley: Petrology of a metallic-melt meteorite breccia. Meteoritics Planetary Science, v. 40, p. 261-295. Differentiation: a widespread but poorly-understood process Most solar system material underwent differentiation, a process involving melting and separation of liquids and solids of varying density and chemical composition. However, chondritic meteorites escaped this process and are believed to be pieces of undifferentiated asteroids. All other meteorites, and probably all rocks from planets and large moons, melted when the parent bodies differentiated to form cores, mantles, and crusts. The heat source for differentiation is uncertain, as are the exact physical processes and conditions that allowed differentiation to proceed in small planetary bodies with weak gravity. Proposed sources of heat include internally-generated heat from short-lived radioactive materials such as aluminum-26 (26Al), external heating from our young active Sun, and heating resulting from collisions between planetary bodies (shock heating). A detailed study of the Portales Valley meteorite suggests that differentiation of small planetary bodies involved a combination of an internal heat source and shock. Shock heating was not the major heat source involved in differentiation, but the stress waves associated with even modest shock events played a critical role in helping materials to separate and reconfigure during differentiation. illustration of differentiation by Granshaw A sequence of images showing stages in the differentiation of a planetesimal, an early-formed planetary body. The image in the left hand side shows a chondritic planetesimal becoming hot enough for melting to begin. The middle image shows that the heavier metallic liquid sinks toward the center, while the less dense rocky material rises toward the surface. The result is a differentiated object with a crust, mantle and core, as shown in the image in the right hand side. (Images created by Frank Granshaw of Artemis Software for the Cascadia Meteorite Laboratory, Portland State University.) Not an ordinary H6 ordinary chondrite Three features link Portales Valley to H-group ordinary chondrites. These are (1) the presence of rare chondrules with a rather typical chondritic texture present in silicate-rich areas, (2) the compositions of most minerals, and (3) the bulk oxygen isotopic composition of the meteorite. Nonetheless, Portales Valley contains unusual features that distinguish it from any other ordinary chondrite. Even in a cut section, the differences between Portales Valley and a typical H-chondrite are readily apparent (see figures below). comparison to H chondrite A comparison of a typical H-chondrite and Portales Valley. Bright areas are mainly metallic; dark areas are mainly silicates. Left: A slice of a meteorite that is paired with the Franconia (H5) chondritic meteorite. The small lines on the ruler are one
Re: [meteorite-list] Portales Valley: Not Just Another Ordinary Chondrite
Anotherthe probably H7, Metallic Melt Breccia (Primitive Achondrite) classification its for the pieces with metal veins...but for the normaly portales valley without any veins the classification its a H6? The matrix its paired to a normaly ordinary chondrite. Matteo --- Frank Cressy [EMAIL PROTECTED] ha scritto: Matteo and all, I believe it is now classified as a Metallic-melt Meteorite Breccia. Cheers, Frank M come Meteorite Meteorites [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: ok...in conclusion what new classification is portales valley? Matteo --- Ron Baalke ha scritto: http://www.psrd.hawaii.edu/Sept05/PortalesValley.html Portales Valley: Not Just Another Ordinary Chondrite Planetary Science Research Discoveries September 30, 2005 --- A melted meteorite gives a snapshot of the heat and shock that wracked an asteroid during the first stages of differentiation. Written by Alex Ruzicka and Melinda Hutson Department of Geology, Portland State University Soon after the Portales Valley meteorite fell in 1998, it was classified as one of the most common types of meteorites, an H6 ordinary chondrite. Although researchers quickly recognized that Portales Valley is not a typical H6 chondrite, there was little agreement about how the meteorite formed. A recent study of Portales Valley by Ruzicka and colleagues suggests that the textures, mineralogy, and chemistry of the meteorite are best explained as the first good example of a metallic melt breccia. This meteorite represents a transitional stage between chondrites and various classes of differentiated meteorites, and offers clues as to how differentiation occurred in early-formed planetary bodies. Reference: * Ruzicka, A., Killgore, M., Mittlefehldt, D.W. and Fries, M.D (2005) Portales Valley: Petrology of a metallic-melt meteorite breccia. Meteoritics Planetary Science, v. 40, p. 261-295. Differentiation: a widespread but poorly-understood process Most solar system material underwent differentiation, a process involving melting and separation of liquids and solids of varying density and chemical composition. However, chondritic meteorites escaped this process and are believed to be pieces of undifferentiated asteroids. All other meteorites, and probably all rocks from planets and large moons, melted when the parent bodies differentiated to form cores, mantles, and crusts. The heat source for differentiation is uncertain, as are the exact physical processes and conditions that allowed differentiation to proceed in small planetary bodies with weak gravity. Proposed sources of heat include internally-generated heat from short-lived radioactive materials such as aluminum-26 (26Al), external heating from our young active Sun, and heating resulting from collisions between planetary bodies (shock heating). A detailed study of the Portales Valley meteorite suggests that differentiation of small planetary bodies involved a combination of an internal heat source and shock. Shock heating was not the major heat source involved in differentiation, but the stress waves associated with even modest shock events played a critical role in helping materials to separate and reconfigure during differentiation. illustration of differentiation by Granshaw A sequence of images showing stages in the differentiation of a planetesimal, an early-formed planetary body. The image in the left hand side shows a chondritic planetesimal becoming hot enough for melting to begin. The middle image shows that the heavier metallic liquid sinks toward the center, while the less dense rocky material rises toward the surface. The result is a differentiated object with a crust, mantle and core, as shown in the image in the right hand side. (Images created by Frank Granshaw of Artemis Software for the Cascadia Meteorite Laboratory, Portland State University.) Not an ordinary H6 ordinary chondrite Three features link Portales Valley to H-group ordinary chondrites. These are (1) the presence of rare chondrules with a rather typical chondritic texture present in silicate-rich areas, (2) the compositions of most minerals, and (3) the bulk oxygen isotopic composition of the meteorite. Nonetheless, Portales Valley contains unusual features that distinguish it from any other ordinary chondrite. Even in a cut section, the differences between Portales Valley and a typical H-chondrite are readily apparent (see figures below). comparison to H chondrite A comparison of a typical H-chondrite and Portales Valley. Bright areas are mainly metallic;
Re: [meteorite-list] Portales Valley: Not Just Another OrdinaryChondrite
Hi All, I can see why this is confusing! Wasn't there another meteorite where people had discussions of what kind of meteorite it was? Here in the US. I can not remember which one. Maybe Gold Basin and Hualapai Wash stones? Sternengruss, Moni From: M come Meteorite Meteorites [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Meteorite Mailing List meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Portales Valley: Not Just Another OrdinaryChondrite Date: Wed, 5 Oct 2005 18:22:54 +0200 (CEST) Anotherthe probably H7, Metallic Melt Breccia (Primitive Achondrite) classification its for the pieces with metal veins...but for the normaly portales valley without any veins the classification its a H6? The matrix its paired to a normaly ordinary chondrite. Matteo --- Frank Cressy [EMAIL PROTECTED] ha scritto: Matteo and all, I believe it is now classified as a Metallic-melt Meteorite Breccia. Cheers, Frank M come Meteorite Meteorites [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: ok...in conclusion what new classification is portales valley? Matteo --- Ron Baalke ha scritto: http://www.psrd.hawaii.edu/Sept05/PortalesValley.html Portales Valley: Not Just Another Ordinary Chondrite Planetary Science Research Discoveries September 30, 2005 --- A melted meteorite gives a snapshot of the heat and shock that wracked an asteroid during the first stages of differentiation. Written by Alex Ruzicka and Melinda Hutson Department of Geology, Portland State University Soon after the Portales Valley meteorite fell in 1998, it was classified as one of the most common types of meteorites, an H6 ordinary chondrite. Although researchers quickly recognized that Portales Valley is not a typical H6 chondrite, there was little agreement about how the meteorite formed. A recent study of Portales Valley by Ruzicka and colleagues suggests that the textures, mineralogy, and chemistry of the meteorite are best explained as the first good example of a metallic melt breccia. This meteorite represents a transitional stage between chondrites and various classes of differentiated meteorites, and offers clues as to how differentiation occurred in early-formed planetary bodies. Reference: * Ruzicka, A., Killgore, M., Mittlefehldt, D.W. and Fries, M.D (2005) Portales Valley: Petrology of a metallic-melt meteorite breccia. Meteoritics Planetary Science, v. 40, p. 261-295. Differentiation: a widespread but poorly-understood process Most solar system material underwent differentiation, a process involving melting and separation of liquids and solids of varying density and chemical composition. However, chondritic meteorites escaped this process and are believed to be pieces of undifferentiated asteroids. All other meteorites, and probably all rocks from planets and large moons, melted when the parent bodies differentiated to form cores, mantles, and crusts. The heat source for differentiation is uncertain, as are the exact physical processes and conditions that allowed differentiation to proceed in small planetary bodies with weak gravity. Proposed sources of heat include internally-generated heat from short-lived radioactive materials such as aluminum-26 (26Al), external heating from our young active Sun, and heating resulting from collisions between planetary bodies (shock heating). A detailed study of the Portales Valley meteorite suggests that differentiation of small planetary bodies involved a combination of an internal heat source and shock. Shock heating was not the major heat source involved in differentiation, but the stress waves associated with even modest shock events played a critical role in helping materials to separate and reconfigure during differentiation. illustration of differentiation by Granshaw A sequence of images showing stages in the differentiation of a planetesimal, an early-formed planetary body. The image in the left hand side shows a chondritic planetesimal becoming hot enough for melting to begin. The middle image shows that the heavier metallic liquid sinks toward the center, while the less dense rocky material rises toward the surface. The result is a differentiated object with a crust, mantle and core, as shown in the image in the right hand side. (Images created by Frank Granshaw of Artemis Software for the Cascadia Meteorite Laboratory, Portland State University.) Not an ordinary H6 ordinary chondrite Three features link Portales Valley to H-group ordinary chondrites. These are (1) the presence of rare chondrules with a rather typical chondritic texture present in silicate-rich areas, (2) the compositions of most minerals
Re: [meteorite-list] Portales Valley: Not Just Another Ordinary Chondrite
Obviously there is disagreement among scientists on what to call PV. I personally see no reason to call it type 7, a primitive achondrite, an achondrite OR to coin a new term. If I take the conclusions of the Ruzicka study as a given, that you had H6 material near its peak metamorphic temperature, which additional shock heating and mobilization of metal-rich melt, then I see no reason not call it an H chondrite impact melt breccia in which the clasts are dominantly type 6. jeff At 12:15 PM 10/5/2005, M come Meteorite Meteorites wrote: In Roberl Woolard site its write this: H7, Metallic Melt Breccia (Primitive Achondrite) Its ok? Matteo --- Frank Cressy [EMAIL PROTECTED] ha scritto: Matteo and all, I believe it is now classified as a Metallic-melt Meteorite Breccia. Cheers, Frank M come Meteorite Meteorites [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: ok...in conclusion what new classification is portales valley? Matteo --- Ron Baalke ha scritto: http://www.psrd.hawaii.edu/Sept05/PortalesValley.html Portales Valley: Not Just Another Ordinary Chondrite Planetary Science Research Discoveries September 30, 2005 --- A melted meteorite gives a snapshot of the heat and shock that wracked an asteroid during the first stages of differentiation. Written by Alex Ruzicka and Melinda Hutson Department of Geology, Portland State University Soon after the Portales Valley meteorite fell in 1998, it was classified as one of the most common types of meteorites, an H6 ordinary chondrite. Although researchers quickly recognized that Portales Valley is not a typical H6 chondrite, there was little agreement about how the meteorite formed. A recent study of Portales Valley by Ruzicka and colleagues suggests that the textures, mineralogy, and chemistry of the meteorite are best explained as the first good example of a metallic melt breccia. This meteorite represents a transitional stage between chondrites and various classes of differentiated meteorites, and offers clues as to how differentiation occurred in early-formed planetary bodies. Reference: * Ruzicka, A., Killgore, M., Mittlefehldt, D.W. and Fries, M.D (2005) Portales Valley: Petrology of a metallic-melt meteorite breccia. Meteoritics Planetary Science, v. 40, p. 261-295. Differentiation: a widespread but poorly-understood process Most solar system material underwent differentiation, a process involving melting and separation of liquids and solids of varying density and chemical composition. However, chondritic meteorites escaped this process and are believed to be pieces of undifferentiated asteroids. All other meteorites, and probably all rocks from planets and large moons, melted when the parent bodies differentiated to form cores, mantles, and crusts. The heat source for differentiation is uncertain, as are the exact physical processes and conditions that allowed differentiation to proceed in small planetary bodies with weak gravity. Proposed sources of heat include internally-generated heat from short-lived radioactive materials such as aluminum-26 (26Al), external heating from our young active Sun, and heating resulting from collisions between planetary bodies (shock heating). A detailed study of the Portales Valley meteorite suggests that differentiation of small planetary bodies involved a combination of an internal heat source and shock. Shock heating was not the major heat source involved in differentiation, but the stress waves associated with even modest shock events played a critical role in helping materials to separate and reconfigure during differentiation. illustration of differentiation by Granshaw A sequence of images showing stages in the differentiation of a planetesimal, an early-formed planetary body. The image in the left hand side shows a chondritic planetesimal becoming hot enough for melting to begin. The middle image shows that the heavier metallic liquid sinks toward the center, while the less dense rocky material rises toward the surface. The result is a differentiated object with a crust, mantle and core, as shown in the image in the right hand side. (Images created by Frank Granshaw of Artemis Software for the Cascadia Meteorite Laboratory, Portland State University.) Not an ordinary H6 ordinary chondrite Three features link Portales Valley to H-group ordinary chondrites. These are (1) the presence of rare chondrules with a rather typical chondritic texture present in silicate-rich areas, (2) the compositions of most minerals, and (3) the bulk oxygen isotopic composition of the meteorite. Nonetheless, Portales Valley
Re: [meteorite-list] Portales Valley: Not Just Another Ordinary Chondrite
Hello Matteo and List, Matteo had written: In Roberl Woolard site its write this: H7, Metallic Melt Breccia (Primitive Achondrite) Its ok? Matteo Just to make it perfectly clear, what I say on the site, in context, is: (Capitalization and spacing added here for emphasis): POSSIBLE New Classification for Portales Valley ! H7, Metallic Melt Breccia (Primitive Achondrite) And further, in the text: From the very start, PV proved to be very puzzling. It simply did not appear to resemble any other known meteorite. Was it a stone, an iron, or a stony-iron? Even today, almost every reference to PV includes phrases such as unique, never before seen, first time ever, puzzling, one of a kind, etc. Some of the reasons for these claims are that this is the first time for a stone meteorite to exhibit Thomson (Widmanstatten) figures, incredibly large veins and even sheets of metal, and graphite nodules up to one inch in diameter. Seven years and literally dozens of research papers later, the complete story of the formation of Portales Valley is still unknown, and continues to be debated. Current research MAY lead to the reclassification of this unique and intriguing meteorite as an H7, Metallic Melt Breccia (primitive achondrite). http://www.portalesvalleymeteorites.com I am encouraged to see that the debate/questioning appears to still be ongoing, and I'm hopeful that one of these days, the COMPLETE formation history of PV will be understood and agreed on by all WHATEVER that final understanding is. Best wishes, Robert __ Yahoo! Mail - PC Magazine Editors' Choice 2005 http://mail.yahoo.com __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
[meteorite-list] Portales Valley: Not Just Another Ordinary Chondrite
http://www.psrd.hawaii.edu/Sept05/PortalesValley.html Portales Valley: Not Just Another Ordinary Chondrite Planetary Science Research Discoveries September 30, 2005 --- A melted meteorite gives a snapshot of the heat and shock that wracked an asteroid during the first stages of differentiation. Written by Alex Ruzicka and Melinda Hutson Department of Geology, Portland State University Soon after the Portales Valley meteorite fell in 1998, it was classified as one of the most common types of meteorites, an H6 ordinary chondrite. Although researchers quickly recognized that Portales Valley is not a typical H6 chondrite, there was little agreement about how the meteorite formed. A recent study of Portales Valley by Ruzicka and colleagues suggests that the textures, mineralogy, and chemistry of the meteorite are best explained as the first good example of a metallic melt breccia. This meteorite represents a transitional stage between chondrites and various classes of differentiated meteorites, and offers clues as to how differentiation occurred in early-formed planetary bodies. Reference: * Ruzicka, A., Killgore, M., Mittlefehldt, D.W. and Fries, M.D (2005) Portales Valley: Petrology of a metallic-melt meteorite breccia. Meteoritics Planetary Science, v. 40, p. 261-295. Differentiation: a widespread but poorly-understood process Most solar system material underwent differentiation, a process involving melting and separation of liquids and solids of varying density and chemical composition. However, chondritic meteorites escaped this process and are believed to be pieces of undifferentiated asteroids. All other meteorites, and probably all rocks from planets and large moons, melted when the parent bodies differentiated to form cores, mantles, and crusts. The heat source for differentiation is uncertain, as are the exact physical processes and conditions that allowed differentiation to proceed in small planetary bodies with weak gravity. Proposed sources of heat include internally-generated heat from short-lived radioactive materials such as aluminum-26 (26Al), external heating from our young active Sun, and heating resulting from collisions between planetary bodies (shock heating). A detailed study of the Portales Valley meteorite suggests that differentiation of small planetary bodies involved a combination of an internal heat source and shock. Shock heating was not the major heat source involved in differentiation, but the stress waves associated with even modest shock events played a critical role in helping materials to separate and reconfigure during differentiation. illustration of differentiation by Granshaw A sequence of images showing stages in the differentiation of a planetesimal, an early-formed planetary body. The image in the left hand side shows a chondritic planetesimal becoming hot enough for melting to begin. The middle image shows that the heavier metallic liquid sinks toward the center, while the less dense rocky material rises toward the surface. The result is a differentiated object with a crust, mantle and core, as shown in the image in the right hand side. (Images created by Frank Granshaw of Artemis Software for the Cascadia Meteorite Laboratory, Portland State University.) Not an ordinary H6 ordinary chondrite Three features link Portales Valley to H-group ordinary chondrites. These are (1) the presence of rare chondrules with a rather typical chondritic texture present in silicate-rich areas, (2) the compositions of most minerals, and (3) the bulk oxygen isotopic composition of the meteorite. Nonetheless, Portales Valley contains unusual features that distinguish it from any other ordinary chondrite. Even in a cut section, the differences between Portales Valley and a typical H-chondrite are readily apparent (see figures below). comparison to H chondrite A comparison of a typical H-chondrite and Portales Valley. Bright areas are mainly metallic; dark areas are mainly silicates. Left: A slice of a meteorite that is paired with the Franconia (H5) chondritic meteorite. The small lines on the ruler are one millimeter apart. Right: A slice of the Portales Valley meteorite showing that the chondritic, silicate-rich material occurs as angular clasts floating in metallic veins. Tiny bright spots in silicate-rich clasts consist of troilite (FeS) and smaller amounts of fine-grained metal. A large graphite nodule is visible. Besides the obvious differences between Portales Valley and a typical H chondrite, Portales Valley is also unusual in several other ways. It is the only known ordinary chondrite that contains coarse (cm-sized) graphite nodules as well as metal that shows a Widmanstätten texture (an intergrowth of high- and low-Ni metal, see left image below), both of which are common in iron meteorites.
Re: [meteorite-list] Portales Valley: Not Just Another Ordinary Chondrite
ok...in conclusion what new classification is portales valley? Matteo --- Ron Baalke [EMAIL PROTECTED] ha scritto: http://www.psrd.hawaii.edu/Sept05/PortalesValley.html Portales Valley: Not Just Another Ordinary Chondrite Planetary Science Research Discoveries September 30, 2005 --- A melted meteorite gives a snapshot of the heat and shock that wracked an asteroid during the first stages of differentiation. Written by Alex Ruzicka and Melinda Hutson Department of Geology, Portland State University Soon after the Portales Valley meteorite fell in 1998, it was classified as one of the most common types of meteorites, an H6 ordinary chondrite. Although researchers quickly recognized that Portales Valley is not a typical H6 chondrite, there was little agreement about how the meteorite formed. A recent study of Portales Valley by Ruzicka and colleagues suggests that the textures, mineralogy, and chemistry of the meteorite are best explained as the first good example of a metallic melt breccia. This meteorite represents a transitional stage between chondrites and various classes of differentiated meteorites, and offers clues as to how differentiation occurred in early-formed planetary bodies. Reference: * Ruzicka, A., Killgore, M., Mittlefehldt, D.W. and Fries, M.D (2005) Portales Valley: Petrology of a metallic-melt meteorite breccia. Meteoritics Planetary Science, v. 40, p. 261-295. Differentiation: a widespread but poorly-understood process Most solar system material underwent differentiation, a process involving melting and separation of liquids and solids of varying density and chemical composition. However, chondritic meteorites escaped this process and are believed to be pieces of undifferentiated asteroids. All other meteorites, and probably all rocks from planets and large moons, melted when the parent bodies differentiated to form cores, mantles, and crusts. The heat source for differentiation is uncertain, as are the exact physical processes and conditions that allowed differentiation to proceed in small planetary bodies with weak gravity. Proposed sources of heat include internally-generated heat from short-lived radioactive materials such as aluminum-26 (26Al), external heating from our young active Sun, and heating resulting from collisions between planetary bodies (shock heating). A detailed study of the Portales Valley meteorite suggests that differentiation of small planetary bodies involved a combination of an internal heat source and shock. Shock heating was not the major heat source involved in differentiation, but the stress waves associated with even modest shock events played a critical role in helping materials to separate and reconfigure during differentiation. illustration of differentiation by Granshaw A sequence of images showing stages in the differentiation of a planetesimal, an early-formed planetary body. The image in the left hand side shows a chondritic planetesimal becoming hot enough for melting to begin. The middle image shows that the heavier metallic liquid sinks toward the center, while the less dense rocky material rises toward the surface. The result is a differentiated object with a crust, mantle and core, as shown in the image in the right hand side. (Images created by Frank Granshaw of Artemis Software for the Cascadia Meteorite Laboratory, Portland State University.) Not an ordinary H6 ordinary chondrite Three features link Portales Valley to H-group ordinary chondrites. These are (1) the presence of rare chondrules with a rather typical chondritic texture present in silicate-rich areas, (2) the compositions of most minerals, and (3) the bulk oxygen isotopic composition of the meteorite. Nonetheless, Portales Valley contains unusual features that distinguish it from any other ordinary chondrite. Even in a cut section, the differences between Portales Valley and a typical H-chondrite are readily apparent (see figures below). comparison to H chondrite A comparison of a typical H-chondrite and Portales Valley. Bright areas are mainly metallic; dark areas are mainly silicates. Left: A slice of a meteorite that is paired with the Franconia (H5) chondritic meteorite. The small lines on the ruler are one millimeter apart. Right: A slice of the Portales Valley meteorite showing that the chondritic, silicate-rich material occurs as angular clasts floating in metallic veins. Tiny bright spots in silicate-rich clasts consist of troilite (FeS) and smaller amounts of fine-grained metal. A large graphite nodule is visible. Besides the obvious differences between Portales Valley and a typical H chondrite, Portales Valley is also unusual in
AW: [meteorite-list] Portales Valley
Hello Listees, I am looking for a nice larger slice of Portales Valley for a local Museum in Germany. It shall be put on display to the public. A trade could be arranged and the Museum can offer a large slice of the L6 chondrite fall Fisher, Minnesota. Although of a common type, material of this fall is not widely distributed in collections and has rarely been offered for trade. Anybody interest can contact me off-list. Best regards, Jörn Koblitz __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] Portales Valley Classification Info
so what are they calling portales? i will be gradually switching over to yahoo mail (it has 100 FREE megs of storage). please cc to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]To: Robert Woolard [EMAIL PROTECTED]CC: meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.comSubject: Re: [meteorite-list] Portales Valley Classification InfoDate: Mon, 16 May 2005 19:28:52 -0700Hello Robert and all,I've always considered PV a round peg in a square hole. I mean that even a quick glance at PV is enough to know it doesn't make sense to lump it in with the run-of-the-mill ordinary chondrite. So this change in heart by the classification gods is really good news.Looking forward to knowing moreMartin- Original Message -From: Robert Woolard [EMAIL PROTECTED]Date: Monday, May 16, 2005 7:21 pmSubject: [meteorite-list] Portales Valley Classification Info Hello List, Well for years now, I know a lot of us were puzzled by the classification of Portales Valley as an " H6 ordinary chondrite". (See my article in the May 2001 issue of Meteorite, titled " Portales Valley - A Not So Ordinary (Ordinary Chondrite??)! " In the recent past, the classification was modified a bit, being changed to read as an " H6 Impact Melt Breccia ". I am excited to be able to say that there is a distinct chance the true uniqueness of PV may soon be reflected in a possible new moniker for this intriguing meteorite. David Weir was kind enough to make me aware of a new and comprehensive paper by Alex Ruzicka, Marvin Killgore, David Mittlefehldt, and Marc Fries in the current MAPS. In this detailed work, we now have the proposed reclassification of PV as an " H7, metallic-melt breccia (primitive achondrite)", with the case made for a new meteorite type designation of "Portalesite" due to this metallic-melt breccia characteristic. You can read David's updated description of PV on his excellent website here: http://www.meteoritestudies.com Many thanks to David for news of this exciting paper, and to the authors of the paper as well. Sincerely, Robert Woolard __ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - You care about security. So do we. http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list __Meteorite-list mailing listMeteorite-list@meteoritecentral.comhttp://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] Portales Valley Classification Info
Hi List, back in March of 2004, I made a lot of enemies on the list for asking; I have to ask, was Portales Valley classified as a H6 ordinary chondrite because they were to lazy to make up a new classification? It would seem to me that this unique meteorite deserves it's own group instead of being shoved into an already existing group. I do not feel like we have found every type of meteorite yet, are they going do this with all of them, just sticking them in existing categories, or will they make a new one if need be? I was called everything from an idiot to a stupid mother $#*^# by a lot of people on the list for questioning the classification. I was put in my place, never question the scientists, if they said it was a H6 ordinary chondrite, then it was! Just thought it was interesting . : ) Thanks, Tom peregrineflier - Original Message - From: Robert Woolard [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com Sent: Monday, May 16, 2005 7:21 PM Subject: [meteorite-list] Portales Valley Classification Info Hello List, Well for years now, I know a lot of us were puzzled by the classification of Portales Valley as an H6 ordinary chondrite. (See my article in the May 2001 issue of Meteorite, titled Portales Valley - A Not So Ordinary (Ordinary Chondrite??)! In the recent past, the classification was modified a bit, being changed to read as an H6 Impact Melt Breccia . I am excited to be able to say that there is a distinct chance the true uniqueness of PV may soon be reflected in a possible new moniker for this intriguing meteorite. David Weir was kind enough to make me aware of a new and comprehensive paper by Alex Ruzicka, Marvin Killgore, David Mittlefehldt, and Marc Fries in the current MAPS. In this detailed work, we now have the proposed reclassification of PV as an H7, metallic-melt breccia (primitive achondrite), with the case made for a new meteorite type designation of Portalesite due to this metallic-melt breccia characteristic. You can read David's updated description of PV on his excellent website here: http://www.meteoritestudies.com Many thanks to David for news of this exciting paper, and to the authors of the paper as well. Sincerely, Robert Woolard __ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - You care about security. So do we. http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail __ 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] Portales Valley Classification Info
ihave one that is 70% etched metal- i think i'm gonna break off the stone part and just call it and iron octahedrite and get rid of the guess work. i will be gradually switching over to yahoo mail (it has 100 FREE megs of storage). please cc to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] From: "Tom Knudson" [EMAIL PROTECTED]To: "Robert Woolard" [EMAIL PROTECTED],meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.comSubject: Re: [meteorite-list] Portales Valley Classification InfoDate: Tue, 17 May 2005 09:11:20 -0700Hi List, back in March of 2004, I made a lot of enemies on the list forasking;" I have to ask, was Portales Valley classified as a H6 ordinarychondrite because "they" were to lazy to make up a new classification? Itwould seem to me that this unique meteorite deserves it's own group insteadof being shoved into an already existing group. I do not feel like we have found every type of meteorite yet, are "theygoing do this with all of them, just sticking them in existing categories,or will they make a new one if need be?"I was called everything from an idiot to a stupid mother $#*^# by a lot ofpeople on the list for questioning the classification. I was put in myplace, never question the scientists, if they said it was a H6 ordinarychondrite, then it was!Just thought it was interesting . : )Thanks, Tomperegrineflier - Original Message -From: "Robert Woolard" [EMAIL PROTECTED]To: meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.comSent: Monday, May 16, 2005 7:21 PMSubject: [meteorite-list] Portales Valley Classification Info Hello List, Well for years now, I know a lot of us were puzzled by the classification of Portales Valley as an " H6 ordinary chondrite". (See my article in the May 2001 issue of Meteorite, titled " Portales Valley - A Not So Ordinary (Ordinary Chondrite??)! " In the recent past, the classification was modified a bit, being changed to read as an " H6 Impact Melt Breccia ". I am excited to be able to say that there is a distinct chance the true uniqueness of PV may soon be reflected in a possible new moniker for this intriguing meteorite. David Weir was kind enough to make me aware of a new and comprehensive paper by Alex Ruzicka, Marvin Killgore, David Mittlefehldt, and Marc Fries in the current MAPS. In this detailed work, we now have the proposed reclassification of PV as an " H7, metallic-melt breccia (primitive achondrite)", with the case made for a new meteorite type designation of "Portalesite" due to this metallic-melt breccia characteristic. You can read David's updated description of PV on his excellent website here: http://www.meteoritestudies.com Many thanks to David for news of this exciting paper, and to the authors of the paper as well. Sincerely, Robert Woolard __ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - You care about security. So do we. http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list __Meteorite-list mailing listMeteorite-list@meteoritecentral.comhttp://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] Portales Valley Classification Info
Tom , I don't believe you were ever chided for questioning the need for reclassifying, I believe the problem stemmed from your derogatory remarks about those working (or not working, lazy, as you assert), on PV. AND as you can see now, work was being done, they were not sitting on their hands, doing nothing. Further, it seems to me as though they had a new type of class and wanted to be sure of their results. That PV was not an ordinary H6 is not an opinion that was yours alone, and you were part of a vast majority. Instead of patting yourself on the back, why don't you apologize for your derisive insinuations about those who have put much time and effort into the study of PV. Bob Holmes - Original Message - From: Tom Knudson [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Robert Woolard [EMAIL PROTECTED]; meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com Sent: Tuesday, May 17, 2005 9:11 AM Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Portales Valley Classification Info Hi List, back in March of 2004, I made a lot of enemies on the list for asking; I have to ask, was Portales Valley classified as a H6 ordinary chondrite because they were to lazy to make up a new classification? It would seem to me that this unique meteorite deserves it's own group instead of being shoved into an already existing group. I do not feel like we have found every type of meteorite yet, are they going do this with all of them, just sticking them in existing categories, or will they make a new one if need be? I was called everything from an idiot to a stupid mother $#*^# by a lot of people on the list for questioning the classification. I was put in my place, never question the scientists, if they said it was a H6 ordinary chondrite, then it was! Just thought it was interesting . : ) Thanks, Tom peregrineflier - Original Message - From: Robert Woolard [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com Sent: Monday, May 16, 2005 7:21 PM Subject: [meteorite-list] Portales Valley Classification Info Hello List, Well for years now, I know a lot of us were puzzled by the classification of Portales Valley as an H6 ordinary chondrite. (See my article in the May 2001 issue of Meteorite, titled Portales Valley - A Not So Ordinary (Ordinary Chondrite??)! In the recent past, the classification was modified a bit, being changed to read as an H6 Impact Melt Breccia . I am excited to be able to say that there is a distinct chance the true uniqueness of PV may soon be reflected in a possible new moniker for this intriguing meteorite. David Weir was kind enough to make me aware of a new and comprehensive paper by Alex Ruzicka, Marvin Killgore, David Mittlefehldt, and Marc Fries in the current MAPS. In this detailed work, we now have the proposed reclassification of PV as an H7, metallic-melt breccia (primitive achondrite), with the case made for a new meteorite type designation of Portalesite due to this metallic-melt breccia characteristic. You can read David's updated description of PV on his excellent website here: http://www.meteoritestudies.com Many thanks to David for news of this exciting paper, and to the authors of the paper as well. Sincerely, Robert Woolard __ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - You care about security. So do we. http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail __ 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] Portales Valley Classification Info
I was the lazy editor of the MetBull when PV fell, so I can tell you the story. Basically, two scientists were in communication with the NomCom during the classification, Dave Kring and Alan Rubin. There were two schools of thought on what to call it, and these were not really that far apart. Kring, the person that submitted the initial classification, described PV as an H6 chondrite with abundant veins of metallic shock melt. His initial interpretation was that the source of the metal was the H chondrite host, and that the metal was basically the same thing you see in small shock veins in many chondrites, just on a larger scale. All of the material appeared to be of H chondrite affinity and many clasts were H6. Rubin wanted to call it an H chondrite impact melt breccia. He too considered all the components to be of H chondrite origin, but thought the IMB designation would alert people to the fact that the texture was so interesting. (Of course, the texture is different from other melt breccias as well.) As you can see, both researchers thought PV was H chondrite material and both thought that shock effects dominated the texture. So there was no way we were going to call it a new group... it was from the H parent body and didn't contain weird or foreign material. In the end, we agreed to go with the submitter's classification as an H6 with remarkable shock effects, and Rubin agreed that he'd call it an H impact melt breccia in the literature (which he did). It hardly seemed to matter since these two classifications were so close. If I had to publish the announcement again today as editor, knowing what we do now, I'd probably go with H melt breccia. But there is still no clear line between H6 chondrites with abundant shock veins and melt pockets and those like PV, which probably should have the presence of melt noted in the classification. Jeff At 12:11 PM 5/17/2005, Tom Knudson wrote: Hi List, back in March of 2004, I made a lot of enemies on the list for asking; I have to ask, was Portales Valley classified as a H6 ordinary chondrite because they were to lazy to make up a new classification? It would seem to me that this unique meteorite deserves it's own group instead of being shoved into an already existing group. I do not feel like we have found every type of meteorite yet, are they going do this with all of them, just sticking them in existing categories, or will they make a new one if need be? I was called everything from an idiot to a stupid mother $#*^# by a lot of people on the list for questioning the classification. I was put in my place, never question the scientists, if they said it was a H6 ordinary chondrite, then it was! Just thought it was interesting . : ) Thanks, Tom peregrineflier - Original Message - From: Robert Woolard [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com Sent: Monday, May 16, 2005 7:21 PM Subject: [meteorite-list] Portales Valley Classification Info Hello List, Well for years now, I know a lot of us were puzzled by the classification of Portales Valley as an H6 ordinary chondrite. (See my article in the May 2001 issue of Meteorite, titled Portales Valley - A Not So Ordinary (Ordinary Chondrite??)! In the recent past, the classification was modified a bit, being changed to read as an H6 Impact Melt Breccia . I am excited to be able to say that there is a distinct chance the true uniqueness of PV may soon be reflected in a possible new moniker for this intriguing meteorite. David Weir was kind enough to make me aware of a new and comprehensive paper by Alex Ruzicka, Marvin Killgore, David Mittlefehldt, and Marc Fries in the current MAPS. In this detailed work, we now have the proposed reclassification of PV as an H7, metallic-melt breccia (primitive achondrite), with the case made for a new meteorite type designation of Portalesite due to this metallic-melt breccia characteristic. You can read David's updated description of PV on his excellent website here: http://www.meteoritestudies.com Many thanks to David for news of this exciting paper, and to the authors of the paper as well. Sincerely, Robert Woolard __ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - You care about security. So do we. http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail __ 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 Dr. Jeffrey N. Grossman phone: (703) 648-6184 US Geological Survey fax: (703) 648-6383 954 National Center Reston, VA 20192, USA __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http
Re: [meteorite-list] Portales Valley Classification Info
Hi Bob, I don't believe you were ever chided for questioning the need for reclassifying, I believe the problem stemmed from your derogatory remarks about those working (or not working, lazy, as you assert), on PV. AND as you can see now, work was being done, they were not sitting on their hands, doing nothing. Further, it seems to me as though they had a new type of class and wanted to be sure of their results. now have the proposed reclassification of PV as an H7, metallic-melt breccia (primitive achondrite), with the case made for a new meteorite type designation of Portalesite due to this metallic-melt breccia characteristic. If this proposed reclassification happens, what does this say about the original classification? Was it wrong? Was it a rush to judgment? Did they not want to take the time out to study it enough to properly classify it (lazy)? How could it go from an H6 ordinary chondrite to a Portalesite, H7, metallic-melt breccia (primitive achondrite) Did it experience a metamorphous between studies. I did not call anyone working on it lazy, I asked why the original group did not make up a new classification for this unique meteorite. Apparently Alex Ruzicka, Marvin Killgore, David Mittlefehldt, and Marc Fries among others I am sure, could see this meteorite needed to be studied further and thought it needed to be something more than an H6 ordinary chondrite. If this reclassification does happen, I think my question back in March of 2004 is a fair and valid question, why was PV called a H6 ordinary chondrite? Astronomers are always being reprimanded for telling us a killer asteroid is going to strike the Earth next year. They come out and say it before they get all the information and when they finally do get all the information, they look bad for jumping the gun. A scientist came out and said PV was an H6 ordinary chondrite. Now it looks like all the info might be in and someone had jumped the gun. Do these two branches of science have to play by the same rules, find out all the info before you talk? Thanks, Tom peregrineflier - Original Message - From: Bob Holmes [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Tom Knudson [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Robert Woolard [EMAIL PROTECTED]; meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com Sent: Tuesday, May 17, 2005 9:52 AM Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Portales Valley Classification Info Tom , I don't believe you were ever chided for questioning the need for reclassifying, I believe the problem stemmed from your derogatory remarks about those working (or not working, lazy, as you assert), on PV. AND as you can see now, work was being done, they were not sitting on their hands, doing nothing. Further, it seems to me as though they had a new type of class and wanted to be sure of their results. That PV was not an ordinary H6 is not an opinion that was yours alone, and you were part of a vast majority. Instead of patting yourself on the back, why don't you apologize for your derisive insinuations about those who have put much time and effort into the study of PV. Bob Holmes - Original Message - From: Tom Knudson [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Robert Woolard [EMAIL PROTECTED]; meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com Sent: Tuesday, May 17, 2005 9:11 AM Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Portales Valley Classification Info Hi List, back in March of 2004, I made a lot of enemies on the list for asking; I have to ask, was Portales Valley classified as a H6 ordinary chondrite because they were to lazy to make up a new classification? It would seem to me that this unique meteorite deserves it's own group instead of being shoved into an already existing group. I do not feel like we have found every type of meteorite yet, are they going do this with all of them, just sticking them in existing categories, or will they make a new one if need be? I was called everything from an idiot to a stupid mother $#*^# by a lot of people on the list for questioning the classification. I was put in my place, never question the scientists, if they said it was a H6 ordinary chondrite, then it was! Just thought it was interesting . : ) Thanks, Tom peregrineflier - Original Message - From: Robert Woolard [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com Sent: Monday, May 16, 2005 7:21 PM Subject: [meteorite-list] Portales Valley Classification Info Hello List, Well for years now, I know a lot of us were puzzled by the classification of Portales Valley as an H6 ordinary chondrite. (See my article in the May 2001 issue of Meteorite, titled Portales Valley - A Not So Ordinary (Ordinary Chondrite??)! In the recent past, the classification was modified a bit, being changed to read as an H6 Impact Melt Breccia . I am excited to be able to say that there is a distinct chance the true uniqueness of PV may soon be reflected in a possible new moniker
Re: [meteorite-list] Portales Valley Classification Info
Tom, The word 'lazy' came from your post, not mine. Perhaps there was an error in the initial classification, but obviously many people realized the need for clarification and were quite diligent in their pursuits. This is an ongoing process. I for one, thank Jeff Grossman for standing up and explaining what the process was. You complain about all the negativity on the list, but here you are again (the Pope, Barringer, remember?), espousing negativity. What is it you want from 'them'? Bob - Original Message - From: Tom Knudson [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Bob Holmes [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Robert Woolard [EMAIL PROTECTED]; meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com Sent: Tuesday, May 17, 2005 10:50 AM Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Portales Valley Classification Info Hi Bob, I don't believe you were ever chided for questioning the need for reclassifying, I believe the problem stemmed from your derogatory remarks about those working (or not working, lazy, as you assert), on PV. AND as you can see now, work was being done, they were not sitting on their hands, doing nothing. Further, it seems to me as though they had a new type of class and wanted to be sure of their results. now have the proposed reclassification of PV as an H7, metallic-melt breccia (primitive achondrite), with the case made for a new meteorite type designation of Portalesite due to this metallic-melt breccia characteristic. If this proposed reclassification happens, what does this say about the original classification? Was it wrong? Was it a rush to judgment? Did they not want to take the time out to study it enough to properly classify it (lazy)? How could it go from an H6 ordinary chondrite to a Portalesite, H7, metallic-melt breccia (primitive achondrite) Did it experience a metamorphous between studies. I did not call anyone working on it lazy, I asked why the original group did not make up a new classification for this unique meteorite. Apparently Alex Ruzicka, Marvin Killgore, David Mittlefehldt, and Marc Fries among others I am sure, could see this meteorite needed to be studied further and thought it needed to be something more than an H6 ordinary chondrite. If this reclassification does happen, I think my question back in March of 2004 is a fair and valid question, why was PV called a H6 ordinary chondrite? Astronomers are always being reprimanded for telling us a killer asteroid is going to strike the Earth next year. They come out and say it before they get all the information and when they finally do get all the information, they look bad for jumping the gun. A scientist came out and said PV was an H6 ordinary chondrite. Now it looks like all the info might be in and someone had jumped the gun. Do these two branches of science have to play by the same rules, find out all the info before you talk? Thanks, Tom peregrineflier - Original Message - From: Bob Holmes [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Tom Knudson [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Robert Woolard [EMAIL PROTECTED]; meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com Sent: Tuesday, May 17, 2005 9:52 AM Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Portales Valley Classification Info Tom , I don't believe you were ever chided for questioning the need for reclassifying, I believe the problem stemmed from your derogatory remarks about those working (or not working, lazy, as you assert), on PV. AND as you can see now, work was being done, they were not sitting on their hands, doing nothing. Further, it seems to me as though they had a new type of class and wanted to be sure of their results. That PV was not an ordinary H6 is not an opinion that was yours alone, and you were part of a vast majority. Instead of patting yourself on the back, why don't you apologize for your derisive insinuations about those who have put much time and effort into the study of PV. Bob Holmes - Original Message - From: Tom Knudson [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Robert Woolard [EMAIL PROTECTED]; meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com Sent: Tuesday, May 17, 2005 9:11 AM Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Portales Valley Classification Info Hi List, back in March of 2004, I made a lot of enemies on the list for asking; I have to ask, was Portales Valley classified as a H6 ordinary chondrite because they were to lazy to make up a new classification? It would seem to me that this unique meteorite deserves it's own group instead of being shoved into an already existing group. I do not feel like we have found every type of meteorite yet, are they going do this with all of them, just sticking them in existing categories, or will they make a new one if need be? I was called everything from an idiot to a stupid mother $#*^# by a lot of people on the list for questioning the classification. I was put in my place, never question the scientists, if they said it was a H6 ordinary chondrite, then it was! Just thought it was interesting . : ) Thanks, Tom peregrineflier - Original Message - From: Robert
Re: [meteorite-list] Portales Valley Classification Info
Maybe Tom could use the tip of reading more books and papers and asking a few less questions that are not really up to speed with the issues. Dave Bob Holmes wrote: Tom, The word 'lazy' came from your post, not mine. Perhaps there was an error in the initial classification, but obviously many people realized the need for clarification and were quite diligent in their pursuits. This is an ongoing process. I for one, thank Jeff Grossman for standing up and explaining what the process was. You complain about all the negativity on the list, but here you are again (the Pope, Barringer, remember?), espousing negativity. What is it you want from 'them'? Bob - Original Message - From: Tom Knudson [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Bob Holmes [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Robert Woolard [EMAIL PROTECTED]; meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com Sent: Tuesday, May 17, 2005 10:50 AM Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Portales Valley Classification Info Hi Bob, I don't believe you were ever chided for questioning the need for reclassifying, I believe the problem stemmed from your derogatory remarks about those working (or not working, lazy, as you assert), on PV. AND as you can see now, work was being done, they were not sitting on their hands, doing nothing. Further, it seems to me as though they had a new type of class and wanted to be sure of their results. now have the proposed reclassification of PV as an H7, metallic-melt breccia (primitive achondrite), with the case made for a new meteorite type designation of Portalesite due to this metallic-melt breccia characteristic. If this proposed reclassification happens, what does this say about the original classification? Was it wrong? Was it a rush to judgment? Did they not want to take the time out to study it enough to properly classify it (lazy)? How could it go from an H6 ordinary chondrite to a Portalesite, H7, metallic-melt breccia (primitive achondrite) Did it experience a metamorphous between studies. I did not call anyone working on it lazy, I asked why the original group did not make up a new classification for this unique meteorite. Apparently Alex Ruzicka, Marvin Killgore, David Mittlefehldt, and Marc Fries among others I am sure, could see this meteorite needed to be studied further and thought it needed to be something more than an H6 ordinary chondrite. If this reclassification does happen, I think my question back in March of 2004 is a fair and valid question, why was PV called a H6 ordinary chondrite? Astronomers are always being reprimanded for telling us a killer asteroid is going to strike the Earth next year. They come out and say it before they get all the information and when they finally do get all the information, they look bad for jumping the gun. A scientist came out and said PV was an H6 ordinary chondrite. Now it looks like all the info might be in and someone had jumped the gun. Do these two branches of science have to play by the same rules, find out all the info before you talk? Thanks, Tom peregrineflier - Original Message - From: Bob Holmes [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Tom Knudson [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Robert Woolard [EMAIL PROTECTED]; meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com Sent: Tuesday, May 17, 2005 9:52 AM Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Portales Valley Classification Info Tom , I don't believe you were ever chided for questioning the need for reclassifying, I believe the problem stemmed from your derogatory remarks about those working (or not working, lazy, as you assert), on PV. AND as you can see now, work was being done, they were not sitting on their hands, doing nothing. Further, it seems to me as though they had a new type of class and wanted to be sure of their results. That PV was not an ordinary H6 is not an opinion that was yours alone, and you were part of a vast majority. Instead of patting yourself on the back, why don't you apologize for your derisive insinuations about those who have put much time and effort into the study of PV. Bob Holmes - Original Message - From: Tom Knudson [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Robert Woolard [EMAIL PROTECTED]; meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com Sent: Tuesday, May 17, 2005 9:11 AM Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Portales Valley Classification Info Hi List, back in March of 2004, I made a lot of enemies on the list for asking; I have to ask, was Portales Valley classified as a H6 ordinary chondrite because they were to lazy to make up a new classification? It would seem to me that this unique meteorite deserves it's own group instead of being shoved into an already existing group. I do not feel like we have found every type of meteorite yet, are they going do this with all of them, just sticking them in existing categories, or will they make a new one if need be? I was called everything from an idiot to a stupid mother $#*^# by a lot of people on the list for questioning the classification. I was put in my place, never question the scientists
Re: [meteorite-list] Portales Valley Classification Info
Hi Bob, The word 'lazy' came from your post, not mine. I know, sorry if I made it sound like you said it. I wanted to know if it was laziness or what that stopped the study and labeled PV as an ordinary chondrite. Perhaps there was an error in the initial classification, but obviously many people realized the need for clarification and were quite diligent in their pursuits. And that is such great news, PV deserves it!!! This is an ongoing process. I for one, thank Jeff Grossman for standing up and explaining what the process was. I agree, Jeff's post was very enlightening! You complain about all the negativity on the list, but here you are again (the Pope, Barringer, remember?), espousing negativity. I did not bring up the pope, there was no reason for news about him to be on the list. If someone brings up the pope, I am going to respond. Barringer, yes I brought him up, but I can not help myself, when I hear that name, it brings out my bad side. But, I am not espousing negativity with this PV stuff. I think this is very positive, my favorite meteorite getting recognized for what it is, a truly great meteorite! I was insulted by many list members being told that I was not smart enough to question the classification, the Lazy thing did not go over very well, but I was told, who do you think you are, to think that the scientist made a mistake. I just thought it was interesting that it may turn out I am not as stupid after all. Thanks, Tom peregrineflier - Original Message - From: Bob Holmes [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Tom Knudson [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Robert Woolard [EMAIL PROTECTED]; meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com Sent: Tuesday, May 17, 2005 11:12 AM Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Portales Valley Classification Info Tom, The word 'lazy' came from your post, not mine. Perhaps there was an error in the initial classification, but obviously many people realized the need for clarification and were quite diligent in their pursuits. This is an ongoing process. I for one, thank Jeff Grossman for standing up and explaining what the process was. You complain about all the negativity on the list, but here you are again (the Pope, Barringer, remember?), espousing negativity. What is it you want from 'them'? Bob - Original Message - From: Tom Knudson [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Bob Holmes [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Robert Woolard [EMAIL PROTECTED]; meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com Sent: Tuesday, May 17, 2005 10:50 AM Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Portales Valley Classification Info Hi Bob, I don't believe you were ever chided for questioning the need for reclassifying, I believe the problem stemmed from your derogatory remarks about those working (or not working, lazy, as you assert), on PV. AND as you can see now, work was being done, they were not sitting on their hands, doing nothing. Further, it seems to me as though they had a new type of class and wanted to be sure of their results. now have the proposed reclassification of PV as an H7, metallic-melt breccia (primitive achondrite), with the case made for a new meteorite type designation of Portalesite due to this metallic-melt breccia characteristic. If this proposed reclassification happens, what does this say about the original classification? Was it wrong? Was it a rush to judgment? Did they not want to take the time out to study it enough to properly classify it (lazy)? How could it go from an H6 ordinary chondrite to a Portalesite, H7, metallic-melt breccia (primitive achondrite) Did it experience a metamorphous between studies. I did not call anyone working on it lazy, I asked why the original group did not make up a new classification for this unique meteorite. Apparently Alex Ruzicka, Marvin Killgore, David Mittlefehldt, and Marc Fries among others I am sure, could see this meteorite needed to be studied further and thought it needed to be something more than an H6 ordinary chondrite. If this reclassification does happen, I think my question back in March of 2004 is a fair and valid question, why was PV called a H6 ordinary chondrite? Astronomers are always being reprimanded for telling us a killer asteroid is going to strike the Earth next year. They come out and say it before they get all the information and when they finally do get all the information, they look bad for jumping the gun. A scientist came out and said PV was an H6 ordinary chondrite. Now it looks like all the info might be in and someone had jumped the gun. Do these two branches of science have to play by the same rules, find out all the info before you talk? Thanks, Tom peregrineflier - Original Message - From: Bob Holmes [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Tom Knudson [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Robert Woolard [EMAIL PROTECTED]; meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com Sent: Tuesday, May 17, 2005 9:52 AM Subject: Re: [meteorite
RE: [meteorite-list] Portales Valley Classification Info
Tom said: just thought it was interesting that it may turn out I am not as stupid after all. And that would be where on a scale of one to ten? David W. Freeman -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Tom Knudson Sent: Tuesday, May 17, 2005 12:39 PM To: Bob Holmes; Robert Woolard; meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Portales Valley Classification Info Hi Bob, The word 'lazy' came from your post, not mine. I know, sorry if I made it sound like you said it. I wanted to know if it was laziness or what that stopped the study and labeled PV as an ordinary chondrite. Perhaps there was an error in the initial classification, but obviously many people realized the need for clarification and were quite diligent in their pursuits. And that is such great news, PV deserves it!!! This is an ongoing process. I for one, thank Jeff Grossman for standing up and explaining what the process was. I agree, Jeff's post was very enlightening! You complain about all the negativity on the list, but here you are again (the Pope, Barringer, remember?), espousing negativity. I did not bring up the pope, there was no reason for news about him to be on the list. If someone brings up the pope, I am going to respond. Barringer, yes I brought him up, but I can not help myself, when I hear that name, it brings out my bad side. But, I am not espousing negativity with this PV stuff. I think this is very positive, my favorite meteorite getting recognized for what it is, a truly great meteorite! I was insulted by many list members being told that I was not smart enough to question the classification, the Lazy thing did not go over very well, but I was told, who do you think you are, to think that the scientist made a mistake. I just thought it was interesting that it may turn out I am not as stupid after all. Thanks, Tom peregrineflier - Original Message - From: Bob Holmes [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Tom Knudson [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Robert Woolard [EMAIL PROTECTED]; meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com Sent: Tuesday, May 17, 2005 11:12 AM Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Portales Valley Classification Info Tom, The word 'lazy' came from your post, not mine. Perhaps there was an error in the initial classification, but obviously many people realized the need for clarification and were quite diligent in their pursuits. This is an ongoing process. I for one, thank Jeff Grossman for standing up and explaining what the process was. You complain about all the negativity on the list, but here you are again (the Pope, Barringer, remember?), espousing negativity. What is it you want from 'them'? Bob - Original Message - From: Tom Knudson [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Bob Holmes [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Robert Woolard [EMAIL PROTECTED]; meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com Sent: Tuesday, May 17, 2005 10:50 AM Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Portales Valley Classification Info Hi Bob, I don't believe you were ever chided for questioning the need for reclassifying, I believe the problem stemmed from your derogatory remarks about those working (or not working, lazy, as you assert), on PV. AND as you can see now, work was being done, they were not sitting on their hands, doing nothing. Further, it seems to me as though they had a new type of class and wanted to be sure of their results. now have the proposed reclassification of PV as an H7, metallic-melt breccia (primitive achondrite), with the case made for a new meteorite type designation of Portalesite due to this metallic-melt breccia characteristic. If this proposed reclassification happens, what does this say about the original classification? Was it wrong? Was it a rush to judgment? Did they not want to take the time out to study it enough to properly classify it (lazy)? How could it go from an H6 ordinary chondrite to a Portalesite, H7, metallic-melt breccia (primitive achondrite) Did it experience a metamorphous between studies. I did not call anyone working on it lazy, I asked why the original group did not make up a new classification for this unique meteorite. Apparently Alex Ruzicka, Marvin Killgore, David Mittlefehldt, and Marc Fries among others I am sure, could see this meteorite needed to be studied further and thought it needed to be something more than an H6 ordinary chondrite. If this reclassification does happen, I think my question back in March of 2004 is a fair and valid question, why was PV called a H6 ordinary chondrite? Astronomers are always being reprimanded for telling us a killer asteroid is going to strike the Earth next year. They come out and say it before they get all the information and when they finally do get all the information, they look bad for jumping the gun. A scientist came out and said PV was an H6 ordinary chondrite. Now it looks like all
Re: [meteorite-list] Portales Valley Classification Info
Dave Maybe Tom could use the tip of reading more books and papers and asking a few less questions that are not really up to speed with the issues. Not up to speed with the issues, Robert Woolard just posted yesterday (may 17th) new info about PV and a possible new classification! How is it my talking about the classification of PV is not up to speed? Read more books and papers, can you direct me to one published book that talks about Portales Valley's possible new classification, H7, metallic-melt breccia (primitive achondrite),? I don't even know if the new paper has been published yet, if not, how am I, or anyone supposed to read it? Thanks, Tom peregrineflier - Original Message - From: d freeman [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Bob Holmes [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: Tom Knudson [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Robert Woolard [EMAIL PROTECTED]; meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com Sent: Tuesday, May 17, 2005 11:33 AM Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Portales Valley Classification Info Maybe Tom could use the tip of reading more books and papers and asking a few less questions that are not really up to speed with the issues. Dave Bob Holmes wrote: Tom, The word 'lazy' came from your post, not mine. Perhaps there was an error in the initial classification, but obviously many people realized the need for clarification and were quite diligent in their pursuits. This is an ongoing process. I for one, thank Jeff Grossman for standing up and explaining what the process was. You complain about all the negativity on the list, but here you are again (the Pope, Barringer, remember?), espousing negativity. What is it you want from 'them'? Bob - Original Message - From: Tom Knudson [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Bob Holmes [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Robert Woolard [EMAIL PROTECTED]; meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com Sent: Tuesday, May 17, 2005 10:50 AM Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Portales Valley Classification Info Hi Bob, I don't believe you were ever chided for questioning the need for reclassifying, I believe the problem stemmed from your derogatory remarks about those working (or not working, lazy, as you assert), on PV. AND as you can see now, work was being done, they were not sitting on their hands, doing nothing. Further, it seems to me as though they had a new type of class and wanted to be sure of their results. now have the proposed reclassification of PV as an H7, metallic-melt breccia (primitive achondrite), with the case made for a new meteorite type designation of Portalesite due to this metallic-melt breccia characteristic. If this proposed reclassification happens, what does this say about the original classification? Was it wrong? Was it a rush to judgment? Did they not want to take the time out to study it enough to properly classify it (lazy)? How could it go from an H6 ordinary chondrite to a Portalesite, H7, metallic-melt breccia (primitive achondrite) Did it experience a metamorphous between studies. I did not call anyone working on it lazy, I asked why the original group did not make up a new classification for this unique meteorite. Apparently Alex Ruzicka, Marvin Killgore, David Mittlefehldt, and Marc Fries among others I am sure, could see this meteorite needed to be studied further and thought it needed to be something more than an H6 ordinary chondrite. If this reclassification does happen, I think my question back in March of 2004 is a fair and valid question, why was PV called a H6 ordinary chondrite? Astronomers are always being reprimanded for telling us a killer asteroid is going to strike the Earth next year. They come out and say it before they get all the information and when they finally do get all the information, they look bad for jumping the gun. A scientist came out and said PV was an H6 ordinary chondrite. Now it looks like all the info might be in and someone had jumped the gun. Do these two branches of science have to play by the same rules, find out all the info before you talk? Thanks, Tom peregrineflier - Original Message - From: Bob Holmes [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Tom Knudson [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Robert Woolard [EMAIL PROTECTED]; meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com Sent: Tuesday, May 17, 2005 9:52 AM Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Portales Valley Classification Info Tom , I don't believe you were ever chided for questioning the need for reclassifying, I believe the problem stemmed from your derogatory remarks about those working (or not working, lazy, as you assert), on PV. AND as you can see now, work was being done, they were not sitting on their hands, doing nothing. Further, it seems to me as though they had a new type of class and wanted to be sure of their results. That PV was not an ordinary H6 is not an opinion that was yours alone, and you were
[meteorite-list] Portales Valley / Bum rap for astronomers
Hi Tom and List, If this proposed reclassification happens, what does this say about the original classification? Was it wrong? No. Was it a rush to judgment? No. Did they not want to take the time out to study it enough to properly classify it (lazy)? No. It was studied. Everything about it fit into the H classification system, and still does. How could it go from an H6 ordinary chondrite to a Portalesite, H7, metallic-melt breccia (primitive achondrite) Did it experience a metamorphous sic between studies. You're jumping the gun. The reclassification is only at the proposal stage. I did not call anyone working on it lazy, I asked why the original group did not make up a new classification for this unique meteorite. Because it didn't need one. It fit into the existing classification system just fine -- and still does. Astronomers are always being reprimanded for telling us a killer asteroid is going to strike the Earth next year. They come out and say it before they get all the information and when they finally do get all the information, they look bad for jumping the gun. This is the trouble with both the media and the general public these days. Communicating science matters with either of them is next to impossible because both are so poorly educated in math and science. Astronomers aren't the ones saying the sky is falling -- the MEDIA is. Asteroid impact predictions our worded in unambiguous language to fellow asteroid trajectory researchers, and anyone else who invests 15 minutes of their time to understand how near-earth objects (NEOs) are discovered and their orbits determined. Let me give you an analogy. You're on the beach at night in Santa Barbara, CA, and you see a missile launch out of Vandenberg AFB. You take a half dozen digital pictures over the course of 30 seconds as the rocket and its plume rise in the western sky... There's a cruise ship in the western Pacific at that moment on its way from Fiji to Hawaii. What are the odds that the missile is going to accidentally hit it (or close enough to it that it presents a hazard) based on the your six time-tagged photographs? Let's suppose you quickly compute a trajectory based on those six positions, and you're surprised to discover that the missile is definitely going to impact within 100 miles of the cruise ship in 30 minutes, and that the odds are 1 in 50 that it's going to impact within 2 miles. Should the cruise ship be warned? (If *you* were on that cruise ship, would you want to know?) Suppose further that you have the ability to get a fix on the missile's position 15 minutes into its flight (say from the tracking station on Maui), and that once you have you'll be able to refine the impact point prediction to within 2 miles with 95% probability. Do you wait those 15 precious minutes to see if the danger goes away, or do you let the ship's captain know about the potential hazard right away (even though the chance of disaster is less than 2%)? To further complicate your dilemma, suppose the captain could easily maneuver the ship to a safe location if given 20 minutes' warning, but that if you wait for the Maui data you can only give him 10 minutes' warning -- and that this isn't enough time for him to get to a safe distance. This is what astronomers are up against -- balancing the public's right to be aware of something potentially disastrous in a timely fashion, versus keeping them in the dark on the grounds that in all likelihood the hazard will go away as more information is obtained. I guarantee that if they did more of the latter, everyone would be screaming conspiracy. But too much of the former desensitizes the public to the warning and causes them to unfairly accuse the astronomers of being a bunch of Chicken Littles. The Torino Scale was an attempt to translate the scientific language of impact probabilities and consequences into a system that the general public could understand: http://neo.jpl.nasa.gov/torino_scale.html The wording was recently revised -- partly as a result of 2004 MN4's temporary status at Torino Scale 4 last year -- but much is still lost in translation. --Rob __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] Portales Valley Classification Info
Hi Tom It was stated in one of the earlier posts where it was published. The article was published in Feb. issue of MAPS. Here is an abstract of the article; http://meteoritics.org/Abst_40-2.htm#Ruzicka I'm not sure if the PV article is available for purchase. It might be and I can check if anyone is interested. I would also like to point out that several other fine articles were in this issue as well including but not limited to; http://meteoritics.org/Current%20Issue.htm 1) A meteorite impact crater field in eastern Bavaria? A preliminary report 2) Regolith history of lunar meteorites 3) Spectral reflectance of Martian meteorites: Spectral signatures as a template for locating source region on Mars 4) The formation of the Widmanstätten structure in meteorites I especially like the last article. It discusses the four possible mechanisms for the formation of Widmanstätten structure in meteorites. Unfortunately the abstract does not do the article justice. It is actually much more readable and interesting than the abstract. If this makes anyone decide to become a member the the Meteoritical Society they do start at the beginning of the year so you would receive all 2005 issues. Mike -- Mike Jensen IMCA 4264 Jensen Meteorites 16730 E Ada PL Aurora, CO 80017-3137 303-337-4361 website: www.jensenmeteorites.com Dave Maybe Tom could use the tip of reading more books and papers and asking a few less questions that are not really up to speed with the issues. Not up to speed with the issues, Robert Woolard just posted yesterday (may 17th) new info about PV and a possible new classification! How is it my talking about the classification of PV is not up to speed? Read more books and papers, can you direct me to one published book that talks about Portales Valley's possible new classification, H7, metallic-melt breccia (primitive achondrite),? I don't even know if the new paper has been published yet, if not, how am I, or anyone supposed to read it? Thanks, Tom peregrineflier - Original Message - From: d freeman [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Bob Holmes [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: Tom Knudson [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Robert Woolard [EMAIL PROTECTED]; meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com Sent: Tuesday, May 17, 2005 11:33 AM Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Portales Valley Classification Info Maybe Tom could use the tip of reading more books and papers and asking a few less questions that are not really up to speed with the issues. Dave Bob Holmes wrote: Tom, The word 'lazy' came from your post, not mine. Perhaps there was an error in the initial classification, but obviously many people realized the need for clarification and were quite diligent in their pursuits. This is an ongoing process. I for one, thank Jeff Grossman for standing up and explaining what the process was. You complain about all the negativity on the list, but here you are again (the Pope, Barringer, remember?), espousing negativity. What is it you want from 'them'? Bob - Original Message - From: Tom Knudson [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Bob Holmes [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Robert Woolard [EMAIL PROTECTED]; meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com Sent: Tuesday, May 17, 2005 10:50 AM Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Portales Valley Classification Info Hi Bob, I don't believe you were ever chided for questioning the need for reclassifying, I believe the problem stemmed from your derogatory remarks about those working (or not working, lazy, as you assert), on PV. AND as you can see now, work was being done, they were not sitting on their hands, doing nothing. Further, it seems to me as though they had a new type of class and wanted to be sure of their results. now have the proposed reclassification of PV as an H7, metallic-melt breccia (primitive achondrite), with the case made for a new meteorite type designation of Portalesite due to this metallic-melt breccia characteristic. If this proposed reclassification happens, what does this say about the original classification? Was it wrong? Was it a rush to judgment? Did they not want to take the time out to study it enough to properly classify it (lazy)? How could it go from an H6 ordinary chondrite to a Portalesite, H7, metallic-melt breccia (primitive achondrite) Did it experience a metamorphous between studies. I did not call anyone working on it lazy, I asked why the original group did not make up a new classification for this unique meteorite. Apparently Alex Ruzicka, Marvin Killgore, David Mittlefehldt, and Marc Fries among others I am sure, could see this meteorite needed to be studied further and thought it needed to be something more than an H6 ordinary chondrite. If this reclassification does happen, I think my question back in March of 2004 is a fair and valid
Re: [meteorite-list] Portales Valley Classification Info
Tom, I agree with Bob. Ask anyone who anxiously waited for the official classification of Portales Valley to be released, and you will find that with few exceptions, every one was shaking their heads in disbelief when the announcement was made. I seriously doubt that anyone spoke negatively about you for saying the classification should be something other than an ordinary H6. Rather, you were probably attacked for making derogatory remarks about scientist being too lazy to do their job right. To me, that shows a lack of understanding on YOUR part about how the system works. JKG At 09:52 AM 5/17/2005, Bob Holmes wrote: Tom , I don't believe you were ever chided for questioning the need for reclassifying, I believe the problem stemmed from your derogatory remarks about those working (or not working, lazy, as you assert), on PV. AND as you can see now, work was being done, they were not sitting on their hands, doing nothing. Further, it seems to me as though they had a new type of class and wanted to be sure of their results. That PV was not an ordinary H6 is not an opinion that was yours alone, and you were part of a vast majority. Instead of patting yourself on the back, why don't you apologize for your derisive insinuations about those who have put much time and effort into the study of PV. Bob Holmes __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] Portales Valley Classification Info
Hola Tom, No one said you are stupid (except your own post)! You are ruffling some feathers because your comments seem to be too insensitive. Scientists - which can include even you and me - normally have no problem being questioned (well, sort of...), that is typically how progress is made. But to play that game on friendly terms, if you have been too lazy to lift a finger for you own education (even if it means via Google!), I would say you are way too arrogant to be taken seriously when you start telling these guys who are busting their buns to turn out papers and teach and have a family life, not to mention deal with the educational politics and institutional beaurocracies, without you having the necessary tools to really understand what they are up against and how science usually works in your neck of the woods. It ain't no fun having a jack-in-the-box in Kingman pop up saying You're wrong, I told you so - and for those more experienced, it can be downright funny or even pathetic to listen to that. Meteoritics, like all sciences is developing all the time as we learn more, sometimes what was a right answer falls from favor because of the benefit of hindsight which a researcher simply doesn't have! I won't comment on the Pope and Barringer provocations, you already have figured them out I hope. But you have a great inquiring mind which could be kicked into shape with you own initiative to be a good scientist. Let me suggest you enroll in Pre-Algebra at the Kingman Campus of the Mohave Community College. You seem to have the time...It starts June 6 and is over by July 11 and costs $126. Then with that course you can take the Geology classes below you like and in the process of lab work, get an appreciation for the scientific mentod and what it is like to have someone who has hindsight to be pressuring you for answers you are still discovering, and then having to produce written evaluations in the way of assignments, lab reports, not even mentioning tests. Instead of throwing stones from your house and bickering your intelligence away over the internet, you could even sign up for some of these courses via the distance education for $60 extra a piece if you are too lazy yourself to go to class! Below is the summer schedule for Pre-Algebra, the prerequisite for the Geology courses, and then I am sure you could sweet-talk the professors into any of the courses listed. The Geology-Rockhounding course is really cool, if you opted for just that. Tom, you may not fully appreciate the opportunity you have living where you do to get out in the field with experts, meet more like minded people which will add to your interest and finally be able to better position and found your questions for more satisfying responses. XXX said this so I am right! is really a hollow response. The math class this summer would have you set to go forward and classes are only $42 a credit there special for you in Kingman. Who knows, being lazy might help you be a better scientist - as long as you aren't t lazy as some of your posts get close to being! Anyway brought to you by your friendly e-neighborhood college counselor (sp?). Man, how luck you are to have the time and location for this!!! Don't let it be taken from you...Maybe you can intern at Killgore's:) Saludos, Doug _www.mohave.edu_ (http://www.mohave.edu) $42/credit Pre-Algebra 211 602 06/06/2005 07/11/2005 - MTWTh HEIDRICH SHERRI L 5:30 PM - 8:20 PM KINGMAN GLG 060 ROCK-HOUND GEOLOGY: Covers a study of basic mineralogy, including rocks, minerals, fossils, and features of the land surface, and techniques of prospecting for minerals and metals.Special emphasis is placed on local geology and topics of interest to individual class members. Designed for the amateur rock hound as well as jewelry makers. Includes field trips. Credit Hours: 3 (Three lecture; two lab) Prerequisites: none GLG 101 PHYSICAL GEOLOGY: An introduction to geologic processes on and within the Earth. Topics covered include concepts in mineral and rocks, tectonic processes, weathering and erosion, sedimentation, structural deformation, landscape development and ground water. Laboratory work and additional field trips are included to provide observational examples of the above topics and to learn geologic field techniques of data gathering. Credit Hours: 4 (Three lecture; three lab) Prerequisites: ENG 085, 089 and MAT 021 or appropriate score on Assessment Test Lab fee=$20 GLG 102 HISTORICAL GEOLOGY: An introduction to the evolutionary history of the earth and life on the planet. Topics covered include concepts in stratigraphy, rock dating, tectonic events, global climate, ecologic changes and the study of faunal and floral succession over geologic periods of time. Laboratory work and additional field trips are included to provide
Re: [meteorite-list] Portales Valley Classification Info
If this proposed reclassification happens, what does this say about the original classification? Things are reclassified all the time. Mount Egerton was originally classified as a mesosiderite, it is now an aubrite. Yilmia was an EL5 and is now an EL6. There are lots of other examples. As more information comes in through more research or new improved equipment things change. Was it wrong? Absolutely not. Was it a rush to judgment? You obviously know nothing about David Kring to even think this question let alone ask it. He doesn't rush anything and if every T isn't crossed or i dotted it doesn't go out. It is one of the reasons the U of Arizona does so few classifications because he nails down every detail and it takes forever to get a classification out. Did they not want to take the time out to study it enough to properly classify it (lazy)? How could it go from an H6 ordinary chondrite to a Portalesite, H7, metallic-melt breccia (primitive achondrite) Did it experience a metamorphous between studies. What a judgmental load of crap this statement is. Not only was the classifier lazy, but also incompetent because he gave a classification that didn't match your views and some new proposed classification somebody called it 7 years later. Your implication the classifier was obviously incompetent or the stone metamorphosed between analysiss is ridiculous. I did not call anyone working on it lazy, I asked why the original group did not make up a new classification for this unique meteorite. Wrong. direct quote from Tom K March 2004 I have to ask, was Portales Valley classified as a H6 ordinary chondrite because they were to lazy to make up a new classification? Tom you make basically the same statement in this email saying the classifier was to lazy to do a proper classification. Did they not want to take the time out to study it enough to properly classify it (lazy)? Apparently Alex Ruzicka, Marvin Killgore, David Mittlefehldt, and Marc Fries among others I am sure, could see this meteorite needed to be studied further What makes you thing the original classifiers don't continue to work on PV? If this reclassification does happen, I think my question back in March of 2004 is a fair and valid question, why was PV called a H6 ordinary chondrite? Nobody has ever said it was ordinary including the classifiers. Both David Kring and Alex Rubin called it an H6 although with different qualifiers because according to the classification scheme in 1998 that is what it was. Astronomers are always being reprimanded for telling us a killer asteroid is going to strike the Earth next year. They come out and say it before they get all the information and when they finally do get all the information, they look bad for jumping the gun. Wrong again. The astronomers post the information so other astronomers can look for the rock. It is the media that finds the information and mis-reports it and then blames the astronomers for the media's lack of understanding. A scientist came out and said PV was an H6 ordinary chondrite. Now it looks like all the info might be in and someone had jumped the gun. Do these two branches of science have to play by the same rules, find out all the info before you talk? Jumped the gun??? So at what point is it acceptable to you, Tom? Should the classification be published after the classification work is done OR do they have to wait for everybody all over the world to complete every single study that will ever be made on the meteorite and then pool the information decades later before anything can be published? The second alternative is certainly what you appear to be asking for. -- Eric Olson Feeling cranky this morning. ELKK Meteorites http://www.star-bits.com __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] Portales Valley Classification Info
Great post Doug, Geeze, learning from othersinteresting concept! Dave F. (who is not proud tom, and is not a blogger participant ever) and would like to see Mr. Tom get some help somewhere before he turns into a paranoid schizophrenic! [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hola Tom, No one said you are stupid (except your own post)! You are ruffling some feathers because your comments seem to be too insensitive. Scientists - which can include even you and me - normally have no problem being questioned (well, sort of...), that is typically how progress is made. But to play that game on friendly terms, if you have been too lazy to lift a finger for you own education (even if it means via Google!), I would say you are way too arrogant to be taken seriously when you start telling these guys who are busting their buns to turn out papers and teach and have a family life, not to mention deal with the educational politics and institutional beaurocracies, without you having the necessary tools to really understand what they are up against and how science usually works in your neck of the woods. It ain't no fun having a jack-in-the-box in Kingman pop up saying You're wrong, I told you so - and for those more experienced, it can be downright funny or even pathetic to listen to that. Meteoritics, like all sciences is developing all the time as we learn more, sometimes what was a right answer falls from favor because of the benefit of hindsight which a researcher simply doesn't have! I won't comment on the Pope and Barringer provocations, you already have figured them out I hope. But you have a great inquiring mind which could be kicked into shape with you own initiative to be a good scientist. Let me suggest you enroll in Pre-Algebra at the Kingman Campus of the Mohave Community College. You seem to have the time...It starts June 6 and is over by July 11 and costs $126. Then with that course you can take the Geology classes below you like and in the process of lab work, get an appreciation for the scientific mentod and what it is like to have someone who has hindsight to be pressuring you for answers you are still discovering, and then having to produce written evaluations in the way of assignments, lab reports, not even mentioning tests. Instead of throwing stones from your house and bickering your intelligence away over the internet, you could even sign up for some of these courses via the distance education for $60 extra a piece if you are too lazy yourself to go to class! Below is the summer schedule for Pre-Algebra, the prerequisite for the Geology courses, and then I am sure you could sweet-talk the professors into any of the courses listed. The Geology-Rockhounding course is really cool, if you opted for just that. Tom, you may not fully appreciate the opportunity you have living where you do to get out in the field with experts, meet more like minded people which will add to your interest and finally be able to better position and found your questions for more satisfying responses. XXX said this so I am right! is really a hollow response. The math class this summer would have you set to go forward and classes are only $42 a credit there special for you in Kingman. Who knows, being lazy might help you be a better scientist - as long as you aren't t lazy as some of your posts get close to being! Anyway brought to you by your friendly e-neighborhood college counselor (sp?). Man, how luck you are to have the time and location for this!!! Don't let it be taken from you...Maybe you can intern at Killgore's:) Saludos, Doug _www.mohave.edu_ (http://www.mohave.edu) $42/credit Pre-Algebra 211 602 06/06/2005 07/11/2005 - MTWTh HEIDRICH SHERRI L 5:30 PM - 8:20 PM KINGMAN GLG 060 ROCK-HOUND GEOLOGY: Covers a study of basic mineralogy, including rocks, minerals, fossils, and features of the land surface, and techniques of prospecting for minerals and metals.Special emphasis is placed on local geology and topics of interest to individual class members. Designed for the amateur rock hound as well as jewelry makers. Includes field trips. Credit Hours: 3 (Three lecture; two lab) Prerequisites: none GLG 101 PHYSICAL GEOLOGY: An introduction to geologic processes on and within the Earth. Topics covered include concepts in mineral and rocks, tectonic processes, weathering and erosion, sedimentation, structural deformation, landscape development and ground water. Laboratory work and additional field trips are included to provide observational examples of the above topics and to learn geologic field techniques of data gathering. Credit Hours: 4 (Three lecture; three lab) Prerequisites: ENG 085, 089 and MAT 021 or appropriate score on Assessment Test Lab fee=$20 GLG 102 HISTORICAL GEOLOGY: An introduction to the evolutionary history of the earth and life on the planet. Topics
Re: [meteorite-list] Portales Valley Classification Info
Geeze, learning from othersinteresting concept That is why I ask the questions you don't like me asking! : ) Thanks, Tom peregrineflier - Original Message - From: d freeman [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; meteorite email List meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com; Tom Knudson [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Bob Holmes [EMAIL PROTECTED]; JKGwilliam [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, May 17, 2005 12:41 PM Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Portales Valley Classification Info Great post Doug, Geeze, learning from othersinteresting concept! Dave F. (who is not proud tom, and is not a blogger participant ever) and would like to see Mr. Tom get some help somewhere before he turns into a paranoid schizophrenic! [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hola Tom, No one said you are stupid (except your own post)! You are ruffling some feathers because your comments seem to be too insensitive. Scientists - which can include even you and me - normally have no problem being questioned (well, sort of...), that is typically how progress is made. But to play that game on friendly terms, if you have been too lazy to lift a finger for you own education (even if it means via Google!), I would say you are way too arrogant to be taken seriously when you start telling these guys who are busting their buns to turn out papers and teach and have a family life, not to mention deal with the educational politics and institutional beaurocracies, without you having the necessary tools to really understand what they are up against and how science usually works in your neck of the woods. It ain't no fun having a jack-in-the-box in Kingman pop up saying You're wrong, I told you so - and for those more experienced, it can be downright funny or even pathetic to listen to that. Meteoritics, like all sciences is developing all the time as we learn more, sometimes what was a right answer falls from favor because of the benefit of hindsight which a researcher simply doesn't have! I won't comment on the Pope and Barringer provocations, you already have figured them out I hope. But you have a great inquiring mind which could be kicked into shape with you own initiative to be a good scientist. Let me suggest you enroll in Pre-Algebra at the Kingman Campus of the Mohave Community College. You seem to have the time...It starts June 6 and is over by July 11 and costs $126. Then with that course you can take the Geology classes below you like and in the process of lab work, get an appreciation for the scientific mentod and what it is like to have someone who has hindsight to be pressuring you for answers you are still discovering, and then having to produce written evaluations in the way of assignments, lab reports, not even mentioning tests. Instead of throwing stones from your house and bickering your intelligence away over the internet, you could even sign up for some of these courses via the distance education for $60 extra a piece if you are too lazy yourself to go to class! Below is the summer schedule for Pre-Algebra, the prerequisite for the Geology courses, and then I am sure you could sweet-talk the professors into any of the courses listed. The Geology-Rockhounding course is really cool, if you opted for just that. Tom, you may not fully appreciate the opportunity you have living where you do to get out in the field with experts, meet more like minded people which will add to your interest and finally be able to better position and found your questions for more satisfying responses. XXX said this so I am right! is really a hollow response. The math class this summer would have you set to go forward and classes are only $42 a credit there special for you in Kingman. Who knows, being lazy might help you be a better scientist - as long as you aren't t lazy as some of your posts get close to being! Anyway brought to you by your friendly e-neighborhood college counselor (sp?). Man, how luck you are to have the time and location for this!!! Don't let it be taken from you...Maybe you can intern at Killgore's:) Saludos, Doug _www.mohave.edu_ (http://www.mohave.edu) $42/credit Pre-Algebra 211 602 06/06/2005 07/11/2005 - MTWTh HEIDRICH SHERRI L 5:30 PM - 8:20 PM KINGMAN GLG 060 ROCK-HOUND GEOLOGY: Covers a study of basic mineralogy, including rocks, minerals, fossils, and features of the land surface, and techniques of prospecting for minerals and metals.Special emphasis is placed on local geology and topics of interest to individual class members. Designed for the amateur rock hound as well as jewelry makers. Includes field trips. Credit Hours: 3 (Three lecture; two lab) Prerequisites: none GLG 101 PHYSICAL GEOLOGY: An introduction to geologic processes on and within the Earth. Topics covered include concepts in mineral and rocks, tectonic processes, weathering and erosion
[meteorite-list] Portales Valley Classification Clarification
The authors of the MAPS paper wrote: Based on our work, it seems clear that the metal-sulfide and even the silicate portion of the meteorite was partly melted, suggesting that the petrographic grade of Portales Valley is higher than six. Considering this likely partial melt origin for PV, the H chondrite-like mineral compositions for most phases, and our inference of a mainly endogenic heat source, Portales Valley can be properly regarded as a primitive achondrite related to H chondrites. In other words, it is an H7 achondrite. Jeff wrote: If I had to publish the announcement again today as editor, knowing what we do now, I'd probably go with H melt breccia. Jeff also wrote: Some people believe that melting in PACs was caused by impact processing, while others (I'd say the majority) think the heat source is internal. If impacts played a role in their formation, then the line between IMB and PAC gets fuzzy at some point. If they didn't play a role, then I suppose type 7 would transition into PAC once partial melting begins. But I don't see any way to confuse type 7 (no melt) with IMB (contains melt). -- That leaves me only a little bit wondering. So you can't have both a PAC and a type 7, they are mutually exclusive? As soon as melt is formed it ceases to be thought of as a petrologic grade 7 (i.e., petrologic grade becomes obsolete) and it is then either a PAC or an IMB, depending on the source of heat which produced the melt (PAC if endogenic and IMB if from impact event)? That would be pretty clear. I would hazard a guess that there might be other lithologies somewhat distant from the PV rock (crater floor?) which would exhibit metamorphic effects only to the degree of an H7 type, without experiencing the degree of heating, endogenic or impact generated, necessary to cause partial melting. David __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Fw: [meteorite-list] Portales Valley Classification Info
Hello all- Forwarding the below message as requested Rob Wesel http://www.nakhladogmeteorites.com -- We are the music makers... and we are the dreamers of the dreams. Willy Wonka, 1971 - Original Message - From: steve eshbaugh [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Rob Wesel [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, May 17, 2005 5:55 AM Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Portales Valley Classification Info Hi Rob: I can't get anything put on the list so I thought I'd go through another list member. Please forward to all list members. Just a reminder Deep Impact is on schedule for a July 4th rendezvous with the comet Tempel 1 More information may be obtained at www.nasa.gov For the Great Comet Crater Contest go to www.planetary.org Thanks Steve [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I had a nice evening chat with Dr. Ruzicka a while back, this paper is the completion of a very long endeavor. He is very erudite and enthusiastic on the subject and I am glad to see the finished work. Portales Valley deserves it. Rob Wesel http://www.nakhladogmeteorites.com -- We are the music makers... and we are the dreamers of the dreams. Willy Wonka, 1971 - Original Message - From: Robert Woolard To: Sent: Monday, May 16, 2005 7:21 PM Subject: [meteorite-list] Portales Valley Classification Info Hello List, Well for years now, I know a lot of us were puzzled by the classification of Portales Valley as an H6 ordinary chondrite. (See my article in the May 2001 issue of Meteorite, titled Portales Valley - A Not So Ordinary (Ordinary Chondrite??)! In the recent past, the classification was modified a bit, being changed to read as an H6 Impact Melt Breccia . I am excited to be able to say that there is a distinct chance the true uniqueness of PV may soon be reflected in a possible new moniker for this intriguing meteorite. David Weir was kind enough to make me aware of a new and comprehensive paper by Alex Ruzicka, Marvin Killgore, David Mittlefehldt, and Marc Fries in the current MAPS. In this detailed work, we now have the proposed reclassification of PV as an H7, metallic-melt breccia (primitive achondrite), with the case made for a new meteorite type designation of Portalesite due to this metallic-melt breccia characteristic. You can read David's updated description of PV on his excellent website here: http://www.meteoritestudies.com Many thanks to David for news of this exciting paper, and to the authors of the paper as well. Sincerely, Robert Woolard __ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - You care about security. So do we. http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail __ 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 - Do you Yahoo!? Make Yahoo! your home page __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
[meteorite-list] Portales Valley Classification Info
Hello List, Well for years now, I know a lot of us were puzzled by the classification of Portales Valley as an H6 ordinary chondrite. (See my article in the May 2001 issue of Meteorite, titled Portales Valley - A Not So Ordinary (Ordinary Chondrite??)! In the recent past, the classification was modified a bit, being changed to read as an H6 Impact Melt Breccia . I am excited to be able to say that there is a distinct chance the true uniqueness of PV may soon be reflected in a possible new moniker for this intriguing meteorite. David Weir was kind enough to make me aware of a new and comprehensive paper by Alex Ruzicka, Marvin Killgore, David Mittlefehldt, and Marc Fries in the current MAPS. In this detailed work, we now have the proposed reclassification of PV as an H7, metallic-melt breccia (primitive achondrite), with the case made for a new meteorite type designation of Portalesite due to this metallic-melt breccia characteristic. You can read David's updated description of PV on his excellent website here: http://www.meteoritestudies.com Many thanks to David for news of this exciting paper, and to the authors of the paper as well. Sincerely, Robert Woolard __ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - You care about security. So do we. http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] Portales Valley Classification Info
Hello Robert and all, I've always considered PV a round peg in a square hole. I mean that even a quick glance at PV is enough to know it doesn't make sense to lump it in with the run-of-the-mill ordinary chondrite. So this change in heart by the classification gods is really good news. Looking forward to knowing more Martin - Original Message - From: Robert Woolard [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Monday, May 16, 2005 7:21 pm Subject: [meteorite-list] Portales Valley Classification Info Hello List, Well for years now, I know a lot of us were puzzled by the classification of Portales Valley as an H6 ordinary chondrite. (See my article in the May 2001 issue of Meteorite, titled Portales Valley - A Not So Ordinary (Ordinary Chondrite??)! In the recent past, the classification was modified a bit, being changed to read as an H6 Impact Melt Breccia . I am excited to be able to say that there is a distinct chance the true uniqueness of PV may soon be reflected in a possible new moniker for this intriguing meteorite. David Weir was kind enough to make me aware of a new and comprehensive paper by Alex Ruzicka, Marvin Killgore, David Mittlefehldt, and Marc Fries in the current MAPS. In this detailed work, we now have the proposed reclassification of PV as an H7, metallic-melt breccia (primitive achondrite), with the case made for a new meteorite type designation of Portalesite due to this metallic-melt breccia characteristic. You can read David's updated description of PV on his excellent website here: http://www.meteoritestudies.com Many thanks to David for news of this exciting paper, and to the authors of the paper as well. Sincerely, Robert Woolard __ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - You care about security. So do we . http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail __ 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] Portales Valley Classification Info
I had a nice evening chat with Dr. Ruzicka a while back, this paper is the completion of a very long endeavor. He is very erudite and enthusiastic on the subject and I am glad to see the finished work. Portales Valley deserves it. Rob Wesel http://www.nakhladogmeteorites.com -- We are the music makers... and we are the dreamers of the dreams. Willy Wonka, 1971 - Original Message - From: Robert Woolard [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com Sent: Monday, May 16, 2005 7:21 PM Subject: [meteorite-list] Portales Valley Classification Info Hello List, Well for years now, I know a lot of us were puzzled by the classification of Portales Valley as an H6 ordinary chondrite. (See my article in the May 2001 issue of Meteorite, titled Portales Valley - A Not So Ordinary (Ordinary Chondrite??)! In the recent past, the classification was modified a bit, being changed to read as an H6 Impact Melt Breccia . I am excited to be able to say that there is a distinct chance the true uniqueness of PV may soon be reflected in a possible new moniker for this intriguing meteorite. David Weir was kind enough to make me aware of a new and comprehensive paper by Alex Ruzicka, Marvin Killgore, David Mittlefehldt, and Marc Fries in the current MAPS. In this detailed work, we now have the proposed reclassification of PV as an H7, metallic-melt breccia (primitive achondrite), with the case made for a new meteorite type designation of Portalesite due to this metallic-melt breccia characteristic. You can read David's updated description of PV on his excellent website here: http://www.meteoritestudies.com Many thanks to David for news of this exciting paper, and to the authors of the paper as well. Sincerely, Robert Woolard __ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - You care about security. So do we. http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail __ 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] Portales Valley Meteorites - Site Update -Ad
Hello List, If you are interested in Portales Valley Meteorites, you might want to check out my site at (what else?): http://www.portalesvalleymeteorites.com Some members have stated that they could not remember how to get to my site. I apologize for it being such a long address, but just remember that between the www. and the .com it's just portales valley meteorites (no spaces between the words and an s on the end of meteorite). I hope you will enjoy the pictures and info. on PV that you will find there. I look forward to working with any of you who are interested in any piece. I think you will find my prices very reasonable. Sincerely, Robert Woolard __ Do you Yahoo!? SBC Yahoo! - Internet access at a great low price. http://promo.yahoo.com/sbc/ __ Meteorite-list mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
[meteorite-list] Portales Valley Meteorites
Hello List, If you are interested in Portales Valley Meteorites, you might want to check out my site at (what else?): http://www.portalesvalleymeteorites.com Some members have stated that they could not remember how to get to my site. I apologize for it being such a long address, but just remember that between the www. and the .com it's just portales valley meteorites (no spaces between the words and an s on the end of meteorite). I hope you will enjoy the pictures and info. on PV that you will find there. I look forward to working with any of you who are interested in any piece. I think you will find my prices very reasonable. Sincerely, Robert Woolard __ Do you Yahoo!? SBC Yahoo! - Internet access at a great low price. http://promo.yahoo.com/sbc/ __ Meteorite-list mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
[meteorite-list] Portales Vally classification?
Hello List, I have to ask, was Portales Valley classified as a H6 ordinary chondrite because they were to lazy to make up a new classification? It would seem to me that this unique meteorite deserves it's own group instead of being shoved into an already existing group. I do not feel like we have found every type of meteorite yet, are they going do this with all of them, just sticking them in existing categories, or will they make a new one if need be? Thanks, Tom peregrineflier IMCA #6168 __ Meteorite-list mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] Portales Vally classification?
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: this unique meteorite deserves it's own group insteadof being shoved into an already existing group. What are your reasons? GregoryJ. Gregory Wilson2118 Wilshire Blvd. #918Santa Monica, CA 90403
Re: [meteorite-list] Portales Vally Thanks
Hey, thanks to all the replies I received! Thanks, Tom peregrineflier IMCA #6168 - Original Message - From: Tom aka James Knudson [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, March 07, 2004 1:21 PM Subject: [meteorite-list] Portales Vally classification? Hello List, I have to ask, was Portales Valley classified as a H6 ordinary chondrite because they were to lazy to make up a new classification? It would seem to me that this unique meteorite deserves it's own group instead of being shoved into an already existing group. I do not feel like we have found every type of meteorite yet, are they going do this with all of them, just sticking them in existing categories, or will they make a new one if need be? Thanks, Tom peregrineflier IMCA #6168 __ Meteorite-list mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list __ Meteorite-list mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] Portales Valley and PF SF's
I'd guess that a particular "tailwind" is not required to make the situation you describe happen, as it impacts me as a bit too simple. The particles are not falling at the same rate (terminal velocity depends on mass, cross sectional area, their ratio and aerodynamics in general, so differing "headwind" (or angled wind, etc) velocities eaisly can be an alternate explanation, as different strata of the atmosphere with different and ever changing conditions, especially for steeper angles of incidence. There are way too many meters of height to be imagining that the wind you feel sitting in a lawn chair is a uniform column extending out to space, or even of uniform density. Try flying a kite. The wind is in your face, but the kite crashes opposite what you expect, happened to me the other day at 250 feet or so. And as fart as strong tail winds in the upper atmosphere...well, in the upper atmosphere where the air is thin enough, a hurricane speed wind might not really do much at all. Most of the action is probably below 10 miles, or even less. Either way, resident time is probaby at least, if not more important than windspeeds. And on the average, the smaller particle the longer its up there. Heck, there are updrafts and down drafts, too. So maybe lighter particles were cycled a bit for good measure, increasing their resident flying time. Lots of possibilities, including that you might only be looking at 10% of the mass, the rest having vaporized, distribution, etc. worse maybe after altering course upon initial disintegration. Idle musings... Regarding terminology good point, convention for descriptors is probably a good idea, with words such as scattered, fragmented, disintegration pattern, etc. Saludos, Doug En un mensaje con fecha 12/19/2003 10:35:41 PM Mexico Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] escribe: My instinct is to suggest that there was a moderate to strong tailwind in the upper atmosphere that pushed the lighter material "past" the heavier pieces so as to make it seem to have fallen in reverse pattern.
Re: [meteorite-list] Portales Valley and PF SF's
Rex and List, That's an interesting point Rex. I have seen that effect. One of my theories about Park Forest had been that it may have been a multi-stage breakup followed by a detonating main mass. Once breakoff pieces separate, they immediately lose energy to the process of seeking aerodynamic equilibrium, thus falling behind the main mass. When the main mass detonates and sends out an omnidirectional shockwave, the followon breakoff fragments collide with the shockwave causing them to be redirected. This wouldquite nearly mimic theeffect you are describing. Rob Matson has programmed re-entry software that he attempted to apply to the PF event to see if he could come close to predicting the SF pattern. He was able to nail it right on by entering the upper level winds into the scenario along with approximatedinitial massandcosmic velocities. I was convinced by that analysis of how much winds could bend SF patterns. I would like to play around with such a program to gauge the differences made by changes in those parameters.Mark Jackson Chaosity Meteoritics [EMAIL PROTECTED] Do you Yahoo!? New Yahoo! Photos - easier uploading and sharing
[meteorite-list] Portales Valley and PF SF's
Dear List, To continue our musings on strewnfields, I'd like to firstclarify Adam's post earlier when he identified strewnfields as the fall pattern of meteorites that break upprior toimpact (Park Forest, etc.). This wouldbe fine with me but it suggests we need new/different terminology to describe post impact distributions of impact created fragments (Canyon Diablo, etc.). Some would ask why and the reason is before us; it's hard to understand and study something without specific language. To that end, I'm trying to resolve in my mind why the Portales Valley SF was essentially the reverse of the expected weight distribution. My instinct is to suggest that there wasa moderate to strong tailwind in the upper atmosphere that pushed the lighter material "past" the heavier pieces so as to make it seem to have fallen in reverse pattern. Maybe Rob can help us there. I remember that the PF upper level winds wereleft to right and made the SFseem to elongate in a perpendicular fashion to the velocity vector. Happy Holidays guys!Mark Jackson Chaosity Meteoritics [EMAIL PROTECTED] Do you Yahoo!? New Yahoo! Photos - easier uploading and sharing
[meteorite-list] Portales Valley Inquiry
Does anyone have Robert Wollard's Portales Valley website URL? Thanks... Jim Strope421 Fourth StreetGlen Dale, WV 26038 Catch a Falling Star Meteoriteshttp://www.catchafallingstar.com
Re: [meteorite-list] Portales Valley Inquiry
Hi Jim, www.portalesvalleymeteorites.com -Ryan __ Meteorite-list mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
RE: [meteorite-list] Portales Valley Inquiry
Its : http://www.portalesvalleymeteorites.com/
Re: [meteorite-list] Portales Valley and Park Forest
I have write the portales when is exit in the market the price it was to $35-40 grams, and for me is ok for a special meteorite type Portales Valley - find another similar meteorite - but after few years the price is go to $12/gr. when the main mass is go cut. The same is for Park Forest, now people sale for prices over $40/gr., but at few years the price for sure go to under 10/gr., and Park Forest, for the moment, is a ordinary chondrite. What change from Portales and Park? All 2 have hit houses, all 2 is a witness fall, but the first is a very fantastic ordinary chondrite, the second is a normaly chondrite. You now put a portales valley for sale for $35/gr. no persons buy this, the same is for Park Forest, now all want a piece and pay high ammount of money, but at few years the price change, specially if someone ruin the prices of market like already was done with the lunars, martian and varied historical meteorites, make losing money to who had invested grosses adds. Regards Matteo --- Dave Andrews [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: M come Meteorite Meteorites wrote: I remember when is exit the first Portales pieces$35-40/gr. now is go to $12.5/gr. but this is a very special meteorite, and have hit houses and fall over a citythe same of Park Forestand the total mass of Portales is many low. I don't understand why you are complaining. You are a dealer, and you stated that you just bought PF for a low price, yet you want too object to the high price it's retailing for? (much more than you supposedly paid). I can't even begin to understand your logic. = M come Meteorite - Matteo Chinellato Via Triestina 126/A - 30030 - TESSERA, VENEZIA, ITALY Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sale Site: http://www.mcomemeteorite.com Collection Site: http://www.mcomemeteorite.info International Meteorite Collectors Association #2140 MSN Messanger: [EMAIL PROTECTED] EBAY.COM:http://members.ebay.com/aboutme/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/ __ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Tax Center - File online, calculators, forms, and more http://tax.yahoo.com __ Meteorite-list mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] Portales Valley and Park Forest
Matteo, Are you just now figuring out that there are several factors that affect the value of anything that is collectable? Lots of factors have negatively affected the prices of meteorites over the past few years. In contrast, some people will say that the net effect was a GOOD one because it made rarer material available to the common man who collects meteorites. What I really hear in your posts sounds like sour grapes. High prices must be okay to you if you are currently in a selling mode, yet you complain about the prices being too high when you decide to buy. This is a pretty common practice used and desired by businessmen (and women) - buy low, sell high. The skillful dealers in this business know when it's the right time to buy AND sell. That's the way the market goes. Learn to live with it. John Gwilliam At 12:42 AM 4/3/03 -0800, M come Meteorite Meteorites wrote: I have write the portales when is exit in the market the price it was to $35-40 grams, and for me is ok for a special meteorite type Portales Valley - find another similar meteorite - but after few years the price is go to $12/gr. when the main mass is go cut. The same is for Park Forest, now people sale for prices over $40/gr., but at few years the price for sure go to under 10/gr., and Park Forest, for the moment, is a ordinary chondrite. What change from Portales and Park? All 2 have hit houses, all 2 is a witness fall, but the first is a very fantastic ordinary chondrite, the second is a normaly chondrite. You now put a portales valley for sale for $35/gr. no persons buy this, the same is for Park Forest, now all want a piece and pay high ammount of money, but at few years the price change, specially if someone ruin the prices of market like already was done with the lunars, martian and varied historical meteorites, make losing money to who had invested grosses adds. Regards Matteo --- Dave Andrews [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: M come Meteorite Meteorites wrote: I remember when is exit the first Portales pieces$35-40/gr. now is go to $12.5/gr. but this is a very special meteorite, and have hit houses and fall over a citythe same of Park Forestand the total mass of Portales is many low. I don't understand why you are complaining. You are a dealer, and you stated that you just bought PF for a low price, yet you want too object to the high price it's retailing for? (much more than you supposedly paid). I can't even begin to understand your logic. = M come Meteorite - Matteo Chinellato Via Triestina 126/A - 30030 - TESSERA, VENEZIA, ITALY Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sale Site: http://www.mcomemeteorite.com Collection Site: http://www.mcomemeteorite.info International Meteorite Collectors Association #2140 MSN Messanger: [EMAIL PROTECTED] EBAY.COM:http://members.ebay.com/aboutme/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/ __ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Tax Center - File online, calculators, forms, and more http://tax.yahoo.com __ Meteorite-list mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list __ Meteorite-list mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] Portales Valley and Park Forest
No one can understand Matteos logic. Dont even try. He is just being a baby and trying to ruin what he does not have. Mike Farmer I just call it like I see it guy. - Original Message - From: Dave Andrews [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: M come Meteorite Meteorites [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: Robert Woolard [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, April 03, 2003 12:33 AM Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Portales Valley and Park Forest M come Meteorite Meteorites wrote: I remember when is exit the first Portales pieces$35-40/gr. now is go to $12.5/gr. but this is a very special meteorite, and have hit houses and fall over a citythe same of Park Forestand the total mass of Portales is many low. I don't understand why you are complaining. You are a dealer, and you stated that you just bought PF for a low price, yet you want too object to the high price it's retailing for? (much more than you supposedly paid). I can't even begin to understand your logic. __ Meteorite-list mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list __ Meteorite-list mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] Portales Valley and Park Forest
Matteo: if someone ruin the prices of market I can't speak for anyone else, Matteo, but THIS phrase clearly identifies perhaps the major difference between your view of the meteorite market (or any market for that matter) and mine, which I'd guess is also shared by many on this list. The fact that you assume that that a seller (or several) even has the capability of "ruining the prices" of a meteorite, suggests that you think that market prices are mostly controlled by the seller. I think that prices are mostly controlled by the buyer. I think sellers must craft their prices around what buyers are willing to pay, not the other way around. Sellers can have some relatively modest amount of influence over the "supply" part of the equation, but have no similar control over "demand," and that's what largely determines prices, in my view. In the case of the Chicago fall, material has fallen in the middle of one the USA's largest cities, there has been a huge media buzz, the Museums are involved, the police are involved, the press is involved, the scientists are involved, there's a feeding frenzy there; surely no one could expect the same reaction from the American public about meteorite news in Lesotho. Or even Portales for that matter. If there was a fall tomorrow, on the grounds of the Foro Romano, don't you think that would produce a much higher street-price (demand!) than a similar chondrite that might fall in the farmland of Emiglia Romagna on the same day? And yes, that price will go down as time passes and the hype dissipates. Matteo, I think you are inexplicably locked into some expectation that all meteorites/classifications must be established at some specific price-level, and then should never ever vary from that, and if they do, there must be some mysterious or sinister force at work. One would think that you would change that expectation after being in the collectibles market for any length of time. That's why they call it a MARKET. One more questionMatteo, do you sell every single L4 at exactly the same price? Do you sell every shergottite at the same price? Zagami and Shergottysame price for 2 grams? If not, why not? Gregory
Re: [meteorite-list] Portales Valley and Park Forest
if someone ruin the prices of market like already was done with the lunars, martian and varied historical meteorites, make losing money to who had invested grosses adds Matteo - did a PERSON "ruin the prices".or did increased supply lower the prices? When DaG 262 first came onto the market, the going rate was $25,000-30,000/gram, and most serious collectors quickly and gladly paid it, for actual lunar material. (I know from personal experience. ;-) Today one can get lunar material for 10% of that, with a little effort. Was that because dealers or some shadowy forces somehow manipulated the prices down, or was it because there was a sudden explosion of lunar material coming out of the deserts? If the world's gold supply somehow became ten times greater, don't you think the price of gold would go down? It's the same material - gold is gold - according to you, the price shouldn't change, right? Gasoline is gasoline, the price should never change, right? (OK, that's a loaded question these days, but you get the point). Gregory
Re: [meteorite-list] Portales Valley and Park Forest
--- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The fact that you assume that that a seller (or several) even has the capability of ruining the prices of a meteorite, suggests that you think that market prices are mostly controlled by the seller. I think that prices are mostly controlled by the buyer. When I buy from Morocco, type a carbonaceous, a ureilite, acapulcoite or other, I sale this for a normaly price ask time ago for the same material, but not all have this idea, see the CR2 NWA 801, time ago for a CR2 minimum to pay $300/gr. now the CR2 is sale for $12/gr. - I hope not the same for Renazzo - and this for many many other type of meteorites, is this howardites, eucrites, SNC, lunars etc...DaG 400 $30.000/gr. now the prices is go for $750/gr. for a lunar. I know many dealers have buy for high prices and now have lost many money for this problem. I think sellers must craft their prices around what buyers are willing to pay, not the other way around. Sellers can have some relatively modest amount of influence over the supply part of the equation, but have no similar control over demand, and that's what largely determines prices, in my view. In the case of the Chicago fall, material has fallen in the middle of one the USA's largest cities, there has been a huge media buzz, the Museums are involved, the police are involved, the press is involved, the scientists are involved, there's a feeding frenzy there; surely no one could expect the same reaction from the American public about meteorite news in Lesotho. Or even Portales for that matter. If there was a fall tomorrow, on the grounds of the Foro Romano, don't you think that would produce a much higher street-price (demand!) than a similar chondrite that might fall in the farmland of Emiglia Romagna on the same day? For me no, here in Italy the argoment meteorite is not know and probably only if a museum come immediatly in the zone of the fall and take all the pieces, probably born a curiosity in the people, but have see with my last meteorite acquire from a person in Piemonte, I have pay this 600$ and is 200 grams of nice individual, I have cut 7 slices only for sale the other is in my collection. The Fermo meteorite, when is fall, the person have found this after the fall have gift the complete meteorite to the museum of Fermo, any money give. If a person is interested in meteorites priobably search to take money from a similar event, but if the person not know the value of a meteorite, probably this person gift to you the piece found. And yes, that price will go down as time passes and the hype dissipates. Matteo, I think you are inexplicably locked into some expectation that all meteorites/classifications must be established at some specific price-level, and then should never ever vary from that, and if they do, there must be some mysterious or sinister force at work. One would think that you would change that expectation after being in the collectibles market for any length of time. That's why they call it a MARKET. One more questionMatteo, do you sell every single L4 at exactly the same price? If is a ordinary L4 - type Morocco - yes, if is a historical material the price change, but I see the old prices, no the new prices. Do you sell every shergottite at the same price? Zagami and Shergottysame price for 2 grams? Zagami $1000/gr. Shergotty I not have but I sale for the same price or over if I have some pieces. If not, why not? Gregory = M come Meteorite - Matteo Chinellato Via Triestina 126/A - 30030 - TESSERA, VENEZIA, ITALY Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sale Site: http://www.mcomemeteorite.com Collection Site: http://www.mcomemeteorite.info International Meteorite Collectors Association #2140 MSN Messanger: [EMAIL PROTECTED] EBAY.COM:http://members.ebay.com/aboutme/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/ __ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Tax Center - File online, calculators, forms, and more http://tax.yahoo.com __ Meteorite-list mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] Portales Valley and Park Forest
Regarding this whole discussion on the price of PF, and ANY OTHER meteorite. There's a little thing we have in this (but not only this) country (i.e., USA)...it's called CAPITALISM. And closely tied to capitalism is a little thing called supply and demand. Heyit may not be the best economic system ever developed, but it's WAY ahead of whatever's second. __ Meteorite-list mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] Portales Valley and Park Forest
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: . I know many dealers have buy for high prices and now have lost many money for this problem. Yes. But when I buy shares in Microsoft or General Motors and the price goes down (true story ;-) I can't really complain to the corporation and ask for my money back, now can I? I can only sell it for wherever the price goes, up or down, and be a smarter investor each time. That's part of the risk of participating in a MARKET. If you're looking for no volatility and unchanging prices, maybe markets (meteorite or stock) are not the right fit for you. I sale this for a normaly price ask time ago for the same material, but not all have this idea, see the CR2 NWA 801, time ago for a CR2 minimum to pay $300/gr. now the CR2 is sale for $12/gr. So, tell me. We all know you are very unhappy when prices go down (join the club), especially after investing in a meteorite, to re-sell. What happens when you invest in a meteorite, and the price that buyers are willing to pay goes UP dramatically? Do you charge the new, higher going-rate? (If not, I'll be selling my shares in "mcomemeteorite, inc", too. ;-) acquire from a person in Piemonte, I have pay this 600$ and is 200 grams of nice individual But answer my question: what if this same meteorite fell not in Piemonte, but in the Foro Romano, same day, and all of Roma was in an uproar over it? Would you be able to buy 200 grams for $600? If not, why not? Same material. Zagami $1000/gr. Shergotty I not have but I sale for the same price or over if I have some pieces. OK, please put me on the top of the waiting list, for two grams of Shergotty, at $1,000/gram. SERIOUSLY. It's pretty easy to say that you'd sell it for $1,000/gram, Matteo, when you don't have any. By the way, I'LL sell it for $500 per grambut I don't have any either. ;-) Gregory
Re: [meteorite-list] Portales Valley and Park Forest
--- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Yes. But when I buy shares in Microsoft or General Motors and the price goes down (true story ;-) I can't really complain to the corporation and ask for my money back, now can I? I can only sell it for wherever the price goes, up or down, and be a smarter investor each time. That's part of the risk of participating in a MARKET. If you're looking for no volatility and unchanging prices, maybe markets (meteorite or stock) are not the right fit for you. But to me is not a lot pleases see some material gained with my money sweat, go in ruin for fault of a person that decides to change the prices from a day to the other one. So, tell me. We all know you are very unhappy when prices go down (join the club), especially after investing in a meteorite, to re-sell. What happens when you invest in a meteorite, and the price that buyers are willing to pay goes UP dramatically? Do you charge the new, higher going-rate? (If not, I'll be selling my shares in mcomemeteorite, inc, too. ;-) But answer my question: what if this same meteorite fell not in Piemonte, but in the Foro Romano, same day, and all of Roma was in an uproar over it? Would you be able to buy 200 grams for $600? If not, why not? Same material. not same material, one is a found another is a fall, but here the people not interested many in meteorites, if is find from a person ask to you a lot of money, if this is faind from a normaly farmerman, probably gift to you the rock. OK, please put me on the top of the waiting list, for two grams of Shergotty, at $1,000/gram. SERIOUSLY. If I have It's pretty easy to say that you'd sell it for $1,000/gram, Matteo, when you don't have any. By the way, I'LL sell it for $500 per gram 500/gr. for a historical SNC? And for a Nakhla what price you ask? but I don't have any either. ;-) Gregory now I go to bed.night Matteo = M come Meteorite - Matteo Chinellato Via Triestina 126/A - 30030 - TESSERA, VENEZIA, ITALY Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sale Site: http://www.mcomemeteorite.com Collection Site: http://www.mcomemeteorite.info International Meteorite Collectors Association #2140 MSN Messanger: [EMAIL PROTECTED] EBAY.COM:http://members.ebay.com/aboutme/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/ __ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Tax Center - File online, calculators, forms, and more http://tax.yahoo.com __ Meteorite-list mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
[meteorite-list] Portales Valley and Park Forest
Hello List, On 3-31-03, Mike Farmer posted in an email Regarding Park Forest Orders: This is a once in a century fall, so I am saying that--- you will never see a gram for sale cheap, and you will find that it will be like Portales Valley, many people complained that it was too expensive when it first popped, well, there is NONE on the market, it is all sold. This one will go out the door the same way. While Mike is mostly right, there are still some fantastic Portales Valley complete slices, end pieces, (and at this time only one smaller, 120g partial slice) still available at: http://www.portalesvalleymeteorites.com The price(s) per gram for these beauties are already far below those of the Park Forest pieces, and are somewhat negotiable. If you are interested, please contact me off list. I will be updating the site soon, and I would be happy to work with you. Sincerely, Robert Woolard IMCA # 8103 __ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Tax Center - File online, calculators, forms, and more http://tax.yahoo.com __ Meteorite-list mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
[meteorite-list] Portales Valley and Park Forest
Hello List, On 3-31-03, Mike Farmer posted in an email Regarding Park Forest Orders: This is a once in a century fall, so I am saying that--- you will never see a gram for sale cheap, and you will find that it will be like Portales Valley, many people complained that it was too expensive when it first popped, well, there is NONE on the market, it is all sold. This one will go out the door the same way. While Mike is mostly right, there are still some fantastic Portales Valley complete slices, end pieces, (and at this time only one smaller, 120g partial slice) still available at: http://www.portalesvalleymeteorites.com The price(s) per gram for these beauties are already far below those of the Park Forest pieces, and are somewhat negotiable. If you are interested, please contact me off list. I will be updating the site soon, and I would be happy to work with you. Sincerely, Robert Woolard IMCA # 8103 __ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Tax Center - File online, calculators, forms, and more http://tax.yahoo.com __ Meteorite-list mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] Portales Valley and Park Forest
I remember when is exit the first Portales pieces$35-40/gr. now is go to $12.5/gr. but this is a very special meteorite, and have hit houses and fall over a citythe same of Park Forestand the total mass of Portales is many low. Regards Matteo --- Robert Woolard [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hello List, On 3-31-03, Mike Farmer posted in an email Regarding Park Forest Orders: This is a once in a century fall, so I am saying that--- you will never see a gram for sale cheap, and you will find that it will be like Portales Valley, many people complained that it was too expensive when it first popped, well, there is NONE on the market, it is all sold. This one will go out the door the same way. While Mike is mostly right, there are still some fantastic Portales Valley complete slices, end pieces, (and at this time only one smaller, 120g partial slice) still available at: http://www.portalesvalleymeteorites.com The price(s) per gram for these beauties are already far below those of the Park Forest pieces, and are somewhat negotiable. If you are interested, please contact me off list. I will be updating the site soon, and I would be happy to work with you. Sincerely, Robert Woolard IMCA # 8103 __ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Tax Center - File online, calculators, forms, and more http://tax.yahoo.com __ Meteorite-list mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list = M come Meteorite - Matteo Chinellato Via Triestina 126/A - 30030 - TESSERA, VENEZIA, ITALY Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sale Site: http://www.mcomemeteorite.com Collection Site: http://www.mcomemeteorite.info International Meteorite Collectors Association #2140 MSN Messanger: [EMAIL PROTECTED] EBAY.COM:http://members.ebay.com/aboutme/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/ __ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Tax Center - File online, calculators, forms, and more http://tax.yahoo.com __ Meteorite-list mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] Portales Valley and Park Forest
M come Meteorite Meteorites wrote: I remember when is exit the first Portales pieces$35-40/gr. now is go to $12.5/gr. but this is a very special meteorite, and have hit houses and fall over a citythe same of Park Forestand the total mass of Portales is many low. I don't understand why you are complaining. You are a dealer, and you stated that you just bought PF for a low price, yet you want too object to the high price it's retailing for? (much more than you supposedly paid). I can't even begin to understand your logic. __ Meteorite-list mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
[meteorite-list] Portales Valley
Wally wrote: I'd trade my house, car and three cats for a just a look at Portales Valley Wally Cluett IMCA 9746 Hello Wally and List, Check out Robert Woolard's website: http://www.portalesvalleymeteorites.com/ Best regards, Bernd __ Meteorite-list mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
[meteorite-list] Portales Valley, etc. -Site update-- Ad
Hello All, My sincere thanks to all of you who have previously contacted me for your kind words about my site and specimens, your helpful suggestions, your expressions of happiness with your purchases, and your inquiries in regard to any other meteorites I might have to offer. I have just updated my site for those of you who may be interested. See at: www.portalesvalleymeteorites.com I have added a few pieces of NWA 032, Lunar Mare Basalt and NWA 725 (Tissemoumine), Acapulcoite, along with some interesting and informative links for each. Please check out the pedigree papers that accompanies each one of the NWA 032 specimens. When you own one of these and your friends ask you, Now, how do you KNOW that's a piece of the moon???, you'll have the perfect answer! The perfect proof. I hope you'll find the prices on all my offerings to be very fair. Please feel free to contact me off the list if you are interested in any of these specimens. Thanks again, Robert Woolard __ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Finance - Get real-time stock quotes http://finance.yahoo.com __ Meteorite-list mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
[meteorite-list] Portales Valley
Good Evening List Members, I recently received a very nice metal rich (including veins) 20.86g part slice of PV. I was amazed at how much Trolite is evident in the specimen. In looking at it with a 10x Loupe, I noticed some dark blue colored material which appeared crystalline in nature. Is this discolored Trolite? What a wonderful rock from space. Warmest Regards, Greg Redfern IMCA #5781 www.meteoritecollectors.org __ Meteorite-list mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
[meteorite-list] portales anyone????
So far only 1 person has come forward to let me know who has portales valley for sale. I'm looking for a 20 to 40 gran slice with rich metal veins. who has some??? let me know. steve arnold, chicago! __ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! - Official partner of 2002 FIFA World Cup http://fifaworldcup.yahoo.com __ Meteorite-list mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] portales anyone????
Steve, I was the first person to arrive in Portales after the fall, followed by Bob Haag about two hours later. I myself found one specimen, and purchased 18 individuals after the fall, and owned a total of ~16 kilos of Portales Valley. Every gram sold out so fast after the fall. Portales is one of those meteorites that simply pleases the senses. Everyone wanted it, and to get it now is quite hard. You might have some difficulty in acquiring a piece. Mike Farmer - Original Message - From: Steve Arnold, Chicago!!! [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, June 13, 2002 4:45 PM Subject: [meteorite-list] portales anyone So far only 1 person has come forward to let me know who has portales valley for sale. I'm looking for a 20 to 40 gran slice with rich metal veins. who has some??? let me know. steve arnold, chicago! __ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! - Official partner of 2002 FIFA World Cup http://fifaworldcup.yahoo.com __ Meteorite-list mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list __ Meteorite-list mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] portales anyone????
Hello all I have 2 slices for sale in my site, all 2 with nice metal veins, and one 16.6 gr. with fusion crust. Regards Matteo --- Michael Farmer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Steve, I was the first person to arrive in Portales after the fall, followed by Bob Haag about two hours later. I myself found one specimen, and purchased 18 individuals after the fall, and owned a total of ~16 kilos of Portales Valley. Every gram sold out so fast after the fall. Portales is one of those meteorites that simply pleases the senses. Everyone wanted it, and to get it now is quite hard. You might have some difficulty in acquiring a piece. Mike Farmer - Original Message - From: Steve Arnold, Chicago!!! [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, June 13, 2002 4:45 PM Subject: [meteorite-list] portales anyone So far only 1 person has come forward to let me know who has portales valley for sale. I'm looking for a 20 to 40 gran slice with rich metal veins. who has some??? let me know. steve arnold, chicago! __ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! - Official partner of 2002 FIFA World Cup http://fifaworldcup.yahoo.com __ Meteorite-list mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list __ Meteorite-list mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list = M come Meteorite - Matteo Chinellato Via Triestina 126/A - 30030 - TESSERA, VENEZIA, ITALY Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sale Site: http://www.mcomemeteorite.com Collection Site: http://www.mcomemeteorite.info International Meteorite Collectors Association #2140 MSN Messanger: [EMAIL PROTECTED] EBAY.COM:http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/ __ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! - Official partner of 2002 FIFA World Cup http://fifaworldcup.yahoo.com __ Meteorite-list mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] portales crust
I absolutely agree with your assessment Frank. The thick crust is over the stone areas and the thin crust is generally over the metal areas. Of course, this is just from my observation of my specimen. http://208.55.105.193/portales491s.htm Jim Strope 421 Fourth Street Glen Dale, WV 26038 Catch a Falling Star Meteorites http://www.catchafallingstar.com From: Frank Cressy [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED], meteorite1.com [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] portales crust Date: Thu, 6 Jun 2002 18:59:44 -0700 Hello Ron and all, The following link is a closs-up of a Portales Valley individual taken from Jim Strope's picture gallery on his website (catchafallingstar). http://208.55.105.193/index/pv491flow1.jpg It seems to clearly show different crusts depending on the underlying material; either metal or stone. I think thin metal veins may be crusted over with a stoney material crust, but if the metal areas have a sufficient surface area, then they clearly show a difference. Maybe Jim can give us a better idea of scale?? Regards, Frank - Original Message - From: meteorite1.com To: harlan trammell ; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, June 06, 2002 4:50 PM Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] portales crust I have a slice about 1/4 inch thick. The crust is a typical stony meteorite crust but is identical over the metal phase as well. I thought this to be curious and would like to receive further comments as well. Ron Hartman __ Meteorite-list mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
[meteorite-list] portales crust
wanna know more- anybady got GOOD PIX? is there a difference between big metal areas and stone? do big metal areas have a sikhote-like crust? or is it all just a mix?Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com. __ Meteorite-list mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] portales crust
Hello Ron and all, The following link is a closs-up of a Portales Valley individual taken from Jim Strope's picture gallery on his website (catchafallingstar). http://208.55.105.193/index/pv491flow1.jpg It seems to clearly show different crusts depending on the underlying material; either metal or stone. I think thin metal veins may be crusted over with a "stoney" material crust, but if the metal areas have a sufficient surface area, then they clearly show a difference. Maybe Jim can give us a better idea of scale?? Regards, Frank - Original Message - From: meteorite1.com To: harlan trammell ; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, June 06, 2002 4:50 PM Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] portales crust I have a slice about 1/4 inch thick. The crust is a typical stony meteorite crust but is identical over the metal phase as well. I thought this to be curious and would like to receive further comments as well. Ron Hartman - Original Message - From: harlan trammell To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, June 06, 2002 11:21 AM Subject: [meteorite-list] portales crust wanna know more- anybady got GOOD PIX? is there a difference between big metal areas and stone? do big metal areas have a sikhote-like crust? or is it all just a mix? Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com.__ Meteorite-list mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
[meteorite-list] Portales Valley Crust
Hello Ron, Harlan, and list, I was fortunate enough to find the 34Kg main mass of Portales Valley and will offer my observations on the question about the crust. The appearance of the crust varies a fair amount from spot to spot over the piece. In some areas,it is fairly weak and very thin, and light grey in color. But on other areas, it is much more developed. In fact, it appears to me that the piece was at least somewhat briefly oriented. On one side and the back, the fusion crust is very smooth and sculpted, and a rich black in color. This back side also has the adhesions of molten globules that are sometimes found on the back sides of oriented meteorites. This back side also has a large area of crust that exhibits textbook contraction lines. My piece was very metal-rich, with large veins and knobs of nickel-iron scattered throughout, and protruding thru the crust. Even they vary from one to another. Some are very black, while others are the silvery color of fresh iron. There are some very prominent flow lines visible on these metal knobs and veins. I enjoyed reading the postings on the history of formation, and the uniqueness of PV on the list yesterday. In addition to PV being the first stone meteorite to exhibit Widmanstatten figures in its metal, I believe it is also interesting to note that large, ~ 1 inch graphite nodules have been found embedded in the metal veins of PV. Sincerely, Robert Woolard __ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! - Official partner of 2002 FIFA World Cup http://fifaworldcup.yahoo.com __ Meteorite-list mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
[meteorite-list] PORTALES
From: Southwest Meteorite Lab Sent: Thursday, June 06, 2002 6:45 PM To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' Subject:RE: [meteorite-list] portales Dear Dave and list I like your Portales story, it is my favorite also. If any of you are interested I have decided to quickly put together a portales page that has a few photos and a brief retelling of the Meteorite Stuck in the Road Story. And to answer your question permission was given before the cutting began. In fact the county road department gave us material to patch the hole in the road. Here is the address http://www.meteorite-lab.com/portales.htm Marvin and Kitty Killgore Southwest Meteorite Lab PO Box 95 Payson, AZ 85547 PH.928.474.9515 FAX.928.474.2474 [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of David Freeman Sent: Wednesday, June 05, 2002 1:41 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: harlan trammell; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject:Re: [meteorite-list] portales Dear Rhett, Harlan, and List; My portales story is...the neatest piece that I saw was half buried in a living chunk of asphalt! And I always wondered if it was sawn out first and permission granted second or was it guarded until saws and a plan were gathered. This was a most amazing effort at specimen collecting in the least. My second portales story, my work associate has a brother that lives there and they are all now meteorite hunters. Long Live portales and we need a few more events just like that one! Best, Dave F. Rhett Bourland wrote: Hi Harlan, First of all, good topic!!! I hope a lot of people post on this one as I'd love to hear what everyone has to say on it. I apologize if I get a bit wordy but I know a lot of people who may not know very much about meteorites come here to learn so I thought I'd talk a bit. If I'm too far off base on any of this I apologize and please let do not hesitate to correct me. Before I even start about how I believe it formed, I'll start off with what I know about it. It is an H6 chondrite which means that it formed deeper in the asteroid it came from than other H chondrites like H3's, H4's, and H5's. For a good explanation on the formation of asteroids check out Meteorites and Their Parent Planets by McSween. Almost all asteroids start off as onion shells with the more metamorphosed grades buried deeper in the parent body than the lower grades. This is due to the asteroid's ability to more easily radiate the heat from its outer layers than the more inside parts and thus heat is what equilibrated and altered the areas closer to the core more than the regions near the surface. Some asteroids, after being formed as an onion shell, will undergo collisions which, depending on their severity, will have different effects on different parent bodies. If the impact is severe enough then the asteroid will be shattered and pieces of it will go flying off in many directions and not reaccreate. If the impact isn't as strong, however, the pieces of it will come back together under gravities powers and the various grades (3's, 4's...) will be mixed together. The high number of H breccias (like Zag which is an H3-6 or Noblesville which is an H4-6) would seem to indicate that the H parent body is a rubble pile asteroid. Subsequent heating in the core of the asteroid doesn't happen because the nuclear isotopes that caused that heating have most likely already ran their course by this time. This would seem to be backed up by the reflectance spectra of asteroid 6 Hebe which, depending on what area is being imaged, has areas that match the respective grades of H's. I also know there are large sections of iron in this chondrite that are unlike any other meteorite out there. These large sections of irons will display a Widmanstatten like most iron meteorites when etched. To be able to form the necessary bands in the pattern would require that this meteorite was formed deep within the asteroid so that there would be plenty of insulation (in the form of rock) to keep the heat in the inside of the asteroid so that the kamacite and taenite would have the needed time to grow large enough to show up when etched. Something that's interesting about the nickel-iron in Portales is that the metal in the veins of this meteorite is different from the metal flecks seen in all chondrites (especially the H's). Another unusual thing is that there is less free iron in the silicate areas of Portales than in normal H chondrites (about 4% in comparison to the normal 15%-19%) even though fayalite values remain pretty much the same as other H's (19.3% +/-0.4%). Check out the Met. Bul. containing information on this meteorite at http://www.uark.edu/campus-resources/metsoc/metbull/mb83.htm S, to get to the point of this email, how do I think Portales was formed? Early in the H parent body's history a pretty good sized impact happens on the H parent body. Its powerful enough
[meteorite-list] portales
how do YOU think portales got formed?Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com. __ Meteorite-list mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] portales
I have no idea.. Harlan.. how?? Rosie - Original Message - From: harlan trammell To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, June 05, 2002 11:40 AM Subject: [meteorite-list] portales how do YOU think portales got formed? Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com.__ Meteorite-list mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
RE: [meteorite-list] portales
Hi Harlan, First of all, good topic!!! I hope a lot of people post on this one as I'd love to hear what everyone has to say on it. I apologize if I get a bit wordy but I know a lot of people who may not know very much about meteorites come here to learn so I thought I'd talk a bit. If I'm too far off base on any of this I apologize and please let do not hesitate to correct me. Before I even start about how I believe it formed, I'll start off with what I know about it. It is an H6 chondrite which means that it formed deeper in the asteroid it came from than other H chondrites like H3's, H4's, and H5's. For a good explanation on the formation of asteroids check out Meteorites and Their Parent Planets by McSween. Almost all asteroids start off as onion shells with the more metamorphosed grades buried deeper in the parent body than the lower grades. This is due to the asteroid's ability to more easily radiate the heat from its outer layers than the more inside parts and thus heat is what equilibrated and altered the areas closer to the core more than the regions near the surface. Some asteroids, after being formed as an onion shell, will undergo collisions which, depending on their severity, will have different effects on different parent bodies. If the impact is severe enough then the asteroid will be shattered and pieces of it will go flying off in many directions and not reaccreate. If the impact isn't as strong, however, the pieces of it will come back together under gravities powers and the various grades (3's, 4's...) will be mixed together. The high number of H breccias (like Zag which is an H3-6 or Noblesville which is an H4-6) would seem to indicate that the H parent body is a rubble pile asteroid. Subsequent heating in the core of the asteroid doesn't happen because the nuclear isotopes that caused that heating have most likely already ran their course by this time. This would seem to be backed up by the reflectance spectra of asteroid 6 Hebe which, depending on what area is being imaged, has areas that match the respective grades of H's. I also know there are large sections of iron in this chondrite that are unlike any other meteorite out there. These large sections of irons will display a Widmanstatten like most iron meteorites when etched. To be able to form the necessary bands in the pattern would require that this meteorite was formed deep within the asteroid so that there would be plenty of insulation (in the form of rock) to keep the heat in the inside of the asteroid so that the kamacite and taenite would have the needed time to grow large enough to show up when etched. Something that's interesting about the nickel-iron in Portales is that the metal in the veins of this meteorite is different from the metal flecks seen in all chondrites (especially the H's). Another unusual thing is that there is less free iron in the silicate areas of Portales than in normal H chondrites (about 4% in comparison to the normal 15%-19%) even though fayalite values remain pretty much the same as other H's (19.3% +/-0.4%). Check out the Met. Bul. containing information on this meteorite at http://www.uark.edu/campus-resources/metsoc/metbull/mb83.htm S, to get to the point of this email, how do I think Portales was formed? Early in the H parent body's history a pretty good sized impact happens on the H parent body. Its powerful enough to disrupt the asteroid to its center but not necessarily powerful enough to break up the asteroid. When it does this, some of the free metal in this region pools together to form the large metal veins. Keep in mind, this is early enough in its history that the nuclear isotopes that are heating this asteroid are still active. Also, since Portales Valley is an H6 that would mean that is towards the core of the asteroid and has plenty insulation in the rocks above it to keep it warm enough to sustain the kamacite and taenite growth needed to form the Widmanstatten patterns that are seen in the large metal areas of Portales Valley. My 8 cents, Rhett Bourland www.asteroidmodels.com www.asteroidmodels.com/personal www.meteoritecollectors.org -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of harlan trammell Sent: Wednesday, June 05, 2002 11:40 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [meteorite-list] portales how do YOU think portales got formed? Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com. __ Meteorite-list mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list __ Meteorite-list mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
[meteorite-list] Portales Valley
Rhett Bourland wrote: My 8 cents Hello Rhett and List, Those 8 cents are well spent :-) I also know there are large sections of iron in this chondrite that are unlike any other meteorite out there. These large sections of irons will display a Widmanstatten like most iron meteorites when etched. To be able to form the necessary bands in the pattern would require that this meteorite was formed deep within the asteroid so that there would be plenty of insulation (in the form of rock) to keep the heat in the inside of the asteroid so that the kamacite and taenite would have the needed time to grow large enough to show up when etched. Early in the H parent body's history a pretty good sized impact happens on the H parent body. Its powerful enough to disrupt the asteroid to its center but not necessarily powerful enough to break up the asteroid. When it does this, some of the free metal in this region pools together to form the large metal veins. KRING D.A., HILL D.H., GLEASON J.D., BRITT D.T. et al. (1999) Portales Valley: A meteoritic sample of the brecciated and metal-veined floor of an impact crater on an H-chondrite asteroid (MAPS 34-4, 1999, 663-669): Summary of the authors' conclusions: 01) Portales Valley has unusually large veins of metal and pockets of metal produced by intersecting veins. 02) Provenance of these veins: a) produced by an impact event on the original H-chondrite parent body, or b) a large asteroid produced from the fragmentation of that parent body. 03) Cooling rate about a few to perhaps tens of degrees per million years for the products of that shock metamorphism. 04) The meteorite was deep within the H-chondrite body at the time of the large impact event. 05) The crater diameter was = 20 km in diameter (about 10% of the original H-chondrite parent body). 06) The impact event probably occurred about 4.4 or 4.5 Ga, soon after accretion from the solar nebula. Best regards, Bernd __ Meteorite-list mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] portales
On Wed, 5 Jun 2002, David Freeman wrote: Dear Rhett, Harlan, and List; My portales story is...the neatest piece that I saw was half buried in a living chunk of asphalt! ...as opposed to a DEAD chunk of asphalt?? :-) Still, cool story. Tracy Latimer __ Meteorite-list mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] portales
Coming Soon to a theater near you: Monolith Monsters VS The Living Asphalt You will never drive at night again! You will wonder at every bump in the Road! What is waiting for YOU around the next curve? Starring Tom Cruise, Harrison Ford, Kathleen Turnover, andSigourney Weaver, Special crater appearance by Brad Pitt (Sorry Harlan) Ken Newton Tracy Latimer wrote: On Wed, 5 Jun 2002, David Freeman wrote: Dear Rhett, Harlan, and List; My portales story is...the neatest piece that I saw was half buried in a living chunk of asphalt! ...as opposed to a DEAD chunk of asphalt?? :-) Still, cool story. Tracy Latimer __ Meteorite-list mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list __ Meteorite-list mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] PORTALES
LOL Zeppieare you trying to tell us something?? How much are these again? Rosie - Original Message - From: robert szep To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, June 05, 2002 8:01 PM Subject: [meteorite-list] PORTALES Hello List... In my opinion, Rhett'sexplaination of how Portales was formed makes a great deal of sense. Especially where he discusses the Widmansatten structure found in the thick metallic veins associated with the metal-rich specimens from that mixed fall. The basic fact that meteorites with the generalresemblance of ordinary chondrites, plummeted to earth along side of meteorites with an appearance similar to that of a silicated iron during a singular witnessed fall event is not only unusual, it is unprecidented. By the way, there is an excellent image of a 16 pound ... that's POUND, not gram, 'SLICE' of PORTALES VALLEY METAL-RICH METEORITE featured in The Third Millennium Meteorite Calendar - 2003 edition. For those whowould like to see a full-size image of the calendar page featuring the PORTALES specimen, just send me an email reqestingthe image and I'llemail you a copy. Robert A Szep.
