This does not make the terms well defined. It is only a proposal for a
more complex set of definitions. And even if widely adopted, it does not
remove the ambiguity in the case of this protective space shelter.
If the shelter is struck by a meteoroid, which then vaporizes, was it a
"meteoroid shelter" or "meteorite shelter"? If the shelter is struck by
a meteoroid, and material survives (either on the surface, or inside),
was it a "meteoroid shelter" or a "meteorite shelter"?
Maybe it is both, or maybe neither. But I don't see any problem with the
terms used, either in the context of current IAU definitions, colloquial
usage, or the terms proposed by Rubin and Grossman. Clearly there is
ambiguity here, since the shield is protective whether or not any
material actually accretes from a collision. Most important, I think, is
that the meaning is absolutely clear and unambiguous, which is really
the ultimate test of usage.
What would you call such a shelter?
Chris
*******************************
Chris L Peterson
Cloudbait Observatory
http://www.cloudbait.com
On 8/20/2012 9:25 AM, Randy Korotev wrote:
Meteorite and meteoroid are, indeed, well defined.
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1945-5100.2009.01009.x/abstract
Randy Korotev
______________________________________________
Visit the Archives at http://www.meteoritecentral.com/mailing-list-archives.html
Meteorite-list mailing list
[email protected]
http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
