It has bogus written all over it. Here is a big why-- 387 kg exceeds the mass of ejectable material from the surface of Mars by about 380± kgs. The problem is the "Goldielocks conundrum: Not too small-not too large but just right". A size small too small might make escape velocity but, may be too small to survive entry. The launching wack has to be just right-- too hard and the target gets vaporized. Too large a a target rock and the inertia results in melting entirely before it can get moving. The "not too small--not too large" envelope is theoretically between approx. 2kg up to 5-7(?) kg sized chunks at the surface which survive the "just right"-- sized impactor.
To fit this "find" scenario, multiple rocks--all most identical in size, adding up to 387 kg is statistically impossible in that no less than 76x10kg sized rocks would have to have been gently blasted from the surface of Mars, fly in formation through a perfect trajectory all arriving as a meteor storm loosing not more than half their mass during entry and every last stone would have to have been recovered. What we believe we know about orbital physics says this is impossible. We have already ruled out the possibility of a single mass making it into orbit so this 387 TKM could not be just a few stones-- and really be from Mars. Any single stone in this recovery(sic) exceeding 5-7kg(no ablation loss) is automatically over the physical limit for a max-sized Martian meteorite as I am going by memory. Someone might want to consult McSween's Meteorites and their Parent Bodies to see is calculations. I though he placed a limit of around 2±kg for recovered stone but I believe we did recover a 3-4 kg Martian. Some inquiring mind might want to post the largest single mass or TKW for a single Martian meteorite. Note this doesn't rule out the paired falls we have where multiple hand -sized stones were recovered over a very large area. The fact that the levels of copper, silver, and gold are discussed is another read flag. I don't keep up with what is commercially mine-able ore but for copper I assume it has to be 5 or more oz per ton for copper and I don't remember any meteorite chemistry that had more than a few ppb of any of those metals. The sulfate type ore deposit has yet to be identified on Mars but those are even more fragile than silicate deposits. Oh and where is the zinc this is after all a sulfate type ore occurrence according to the press release? The only Glyn Howard I can find a reference to is Glyn Howard, science teacher/meteoritics scientist, ... Successful Music Teacher and Author Continues Streak of Popular Kids' Books... He has not ever published a peer reviewed classification for a meteorite that I can find but the press release says he classified it himself... In addition to having bogus written all over it, I can detect the smell of Curry in there somewhere.... Elton >________________________________ > From: Anne Black <[email protected]> >To: [email protected]; [email protected] >Sent: Thursday, March 28, 2013 8:37 PM >Subject: [meteorite-list] "Great Discovery" maybe ;-) > >Just in case you missed this "great" announcement: > >http://world.einnews.com/247pr/337148 > >Enjoy! > > >Anne M. Black >www.IMPACTIKA.com >[email protected] > >______________________________________________ > >Visit the Archives at http://www.meteorite-list-archives.com >Meteorite-list mailing list >[email protected] >http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list > > > ______________________________________________ Visit the Archives at http://www.meteorite-list-archives.com Meteorite-list mailing list [email protected] http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
