phenomenological
It this really a word? Sounds like a George Bush word.
DF
Matthias Bärmann wrote:
I agree. But using an expression (also a scientific one) in a
phenomenological manner we should take care to avoid a contradiction (or
even tensions) between the phenomenological and the scientific dimension.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Darren Garrison" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Matthias Bärmann" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, January 07, 2007 8:26 PM
Subject: Re: Re: [meteorite-list] Irons DON'T form Fusion Crust's - yes they
DO
On Sun, 7 Jan 2007 20:17:25 +0100, you wrote:
But it doesn't hit the point regarding meteorites. "Glassy" evokes the
impression of something shiny, very smooth, mirror-like. But as we all now
But the "laymen" use of the term isn't the scientific one. "Glassy" means
something that cooled quickly enough that it didn't have time to crystalize
and
is instead, on the atomic level, an amorphous mess.
______________________________________________
Meteorite-list mailing list
[email protected]
http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
______________________________________________
Meteorite-list mailing list
[email protected]
http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
