G'Day List
This thread has been very interesting. Hammers have really not played an
important part of my quest to seek knowledge, meteoritically speaking. But
the discussions have been an eye opener, especially when it comes to a few
mets that I had not considered.
Mike, thanks for starting this. Steve, you continue to amaze me.
Dave, what can I say? Thanks for all your input. I for one, have definitely
benefited from it.
As for my little humor on hammers, I sincerely apologize. It was in jest and
not to throw anybody off the subject presently being discussed. I'm just a
happy person by nature.
Cheers
John
----- Original Message -----
From: "Dave Gheesling" <[email protected]>
To: <[email protected]>; <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, January 03, 2009 7:24 PM
Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] What makes a hammer a hammer?
Good points, Darren...and the list of collecting criteria could go on and
on
ad infinitum. Yet it would also be interesting to measure this hammer
issue
not in units but in dollars (or Euros or whatever currency). Like you, I
have no solid statistics here (this arena really needs them badly, by the
way), but, when looking at market price and/or relative price/gram (i.e.
"value"), the representative percentage of both collectors in the
community
and specimens in collections would obviously be substantially higher than
on
a units basis. Whatever the statistics, it is true that a significant
premium is paid by collectors for "hammers," and we could probably all (at
least most) agree it would be a good thing to have a better definition of
that term...at least a consistent one.
-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected]
[mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Darren
Garrison
Sent: Saturday, January 03, 2009 10:18 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] What makes a hammer a hammer?
On Sat, 3 Jan 2009 21:50:18 -0500, you wrote:
I thought you meant to say the community of hammer collectors within
the meteorite collecting community was small -- relative to the
international meteorite collecting community itself.
I would say that it probably is, when defined as a "main concern" for the
collectors-- you have people who collect by type, people who collect by
location, people who collect only witnessed falls, and people who collect
based on wherther or not it hit some human artifact. At most, what
percentage of meteorite collectors have "hammers" being a main collecting
criteria? 10%? I'd bet that it doesn't approach 25%. It is, then, a
small
percentage of what is already a tiny (compaired to world population and
compaired to other areas of
collecting) group of people.
My point being-- a term in use by such a small number of people and known
by
such a small number of people woukd, I think, be more vaguely defined than
something-- say-- that would reach The OED or Encyclopedia Britannica
(leaving the Urban Dictionary and Wikipedia out of the equation for the
moment).
______________________________________________
http://www.meteoritecentral.com
Meteorite-list mailing list
[email protected]
http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
______________________________________________
http://www.meteoritecentral.com
Meteorite-list mailing list
[email protected]
http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
______________________________________________
http://www.meteoritecentral.com
Meteorite-list mailing list
[email protected]
http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
