Hello Mike,
Greetings from a foggy night in Georgia!
I created a list a while back of meteorites that had struck human, animals
and man-made objects (what I called HAMs - Michael Blood extended the term
to "hammers"). I did it for fun and to demonstrate the relationship between
falls and population density. It used to be on the IMCA website but I don't
it there anymore. I included witnessed falls which I believed had a
reliable and valid reference. If you want a copy of the table, I believe I
still have a copy and can email it to you.
As to the issue of whether or not a given stone or iron actually hit
something, I believe one can differentiate between a hammer stone (or iron)
vs. a hammer fall. A hammer stone would be the actual stone which hit
something (e.g., Claxton) and a hammer fall meaning a least one stone of a
given fall actually hitting something (e.g., Allende).
As to why someone may or may not describe a fall as a "hammer," some may
simply be unaware of the status of a given fall (with regard to it actually
hitting something) and some may play up other characteristics which are more
scientifically interesting. For example, Dave's reference to Murchison is
correct. Murchison is more widely known within the meteorite community as
containing a variety of amino acids, rather than some fragments hitting
something. That is the reason most people purchase it (and why there is a
very nice piece is my collection - thank you Michael Blood).
Some simply copy verbatim what others have written, without doing their own
research.
Hope this helps.
-Walter Branch
_______________________
----- Original Message -----
From: "Michael Gilmer" <[email protected]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, January 03, 2009 7:32 PM
Subject: [meteorite-list] What makes a hammer a hammer?
Hi Listees,
I have a quick question for the group - why are some falls not referred
to as "hammers" ?
For example, Allende and Holbrook are rarely referred to as hammers,
but there are reports that both hit rooftops and other manmade
structures. Both falls are generally referred to as "historical" but
rarely as hammers. Is there a reason? Is it because the historical
element outweighs the hammer element in these cases? Claxton is
well known as a hammer, but historically-speaking it's otherwise
unremarkable. Is this simply semantics at play, or is there some
kind of formula at work?
Regards and clear skies,
MikeG
PS - Michael Blood, please email me offlist.
.........................................................
Michael Gilmer (Louisiana, USA)
Member of the Meteoritical Society.
Member of the Bayou Region Stargazers Network.
Websites - http://www.galactic-stone.com and http://www.glassthrower.com
MySpace - http://www.myspace.com/fine_meteorites_4_sale
..........................................................
______________________________________________
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
