Hi Steve, Jason is correct about there always being far more small stones than large ones, so the short end of the fall ellipse should have more distinct meteorites per square mile than the long end. The only aspect of Jason's post that could be called questionable was his tentative assumption that hunters have actually been working the "light" end. (Note that he ~did~ qualify it with "they *may* be at the light end") As I posted a little earlier, I believe they are hunting the middle, which is perfectly understandable since that's where the initial finds were made. When people don't know the exact trend line, they are naturally hesitant to stray too far uprange or downrange from known finds. --Rob
-----Original Message----- From: meteorite-list-boun...@meteoritecentral.com [mailto:meteorite-list-boun...@meteoritecentral.com] On Behalf Of Steve Witt Sent: Wednesday, April 21, 2010 12:26 PM To: Meteorite-list; Jason Utas Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Nothing wrong with "just west of Mineral Point" Hi Jason, If I may ask, what are you basing this on? thanx, Steve Steve Witt IMCA #9020 http://imca.cc/ --- On Wed, 4/21/10, Jason Utas <meteorite...@gmail.com> wrote: > From: Jason Utas <meteorite...@gmail.com> > Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Nothing wrong with "just west of Mineral Point" > To: "Meteorite-list" <meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com> > Date: Wednesday, April 21, 2010, 1:54 PM Not really - with every > large, fragmented fall there are almost always more smaller rather > than larger stones. > In other words, while they may be at the "light" end of the > strewnfield, meteorite density is probably going to be the greatest > there. > Regards, > Jason ______________________________________________ Visit the Archives at http://www.meteoritecentral.com/mailing-list-archives.html Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
