Re: [meteorite-list] Scalecube Family
I thought they were all cm cubes as well, until I got several emails asking me to produce inch cubes. One guy even sent me pictures of several NASA inch cubes.Some pictures of cubes had marks on the T and B. That guy bought one of my inch cubes, and after receiving it, ordered 12 custom made cubes with tick marks on ALL letters! What I don't understand is why some of them have tick marks on all the letters. Why would one need a mark showing the bottom of the W? ...And the T and B??? Mike, can you enlighten me on this one? Drake A rock pile ceases to be a pile of rocks, the moment one contemplates it and envisions a cathedral. Drake Doc Dameräu L3CC Member www.nepra.com www.rocketmaterials.org http://home.sprynet.com/~monel/ - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com Sent: Thursday, November 08, 2007 2:03 AM Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Scalecube Family On November 7, 2007 Mike wrote: From left to right: Buhl 1cm Cube, Unknown 1cm Cube, NASA 'Scale Block' 1 inch Cube, Drake 1 inch Certified Cube, Drake 1cm Cube, Drake 1cm prototype. Dear Mike, when or where did NASA use a 1 inch cube? I am quite sure all their meteorite documentation use the metric sytem with 1 cm cubes. Just curious. Svend www.niger-meteorite-recon.de __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list -- www.niger-meteorite-recon.de __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
[meteorite-list] AD - Ebay Auctions ending
Good Morning All I have auctions ending tonight, ebay ID catchafallingstar.com. ALL started just at 99 Cents!!! Highlights include: NWA 2995 Lunar Meteorite. A full slice of this beauty recently sold at Bonahms auction. http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItemitem=200167978082 Oriented Bassikounou: http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItemitem=200164025514 Beautiful FUSION Crusted Oum Dreyga (Amgala): http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItemitem=200164012816 See everything at: http://search.ebay.com/_W0QQsassZcatchafallingstar.com Also, we still have some NWA 2986 Mars, NWA 2995 Moon, Campo del Cielo and NWA 869 coins available at: http://www.meteoritecoins.com/ Thanks for looking Jim Strope 421 Fourth Street Glen Dale, WV 26038 http://www.catchafallingstar.com __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] Comet Holmes/Parent bodies?
G'day Graham, Here's a list I compiled some years ago from various posts to the list following a large a origins/parent-body thread. I'm not sure if those discussions are still in the archives though. www.meteorites.com.au/oddsends/origin.html Cheers, Jeff - Original Message - From: ensoramanda To: MeteoriteList Sent: Wed Nov 7 04:23:56 2007 Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Comet Holmes/Parent bodies? Hi Al, All, Nice shots for first attemptI hav'nt had a go for ages...you've inspired me to give it a try whilst there is something special about. You also made me wonder about parent bodies when considering if there might be bits of Holmes about. I am not sure if this has been discussed on the list before much...but wondered if there was any more recent research that indicated more about where all our collections have come from? I have read about various possibilities, matching various classifications of meteorite with various asteroids and suggestions that certain ones might be cometary material...but is there an up to date simple summary or list that matches them up as far as current thinking can? Anyone know? Regards, Graham Ensor __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] Did a Collision Cause Comet 17P/Holmes'MysteriousOutburst?
Hi Jerry, Sterling, and list: Sterling. Have I done something wrong. I just got an error message stating that mailbox disabled for this recipient. L- No pun intended, but the solid theory is actually a good one. I was making comets in class yesterday and we tried getting pictures of me popping film canisters (back in the dark ages cameras had this long plastic stuff that you actually loaded into the camera and then, after taking your pictures had to have them developed). It is very dramatic, especially the Fuji film canisters that have a much tighter fitting top. You put a little water a a small piece of dry ice (frozen carbon dioxide) into it and close the top. The solid warms up, turns to gas and --- pop. Like popping a champagne cork. It gets the students' attention. The top actually slams off of our 15 foot class ceiling and lands well up the rows of students. At room temperature, solid carbon dioxide weighs 1.6 g/cc and the gas is 0.00198 g/cc. Therefore the volume change is over 800 times. If you try holding that under the surface of a comet (even with temperatures a little less) that builds up a lot of pressure --- a really big burp! Why this comet seems to burp every hundred years or so rather than just having a jet of material like any normal comet is something that I (or probably anyone else at the moment) understands. Larry On Wed, November 7, 2007 8:09 pm, Jerry wrote: Sterling, Larry and List, The burp theory as proposed by Sterling is as solid as any and more likely than most to guesstmate the auspicious, unusual cometary event that graced this generation of observers with a front row seat to the great mysteries of OUR existence. We, once more, have been priviledged to witness a spectcal to generate wonder. Whether, and I doubt we'll ever explain this one, a consensus is ever arrived at, I am satisfied that the collisional aspect has been addressed and though partitioned into a much lower probability, uncertaintity, chaos if you will, has reared its head to grade our fears and futures into a more respectable framework to wend our way through the rest of our days. Spooky, but throw in a Nakhla Dog, a Lama or two, a guy blow off his feet and knoked unconscious, another at Tunguska and IT does give one pause. Jerry Flaherty - Original Message - From: Sterling K. Webb [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Meteorite Mailing List meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com Cc: Ron Baalke [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, November 07, 2007 9:42 PM Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Did a Collision Cause Comet 17P/Holmes'MysteriousOutburst? Hi, List, You would think with all the new (and old) scientists examining the collisional possibilities of Comet Holmes passing through the Asteroid Belt, some of them might have noticed that Comet Holmes DOES NOT PASS through the Asteroid Belt! I'm being sarcastic about this because I made exactly the same mistake myself, until an astronomer, List member Larry Lebofsky, pointed out that because of its high inclination (19.12 degrees), Comet Holmes does not pass through the ecliptic plane in the Asteroid Belt, but way out at the inside edge of Jupiter's orbit, at 4.86 AU. http://ssd.jpl.nasa.gov/sbdb.cgi?sstr=17porb=1 The vast majority of the asteroids in the Main Belt have inclinations of less than 19 degrees. Of course, it is possible that Holmes could collide with a less inclined asteroid; it depends on the orientation of the asteroidal orbit. But, but it's really a very thin chance, with a small subgroup of an already widely scattered population. In non-numerical terms, Comet Holmes essentially passes over (and under) the Asteroid Belt, rather than through it. However, Holmes does plunge through the ecliptical plane in the position where thousands of Jupiter Trojan asteroids co-orbit with the planet, making passes that repeat the same orbital configuration every 81-point-something years. The odds of a collision with something in Jupiter's Trojans is dramatically higher than with a Main Belt asteroid. There are two goups of Trojans, ahead and behind Jupiter at 60 degrees, but since they are themselves generously distributed ahead and behind their Trojan points, along about 1/3rd of the Jupiter orbit, Holmes is exposed to such Trojan encounters for about 1/3rd of its orbits. The two possible causes of the outburst, collision or thermal, can be summarized as the Bump or Burp theories. I think an endogenous cause of the outburst is more likely than a collision, as both the great outbursts, the discovery outburst and the present one, occured after perihelion passage with some delay. From June 16, 1892 to November 6, 1892 is 143 days. From May 4, 2007 to October 24, 2007 is 173 days. (There are some uncertainties about dates of perihelion.) Passage through the ecliptic plane at 2.05 AU (right at the inner limit of the Asteroid Belt) occurs 4-5 months earlier than perihelion. At the times of the
Re: [meteorite-list] Comet Holmes/Parent bodies?
Hi Graham and all, Here is a listing of possible parent bodies to our meteorites. If anyone has a more complete listing and would care to share it with me on or off list I would appreciate it. I am sure there a quite a number of suspect parent bodies but not enough data to support a pairing. Best! Comets have also been suggested to be sources for some meteorites but a few problems exist to determine this. First very little is know about comets (though we are just now finding out more) Two no photographs from a network of cameras of material has been taken to show a relationship of material to comets. The streaks of light during a meteor shower represent only minor particles the size of dust or perhaps a bit larger. So currently the jury is still out on pinning meteorite falls to known comets or cometary debris. A Listing of Known and Possible Parent Bodies of Meteorites H class of meteorites: Asteroid Hebe L Classes L4: Asteroid Eros L6: Asteroid Bozemcova 3628 LL Class: Asteroid SF36 (1998) Carbonaceous Group CM2: Asteroid Ceres, Asteroid: Fortuna19 CR2: Asteroid Pallas 2 CO3: Asteroids Eos Family C2 Tagish Lake may be linked to D Asteroid 368 Haidea Achondrite Classes Aubrites: Asteroid Nysa 44, Asteroid Eger 3103 Brachinites: Asteroid Benetta 289 Howardites: Eucrites: Asteroid Vesta (4) Diogenites: Olivine Diogenites: Stony Iron Classes Pallasites: A Type Asteroids, Asteroid Asporina (46), Asteroid Eleonora (354) (there are three or four known parent bodies for pallasites) Iron Classes M-Type Asteroids: Asteroid Psyche, Asteroid 1986 DA Mars Meteorites (SNC 's) From The Planet Mars Shergotties: Nakhlaites: Chassigniates: Allan Hills: Lunar Meteorites (LUN) LUN A: Anorthositic Highland Rocks (four combinations of this group) LUN B: Mare Basalts LUN G:Mare Gabbros LUN N: Lunar Norites This list is derived from Harry McSween's book Meteorite and their Parent Planets and from other sources on the internet that have posted pairings. --AL Mitterling ensoramanda wrote: Hi Al, All, Nice shots for first attemptI hav'nt had a go for ages...you've inspired me to give it a try whilst there is something special about. You also made me wonder about parent bodies when considering if there might be bits of Holmes about. I am not sure if this has been discussed on the list before much...but wondered if there was any more recent research that indicated more about where all our collections have come from? I have read about various possibilities, matching various classifications of meteorite with various asteroids and suggestions that certain ones might be cometary material...but is there an up to date simple summary or list that matches them up as far as current thinking can? Anyone know? Regards, Graham Ensor __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
[meteorite-list] Rocks From Space Picture of the Day - November 8, 2007
http://www.spacerocksinc.com/November_8_2007.html ** See what's new at http://www.aol.com __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] Scalecube Family
Hi Mike, they used 1 inch cubes at: 1 inch : http://www.hq.nasa.gov/alsj/a15/ap15-S71-44990.jpg 1 inch : http://pds.jpl.nasa.gov/planets/images/browse/earth/breccia.jpg but they used 1cm cubes also : 1cm : http://www.lpi.usra.edu/expmoon/Apollo11/A11_MP.SampleDoc2FS.gif 1cm : http://www.alaska.net/~meteor/Rock79135.jpg 1cm : http://pds.jpl.nasa.gov/planets/images/browse/earth/igneous.jpg 1cm : http://www.apolloexplorer.co.uk/photo/html/AS17/10076007.htm 1cm : http://www.apolloexplorer.co.uk/photo/html/AS17/10076008.htm 1cm : http://www.apolloexplorer.co.uk/photo/html/AS17/10076009.htm 1cm : http://www.apolloexplorer.co.uk/photo/html/AS17/10076010.htm Stefan Hello Svend, NASA used the 1 inch cube in the Lunar Receiving Lab for photographic reference of all Apollo lunar samples. At the time, it was referred to as a 'Scale Block.' I believe this is the only time the 1 inch cube was employed anywhere in the world. In the LRL, centimeters would be referenced on the specimen 'counter' only. Here is a photo of the 1 inch cube in the LRL circa 1970: http://img.villagephotos.com/p/2004-11/877141/LRL-scaleblock.jpg The 1 inch cube was fabricated in a machine shop next to the LRL prior to Apollo 11. Later, the vertical tick mark would be added. I believe they were designed by the gentlemen who designed all of the LRL tools (I have his name here somewhere). It is unclear at what point the CM cubes were first employed, but I believe it was around 1975-1977 when ANSMET began collecting meteorites from Antarctica. I believe the 1 inch LRL cubes are the first cubes ever produced. Thanks for the question! Cheers, Mike Bandli www.Astro-Artifacts.com -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, November 07, 2007 11:03 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com Subject: RE: [meteorite-list] Scalecube Family On November 7, 2007 Mike wrote: From left to right: Buhl 1cm Cube, Unknown 1cm Cube, NASA 'Scale Block' 1 inch Cube, Drake 1 inch Certified Cube, Drake 1cm Cube, Drake 1cm prototype. Dear Mike, when or where did NASA use a 1 inch cube? I am quite sure all their meteorite documentation use the metric sytem with 1 cm cubes. Just curious. Svend www.niger-meteorite-recon.de __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list -- www.niger-meteorite-recon.de __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] Scalecube Family
thanks Mike, that's quite interesting. They must have switched their reference scale somewhere in the late seventies. There are a number of later ANSMET photos from the eighties that already show 1cm cubes. For example here with Mac Alpine Hills 88104 and MAC 88105: http://www.meteorites.wustl.edu/lunar/stones/mac88105.htm or here as early as 1981 with ALH 81005: Seems strange to me that they switched from inch to cm. That would make comparing of earlier and later documentation a quite disturbing. Thanks for answering best regards Svend www.niger-meteorite-recon.de Hello Svend, NASA used the 1 inch cube in the Lunar Receiving Lab for photographic reference of all Apollo lunar samples. At the time, it was referred to as a 'Scale Block.' I believe this is the only time the 1 inch cube was employed anywhere in the world. In the LRL, centimeters would be referenced on the specimen 'counter' only. Here is a photo of the 1 inch cube in the LRL circa 1970: http://img.villagephotos.com/p/2004-11/877141/LRL-scaleblock.jpg The 1 inch cube was fabricated in a machine shop next to the LRL prior to Apollo 11. Later, the vertical tick mark would be added. I believe they were designed by the gentlemen who designed all of the LRL tools (I have his name here somewhere). It is unclear at what point the CM cubes were first employed, but I believe it was around 1975-1977 when ANSMET began collecting meteorites from Antarctica. I believe the 1 inch LRL cubes are the first cubes ever produced. Thanks for the question! Cheers, Mike Bandli www.Astro-Artifacts.com -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, November 07, 2007 11:03 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com Subject: RE: [meteorite-list] Scalecube Family On November 7, 2007 Mike wrote: From left to right: Buhl 1cm Cube, Unknown 1cm Cube, NASA 'Scale Block' 1 inch Cube, Drake 1 inch Certified Cube, Drake 1cm Cube, Drake 1cm prototype. Dear Mike, when or where did NASA use a 1 inch cube? I am quite sure all their meteorite documentation use the metric sytem with 1 cm cubes. Just curious. Svend www.niger-meteorite-recon.de __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list -- www.niger-meteorite-recon.de -- www.niger-meteorite-recon.de __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] Scalecube Family
Hello Svend, NASA used the 1 inch cube in the Lunar Receiving Lab for photographic reference of all Apollo lunar samples. At the time, it was referred to as a 'Scale Block.' I believe this is the only time the 1 inch cube was employed anywhere in the world. In the LRL, centimeters would be referenced on the specimen 'counter' only. Here is a photo of the 1 inch cube in the LRL circa 1970: http://img.villagephotos.com/p/2004-11/877141/LRL-scaleblock.jpg The 1 inch cube was fabricated in a machine shop next to the LRL prior to Apollo 11. Later, the vertical tick mark would be added. I believe they were designed by the gentlemen who designed all of the LRL tools (I have his name here somewhere). It is unclear at what point the CM cubes were first employed, but I believe it was around 1975-1977 when ANSMET began collecting meteorites from Antarctica. I believe the 1 inch LRL cubes are the first cubes ever produced. Thanks for the question! Cheers, Mike Bandli www.Astro-Artifacts.com -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, November 07, 2007 11:03 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com Subject: RE: [meteorite-list] Scalecube Family On November 7, 2007 Mike wrote: From left to right: Buhl 1cm Cube, Unknown 1cm Cube, NASA 'Scale Block' 1 inch Cube, Drake 1 inch Certified Cube, Drake 1cm Cube, Drake 1cm prototype. Dear Mike, when or where did NASA use a 1 inch cube? I am quite sure all their meteorite documentation use the metric sytem with 1 cm cubes. Just curious. Svend www.niger-meteorite-recon.de __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list -- www.niger-meteorite-recon.de __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] Scalecube Family
sorry, forgot the 2nd link -- thanks Mike, that's quite interesting. They must have switched their reference scale somewhere in the late seventies. There are a number of later ANSMET photos from the eighties that already show 1cm cubes. For example here with Mac Alpine Hills 88104 and MAC 88105: http://www.meteorites.wustl.edu/lunar/stones/mac88105.htm or here as early as 1981 with ALH 81005: http://www.meteorites.wustl.edu/lunar/stones/alha81005.htm Seems strange to me that they switched from inch to cm. That would make comparing of earlier and later documentation quite disturbing. Thanks for answering best regards Svend www.niger-meteorite-recon.de Hello Svend, NASA used the 1 inch cube in the Lunar Receiving Lab for photographic reference of all Apollo lunar samples. At the time, it was referred to as a 'Scale Block.' I believe this is the only time the 1 inch cube was employed anywhere in the world. In the LRL, centimeters would be referenced on the specimen 'counter' only. Here is a photo of the 1 inch cube in the LRL circa 1970: http://img.villagephotos.com/p/2004-11/877141/LRL-scaleblock.jpg The 1 inch cube was fabricated in a machine shop next to the LRL prior to Apollo 11. Later, the vertical tick mark would be added. I believe they were designed by the gentlemen who designed all of the LRL tools (I have his name here somewhere). It is unclear at what point the CM cubes were first employed, but I believe it was around 1975-1977 when ANSMET began collecting meteorites from Antarctica. I believe the 1 inch LRL cubes are the first cubes ever produced. Thanks for the question! Cheers, Mike Bandli www.Astro-Artifacts.com -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, November 07, 2007 11:03 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com Subject: RE: [meteorite-list] Scalecube Family On November 7, 2007 Mike wrote: From left to right: Buhl 1cm Cube, Unknown 1cm Cube, NASA 'Scale Block' 1 inch Cube, Drake 1 inch Certified Cube, Drake 1cm Cube, Drake 1cm prototype. Dear Mike, when or where did NASA use a 1 inch cube? I am quite sure all their meteorite documentation use the metric sytem with 1 cm cubes. Just curious. Svend www.niger-meteorite-recon.de __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list -- www.niger-meteorite-recon.de -- www.niger-meteorite-recon.de __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list -- www.niger-meteorite-recon.de __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] Scalecube Family
Mike, the Scherff-cube is missing in your collection, was the most used meteorite-cube before the Buhl-cube. (Got blue edges with time). Best! Martin (are sugar-cubes in USA metric?) -Ursprüngliche Nachricht- Von: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Im Auftrag von Mike Bandli Gesendet: Donnerstag, 8. November 2007 02:17 An: 'Meteorite List' Betreff: [meteorite-list] Scalecube Family On June 21, 2007 Paul wrote: I have to wonder if ten years from now, there will be people collecting the different types of scalecubes/centimeter cubes as people on this list are collecting meteorites. Ten years? How about five months! My Scalecube family: http://img.villagephotos.com/p/2004-11/877141/cubes.jpg From left to right: Buhl 1cm Cube, Unknown 1cm Cube, NASA 'Scale Block' 1 inch Cube, Drake 1 inch Certified Cube, Drake 1cm Cube, Drake 1cm prototype. Kudos to Drake D. for building such a great 1 inch cube! Its well worth the money and perfect for other scientific/forensic photography. What strange hobbies I have... Kind regards, Mike Bandli www.Astro-Artifacts.com __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] Scalecube Family
Stefan is correct! It appears they used both sizes. What is strange is that the most famous rock, the Genesis Stone, is pictured with a 1 inch cube, similar to mine. I can also find Apollo 11 and Apollo 17 samples photographed with 1 inchers. I have no clue as to why they would mix up these sizes in their photography! I'll have to do some more research this week and see what I can find out. Ralph Harvey from ANSMET did tell me the Counters were 'hand-me-downs' from the Apollo program, so I imagine that is also where they got their CM cubes from. Kind regards, Mike Bandli www.Astro-Artifacts.com -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Stefan Brandes Sent: Thursday, November 08, 2007 2:01 AM To: Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Scalecube Family Hi Mike, they used 1 inch cubes at: 1 inch : http://www.hq.nasa.gov/alsj/a15/ap15-S71-44990.jpg 1 inch : http://pds.jpl.nasa.gov/planets/images/browse/earth/breccia.jpg but they used 1cm cubes also : 1cm : http://www.lpi.usra.edu/expmoon/Apollo11/A11_MP.SampleDoc2FS.gif 1cm : http://www.alaska.net/~meteor/Rock79135.jpg 1cm : http://pds.jpl.nasa.gov/planets/images/browse/earth/igneous.jpg 1cm : http://www.apolloexplorer.co.uk/photo/html/AS17/10076007.htm 1cm : http://www.apolloexplorer.co.uk/photo/html/AS17/10076008.htm 1cm : http://www.apolloexplorer.co.uk/photo/html/AS17/10076009.htm 1cm : http://www.apolloexplorer.co.uk/photo/html/AS17/10076010.htm Stefan Hello Svend, NASA used the 1 inch cube in the Lunar Receiving Lab for photographic reference of all Apollo lunar samples. At the time, it was referred to as a 'Scale Block.' I believe this is the only time the 1 inch cube was employed anywhere in the world. In the LRL, centimeters would be referenced on the specimen 'counter' only. Here is a photo of the 1 inch cube in the LRL circa 1970: http://img.villagephotos.com/p/2004-11/877141/LRL-scaleblock.jpg The 1 inch cube was fabricated in a machine shop next to the LRL prior to Apollo 11. Later, the vertical tick mark would be added. I believe they were designed by the gentlemen who designed all of the LRL tools (I have his name here somewhere). It is unclear at what point the CM cubes were first employed, but I believe it was around 1975-1977 when ANSMET began collecting meteorites from Antarctica. I believe the 1 inch LRL cubes are the first cubes ever produced. Thanks for the question! Cheers, Mike Bandli www.Astro-Artifacts.com -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, November 07, 2007 11:03 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com Subject: RE: [meteorite-list] Scalecube Family On November 7, 2007 Mike wrote: From left to right: Buhl 1cm Cube, Unknown 1cm Cube, NASA 'Scale Block' 1 inch Cube, Drake 1 inch Certified Cube, Drake 1cm Cube, Drake 1cm prototype. Dear Mike, when or where did NASA use a 1 inch cube? I am quite sure all their meteorite documentation use the metric sytem with 1 cm cubes. Just curious. Svend www.niger-meteorite-recon.de __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list -- www.niger-meteorite-recon.de __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] Rocks From Space Picture of the Day - November 8, 2007
Talk about a perfect piece to help one visualize an object plunging thru the atmosphere, vibrating intensely and slowly spinning to and fro struggling to maintain orientation. Thank you Svend and Michael, a picture worth thousands of words. Jerry Flaherty - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com Sent: Thursday, November 08, 2007 7:34 AM Subject: [meteorite-list] Rocks From Space Picture of the Day - November 8, 2007 http://www.spacerocksinc.com/November_8_2007.html ** See what's new at http://www.aol.com __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] Did a Collision Cause Comet 17P/Holmes'MysteriousOutburst?
On Thu, 8 Nov 2007 03:48:15 -0700 (MST), you wrote: You put a little water a a small piece of dry ice (frozen carbon dioxide) into it and close the top. The solid warms up, turns to gas and --- pop. Like popping a champagne cork. It gets the students' attention. The top actually slams off of our 15 foot class ceiling and lands well up the rows of students. It is more fun with bigger bottles. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cTP4yp8y_NA http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=dry+ice (I did that once with a 24-ounce soft drink bottle. Split the thing open right down the side. I have a local Ingles supermarket that sells dry ice for 99 cents a pound). __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
[meteorite-list] Is the Perfect Chondrule Carbonaceous?
Hi list, I don't think publicly guessing at a classification is productive as it tends to impact peoples understandings and collections in a more permanent way than the later corrections.However, I need to address this to who ever might be interested. I have about 35 Kg. of material that has been nick named Perfect Chondrule because of some of the cool chondrule micrographs I had taken of it. Recently, Matt sent me this email. (There were others as well) Hi Tom, I see that Steve Arnold (Chicago) is selling the 'perfect chondrule' stones you sold him ( http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItemrd=1item=290177496876 ). Do you still have some of this material available and if so how much is it? Secondly how much truth is there in his claim that 'PIECES HAVE BEEN SENT TO MARC FRIES AND JOHN KASHUBA.BOTH ARE PRETTY SURE THAT THIS IS PROBABLY A VERY UNIQUE CO3 CARBENACEOUS CHONDRITE'? Thanks, Matt. I sold some of the material to both Steve and John prior to Marc Fries requesting a sample for examination. Marc has found carbon in the Raman Spectrometer testing he has done and the chances are likely it is carbonaceous. Marc has been very helpful and I think he is a great guy. He said these are preliminary observations and should not be considered Classification. John Kashuba has been a great help to me in speeding along classification. He had multiple thin sections produced and sent one to me for imaging as well as hand delivering one to ASU. (Thank you John!) John has not publicly guessed at what that classification will be. John is deliberate and cautious. He would not make pronouncements like that. This material is still unclassified. It's cool that Steve said what he did and he is welcome to sell any thing he owns (and I will watch for what it sells for) but I felt some clarification was in order. Tom Phillips ** See what's new at http://www.aol.com __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
[meteorite-list] AD: One cent ebay sale this afternoon. Some great items
Check out these spectacular pieces ending on ebay ending tonight, some nice goodies, many still at or near one cent! This sale includes rarities like Lance and Orgueil. Somce examples include these nice pieces, but be sure to see everything. Beautiful piece of translucent Brahin, large slice. http://cgi.ebay.com/_W0QQitemZ170164068851 Incredible flight-oriented Gao meteorite, with rollover rim and pieces fused into the backside fusion crust. Truly one of a kind piece! http://cgi.ebay.com/_W0QQitemZ140173782668 One of the best oriented Sikhote-Alin bullets I have sold in years, thousands of flow lines. http://cgi.ebay.com/_W0QQitemZ140173837051 Beautiful Imilac piece from British museum. http://cgi.ebay.com/_W0QQitemZ140173836134 Large Sikhote-Alin shrapnel, 330 grams. http://cgi.ebay.com/_W0QQitemZ140173828132 RARE slice of NWA 4664, Polymict Diogenite. http://cgi.ebay.com/_W0QQitemZ170164066757 See all available items at the links below, there are way too many to list here. http://members.ebay.com/ws2/eBayISAPI.dll? viewUserPageuserid=meteoritehunters http://members.ebay.com/ws2/eBayISAPI.dll? ViewUserPageuserid=meteorite-hunter Thanks Mike Farmer __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
[meteorite-list] More on Tunguska and Lake Cheko
http://www.inform.kz/showarticle.php?lang=engid=157070 08.11.2007 / 09:32 Crater from 1908 Russian space impact found, team says NEW YORK. November 8. KAZINFORM. Almost a century after a mysterious explosion in Russia flattened a huge swath of Siberian forest, scientists have found what they believe is a crater made by the cosmic object that made the blast. The crater was discovered under a lake near the Podkamennaya Tunguska River in western Siberia, where the cataclysm, known as the Tunguska event, took place. On June 30, 1908, a ball of fire exploded about 6 miles (10 kilometers) above the ground in the sparsely populated region, scientists say. The blast released 15 megatons of energyabout a thousand times that of the atomic bomb dropped on Hiroshimaand flattened 770 square miles (2,000 square kilometers) of forest. Since then many teams of scientists have combed the site, but none was able to find any fragments of an object, like a rocky asteroid or a comet, that might have caused the event. In their new study, a team of Italian scientists used acoustic imagery to investigate the bottom of Lake Cheko, about five miles (eight kilometers) north of the explosion's suspected epicenter. When our expedition [was at] Tunguska, we didn't have a clue that Lake Cheko might fill a crater, said Luca Gasperini, a geologist with the Marine Science Institute in Bologna who led the study. We searched its bottom looking for extraterrestrial particles trapped in the mud. We mapped the basin and took samples. As we examined the data, we couldn't believe what they were suggesting. The funnel-like shape of the basin and samples from its sedimentary deposits suggest that the lake fills an impact crater, Gasperini said. A Soft Crash The basin of Lake Cheko is not circular, deep, and steep like a typical impact crater, the scientists say. Instead it's elongated and shallow, about 1,640 feet (500 meters) long with a maximum depth of only 165 feet (50 meters). It also lacks the rim of debris usually found around typical impact craters, such as the Meteor Crater in Arizona, Kazinform quotes National Geographic News. Gasperini's team says that the basin's unusual shape is the result of a fragment thrown from the Tunguska explosion that plowed into the ground, leaving a long, trenchlike depression. We suggest that a 10-meter-wide [33-foot-wide] fragment of the object escaped the explosion and kept going in the same direction. It was relatively slow, about 1 kilometer a second [0.6 mile a second], Gasperini said. The lake is located along the most probable track of the cosmic body, he added, which likely made a soft crash in the marshy terrain. It splashed on the soft, swampy soil and melted the underlying permafrost layer, releasing CO2 [carbon dioxide], water vapor, and methane that broadened the hole, hence the shape and size of the basin, unusual for an impact crater. Our hypothesis is the only one that accounts for the funnel-like morphology of Lake Cheko's bottom, he added. In a previous expedition, Russian scientists studied Lake Cheko and concluded that it had formed before 1908, indicating that it was not formed by the Tunguska event. The team had measured sediments on the bottom of the lake and determined that the deposits were accumulating there at about 0.4 inch (1 centimeter) a year. This suggested that Lake Cheko was several centuries old. But Gasperini's team argues that the older deposits found by the Russians were already there when the explosion took place. We found evidence that only the topmost, one-meter-deep [three-foot-deep] layer of debris actually came from the inflowing river, Gasperini said. [The] deeper sediments are deposits that predate 1908. They were the target over which the impact took place, so Lake Cheko is only one century old. The team's findings are based on a 1999 expedition to Tunguska and appeared in the August issue of the journal Terra Nova. Asteroid or Comet? William Hartmann, senior scientist of the Planetary Science Institute in Tucson, Arizona, said the new findings are compelling but do not address all of the lingering questions about the event. It's an exciting result that might shed new light on the Tunguska explosion, he said. Certainly it warrants new studies of the area. But it raises a question in my mind: If one large fragment hit the ground, we would normally expect thousands of smaller fragments also to hit the ground along the path, and many searches have failed to find such meteorite fragments. So, why no smaller pieces? Finding fragments from the explosion is considered key to determining what kind of object made the impact. An asteroid would probably leave some remains, while a comet might be annihilated in the blast, Hartmann said. Our crater hypothesis is consistent with both possibilities, Gasperini said. If the body was an asteroid, a surviving fragment may be buried beneath the lake. If it was a comet, its chemical signature should
[meteorite-list] Since Scale Cubes are a topic today
I seem to remember a few months back someone posted a link that told the sory of the Scale Cube. I was wondering what that link is so I can read it. Del __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] Since Scale Cubes are a topic today
Sterling Wrote: The purpose of a scalecube is SCALE ONLY. I believe there is a misconception that scalecubes were designed for meteorites, measurement, and field photography. This is not the case. The ORIGINAL design had several functions and had nothing to do with meteorites, measurement, or field photography. One of the most important functions was showing the orientation of lunar samples on the lunar surface within the a lab setting. You'll notice many lunar samples oriented on clumps of Tin-Foil inside the pressure cabinets. Some photos show both cube and sample oriented on Tin-Foil. (This was only possible if a photograph was taken on the lunar surface with a Gnomon prior to sample collection.) It was important to record and note the orientation of samples as they appeared on the lunar surface for future reference. Another important function was for describing important features such as zap pits, clasts, etc.. From the A17 Sample Catalog, page 127, Sample #75075: Surface T was coated by a dark gray, fine grained, cohesive patina... Parallel microgrooves run N to S over much of surface T. Surface B is fresh, except for small patches of gray patina. How would one describe these features without some sort of reference device like the scalecube? It was crucial that this kind of data be recorded as samples would soon be split and chipped and divided to principle investigators. The scalecube aided in recording the sample's original collection state, both in photography and in description. This being said, I would respectively disagree with Sterling's statement that cubes are only for scale. HOWEVER... I believe that, after the LRL, the cubes were adapted to be used for meteorite photography and share different, but similar functions (When used correctly!!). I don't believe the majority of meteorite collectors give much thought as to T, B, S, E, W, and N. Cubes are arbitrarily placed in the majority of photographs I see and used only for the 'scientific/official look.' This is an example where Sterling's statement could be true. Cube out, Mike Bandli __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
[meteorite-list] Crater From 1908 Russian Space Impact Found, Team Says
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2007/11/071107-russia-crater.html Crater From 1908 Russian Space Impact Found, Team Says Maria Cristina Valsecchi in Rome, Italy for National Geographic News November 7, 2007 Almost a century after a mysterious explosion in Russia flattened a huge swath of Siberian forest, scientists have found what they believe is a crater made by the cosmic object that made the blast. The crater was discovered under a lake near the Podkamennaya Tunguska River in western Siberia, where the cataclysm, known as the Tunguska event, took place (see map). On June 30, 1908, a ball of fire exploded about 6 miles (10 kilometers) above the ground in the sparsely populated region, scientists say. The blast released 15 megatons of energyabout a thousand times that of the atomic bomb dropped on Hiroshimaand flattened 770 square miles (2,000 square kilometers) of forest. Since then many teams of scientists have combed the site, but none was able to find any fragments of an object, like a rocky asteroid or a comet, that might have caused the event. In their new study, a team of Italian scientists used acoustic imagery to investigate the bottom of Lake Cheko, about five miles (eight kilometers) north of the explosion's suspected epicenter. When our expedition [was at] Tunguska, we didn't have a clue that Lake Cheko might fill a crater, said Luca Gasperini, a geologist with the Marine Science Institute in Bologna who led the study. We searched its bottom looking for extraterrestrial particles trapped in the mud. We mapped the basin and took samples. As we examined the data, we couldn't believe what they were suggesting. The funnel-like shape of the basin and samples from its sedimentary deposits suggest that the lake fills an impact crater, Gasperini said. A Soft Crash The basin of Lake Cheko is not circular, deep, and steep like a typical impact crater, the scientists say. Instead it's elongated and shallow, about 1,640 feet (500 meters) long with a maximum depth of only 165 feet (50 meters). It also lacks the rim of debris usually found around typical impact craters, such as the Meteor Crater in Arizona. Gasperini's team says that the basin's unusual shape is the result of a fragment thrown from the Tunguska explosion that plowed into the ground, leaving a long, trenchlike depression. We suggest that a 10-meter-wide [33-foot-wide] fragment of the object escaped the explosion and kept going in the same direction. It was relatively slow, about 1 kilometer a second [0.6 mile a second], Gasperini said. The lake is located along the most probable track of the cosmic body, he added, which likely made a soft crash in the marshy terrain. It splashed on the soft, swampy soil and melted the underlying permafrost layer, releasing CO2 [carbon dioxide], water vapor, and methane that broadened the hole, hence the shape and size of the basin, unusual for an impact crater. Our hypothesis is the only one that accounts for the funnel-like morphology of Lake Cheko's bottom, he added. In a previous expedition, Russian scientists studied Lake Cheko and concluded that it had formed before 1908, indicating that it was not formed by the Tunguska event. The team had measured sediments on the bottom of the lake and determined that the deposits were accumulating there at about 0.4 inch (1 centimeter) a year. This suggested that Lake Cheko was several centuries old. But Gasperini's team argues that the older deposits found by the Russians were already there when the explosion took place. We found evidence that only the topmost, one-meter-deep [three-foot-deep] layer of debris actually came from the inflowing river, Gasperini said. [The] deeper sediments are deposits that predate 1908. They were the target over which the impact took place, so Lake Cheko is only one century old. The team's findings are based on a 1999 expedition to Tunguska and appeared in the August issue of the journal Terra Nova. Asteroid or Comet? William Hartmann, senior scientist of the Planetary Science Institute in Tucson, Arizona, said the new findings are compelling but do not address all of the lingering questions about the event. It's an exciting result that might shed new light on the Tunguska explosion, he said. Certainly it warrants new studies of the area. But it raises a question in my mind: If one large fragment hit the ground, we would normally expect thousands of smaller fragments also to hit the ground along the path, and many searches have failed to find such meteorite fragments. So, why no smaller pieces? Finding fragments from the explosion is considered key to determining what kind of object made the impact. An asteroid would probably leave some remains, while a comet might be annihilated in the blast, Hartmann said. Our crater hypothesis is consistent with both possibilities, Gasperini said. If the body was an asteroid, a surviving fragment may be buried beneath the
Re: [meteorite-list] Did a Collision Cause Comet17P/Holmes'MysteriousOutburst?
Sweet! Certainly shows that given that the right ingredients are present and cause and effect are dramatic the Burp can produce profound reactions. Cool, I gota get me some dry ice and a fool [other than this one] to set it off! Jerry Flaherty - Original Message - From: Darren Garrison [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: Meteorite Mailing List meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com Sent: Thursday, November 08, 2007 9:06 AM Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Did a Collision Cause Comet17P/Holmes'MysteriousOutburst? On Thu, 8 Nov 2007 03:48:15 -0700 (MST), you wrote: You put a little water a a small piece of dry ice (frozen carbon dioxide) into it and close the top. The solid warms up, turns to gas and --- pop. Like popping a champagne cork. It gets the students' attention. The top actually slams off of our 15 foot class ceiling and lands well up the rows of students. It is more fun with bigger bottles. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cTP4yp8y_NA http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=dry+ice (I did that once with a 24-ounce soft drink bottle. Split the thing open right down the side. I have a local Ingles supermarket that sells dry ice for 99 cents a pound). __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
[meteorite-list] For sale: Glorieta pallasite, Canyon Diablo's with Holes, Campo with hole
The prices are: Glorieta Pallasite $15 per gram Glorieta Siderite $ 10 per gram CD's with holes are $3.00 per gram Campo with hole is .33 per gram Ruben Garcia Phoenix, Arizona http://www.mr-meteorite.com __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] Since Scale Cubes are a topic today
Hi, All I hate to sound a sour note, but these artifacts are for SCALE, not measurement. I think it's wonderful that folks make them accurate to +/- 0.001 inch or millimeter, out of materials with low coefficients of expansion, and so forth, but that is purely an exercise in personal perfectionism. Measurement from a photo with a scalecube in it is impossible except in the case of a very elaborate photo setup designed to make such measurements possible and even then, the precision is low. The purpose of a scalecube is SCALE ONLY. Scale is a measurement so crude that we don't even apply the word measurement to it. Originally, they were for use in the field only. You could carry it in your pocket and drop it on the ground for the in situ photo. Putting them into a lab photo is an affectation and serves only the PR purpose of making a photo of a rock look scientific. (There were people who said, We paid billions to go to the Moon, and this is what we get: a picture of a rock? And you could point to the scalecube and say, Nah! See, it's Science.) During the scalecube threadflood, Dean Bessey kept saying, Just put a quarter in the photo. Apparently, he understands that the purpose of the object is Scale, not Measurement! If you see a picture of a rock with a featureless white background and there's a quarter next to it, you know it's a little rock. If you see a picture of a rock with a featureless white background and there's me standing next to it, you know it's a big rock. Making the scalecube artifact with such great care and precision is admirable and very enjoyable, but let's apply a little perspective to the purpose of the cube. And I DO admire the makers' pride in precision. Precision is a fine thing (say I, who have ancient Starrett verniers and micro- meters in their old wooden boxes, so I understand), but precision is NOT the purpose of the cube. Sterling K. Webb -- - Original Message - From: Mike Bandli [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: 'Delbert Waterbury' [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com Sent: Thursday, November 08, 2007 1:11 PM Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Since Scale Cubes are a topic today http://www.niger-meteorite-recon.de/en/meteorite-scalecube.htm Best, Mike -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Delbert Waterbury Sent: Thursday, November 08, 2007 11:04 AM To: Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com Subject: [meteorite-list] Since Scale Cubes are a topic today I seem to remember a few months back someone posted a link that told the story of the Scale Cube. I was wondering what that link is so I can read it. Del __ __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
[meteorite-list] possible CO 3 clearup/trade
Hi list.I just want to say on that ebay sell on the perfect chondrule,that I stated it was a possible co3 and that it was looked at by john and marc and they were only giving thier opinion as to what it might be.I know it is in classification and I am waiting for the results.Till than we have to wait in anticipation.Also I have a 40 gram esquel I am will to trade for a piece of park forest if anyone is interested. Steve R.Arnold,chicago,Ill,Usa!! The Asteroid Belt! Chicagometeorites.net Collecting Meteorites since 06/19/1999 Ebay I.D. Illinoismeteorites __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] More on Tunguska and Lake Cheko
Thanks, always an interesting subject. Jerry Flaherty - Original Message - From: Darren Garrison [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com Sent: Thursday, November 08, 2007 11:58 AM Subject: [meteorite-list] More on Tunguska and Lake Cheko http://www.inform.kz/showarticle.php?lang=engid=157070 08.11.2007 / 09:32 Crater from 1908 Russian space impact found, team says NEW YORK. November 8. KAZINFORM. Almost a century after a mysterious explosion in Russia flattened a huge swath of Siberian forest, scientists have found what they believe is a crater made by the cosmic object that made the blast. The crater was discovered under a lake near the Podkamennaya Tunguska River in western Siberia, where the cataclysm, known as the Tunguska event, took place. On June 30, 1908, a ball of fire exploded about 6 miles (10 kilometers) above the ground in the sparsely populated region, scientists say. The blast released 15 megatons of energy-about a thousand times that of the atomic bomb dropped on Hiroshima-and flattened 770 square miles (2,000 square kilometers) of forest. Since then many teams of scientists have combed the site, but none was able to find any fragments of an object, like a rocky asteroid or a comet, that might have caused the event. In their new study, a team of Italian scientists used acoustic imagery to investigate the bottom of Lake Cheko, about five miles (eight kilometers) north of the explosion's suspected epicenter. When our expedition [was at] Tunguska, we didn't have a clue that Lake Cheko might fill a crater, said Luca Gasperini, a geologist with the Marine Science Institute in Bologna who led the study. We searched its bottom looking for extraterrestrial particles trapped in the mud. We mapped the basin and took samples. As we examined the data, we couldn't believe what they were suggesting. The funnel-like shape of the basin and samples from its sedimentary deposits suggest that the lake fills an impact crater, Gasperini said. A Soft Crash The basin of Lake Cheko is not circular, deep, and steep like a typical impact crater, the scientists say. Instead it's elongated and shallow, about 1,640 feet (500 meters) long with a maximum depth of only 165 feet (50 meters). It also lacks the rim of debris usually found around typical impact craters, such as the Meteor Crater in Arizona, Kazinform quotes National Geographic News. Gasperini's team says that the basin's unusual shape is the result of a fragment thrown from the Tunguska explosion that plowed into the ground, leaving a long, trenchlike depression. We suggest that a 10-meter-wide [33-foot-wide] fragment of the object escaped the explosion and kept going in the same direction. It was relatively slow, about 1 kilometer a second [0.6 mile a second], Gasperini said. The lake is located along the most probable track of the cosmic body, he added, which likely made a soft crash in the marshy terrain. It splashed on the soft, swampy soil and melted the underlying permafrost layer, releasing CO2 [carbon dioxide], water vapor, and methane that broadened the hole, hence the shape and size of the basin, unusual for an impact crater. Our hypothesis is the only one that accounts for the funnel-like morphology of Lake Cheko's bottom, he added. In a previous expedition, Russian scientists studied Lake Cheko and concluded that it had formed before 1908, indicating that it was not formed by the Tunguska event. The team had measured sediments on the bottom of the lake and determined that the deposits were accumulating there at about 0.4 inch (1 centimeter) a year. This suggested that Lake Cheko was several centuries old. But Gasperini's team argues that the older deposits found by the Russians were already there when the explosion took place. We found evidence that only the topmost, one-meter-deep [three-foot-deep] layer of debris actually came from the inflowing river, Gasperini said. [The] deeper sediments are deposits that predate 1908. They were the target over which the impact took place, so Lake Cheko is only one century old. The team's findings are based on a 1999 expedition to Tunguska and appeared in the August issue of the journal Terra Nova. Asteroid or Comet? William Hartmann, senior scientist of the Planetary Science Institute in Tucson, Arizona, said the new findings are compelling but do not address all of the lingering questions about the event. It's an exciting result that might shed new light on the Tunguska explosion, he said. Certainly it warrants new studies of the area. But it raises a question in my mind: If one large fragment hit the ground, we would normally expect thousands of smaller fragments also to hit the ground along the path, and many searches have failed to find such meteorite fragments. So, why no smaller pieces? Finding fragments from the explosion is considered key to determining what kind of object made the
[meteorite-list] Since Scale Cubes are a topic today
I'm going to have to disagree with you. Another hobby I have is making replicas of props from various science fiction movies I have used photos to reverse engineer parts and have done so with amazing accuracy A perfect example is an MG-81 Flash Hider/ Booster that was use on Han Solo's Blaster from Star Wars. This part went unidentified for 26 years but I and a small group of hobbyists created and manufactured replica of this part from the various available photos. About 3 years ago, it was finally identified and a mint specimen was found and borrowed, they have a value of about $3000 so we were lucky the guy let use it. To even my own surprise my Flash Hider was surprisingly accurate to the real thing. Here is a picture, the real prop is on top and my replica is on the bottom http://i131.photobucket.com/albums/p298/BobaDebt/Flashhiders.jpg Bear in mind that this is just one image of a single prop, they used a variety of props and each had variances in the parts. For instance in the above picture the holes are look smaller but there are other pictures that they look bigger. However, when I compared my replica to a real MG-81 Flash Hider most of my measurements were off by less then .005 of an inch which is pretty good. - Hi, All Measurement from a photo with a scalecube in it is impossible except in the case of a very elaborate photo setup designed to make such measurements possible and even then, the precision is low. aying Sterling K. Webb - __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] Since Scale Cubes are a topic today
http://www.niger-meteorite-recon.de/en/meteorite-scalecube.htm Best, Mike -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Delbert Waterbury Sent: Thursday, November 08, 2007 11:04 AM To: Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com Subject: [meteorite-list] Since Scale Cubes are a topic today I seem to remember a few months back someone posted a link that told the sory of the Scale Cube. I was wondering what that link is so I can read it. Del __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] Since Scale Cubes are a topic today
Not asistotelian tho?! Jerry Flaherty - Original Message - From: Matthias Bärmann [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Sterling K. Webb [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Mike Bandli [EMAIL PROTECTED]; 'Delbert Waterbury' [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com Sent: Thursday, November 08, 2007 4:39 PM Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Since Scale Cubes are a topic today Well, Sterling, I'd say: the presence of a first-class precise scale cube in a photo marks the transition between relative and absolute, measurement and scale, thing and concept, with other words: it tells us something about platonic ideas. best, matthias baermann - Original Message - From: Sterling K. Webb [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Mike Bandli [EMAIL PROTECTED]; 'Delbert Waterbury' [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com Sent: Thursday, November 08, 2007 10:20 PM Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Since Scale Cubes are a topic today Hi, All I hate to sound a sour note, but these artifacts are for SCALE, not measurement. I think it's wonderful that folks make them accurate to +/- 0.001 inch or millimeter, out of materials with low coefficients of expansion, and so forth, but that is purely an exercise in personal perfectionism. Measurement from a photo with a scalecube in it is impossible except in the case of a very elaborate photo setup designed to make such measurements possible and even then, the precision is low. The purpose of a scalecube is SCALE ONLY. Scale is a measurement so crude that we don't even apply the word measurement to it. Originally, they were for use in the field only. You could carry it in your pocket and drop it on the ground for the in situ photo. Putting them into a lab photo is an affectation and serves only the PR purpose of making a photo of a rock look scientific. (There were people who said, We paid billions to go to the Moon, and this is what we get: a picture of a rock? And you could point to the scalecube and say, Nah! See, it's Science.) During the scalecube threadflood, Dean Bessey kept saying, Just put a quarter in the photo. Apparently, he understands that the purpose of the object is Scale, not Measurement! If you see a picture of a rock with a featureless white background and there's a quarter next to it, you know it's a little rock. If you see a picture of a rock with a featureless white background and there's me standing next to it, you know it's a big rock. Making the scalecube artifact with such great care and precision is admirable and very enjoyable, but let's apply a little perspective to the purpose of the cube. And I DO admire the makers' pride in precision. Precision is a fine thing (say I, who have ancient Starrett verniers and micro- meters in their old wooden boxes, so I understand), but precision is NOT the purpose of the cube. Sterling K. Webb -- - Original Message - From: Mike Bandli [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: 'Delbert Waterbury' [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com Sent: Thursday, November 08, 2007 1:11 PM Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Since Scale Cubes are a topic today http://www.niger-meteorite-recon.de/en/meteorite-scalecube.htm Best, Mike -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Delbert Waterbury Sent: Thursday, November 08, 2007 11:04 AM To: Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com Subject: [meteorite-list] Since Scale Cubes are a topic today I seem to remember a few months back someone posted a link that told the story of the Scale Cube. I was wondering what that link is so I can read it. Del __ __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] Since Scale Cubes are a topic today
Thanks Mike! Del --- Mike Bandli [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: http://www.niger-meteorite-recon.de/en/meteorite-scalecube.htm Best, Mike -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Delbert Waterbury Sent: Thursday, November 08, 2007 11:04 AM To: Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com Subject: [meteorite-list] Since Scale Cubes are a topic today I seem to remember a few months back someone posted a link that told the sory of the Scale Cube. I was wondering what that link is so I can read it. Del __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] Since Scale Cubes are a topic today
Well, Sterling, I'd say: the presence of a first-class precise scale cube in a photo marks the transition between relative and absolute, measurement and scale, thing and concept, with other words: it tells us something about platonic ideas. best, matthias baermann - Original Message - From: Sterling K. Webb [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Mike Bandli [EMAIL PROTECTED]; 'Delbert Waterbury' [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com Sent: Thursday, November 08, 2007 10:20 PM Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Since Scale Cubes are a topic today Hi, All I hate to sound a sour note, but these artifacts are for SCALE, not measurement. I think it's wonderful that folks make them accurate to +/- 0.001 inch or millimeter, out of materials with low coefficients of expansion, and so forth, but that is purely an exercise in personal perfectionism. Measurement from a photo with a scalecube in it is impossible except in the case of a very elaborate photo setup designed to make such measurements possible and even then, the precision is low. The purpose of a scalecube is SCALE ONLY. Scale is a measurement so crude that we don't even apply the word measurement to it. Originally, they were for use in the field only. You could carry it in your pocket and drop it on the ground for the in situ photo. Putting them into a lab photo is an affectation and serves only the PR purpose of making a photo of a rock look scientific. (There were people who said, We paid billions to go to the Moon, and this is what we get: a picture of a rock? And you could point to the scalecube and say, Nah! See, it's Science.) During the scalecube threadflood, Dean Bessey kept saying, Just put a quarter in the photo. Apparently, he understands that the purpose of the object is Scale, not Measurement! If you see a picture of a rock with a featureless white background and there's a quarter next to it, you know it's a little rock. If you see a picture of a rock with a featureless white background and there's me standing next to it, you know it's a big rock. Making the scalecube artifact with such great care and precision is admirable and very enjoyable, but let's apply a little perspective to the purpose of the cube. And I DO admire the makers' pride in precision. Precision is a fine thing (say I, who have ancient Starrett verniers and micro- meters in their old wooden boxes, so I understand), but precision is NOT the purpose of the cube. Sterling K. Webb -- - Original Message - From: Mike Bandli [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: 'Delbert Waterbury' [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com Sent: Thursday, November 08, 2007 1:11 PM Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Since Scale Cubes are a topic today http://www.niger-meteorite-recon.de/en/meteorite-scalecube.htm Best, Mike -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Delbert Waterbury Sent: Thursday, November 08, 2007 11:04 AM To: Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com Subject: [meteorite-list] Since Scale Cubes are a topic today I seem to remember a few months back someone posted a link that told the story of the Scale Cube. I was wondering what that link is so I can read it. Del __ __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] Since Scale Cubes are a topic today
Hi Sterling, yeah I agree with you to a point. However I'll throw this in there for you: I am a Mechanical Design Engineer and occasionally I pick up projects of something someone built and all they have is a picture with no documentated dimensions or anything to help you figure the size out. So I have to get an X dimension and a Y dimension from that person, calculate the scale of the photograph, then start designing away. This is not the most accurate way to design things, but you can get the design in the ballpark range. So in a situation like I describe above, do you think a scale cube could help out? Absolutely! I've experienced this first hand. Using a scale cube is a lot better and more accurate that someone telling me oh yeah, that part is about XX long. So if you ask me about taking measurements from a photo's I'll tell heck yeah you can do it. As for putting a quarter in a picture for scale. Yea I think this is good too because most people know the exact size of a quarter and they can visualise it a lot easier. However the major problem with a quarter is the fact that it lacks the third dimension. Since I hunt meteorites, a scale cube is perfect for my in-situ pics. And no, I'm not planning on using it for exact measurements because I have no intention of selling any of my finds. Just my two cents. Del --- Sterling K. Webb [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi, All I hate to sound a sour note, but these artifacts are for SCALE, not measurement. I think it's wonderful that folks make them accurate to +/- 0.001 inch or millimeter, out of materials with low coefficients of expansion, and so forth, but that is purely an exercise in personal perfectionism. Measurement from a photo with a scalecube in it is impossible except in the case of a very elaborate photo setup designed to make such measurements possible and even then, the precision is low. The purpose of a scalecube is SCALE ONLY. Scale is a measurement so crude that we don't even apply the word measurement to it. Originally, they were for use in the field only. You could carry it in your pocket and drop it on the ground for the in situ photo. Putting them into a lab photo is an affectation and serves only the PR purpose of making a photo of a rock look scientific. (There were people who said, We paid billions to go to the Moon, and this is what we get: a picture of a rock? And you could point to the scalecube and say, Nah! See, it's Science.) During the scalecube threadflood, Dean Bessey kept saying, Just put a quarter in the photo. Apparently, he understands that the purpose of the object is Scale, not Measurement! If you see a picture of a rock with a featureless white background and there's a quarter next to it, you know it's a little rock. If you see a picture of a rock with a featureless white background and there's me standing next to it, you know it's a big rock. Making the scalecube artifact with such great care and precision is admirable and very enjoyable, but let's apply a little perspective to the purpose of the cube. And I DO admire the makers' pride in precision. Precision is a fine thing (say I, who have ancient Starrett verniers and micro- meters in their old wooden boxes, so I understand), but precision is NOT the purpose of the cube. Sterling K. Webb -- - Original Message - From: Mike Bandli [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: 'Delbert Waterbury' [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com Sent: Thursday, November 08, 2007 1:11 PM Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Since Scale Cubes are a topic today http://www.niger-meteorite-recon.de/en/meteorite-scalecube.htm Best, Mike -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Delbert Waterbury Sent: Thursday, November 08, 2007 11:04 AM To: Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com Subject: [meteorite-list] Since Scale Cubes are a topic today I seem to remember a few months back someone posted a link that told the story of the Scale Cube. I was wondering what that link is so I can read it. Del __ __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] Since Scale Cubes are a topic today
- Original Message - From: Sterling K. Webb [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Mike Bandli [EMAIL PROTECTED]; 'Delbert Waterbury' [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com Sent: Thursday, November 08, 2007 4:20 PM Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Since Scale Cubes are a topic today Hi, All I hate to sound a sour note, but these artifacts are for SCALE, not measurement. I think it's wonderful that folks make them accurate to +/- 0.001 inch or millimeter, out of materials with low coefficients of expansion, and so forth, but that is purely an exercise in personal perfectionism. snipped for brevity Actualy, I made them to +/- 0.00015 ;-) But your are right, scale is not a NIST traceable measurement. It's more of a concept. But still... you can't be too accurate. :-) Drake A rock pile ceases to be a pile of rocks, the moment one contemplates it and envisions a cathedral. Drake Doc Dameräu L3CC Member www.nepra.com www.rocketmaterials.org http://home.sprynet.com/~monel/ __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
[meteorite-list] For sale: Glorieta pallasite, Canyon Diablo's with Holes, Campo with hole
Hi all, Here are some cool meteorites for sale. check them out! I'd like to sell all the CD's with holes to the same person since they're small. It would be a pain to mail each tiny piece individually. http://www.mr-meteorite.com/meteoritesforsale.htm Ruben Garcia Phoenix, Arizona http://www.mr-meteorite.com __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
[meteorite-list] Extra material from Polandmet !
Hello List Long time there was nothing new to show. Finaly when I got some new specimens, I also received after 6 months of waiting classifications for really good material that You will love. Belive me :) Tooday I finished work with normall meteorites and I have updated my page. From tomorrow I must start working on all NWA material I got classified. There are hundreds of slices to prepare, put in boxes, print labels and make thousand of photos. Its really worth to wait for this samples. So for now please enjoy photos of new specimens I have for sale at http://www.PolandMET.com From new NWA material on my page I have small TKW eucrite that I show here on march or april becouse I was not sure if this is shocked LL6 or eucrite becouse of high ammount of iron. Another one is my little L3.5 that I have purchased on my first visit in Morocco in 2004. After losing one thin section and type specimen in german lab, I finaly got classification from Ted Bunch. This little meteorite was long distance runner :) but he fortunatelly reach destination. Have fun -[ MARCIN CIMALA ]-[ I.M.C.A.#3667 ]- http://www.Meteoryty.pl marcin(at)meteoryty.pl http://www.PolandMET.com marcin(at)meteorite.pl http://www.Gao-Guenie.com GSM +48(607)535 195 [ Member of Polish Meteoritical Society ] __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
[meteorite-list] Test
test 123456 __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
[meteorite-list] MRO HiRISE Images - November 8, 2007
MARS RECONNAISSANCE ORBITER HIRISE IMAGES November 8, 2007 o HiRISE at One Year: Student Image of the Week- Seasonal Changes of South Polar Dark Dune Field http://hirise.lpl.arizona.edu/PSP_003609_1110 o Cerberus Fossae Fissures http://hirise.lpl.arizona.edu/PSP_005720_1885 o Rugged Crater Floor in Terra Tyrrhena http://hirise.lpl.arizona.edu/PSP_005710_1555 o Basal Exposure of South Polar Layered Deposits http://hirise.lpl.arizona.edu/PSP_005682_1035 o Gullies and Concentric Fill in an Unnamed Rampart Crater in Noachis Terra http://hirise.lpl.arizona.edu/PSP_003708_1335 All of the HiRISE images are archived here: http://hirise.lpl.arizona.edu/ Information about the Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter is online at http://www.nasa.gov/mro. The mission is managed by NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory, a division of the California Institute of Technology, for the NASA Science Mission Directorate, Washington, D.C. Lockheed Martin Space Systems, of Denver, is the prime contractor and built the spacecraft. HiRISE is operated by the University of Arizona. Ball Aerospace and Technologies Corp., of Boulder, Colo., built the HiRISE instrument. __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] Since Scale Cubes are a topic today
Hi All Since we are on the subject I thought everyone might want to see the worlds first use of the cube and yes it was for a meteorite. I guess it would be the granddaddy or great granddaddy of the NASA scale cubes. http://jensenmeteorites.com/Book/Cube%201.jpg http://jensenmeteorites.com/Book/cube2.jpg They come from Las Meteoritas Mexicanas Generalidades Sobre Meteoritas Y Catalogo Descriptivo De Las Meteoritas Mexibcanas Instituto Geologico De Mexico by Jose C Haro. Printed in 1931. Obviously predates the NASA cube by almost 50 years. The book is full of pictures of meteorites with numerous types of scales in including rulers, people and photo bars. BTW this book is in my opinion the best meteorite book by geographic region ever done. Just wish I could read Spanish. -- Mike -- Mike Jensen Jensen Meteorites 16730 E Ada PL Aurora, CO 80017-3137 303-337-4361 IMCA 4264 website: www.jensenmeteorites.com On Nov 8, 2007 5:31 PM, Mike Bandli [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Sterling Wrote: The purpose of a scalecube is SCALE ONLY. I believe there is a misconception that scalecubes were designed for meteorites, measurement, and field photography. This is not the case. The ORIGINAL design had several functions and had nothing to do with meteorites, measurement, or field photography. One of the most important functions was showing the orientation of lunar samples on the lunar surface within the a lab setting. You'll notice many lunar samples oriented on clumps of Tin-Foil inside the pressure cabinets. Some photos show both cube and sample oriented on Tin-Foil. (This was only possible if a photograph was taken on the lunar surface with a Gnomon prior to sample collection.) It was important to record and note the orientation of samples as they appeared on the lunar surface for future reference. Another important function was for describing important features such as zap pits, clasts, etc.. From the A17 Sample Catalog, page 127, Sample #75075: Surface T was coated by a dark gray, fine grained, cohesive patina... Parallel microgrooves run N to S over much of surface T. Surface B is fresh, except for small patches of gray patina. How would one describe these features without some sort of reference device like the scalecube? It was crucial that this kind of data be recorded as samples would soon be split and chipped and divided to principle investigators. The scalecube aided in recording the sample's original collection state, both in photography and in description. This being said, I would respectively disagree with Sterling's statement that cubes are only for scale. HOWEVER... I believe that, after the LRL, the cubes were adapted to be used for meteorite photography and share different, but similar functions (When used correctly!!). I don't believe the majority of meteorite collectors give much thought as to T, B, S, E, W, and N. Cubes are arbitrarily placed in the majority of photographs I see and used only for the 'scientific/official look.' This is an example where Sterling's statement could be true. Cube out, Mike Bandli __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] Since Scale Cubes are a topic today
Now that is COOL! I have never seen one like that. This is a good example of a cube that serves only one function: To show scale! Thanks for the pics! Mike Bandli -- Original message -- From: Mike Jensen [EMAIL PROTECTED] Hi All Since we are on the subject I thought everyone might want to see the worlds first use of the cube and yes it was for a meteorite. I guess it would be the granddaddy or great granddaddy of the NASA scale cubes. http://jensenmeteorites.com/Book/Cube%201.jpg http://jensenmeteorites.com/Book/cube2.jpg They come from Las Meteoritas Mexicanas Generalidades Sobre Meteoritas Y Catalogo Descriptivo De Las Meteoritas Mexibcanas Instituto Geologico De Mexico by Jose C Haro. Printed in 1931. Obviously predates the NASA cube by almost 50 years. The book is full of pictures of meteorites with numerous types of scales in including rulers, people and photo bars. BTW this book is in my opinion the best meteorite book by geographic region ever done. Just wish I could read Spanish. -- Mike -- Mike Jensen Jensen Meteorites 16730 E Ada PL Aurora, CO 80017-3137 303-337-4361 IMCA 4264 website: www.jensenmeteorites.com __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] Scalecube Family
Hi, Mike, CubeList, Now you can add one more size to the Scalecube Family: the 1/2-inch Scalecube! http://cgi.ebay.com/Scale-cubes-(1%2F2-by-1%2F2)_W0QQitemZ160176417617QQcmdZViewItem Yes, there's a new baby-12.7mm addition in the house, in black with the TBEWNS markings, with ticks. Now, we can look at the picture and wonder if the meteorite is 10 in., 5 in., or 10 cm? Sterling K. Webb - - Original Message - From: Mike Bandli [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: 'Meteorite List' meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com Sent: Wednesday, November 07, 2007 7:17 PM Subject: [meteorite-list] Scalecube Family On June 21, 2007 Paul wrote: I have to wonder if ten years from now, there will be people collecting the different types of scalecubes/centimeter cubes as people on this list are collecting meteorites. Ten years? How about five months! My Scalecube family: http://img.villagephotos.com/p/2004-11/877141/cubes.jpg From left to right: Buhl 1cm Cube, Unknown 1cm Cube, NASA 'Scale Block' 1 inch Cube, Drake 1 inch Certified Cube, Drake 1cm Cube, Drake 1cm prototype. Kudos to Drake D. for building such a great 1 inch cube! Its well worth the money and perfect for other scientific/forensic photography. What strange hobbies I have... Kind regards, Mike Bandli www.Astro-Artifacts.com __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] Scalecube Family
And to make things more confusing, I have found reference in the A15 and A16 Sample Catalogs to a 2cm (!) cube being used in some photos. Crazy! Kind regards, Mike Bandli -Original Message- From: Sterling K. Webb [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, November 08, 2007 6:31 PM To: Meteorite List Cc: Mike Bandli Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Scalecube Family Hi, Mike, CubeList, Now you can add one more size to the Scalecube Family: the 1/2-inch Scalecube! http://cgi.ebay.com/Scale-cubes-(1%2F2-by-1%2F2)_W0QQitemZ160176417617QQcmdZ ViewItem Yes, there's a new baby-12.7mm addition in the house, in black with the TBEWNS markings, with ticks. Now, we can look at the picture and wonder if the meteorite is 10 in., 5 in., or 10 cm? Sterling K. Webb - - Original Message - From: Mike Bandli [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: 'Meteorite List' meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com Sent: Wednesday, November 07, 2007 7:17 PM Subject: [meteorite-list] Scalecube Family On June 21, 2007 Paul wrote: I have to wonder if ten years from now, there will be people collecting the different types of scalecubes/centimeter cubes as people on this list are collecting meteorites. Ten years? How about five months! My Scalecube family: http://img.villagephotos.com/p/2004-11/877141/cubes.jpg From left to right: Buhl 1cm Cube, Unknown 1cm Cube, NASA 'Scale Block' 1 inch Cube, Drake 1 inch Certified Cube, Drake 1cm Cube, Drake 1cm prototype. Kudos to Drake D. for building such a great 1 inch cube! Its well worth the money and perfect for other scientific/forensic photography. What strange hobbies I have... Kind regards, Mike Bandli www.Astro-Artifacts.com __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
[meteorite-list] Rocks From Space Picture of the Day - November 9, 2007
http://www.rocksfromspace.org/November_9_2007.html ** See what's new at http://www.aol.com __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] Rocks From Space Picture of the Day - November 9, 2007
HAH! Amazing... thanks for sharing that one Jan, Yvonne and Michael! Cheers, Jeff - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com Sent: Friday, November 09, 2007 3:20 PM Subject: [meteorite-list] Rocks From Space Picture of the Day - November 9,2007 http://www.rocksfromspace.org/November_9_2007.html ** See what's new at http://www.aol.com __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] Scalecube Family
Dear List, Hmmm. Very meteorite related! Now for a fun post. Great history on the Scale Cube, Svend, and thanks Mike for the additional information! Given all the interest in scale cubes, I've compiled a history of the scale cube prior to the ones developed by the Russians and NASA (it is below my answer to Martin's question). There wasn't much info available on your sites about what was used before NASA, except the cube that Mike Jensen kindly posted regarding Haro's Heros. These cubes are definitely related to meteorites, more than many will probably even know. But first: Martin foreshadowed: (are sugar-cubes in USA metric?) No, they are not, unless you measure them with a centimeter ruler :-) In the US they are actually certified scale cubes. They are loosely 1/2 or 1 Tea-spoon amounts of sugar, which scale to one cup of Tea. I don't think the ones in Europe are a centimeter cubed either, for that matter, are they? That would be a real diet lite cube being just 0.8 to 1.1 grams... Now a question for you: German Zuckerwürfels aren't even cubes, are they? and how many/what dimensions are in a 500g box that sells for under what $2 ( In the US sugar cubes are one cent each.)? http://www.wopping.com/images/product/1483.jpg . Maybe at least Diamant Würfelzuckers (which have a pedigree back to Langen)? About the original scale cube. These were actually first crystallized as T Cubes or Tea Cubes, and they were literally covered in Tea that was underlied with a saucer. By Victorian times they were the de facto scale cube of choice in Europe to measure size. The material of construction was, in fact, sugar. The first application was a non-hazardous fixed aliquot of sugar for a nice cup of tea. But I am getting ahead of myself... Sugar was introduced by conquering Moroccans into Europe during the conquest of Spain in about 800 AD. Christopher Columbus had an steamy affair with Beatriz in the Canary Islands on the way to discover the Americas and delayed continuing on the maiden voyage a month so he could romantically take some of here sugarcane, which he brought to the new world with him to remember her. (Columbus was a sugar broker in Genoa.) However, for the first ~1500 years, the process to make sugar didn't lend to cube-making due to all the sticky and wasted carmel produced in the boiling kettles as syrup was concentrated. This all changed when the first prototype modern sugar cubes were reputedly invented by Edward C. Howard in 1813. Mr. Howard, an inspiration for the future Edisons of the world, invented the Howard Vacuum-Pan - the most important development in the history of sugar to the present day, from which he greatly increased his wealth by enforcing the patents. It is actually an enclosed and sealed metal vat allowing sugar syrup to be produced from plant extract by driving off the water at only 55 C (Instead ove 100+ C) under partial vacuum pressures resulting in a more uniform crystalline form easily set in moulds. This process is still used worldwide (utilizing a staged modification ca. 1830 invented by a free African-American scientist) and makes in the necessary syrup for easy and uniform granulations. T-Cube making requires a uniform granulate that is being dried, mixed with a trace amount of syrup again, and then pressed. NASA honored the T cubes by placing the letter T on top of every scale cube it produced. The young Englishman Howard, got into laying these sweet foundations after Joseph Banks, a well known meteorite collector, gave him three meteorites to analyze: Sienna (Italy, 1794, LL5), Benares (India, 1798, LL4) and the recently fallen Wold Cottage (UK, 1795, L6). Banks, a serious collector came across the Wold Cottage mass being exhibited in London along with written declarations by witnesses to the fall, and hired Howard in 1800 to see if these stones that were said to have fallen from the sky were similar, as the geology of the areas was different. Howard had just invented a potent explosive and won a medal of honor, and had an aristocratic background, so Banks thought he was the right young man for the job. The meteorite got Howard more interested in metal alloys when he studied the similar metals in them, and uniquely placed him to set the foundations of producing engineering vats and vessels that culminated with the landmark Vacuum-Pan http://home.clara.net/mawer/vacuum.jpg and other applications he developed in his real jobs for the next dozen years (Howard was more a chemical mercenary than a meteoriticist), and always kept a keen eye open for better metallic alloys ever since he made a few quid working for the meteorite collector Banks. Michael Farady was inspired by Howard et. al.'s analyses and in the 1820's played with these metals, alloys (including meteorites which he was interested in) and electricity, and then figured out how to generate electricity around 1831 using a
Re: [meteorite-list] Scalecube Family
for the listed wuerfel-aficionados : the instruction leaflet of the last box with zuckerwuerfel I bought yesterday informed me that in shape and weight zuckerwuerfel depend much on surrounding humidity and therefore shouldn't be used as scale cubes together with zag, for instance. should be taken into consideration in meteo(c)ritical circles. - Original Message - From: mexicodoug [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com Cc: Martin Altmann [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, November 09, 2007 6:33 AM Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Scalecube Family Dear List, Hmmm. Very meteorite related! Now for a fun post. Great history on the Scale Cube, Svend, and thanks Mike for the additional information! Given all the interest in scale cubes, I've compiled a history of the scale cube prior to the ones developed by the Russians and NASA (it is below my answer to Martin's question). There wasn't much info available on your sites about what was used before NASA, except the cube that Mike Jensen kindly posted regarding Haro's Heros. These cubes are definitely related to meteorites, more than many will probably even know. But first: Martin foreshadowed: (are sugar-cubes in USA metric?) No, they are not, unless you measure them with a centimeter ruler :-) In the US they are actually certified scale cubes. They are loosely 1/2 or 1 Tea-spoon amounts of sugar, which scale to one cup of Tea. I don't think the ones in Europe are a centimeter cubed either, for that matter, are they? That would be a real diet lite cube being just 0.8 to 1.1 grams... Now a question for you: German Zuckerwürfels aren't even cubes, are they? and how many/what dimensions are in a 500g box that sells for under what $2 ( In the US sugar cubes are one cent each.)? http://www.wopping.com/images/product/1483.jpg . Maybe at least Diamant Würfelzuckers (which have a pedigree back to Langen)? About the original scale cube. These were actually first crystallized as T Cubes or Tea Cubes, and they were literally covered in Tea that was underlied with a saucer. By Victorian times they were the de facto scale cube of choice in Europe to measure size. The material of construction was, in fact, sugar. The first application was a non-hazardous fixed aliquot of sugar for a nice cup of tea. But I am getting ahead of myself... Sugar was introduced by conquering Moroccans into Europe during the conquest of Spain in about 800 AD. Christopher Columbus had an steamy affair with Beatriz in the Canary Islands on the way to discover the Americas and delayed continuing on the maiden voyage a month so he could romantically take some of here sugarcane, which he brought to the new world with him to remember her. (Columbus was a sugar broker in Genoa.) However, for the first ~1500 years, the process to make sugar didn't lend to cube-making due to all the sticky and wasted carmel produced in the boiling kettles as syrup was concentrated. This all changed when the first prototype modern sugar cubes were reputedly invented by Edward C. Howard in 1813. Mr. Howard, an inspiration for the future Edisons of the world, invented the Howard Vacuum-Pan - the most important development in the history of sugar to the present day, from which he greatly increased his wealth by enforcing the patents. It is actually an enclosed and sealed metal vat allowing sugar syrup to be produced from plant extract by driving off the water at only 55 C (Instead ove 100+ C) under partial vacuum pressures resulting in a more uniform crystalline form easily set in moulds. This process is still used worldwide (utilizing a staged modification ca. 1830 invented by a free African-American scientist) and makes in the necessary syrup for easy and uniform granulations. T-Cube making requires a uniform granulate that is being dried, mixed with a trace amount of syrup again, and then pressed. NASA honored the T cubes by placing the letter T on top of every scale cube it produced. The young Englishman Howard, got into laying these sweet foundations after Joseph Banks, a well known meteorite collector, gave him three meteorites to analyze: Sienna (Italy, 1794, LL5), Benares (India, 1798, LL4) and the recently fallen Wold Cottage (UK, 1795, L6). Banks, a serious collector came across the Wold Cottage mass being exhibited in London along with written declarations by witnesses to the fall, and hired Howard in 1800 to see if these stones that were said to have fallen from the sky were similar, as the geology of the areas was different. Howard had just invented a potent explosive and won a medal of honor, and had an aristocratic background, so Banks thought he was the right young man for the job. The meteorite got Howard more interested in metal alloys when he studied the similar metals in them, and uniquely placed him to set the foundations of producing engineering vats and vessels that culminated with the landmark Vacuum-Pan
