Re: [meteorite-list] Pope Holds Mars Meteorite
Àmen! Yes - I am a Christian who embraces science! And am a STRONGLY opposed to that *cult* that became known as "Creation Science" (a very misleading label). Regards, and God bless - Mel > Date: Thu, 17 Sep 2009 13:15:06 -0400 > From: mike.han...@gmail.com > To: countde...@earthlink.net > CC: meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com > Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Pope Holds Mars Meteorite > > The curator sounds like a pretty interesting person > > http://vaticanobservatory.org/GConsolmagno.html > > "Religion needs science to keep it away from superstition and keep it > close to reality, to protect it from creationism, which at the end of > the day is a kind of paganism - it's turning God into a nature > god."[2]. > > I think that statement is kind of relevant to some of the wacky > conversations we've had on here recently (especially the alien life > ones). Science and God can co-exist. > > On Thu, Sep 17, 2009 at 1:08 PM, wrote: >> Galileo rolls over.smiles... >> >> -Original Message- >>>From: Ken Newton >>>Sent: Sep 17, 2009 12:15 PM >>>To: Meteorites USA >>>Cc: "meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com" >>>Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Pope Holds Mars Meteorite >>> >>>The Vatican meteorite collection is most impressive. >>>http://articles.adsabs.harvard.edu/full/1984Metic..19..161S >>> >>>Best, >>>kn >>> >>>On Thu, Sep 17, 2009 at 11:24 AM, Meteorites USA wrote: Hi All, Religion meets science... Yet again. http://www.catholicnews.com/data/stories/cns/0904135.htm Cool... Regards, Eric __ http://www.meteoritecentral.com Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list >>>__ >>>http://www.meteoritecentral.com >>>Meteorite-list mailing list >>>Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com >>>http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list >> >> __ >> http://www.meteoritecentral.com >> Meteorite-list mailing list >> Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com >> http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list >> > __ > http://www.meteoritecentral.com > Meteorite-list mailing list > Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com > http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list _ New! Open Messenger faster on the MSN homepage http://go.microsoft.com/?linkid=9677405 __ http://www.meteoritecentral.com Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
[meteorite-list] Warning, not serious buyer
In this days I have received problems from the person Paulo Matioli, he have order to me at 1200 euro of meteorites promise a friend here in Italy pay me first, I have to give the meteorites to this friend and after this give the meteorites to Matioli. I have say ok, I have give a discount on the price and a meteorite free over. I have contact this friend, seen I know, but he have say immediatly he are not interested in this type of transictions. After this Matioli have start to change the order, passing from 1200 euro order to a 720 euro order and claiming a discount of at 250 euro and a R chondrite of 100 euro in gift. Sureafter have say I never give similar discounts, only if the order is very high, he have change again idea changing again the order...when I have lost totaly the patience and I have say if you want this is the price or goodbye, I have close the order with the excuse the tax for the bank transiction is to much high to Italy - 10 euro - and why the friend here in Italy not give a hand to this affair. A my advise, if this person contact you, forget it its only time lost Matteo M come Meteorite Meteoriti i...@mcomemeteorite.it http://www.mcomemeteorite.it http://www.mcomemeteorite.org Mindat Gallery http://www.mindat.org/gallery-5018.html ChinellatoPhoto Servizi Fotografici http://www.chinellatophoto.com __ http://www.meteoritecentral.com Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
[meteorite-list] Denver Show
Is there a Denver Meteorite Show this year? I have not heard anything about it on this supposed meteorite list between all the alien, pope, and other off topic posts. Is the Denver show that bad this year that no one wants to talk about it? Sales and traffic must really be down this year. Even the Colorado dealers are keeping quiet. Awaiting news guys. Noah __ http://www.meteoritecentral.com Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] Strange Rock Reports - Mr Hankey
Hello Mr. Hankey I just got done reading your website. Superb Job and a real professional looking site! I am sure you will are getting a lot of responses to your ad for meteorite hunter trainees. I was just wondering how many meteorites you have personally found. Thank you for your time. Gary. > Date: Wed, 16 Sep 2009 15:23:32 -0400 > From: mike.han...@gmail.com > To: meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com > Subject: [meteorite-list] Strange Rock Reports > > I’ve gotten about six strange rock reports so far which is great! It > shows the locals know meteorites could be on the ground and they are > keeping an eye out for them. I have been able to identify most of the > rocks I’ve seen so far, but this one in particular I’m not sure about. > If anyone knows what this rock is please let me know. It is very hard > and magnetic seemed like a lot of metal in it. It is pretty weathered > and hard to tell if it has a crust on it or not. > > http://www.mikesastrophotos.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/09/gideon-rock1.jpg > > http://www.mikesastrophotos.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/09/gideon-rock2.jpg > > http://www.mikesastrophotos.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/09/gideon-rock3.jpg > > http://www.mikesastrophotos.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/09/gideon-rock4.jpg > __ > http://www.meteoritecentral.com > Meteorite-list mailing list > Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com > http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list > _ Lauren found her dream laptop. Find the PC that’s right for you. http://www.microsoft.com/windows/choosepc/?ocid=ftp_val_wl_290 __ http://www.meteoritecentral.com Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
[meteorite-list] Arrrh, tis a fine documentary, arrrh.
In honor of International Talk Like a Pirate Day... A documentary: http://iwillsearch4u.com/inside-planet-earth-2009-dvdrip-xvid-vision/#more-10110 http://www.shoppbs.org/product/index.jsp?productId=3766255 Has some stuff about asteroids, comets, formation of the moon, and a great short clip of a guy talking while sitting on Hoba, arrgh. Voiceover by John Luc Picd. __ http://www.meteoritecentral.com Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] New Australian fall
Hi, Jason, List The word "eucrite" comes from the Greek and means "easily recognized." It was coined to describe terrestrial basalts and only later was it applied to meteorites, and to the most common of achondrites. It is no longer used for Earthly rocks. They are basalts from lava flows on the surface of a differentiated body. They're just ordinary basaltic rocks, only from somewhere other than Earth. The oxygen data is tricky. You plot the slope of the ratios of O17 or O18 to O16 for each rock. Those that land on the same slope are not always from the same body, because different bodies may have the same oxygen ratios. For example, aubrites and lunar achondrites plot on the terrestrial ratio slope, meaning that the Earth and the Moon and the Wherever-the- aubrites-came-from all have the SAME oxygen ratios. Eucrites from Vesta plot along a slope all their own. I assume what the reporter said of what Bland said meant that this eucrite does not plot on the Vestan slope. We have no idea of what slope it plots on; as is usual with press reports, there is no usable information in them. What slope did it plot on? Who knows? Bland does; we're guessing without data. If he knew the body it came from, it would be big news and he would have told it. Shouted it, actually... So, it is a basalt lava flow from the crust of SOME other body than Vesta or a Vestoid, but otherwise not known. It's a breccia with clasts so that body has an impact-altered surface. We have exsolution so it was (once) a big enough body to have cooled slowly. Equally vague and useless are the press release level comments about "inner solar system" orbits. Numbers are the only thing with meaning. Semi-major axis in AU, please, eccentricity, etc. NOT knocking the scientist speaking, only the reporter listening to stuff he knows nothing about. It's like sending your five-year-old to talk to your Congressman, and then come back and tell you what he said about health care reform. Meaningless. The "Scientific" American article is, if anything, more vague. The mention of Bottke and SWR studies probably means the study that showed that many members of the inner asteroid zone were tossed there from the very "inner" solar system, <0.5 AU, particularly the big iron asteroids. This little eucrite could be a chunk of the largely battered-away former crust of Mercury, for example. Put a lander on Mercury and measure the oxygen ratios and we'll know. As usual, too little data for ANY conclusion. The connection with the Bottke study is likely purely hypothetical. In other words, a guess. There's nothing you can say about nothing. Sterling K. Webb -- - Original Message - From: "Jason Utas" To: "Meteorite-list" Sent: Friday, September 18, 2009 8:45 PM Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] New Australian fall Good point; and seeing as such meteorites haven't been reclassified/re-typed, it seems as though this brings up a very valid flaw in the classification system of basaltic achondrites. Perhaps there are some scientists out there who can shed some light on why meteorites such as these are called Eucrites when they are apparently from different parent bodies. I'd be curious of the general scientific opinion of the current classification scheme; is it adequate or should there be more, if not classes, at least meteorites deemed 'ungrouped.' Jason On Fri, Sep 18, 2009 at 6:37 PM, Michael Fowler wrote: And in case you didn't check the met-bull, the Bunburra Rockhole meteorite has been classified as a typical Eucrite. He stated that said meteorite is not from Vesta, but Eucrites are widely accepted to have come from Vesta. I suppose we don't have solid proof of that yet, but it is generally accepted to be true, based on reflected light analyses. Go figure. Jason Hi Jason, Sorry if I ruffled your feathers earlier. I did check the met bulletin, and it is described as: " meteorite is a basaltic eucrite monomict breccia " http://tin.er.usgs.gov/meteor/index.php?code=48653 However I note that many meteorites are not correctly classified on their first appearance in the Met Bul, including of course Ibitria, which is still listed as a Eucrite Monomict, even though we know it is not from Vesta, http://tin.er.usgs.gov/meteor/index.php?sea=ibitira&sfor=names&ants=&falls=&valids=&stype=contains&lrec=50&map=ge&browse=&country=All&srt=name&categ=All&mblist=All&rect=&phot=&snew=0&pnt=no&code=11993 However back to, Bunburra Rockhole, can someone comment or whether the mineral composition as stated in the met bul is consistent, or anomalous for a eucrite? Mineral compositions: Pyroxene, Fs62.5Wo3.6 (Fe/Mn-31.1) with augite (Fs27.7Wo43.0) lamellae; plagioclase, An84.1 to An88.2. Of course, the final word is probably the O isotope work, which Dr Bland says has already been done, although I couldn't find any additional reference. Thanks, Mike
Re: [meteorite-list] New Australian fall-Non Vesta Eucrite
I don't think there's a difference between any of these meteorites in terms of what we should call them. We just don't have consistent terminology in place. Ibitira, NWA 011, and, it appears, Bunburra Rockhole are all basaltic achondrites that seem to come from a separate parent body than other basaltic achondrites. In my opinion, none of these should be called a eucrite, just as we don't call angrites eucrites. I would prefer to call them ungrouped basaltic achondrites. If I had a peer-reviewed reference that handled the nomenclature well, I'd change the recommended classifications in the MetBull database. Jeff Jason Utas wrote: Well, oxygen isotopes are one thing, but orbital data would seem to be a strange way to classify a meteorite to me; given the past four and a half billion years of collisions, things have been far too 'messed up' in the inner solar system for that to mean much; we have comets present in stable orbits here in the innrer solar system, and it doesn't mean that they formed there. And most would also make a clear definition between chemical and isotopic data, which he confuses (or the reference was a misquote) in the article. After all, Ibitira's a "Eucrite," but NWA 011's an ungrouped achondrite. It's the chemical difference that seems to make the difference in nomenclature. Jason On Fri, Sep 18, 2009 at 5:47 PM, Michael Fowler wrote: Additional information from a Scientific American link that says that the meteorite is not from Vesta, because the orbit is wrong, and the oxygen isotopes are different. http://www.scientificamerican.com/blog/60-second-science/post.cfm?id=recovered-meteorite-points-to-an-un-2009-09-17 Mike Fowler Chicago And I think it might be interesting to note this article, where Dr. Philip Bland can be quoted as stating that Eucrites are not, in fact, from Vesta. Go figure. http://au.news.yahoo.com/a/-/technology/6075299/rare-meteorite-found-in-outback/ Regards, Jason Jason, You were a little bit hasty or misleading in your summarizing of Dr Bland. see quote below from the article you cited. (and to think that we are always criticizing reporters for getting it wrong!) Mike Fowler Chicago ""Dr Bland says most basalt meteorites, like the one found in the Nullarbor, originate from a large asteroid called Vesta but the Bunburra Rockhole meteorite is different. "Our little guy can't be from Vesta, the composition is all wrong," he said."" __ http://www.meteoritecentral.com Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list __ http://www.meteoritecentral.com Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list -- Dr. Jeffrey N. Grossman phone: (703) 648-6184 US Geological Survey fax: (703) 648-6383 954 National Center Reston, VA 20192, USA __ http://www.meteoritecentral.com Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] New Australian fall
Hi jason and Mike Fowler, It's been a privilege to be able to eavesdrop on your discussion on this other body eucrite. You have been most informative and professional. Thanks! Carl _ Microsoft brings you a new way to search the web. Try Bing™ now http://www.bing.com?form=MFEHPG&publ=WLHMTAG&crea=TEXT_MFEHPG_Core_tagline_try bing_1x1 __ http://www.meteoritecentral.com Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] New Australian fall
That's right. In fact it was approved and added to the Met Bull database earlier this year: http://tin.er.usgs.gov/meteor/index.php?code=48653 Cheers, Jeff - Original Message - From: "Norbert & Heike Kammel" To: Cc: Sent: Saturday, September 19, 2009 8:21 AM Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] New Australian fall The fall actually happened in 2007, Meteoritical Bulletin: MB 95 <http://tin.er.usgs.gov/meteor/docs/mb95.pdf> . I heard of it in February this year. The location is between Mundrabilla and Cook 001. Coordinates are 31° 21.0'S, 129° 11.4'E, that means 168.6 km east of Mundrabilla and 170.9 km south west of cook 001. Unfortunately no fragments have been available for collectors. Cheers, and best regards from Down-Under, Norbert Kammel IMCA # 3420 Matt Morgan wrote: Looks like a nice eucrite. Similar to Camel Donga. Matt -- Matt Morgan Mile High Meteorites http://www.mhmeteorites.com P.O. Box 151293 Lakewood, CO 80215 USA -Original Message- From: Darren Garrison Date: Fri, 18 Sep 2009 12:51:04 To: Subject: [meteorite-list] New Australian fall http://www.smh.com.au/technology/sci-tech/rare-snapshot-of-solar-systems-dawn-20090918-fvcl.html Rare snapshot of solar system's dawn DEBORAH SMITH SCIENCE EDITOR September 19, 2009 CAMERAS set up in outback Australia to track fireballs across the night sky have led scientists to a rare meteorite formed at the dawn of the solar system. The fiery streak it made on descent allowed them not only to pinpoint where it would fall on the vast Nullarbor Plain, but also work out where it had come from. Three fragments of the meteorite, the biggest the size of a cricket ball, were found within 100 metres of the predicted landing site, Alex Bevan, head of earth and planetary science at the Western Australian Museum, said. ''That is incredible accuracy.'' Dr Bevan said the Nullarbor desert was chosen for a new fireball observatory because of its pale limestone colour. ''Most meteorites are dark so they contrast well with the local rock.'' Dubbed Bunburra Rockhole after a nearby landmark, the meteorite was found on the first day of searching by the international team, which includes researchers from the Perth museum and CSIRO. Meteorites are among the most studied rocks on Earth, the team leader, Philip Bland, of the Imperial College in London, said. ''But it's really rare for us to be able to tell where they came from.'' Based on its unusual basalt composition and trajectory, the researchers believe the Nullarbor meteorite was once part of an asteroid in the innermost side of the asteroid belt between Mars and Jupiter, until a collision chipped it off millions of years ago. It then moved into an orbit around the sun similar to that of Earth, before plummeting to the ground on July 20, 2007. Weighing about 22 kilograms when it began its fiery descent at an altitude of 60 kilometres, only fragments of less than 200 grams were left when it hit. ''We're cautiously optimistic that this find could be the first of many, and if that happens, each find may give us more clues about how the solar system began,'' Dr Bland, whose team's study was published yesterday in the journal Science, said. Asteroids in the innermost belt are thought to have formed near the sun and consist of the same material from which the earth was made. The fireball observatory consists of a network of four cameras that take a single time-lapse picture every night to track any shooting stars, and complex mathematics is required to determine a meteorite's original orbit. __ http://www.meteoritecentral.com Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list __ http://www.meteoritecentral.com Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list __ http://www.meteoritecentral.com Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list __ http://www.meteoritecentral.com Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] New Australian fall-Non Vesta Eucrite
After all, Ibitira's a "Eucrite," but NWA 011's an ungrouped achondrite. It's the chemical difference that seems to make the difference in nomenclature. Jason So Jason, I guess we can both agree that Bunburra Rockhole is a Eucrite, and that most Eucrites, but not all, come from Vesta. Mike __ http://www.meteoritecentral.com Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] New Australian fall
Good point; and seeing as such meteorites haven't been reclassified/re-typed, it seems as though this brings up a very valid flaw in the classification system of basaltic achondrites. Perhaps there are some scientists out there who can shed some light on why meteorites such as these are called Eucrites when they are apparently from different parent bodies. I'd be curious of the general scientific opinion of the current classification scheme; is it adequate or should there be more, if not classes, at least meteorites deemed 'ungrouped.' Jason On Fri, Sep 18, 2009 at 6:37 PM, Michael Fowler wrote: >> And in case you didn't check the met-bull, the Bunburra Rockhole >> meteorite has been classified as a typical Eucrite. >> He stated that said meteorite is not from Vesta, but Eucrites are >> widely accepted to have come from Vesta. >> I suppose we don't have solid proof of that yet, but it is generally >> accepted to be true, based on reflected light analyses. >> Go figure. >> Jason > > Hi Jason, > > Sorry if I ruffled your feathers earlier. > > I did check the met bulletin, and it is described as: " meteorite is a > basaltic eucrite monomict breccia " > > http://tin.er.usgs.gov/meteor/index.php?code=48653 > > However I note that many meteorites are not correctly classified on their > first appearance in the Met Bul, including of course Ibitria, which is > still listed as a Eucrite Monomict, even though we know it is not from > Vesta, > > http://tin.er.usgs.gov/meteor/index.php?sea=ibitira&sfor=names&ants=&falls=&valids=&stype=contains&lrec=50&map=ge&browse=&country=All&srt=name&categ=All&mblist=All&rect=&phot=&snew=0&pnt=no&code=11993 > > However back to, Bunburra Rockhole, can someone comment or whether the > mineral composition as stated in the met bul is consistent, or anomalous for > a eucrite? > > Mineral compositions: Pyroxene, Fs62.5Wo3.6 (Fe/Mn-31.1) with augite > (Fs27.7Wo43.0) lamellae; plagioclase, An84.1 to An88.2. > > Of course, the final word is probably the O isotope work, which Dr Bland > says has already been done, although I couldn't find any additional > reference. > > Thanks, > > Mike > > > > > __ > http://www.meteoritecentral.com > Meteorite-list mailing list > Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com > http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list > __ http://www.meteoritecentral.com Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] New Australian fall
And in case you didn't check the met-bull, the Bunburra Rockhole meteorite has been classified as a typical Eucrite. He stated that said meteorite is not from Vesta, but Eucrites are widely accepted to have come from Vesta. I suppose we don't have solid proof of that yet, but it is generally accepted to be true, based on reflected light analyses. Go figure. Jason Hi Jason, Sorry if I ruffled your feathers earlier. I did check the met bulletin, and it is described as: " meteorite is a basaltic eucrite monomict breccia " http://tin.er.usgs.gov/meteor/index.php?code=48653 However I note that many meteorites are not correctly classified on their first appearance in the Met Bul, including of course Ibitria, which is still listed as a Eucrite Monomict, even though we know it is not from Vesta, http://tin.er.usgs.gov/meteor/index.php?sea=ibitira&sfor=names&ants=&falls=&valids=&stype=contains&lrec=50&map=ge&browse=&country=All&srt=name&categ=All&mblist=All&rect=&phot=&snew=0&pnt=no&code=11993 However back to, Bunburra Rockhole, can someone comment or whether the mineral composition as stated in the met bul is consistent, or anomalous for a eucrite? Mineral compositions: Pyroxene, Fs62.5Wo3.6 (Fe/Mn-31.1) with augite (Fs27.7Wo43.0) lamellae; plagioclase, An84.1 to An88.2. Of course, the final word is probably the O isotope work, which Dr Bland says has already been done, although I couldn't find any additional reference. Thanks, Mike __ http://www.meteoritecentral.com Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
[meteorite-list] Mars Odyssey THEMIS Images: September 14-18, 2009
MARS ODYSSEY THEMIS IMAGES September 14-18, 2009 o Dunes (Released 14 September 2009) http://themis.asu.edu/zoom-20090914a o Windstreaks (Released 15 September 2009) http://themis.asu.edu/zoom-20090915a o Dust Devil Tracks (Released 16 September 2009) http://themis.asu.edu/zoom-20090916a o Nirgal Vallis (Released 17 September 2009) http://themis.asu.edu/zoom-20090917a o Vallis Marineris (Released 18 September 2009) http://themis.asu.edu/zoom-20090918a All of the THEMIS images are archived here: http://themis.asu.edu/latest.html NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory manages the 2001 Mars Odyssey mission for NASA's Office of Space Science, Washington, D.C. The Thermal Emission Imaging System (THEMIS) was developed by Arizona State University, Tempe, in co.oration with Raytheon Santa Barbara Remote Sensing. The THEMIS investigation is led by Dr. Philip Christensen at Arizona State University. Lockheed Martin Astronautics, Denver, is the prime contractor for the Odyssey project, and developed and built the orbiter. Mission operations are conducted jointly from Lockheed Martin and from JPL, a division of the California Institute of Technology in Pasadena. __ http://www.meteoritecentral.com Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] New Australian fall-Non Vesta Eucrite
Well, oxygen isotopes are one thing, but orbital data would seem to be a strange way to classify a meteorite to me; given the past four and a half billion years of collisions, things have been far too 'messed up' in the inner solar system for that to mean much; we have comets present in stable orbits here in the innrer solar system, and it doesn't mean that they formed there. And most would also make a clear definition between chemical and isotopic data, which he confuses (or the reference was a misquote) in the article. After all, Ibitira's a "Eucrite," but NWA 011's an ungrouped achondrite. It's the chemical difference that seems to make the difference in nomenclature. Jason On Fri, Sep 18, 2009 at 5:47 PM, Michael Fowler wrote: > Additional information from a Scientific American link that says that the > meteorite is not from Vesta, because the orbit is wrong, and the oxygen > isotopes are different. > > > http://www.scientificamerican.com/blog/60-second-science/post.cfm?id=recovered-meteorite-points-to-an-un-2009-09-17 > > > Mike Fowler > Chicago > > >> > And I think it might be interesting to note this article, where Dr. >> > Philip Bland can be quoted as stating that Eucrites are not, in fact, >> > from Vesta. >> >> > Go figure. >> >> > >> > http://au.news.yahoo.com/a/-/technology/6075299/rare-meteorite-found-in-outback/ >> > >> > Regards, >> > Jason >> >> >> Jason, >> >> You were a little bit hasty or misleading in your summarizing of Dr >> Bland. >> >> see quote below from the article you cited. (and to think that we are >> always criticizing reporters for getting it wrong!) >> >> Mike Fowler >> Chicago >> >> >> >> ""Dr Bland says most basalt meteorites, like the one found in the >> Nullarbor, originate from a large asteroid called Vesta but the >> Bunburra Rockhole meteorite is different. >> >> "Our little guy can't be from Vesta, the composition is all wrong," he >> said."" > > __ > http://www.meteoritecentral.com > Meteorite-list mailing list > Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com > http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list > __ http://www.meteoritecentral.com Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
[meteorite-list] MRO HiRISE Images - September 16, 2009
MARS RECONNAISSANCE ORBITER HIRISE IMAGES September 16, 2009 o McMurdo Crater http://hirise.lpl.arizona.edu/ESP_014324_0955 o Sinuous Ridge in Argyre Planitia http://hirise.lpl.arizona.edu/ESP_014272_1245 o Lines in the Sand http://hirise.lpl.arizona.edu/ESP_014185_1095 o Sulfate Strata in Ius Chasma http://hirise.lpl.arizona.edu/ESP_012625_1720 o Gullied Crater Wall http://hirise.lpl.arizona.edu/ESP_012603_1300 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. __ http://www.meteoritecentral.com Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] New Australian fall
And in case you didn't check the met-bull, the Bunburra Rockhole meteorite has been classified as a typical Eucrite. He stated that said meteorite is not from Vesta, but Eucrites are widely accepted to have come from Vesta. I suppose we don't have solid proof of that yet, but it is generally accepted to be true, based on reflected light analyses. Go figure. Jason On Fri, Sep 18, 2009 at 5:39 PM, Michael Fowler wrote: >> And I think it might be interesting to note this article, where Dr. >> Philip Bland can be quoted as stating that Eucrites are not, in fact, >> from Vesta. >> Go figure. >> >> >> http://au.news.yahoo.com/a/-/technology/6075299/rare-meteorite-found-in-outback/ >> >> Regards, >> Jason > > Jason, > > You were a little bit hasty or misleading in your summarizing of Dr Bland. > > see quote below from the article you cited. (and to think that we are > always criticizing reporters for getting it wrong!) > > Mike Fowler > Chicago > > > > ""Dr Bland says most basalt meteorites, like the one found in the Nullarbor, > originate from a large asteroid called Vesta but the Bunburra Rockhole > meteorite is different. > > "Our little guy can't be from Vesta, the composition is all wrong," he > said."" > > > __ > http://www.meteoritecentral.com > Meteorite-list mailing list > Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com > http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list > __ http://www.meteoritecentral.com Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] New Australian fall-Non Vesta Eucrite
Additional information from a Scientific American link that says that the meteorite is not from Vesta, because the orbit is wrong, and the oxygen isotopes are different. http://www.scientificamerican.com/blog/60-second-science/post.cfm?id=recovered-meteorite-points-to-an-un-2009-09-17 Mike Fowler Chicago > And I think it might be interesting to note this article, where Dr. > Philip Bland can be quoted as stating that Eucrites are not, in fact, > from Vesta. > Go figure. > http://au.news.yahoo.com/a/-/technology/6075299/rare-meteorite-found-in-outback/ > > Regards, > Jason Jason, You were a little bit hasty or misleading in your summarizing of Dr Bland. see quote below from the article you cited. (and to think that we are always criticizing reporters for getting it wrong!) Mike Fowler Chicago ""Dr Bland says most basalt meteorites, like the one found in the Nullarbor, originate from a large asteroid called Vesta but the Bunburra Rockhole meteorite is different. "Our little guy can't be from Vesta, the composition is all wrong," he said."" __ http://www.meteoritecentral.com Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] New Australian fall
And I think it might be interesting to note this article, where Dr. Philip Bland can be quoted as stating that Eucrites are not, in fact, from Vesta. Go figure. http://au.news.yahoo.com/a/-/technology/6075299/rare-meteorite-found-in-outback/ Regards, Jason Jason, You were a little bit hasty or misleading in your summarizing of Dr Bland. see quote below from the article you cited. (and to think that we are always criticizing reporters for getting it wrong!) Mike Fowler Chicago ""Dr Bland says most basalt meteorites, like the one found in the Nullarbor, originate from a large asteroid called Vesta but the Bunburra Rockhole meteorite is different. "Our little guy can't be from Vesta, the composition is all wrong," he said."" __ http://www.meteoritecentral.com Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] S-A with Holes (AD)
As you know, I rarely advertise specimens on the list. However, I have a couple of excellent ones and I need Cash fast, so, here is a special offer: For the last 2 years at the Tucson Show S-A of decent quality have sold for $5/g. For tolerable quality they could be had for $3/g. Oriented specimens or specimens with holes have been astronomical from all the Russian dealers (the source of S-As). I have a couple of outstanding specimens I am offering them to any List Members for prices well under wholesale at the Tucson Show good for the next 24 hrs: 73.2g S-A Oriented, Impact Craters, Stands up naturally, Large Hole. An outstanding specimen priced below wholesale at $725 25.1g S-A Very Large Hole, 2 Impact Craters, Very Impressive Specimen $250 Both can be seen at: http://michaelbloodmeteorites.com/indextest.html __ http://www.meteoritecentral.com Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] New Australian fall
Hola, Wha-la - Photos: http://www.eurekalert.org/multimedia/pub/16856.php http://www.news.com.au/perthnow/story/0,27574,26090814-2761,00.html And I think it might be interesting to note this article, where Dr. Philip Bland can be quoted as stating that Eucrites are not, in fact, from Vesta. Go figure. http://au.news.yahoo.com/a/-/technology/6075299/rare-meteorite-found-in-outback/ Regards, Jason On Fri, Sep 18, 2009 at 3:29 PM, Carl 's wrote: > > Hi Matt, > > I don't see a pic. > > Carl > > _ > Hotmail® has ever-growing storage! Don’t worry about storage limits. > http://windowslive.com/Tutorial/Hotmail/Storage?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_WL_HM_Tutorial_Storage_062009 > __ > http://www.meteoritecentral.com > Meteorite-list mailing list > Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com > http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list > __ http://www.meteoritecentral.com Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] New Australian fall
Hi Matt, I don't see a pic. Carl _ Hotmail® has ever-growing storage! Don’t worry about storage limits. http://windowslive.com/Tutorial/Hotmail/Storage?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_WL_HM_Tutorial_Storage_062009 __ http://www.meteoritecentral.com Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] New Australian fall
The fall actually happened in 2007, Meteoritical Bulletin: MB 95 <http://tin.er.usgs.gov/meteor/docs/mb95.pdf> . I heard of it in February this year. The location is between Mundrabilla and Cook 001. Coordinates are 31° 21.0'S, 129° 11.4'E, that means 168.6 km east of Mundrabilla and 170.9 km south west of cook 001. Unfortunately no fragments have been available for collectors. Cheers, and best regards from Down-Under, Norbert Kammel IMCA # 3420 Matt Morgan wrote: Looks like a nice eucrite. Similar to Camel Donga. Matt -- Matt Morgan Mile High Meteorites http://www.mhmeteorites.com P.O. Box 151293 Lakewood, CO 80215 USA -Original Message- From: Darren Garrison Date: Fri, 18 Sep 2009 12:51:04 To: Subject: [meteorite-list] New Australian fall http://www.smh.com.au/technology/sci-tech/rare-snapshot-of-solar-systems-dawn-20090918-fvcl.html Rare snapshot of solar system's dawn DEBORAH SMITH SCIENCE EDITOR September 19, 2009 CAMERAS set up in outback Australia to track fireballs across the night sky have led scientists to a rare meteorite formed at the dawn of the solar system. The fiery streak it made on descent allowed them not only to pinpoint where it would fall on the vast Nullarbor Plain, but also work out where it had come from. Three fragments of the meteorite, the biggest the size of a cricket ball, were found within 100 metres of the predicted landing site, Alex Bevan, head of earth and planetary science at the Western Australian Museum, said. ''That is incredible accuracy.'' Dr Bevan said the Nullarbor desert was chosen for a new fireball observatory because of its pale limestone colour. ''Most meteorites are dark so they contrast well with the local rock.'' Dubbed Bunburra Rockhole after a nearby landmark, the meteorite was found on the first day of searching by the international team, which includes researchers from the Perth museum and CSIRO. Meteorites are among the most studied rocks on Earth, the team leader, Philip Bland, of the Imperial College in London, said. ''But it's really rare for us to be able to tell where they came from.'' Based on its unusual basalt composition and trajectory, the researchers believe the Nullarbor meteorite was once part of an asteroid in the innermost side of the asteroid belt between Mars and Jupiter, until a collision chipped it off millions of years ago. It then moved into an orbit around the sun similar to that of Earth, before plummeting to the ground on July 20, 2007. Weighing about 22 kilograms when it began its fiery descent at an altitude of 60 kilometres, only fragments of less than 200 grams were left when it hit. ''We're cautiously optimistic that this find could be the first of many, and if that happens, each find may give us more clues about how the solar system began,'' Dr Bland, whose team's study was published yesterday in the journal Science, said. Asteroids in the innermost belt are thought to have formed near the sun and consist of the same material from which the earth was made. The fireball observatory consists of a network of four cameras that take a single time-lapse picture every night to track any shooting stars, and complex mathematics is required to determine a meteorite's original orbit. __ http://www.meteoritecentral.com Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list __ http://www.meteoritecentral.com Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list __ http://www.meteoritecentral.com Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] Strange Rock Reports
Hello everyone, I received this email concerning what I had proposed yesterday of Strange Rock pics for newbies. This post did not appear on this list (possibly rich texting?) I am forwarding this with the poster's permission. I still think this is a great educational idea. Carl PS. The last time I looked, Skyrock is down again. > Hello all! > > Too late! The french invented it already: > > http://meteorites.superforum.fr/forum.htm > See: Jeux Météoritique/ Nommez cette météorite > Jeux Météoritique/ Nommez ce cratère d'impact > > Now, there are several solutions: > > 1- Learn French :P > > 2- Use the section "Meteorite and related discussions in English" in > http://meteorites.superforum.fr/forum.htm > > 3- Ask the Skyrock ( http://illinoismeteorites.com/cgi-bin/board/YaBB.pl > ) administrators to create a similar section. > > Otherwise it is a great idea and I must confess I am addicted to these > two games in the french forum. > > Saludos > > Sanscelerien > > Carl 's wrote: >> Me too! As Mr Graham said, I should have looked at the file name for clues. >> Instead I may have burnt out some brain cells trying to remember where I've >> seen that stone, or one like it, before. >> >> I think George is on to something. Why not from time to time, someone post a >> picture of a meteorite and we newbies try to identify it. This could be a >> regular thread. It would also help if the person posting the pic change the >> file name, now that we've all wised up to that. The meteorite should have a >> distinctive look or feature to it, not some weathered uNWA that nobody can >> identify. How about it? >> >> Carl >> >> GeoZay wrote: >> >>> ...Thanks for the education guys _ Bing™ brings you maps, menus, and reviews organized in one place. Try it now. http://www.bing.com/search?q=restaurants&form=MLOGEN&publ=WLHMTAG&crea=TEXT_MLOGEN_Core_tagline_local_1x1 __ http://www.meteoritecentral.com Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] New Australian fall
FAR OUT! -- From: "Darren Garrison" Sent: Friday, September 18, 2009 1:51 PM To: Subject: [meteorite-list] New Australian fall http://www.smh.com.au/technology/sci-tech/rare-snapshot-of-solar-systems-dawn-20090918-fvcl.html Rare snapshot of solar system's dawn DEBORAH SMITH SCIENCE EDITOR September 19, 2009 CAMERAS set up in outback Australia to track fireballs across the night sky have led scientists to a rare meteorite formed at the dawn of the solar system. The fiery streak it made on descent allowed them not only to pinpoint where it would fall on the vast Nullarbor Plain, but also work out where it had come from. Three fragments of the meteorite, the biggest the size of a cricket ball, were found within 100 metres of the predicted landing site, Alex Bevan, head of earth and planetary science at the Western Australian Museum, said. ''That is incredible accuracy.'' Dr Bevan said the Nullarbor desert was chosen for a new fireball observatory because of its pale limestone colour. ''Most meteorites are dark so they contrast well with the local rock.'' Dubbed Bunburra Rockhole after a nearby landmark, the meteorite was found on the first day of searching by the international team, which includes researchers from the Perth museum and CSIRO. Meteorites are among the most studied rocks on Earth, the team leader, Philip Bland, of the Imperial College in London, said. ''But it's really rare for us to be able to tell where they came from.'' Based on its unusual basalt composition and trajectory, the researchers believe the Nullarbor meteorite was once part of an asteroid in the innermost side of the asteroid belt between Mars and Jupiter, until a collision chipped it off millions of years ago. It then moved into an orbit around the sun similar to that of Earth, before plummeting to the ground on July 20, 2007. Weighing about 22 kilograms when it began its fiery descent at an altitude of 60 kilometres, only fragments of less than 200 grams were left when it hit. ''We're cautiously optimistic that this find could be the first of many, and if that happens, each find may give us more clues about how the solar system began,'' Dr Bland, whose team's study was published yesterday in the journal Science, said. Asteroids in the innermost belt are thought to have formed near the sun and consist of the same material from which the earth was made. The fireball observatory consists of a network of four cameras that take a single time-lapse picture every night to track any shooting stars, and complex mathematics is required to determine a meteorite's original orbit. __ http://www.meteoritecentral.com Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list __ http://www.meteoritecentral.com Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] Montana Fireball
Hmmm 9:22 p.m. a fireball sighted. 11:04 p.m. A dead deer obstructed Highway 93. 11:50 p.m. A dead deer obstructed Foys Canyon Road. A coincidence? I think not. But seriously. This is all an hour or two from my house. I'll keep an eye on the news. BYW: a police blotter full of bear, moose, deer and dopes is just another grand day here under The Big Sky. -Martin On Fri, Sep 18, 2009 at 10:12 AM, Meteorites USA wrote: > Hi List, > > 9:22 p.m. last night? - Someone saw what was described as a “big fireball” > in the sky on the north side of Hash Mountain. Although the reporting party > believed it to be an aircraft, all planes in the area were fully accounted > for and all was well. > > http://www.flatheadbeacon.com/articles/article/car_versus_moose_and_a_mysterious_fireball/13066/ > > Regards, > Eric Wichman > Meteorites USA > __ > http://www.meteoritecentral.com > Meteorite-list mailing list > Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com > http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list > __ http://www.meteoritecentral.com Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] New Australian fall
Looks like a nice eucrite. Similar to Camel Donga. Matt -- Matt Morgan Mile High Meteorites http://www.mhmeteorites.com P.O. Box 151293 Lakewood, CO 80215 USA -Original Message- From: Darren Garrison Date: Fri, 18 Sep 2009 12:51:04 To: Subject: [meteorite-list] New Australian fall http://www.smh.com.au/technology/sci-tech/rare-snapshot-of-solar-systems-dawn-20090918-fvcl.html Rare snapshot of solar system's dawn DEBORAH SMITH SCIENCE EDITOR September 19, 2009 CAMERAS set up in outback Australia to track fireballs across the night sky have led scientists to a rare meteorite formed at the dawn of the solar system. The fiery streak it made on descent allowed them not only to pinpoint where it would fall on the vast Nullarbor Plain, but also work out where it had come from. Three fragments of the meteorite, the biggest the size of a cricket ball, were found within 100 metres of the predicted landing site, Alex Bevan, head of earth and planetary science at the Western Australian Museum, said. ''That is incredible accuracy.'' Dr Bevan said the Nullarbor desert was chosen for a new fireball observatory because of its pale limestone colour. ''Most meteorites are dark so they contrast well with the local rock.'' Dubbed Bunburra Rockhole after a nearby landmark, the meteorite was found on the first day of searching by the international team, which includes researchers from the Perth museum and CSIRO. Meteorites are among the most studied rocks on Earth, the team leader, Philip Bland, of the Imperial College in London, said. ''But it's really rare for us to be able to tell where they came from.'' Based on its unusual basalt composition and trajectory, the researchers believe the Nullarbor meteorite was once part of an asteroid in the innermost side of the asteroid belt between Mars and Jupiter, until a collision chipped it off millions of years ago. It then moved into an orbit around the sun similar to that of Earth, before plummeting to the ground on July 20, 2007. Weighing about 22 kilograms when it began its fiery descent at an altitude of 60 kilometres, only fragments of less than 200 grams were left when it hit. ''We're cautiously optimistic that this find could be the first of many, and if that happens, each find may give us more clues about how the solar system began,'' Dr Bland, whose team's study was published yesterday in the journal Science, said. Asteroids in the innermost belt are thought to have formed near the sun and consist of the same material from which the earth was made. The fireball observatory consists of a network of four cameras that take a single time-lapse picture every night to track any shooting stars, and complex mathematics is required to determine a meteorite's original orbit. __ http://www.meteoritecentral.com Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list __ http://www.meteoritecentral.com Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
[meteorite-list] New Australian fall
http://www.smh.com.au/technology/sci-tech/rare-snapshot-of-solar-systems-dawn-20090918-fvcl.html Rare snapshot of solar system's dawn DEBORAH SMITH SCIENCE EDITOR September 19, 2009 CAMERAS set up in outback Australia to track fireballs across the night sky have led scientists to a rare meteorite formed at the dawn of the solar system. The fiery streak it made on descent allowed them not only to pinpoint where it would fall on the vast Nullarbor Plain, but also work out where it had come from. Three fragments of the meteorite, the biggest the size of a cricket ball, were found within 100 metres of the predicted landing site, Alex Bevan, head of earth and planetary science at the Western Australian Museum, said. ''That is incredible accuracy.'' Dr Bevan said the Nullarbor desert was chosen for a new fireball observatory because of its pale limestone colour. ''Most meteorites are dark so they contrast well with the local rock.'' Dubbed Bunburra Rockhole after a nearby landmark, the meteorite was found on the first day of searching by the international team, which includes researchers from the Perth museum and CSIRO. Meteorites are among the most studied rocks on Earth, the team leader, Philip Bland, of the Imperial College in London, said. ''But it's really rare for us to be able to tell where they came from.'' Based on its unusual basalt composition and trajectory, the researchers believe the Nullarbor meteorite was once part of an asteroid in the innermost side of the asteroid belt between Mars and Jupiter, until a collision chipped it off millions of years ago. It then moved into an orbit around the sun similar to that of Earth, before plummeting to the ground on July 20, 2007. Weighing about 22 kilograms when it began its fiery descent at an altitude of 60 kilometres, only fragments of less than 200 grams were left when it hit. ''We're cautiously optimistic that this find could be the first of many, and if that happens, each find may give us more clues about how the solar system began,'' Dr Bland, whose team's study was published yesterday in the journal Science, said. Asteroids in the innermost belt are thought to have formed near the sun and consist of the same material from which the earth was made. The fireball observatory consists of a network of four cameras that take a single time-lapse picture every night to track any shooting stars, and complex mathematics is required to determine a meteorite's original orbit. __ http://www.meteoritecentral.com Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] Where all the iron and nickle came from...?
I love those lyrics I am those lyrics we are those lyrics Scientist and poet are these terms self contradictory? I love science [what little I can understand of it] yet deep in my "soul" I yearn to "know" more The reality is overwhelming to my feeble mind So I dabble in the "arts" to sooth a humbled heart We are star dust Yippee what a claim to fame We are born Deep in the heart of the stars You got to love it! Our mementos filed neatly and labeled for posterity Bring us closer to that crux Bring us to a List of like minded Jerry Flaherty -- From: "Sterling K. Webb" Sent: Friday, September 18, 2009 12:15 PM To: "Melanie Matthews" ; Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Where all the iron and nickle came from...? Hi, Mel, List, The recipe for a universe is simple. Start with a batch of hot particles. Let them cool until they combine into hydrogen atoms. As they cool, some will fuse and make some helium. Now you have a universe of 75% hydrogen and 25% helium gas. Boring. Let the gas gather by gravity into stars everywhere. More interesting. The big stars burn fast and combine atoms bigger and bigger until you have all the atoms up to iron, in just a few million years. Then the big ones explode, creating all the elements heavier than iron and spreading them as gas and dust in clouds through the universe in a few billion years. The gas and dust clump by gravity into new stars, the biggest of which will explode in a few million years all over again. (Some stars never learn). Before you know it, there's a mix of all elements everywhere, making new stars, exploding big stars right away. The small stars will live longer than the universe. The medium stars will live 5 to 15 billion years (like ours). We look out the window and it's still going on. We see the remnants of the exploded stars. We see the new stars forming. We see the young stars, the middle-aged stars, the old stars. The young universe had very little heavier elements. They increase as the universe ages. You can actually make a good rough calculation of the age of a universe by the amount of heavier elements you find. As the universe gets older, the amount of heavier elements increases. Iron is a particularly important element in this cycle. It's when a star works its way up to burning iron that it fails, collapses and goes boom! Iron is the heaviest element that can be cooked slowly in a star; all the heavier ones are created in the flash of the explosion. You see, it takes more energy to fuse iron than you get from the fusion. Instead of heating the star, it cools it. When the star cools, it suddenly collapses. The big whack that results is a supernova, when all the other elements are cooked up in an instant. Some (not all) believe that our star formed in a neighborhood where there had been one or more recent supernovae that enriched the raw materials in our star's mix of gas and dust. It's an argument, but the evidence seems to tilting in that direction. We keep finding traces of isotopes from a recipe of recent exploding stars. So, what do you get? Five billion years later, we get songs written especially for Woodstock that start: "We are stardust..." Sterling K. Webb -- - Original Message - From: "Melanie Matthews" To: Sent: Friday, September 18, 2009 6:05 AM Subject: [meteorite-list] Where all the iron and nickle came from...? Hello list, These metallic elements are so common in stony meteorites - as we know... now, don't they originally form at the cores of stars, and the traces of these metals that contained during the earliest days of the formation of our Solar System, are the remnants of nearby dead stars that exploded millions or billions of years before the Solar System started to emerge? Regards - Mel _ New: Messenger sign-in on the MSN homepage http://go.microsoft.com/?linkid=9677403 __ http://www.meteoritecentral.com Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list __ http://www.meteoritecentral.com Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list __ http://www.meteoritecentral.com Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] Where all the iron and nickle came from...?
Hi, Mel, List, The recipe for a universe is simple. Start with a batch of hot particles. Let them cool until they combine into hydrogen atoms. As they cool, some will fuse and make some helium. Now you have a universe of 75% hydrogen and 25% helium gas. Boring. Let the gas gather by gravity into stars everywhere. More interesting. The big stars burn fast and combine atoms bigger and bigger until you have all the atoms up to iron, in just a few million years. Then the big ones explode, creating all the elements heavier than iron and spreading them as gas and dust in clouds through the universe in a few billion years. The gas and dust clump by gravity into new stars, the biggest of which will explode in a few million years all over again. (Some stars never learn). Before you know it, there's a mix of all elements everywhere, making new stars, exploding big stars right away. The small stars will live longer than the universe. The medium stars will live 5 to 15 billion years (like ours). We look out the window and it's still going on. We see the remnants of the exploded stars. We see the new stars forming. We see the young stars, the middle-aged stars, the old stars. The young universe had very little heavier elements. They increase as the universe ages. You can actually make a good rough calculation of the age of a universe by the amount of heavier elements you find. As the universe gets older, the amount of heavier elements increases. Iron is a particularly important element in this cycle. It's when a star works its way up to burning iron that it fails, collapses and goes boom! Iron is the heaviest element that can be cooked slowly in a star; all the heavier ones are created in the flash of the explosion. You see, it takes more energy to fuse iron than you get from the fusion. Instead of heating the star, it cools it. When the star cools, it suddenly collapses. The big whack that results is a supernova, when all the other elements are cooked up in an instant. Some (not all) believe that our star formed in a neighborhood where there had been one or more recent supernovae that enriched the raw materials in our star's mix of gas and dust. It's an argument, but the evidence seems to tilting in that direction. We keep finding traces of isotopes from a recipe of recent exploding stars. So, what do you get? Five billion years later, we get songs written especially for Woodstock that start: "We are stardust..." Sterling K. Webb -- - Original Message - From: "Melanie Matthews" To: Sent: Friday, September 18, 2009 6:05 AM Subject: [meteorite-list] Where all the iron and nickle came from...? Hello list, These metallic elements are so common in stony meteorites - as we know... now, don't they originally form at the cores of stars, and the traces of these metals that contained during the earliest days of the formation of our Solar System, are the remnants of nearby dead stars that exploded millions or billions of years before the Solar System started to emerge? Regards - Mel _ New: Messenger sign-in on the MSN homepage http://go.microsoft.com/?linkid=9677403 __ http://www.meteoritecentral.com Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list __ http://www.meteoritecentral.com Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
[meteorite-list] Montana Fireball
Hi List, 9:22 p.m. last night? - Someone saw what was described as a “big fireball” in the sky on the north side of Hash Mountain. Although the reporting party believed it to be an aircraft, all planes in the area were fully accounted for and all was well. http://www.flatheadbeacon.com/articles/article/car_versus_moose_and_a_mysterious_fireball/13066/ Regards, Eric Wichman Meteorites USA __ http://www.meteoritecentral.com Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] Where all the iron and nickle came from...?
On Fri, 18 Sep 2009 04:05:50 -0700, you wrote: > >Hello list, >These metallic elements are so common in stony meteorites - as we know... now, >don't they originally form at the cores of stars, and the traces of these >metals that contained during the earliest days of the formation of our Solar >System, are the remnants of nearby dead stars that exploded millions or >billions of years before the Solar System started to emerge? > Everything heavier than hydrogen, helium (and a little bit of Lithium and Beryllium) was cooked up in stars. __ http://www.meteoritecentral.com Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] Bugs In Space!
Mark, Sorry... I was not really directly trying to refute you personally, only what was said as I understood it from the way it was written. I wasn't stating emphatically that you were personally wrong.. Maybe I misunderstood what you were saying... I think we were both saying the same thing but in different ways... It doesn't change my opinion or what I wrote... ;) Life has probably started all over the universe in hundreds of millions of systems in millions of galaxies across the universe. We're just a small micro-dot, in a over 100 billion star-dots in 1 galaxy. There are millions of galaxies! Millions times billions of stars is more numbers than I can possibly count. If we're here in one tiny section of our galaxy what other life in the Milky Way? We'll probably never know exactly when the universe was born, but we can know when our planet was born, and that tells us that if it happened here, it can happen elsewhere. That is an empirical fact! We are the aliens we seek. Regards, Eric Mark Ford wrote: I did not say all life in the universe is from Earth, read my posts again!! I said the life we find on Earth originated from Earth that's all. As I said there is every possibility life has started else where too. We are not the centre of the universe! I never said we are, please don't misquote me. Best Mark -Original Message- From: Meteorites USA [mailto:e...@meteoritesusa.com] Sent: 17 September 2009 16:18 To: Mark Ford; meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Bugs In Space! Hello everyone, Again I feel compelled to respond to such Earth centered thinking. We are NOT the center of everything. Our planet is merely a dot in billions of trillions of other dots in this universe. "...Sorry but imho panspermia is nothing more than religion by the back door..." ok... Not really. "...Some people just cannot accept that life doesn't automatically have to have come from outer space..." Some people cannot except that life COULD come from out there. "...where is the evidence to show that life cannot possibly start on Earth?..." There is lots of evidence to shows life could start here. But that does not mean ALL life is from here. This "Earth centered" idea is flawed in every way. "...It has to start somewhere, and what better place than right here, where the conditions are warm/wet/cold/ideal?..." Again, Earth centered and ultimately wrong. This is not to say that life that is present today on this planet could not have started on this planet. Just because someone says that meteorites might have seeded Earth, does not mean that ALL life was seeded from elsewhere. It's flawed thinking because it leaves out the fact that SOME life could have come from elsewhere. Just because someone says that rocks from space could have brought life to our planet does not mean it is all encompassing or empirical at all because there is evidence. I believe the Panspermia theory may be flawed (or peoples understanding of Panspermia anyway) if they state that all life came from elsewhere simply because if all life came from elsewhere then where did "elsewhere" get the life to begin with? It had to come into existence from somewhere. If you don't believe in evolution, then you believe in God, if you believe in God you most likely don't believe in evolution. But I ask you why you can't believe in both? (rhetorical, please do not answer this as it's NOT related to meteorites ;)) This is NOT the topic I want to get into so I will continue on... So you believe the Earth is the Goldilocks planet. Given that you most likely also believe there is a good chance that there is another system out there with a star similar to our Sun and quite possibly another planet similar to ours that lies within what science calls the habitable zone. Or is that too big of a stretch? Let's just say for the sake of argument there is another planet out there nearby (relative to our system) that is in this zone and that there is life on that planet. One can safely assume that large asteroidal and cometary debris has at some time in the past slammed into that planet. Perhaps even while life existed on it, thereby ejecting billions of tons of debris into space over time. Some of that debris would no doubt carry some form of microbial life that lives deep inside the soil and rock. (perhaps even insects) Protected from the harshness of the vacuum and cold of space. Now we know that if there's a Goldilocks planet that there are most likely other planets in that system as well, perhaps more, perhaps less than our system, but our knowledge of solar system formation is one that allows us to make an educated guess. The point is most of the debris would be sucked into the orbits and eventually the atmospheres of other planetary and larger bodies in that system. But. Not all of it would be. Would it? Some of it would escape. Eventually..
Re: [meteorite-list] Bugs In Space!
Interesting term "Singularity" Philosophically "ONE" [arrow] MANY -- From: "Becky and Kirk" Sent: Friday, September 18, 2009 10:20 AM To: Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Bugs In Space! Yes---it would like the PRIME MOVER indeed. This singular force had to include ALL OF THE INFORMATION, in the beginning BEFORE the Big Bang, into the Big Bang, that the Universe would ever need to accomplish all of the wondrous things that occur in our Universe to this day. This has been called"The big download" of information. Seems to me that something had to download or put all of this information into the singularity that became the Big Bang BEFORE it exploded into the known Universe. That seems pretty miraculous to me! Kirk..:-) - Original Message - From: "Jerry Flaherty" To: ; ; "Mark Ford" ; "Meteorites USA" Sent: Friday, September 18, 2009 9:05 AM Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Bugs In Space! I have to agree. So too, If the BB is the beginning WHO or if you prefer WHAT started IT? Some would call that a PRIME MOVER. Maybe even, dare I venture, THE prime mover. Jerry Flaherty -- From: Sent: Thursday, September 17, 2009 2:08 PM To: ; "Mark Ford" ; "Meteorites USA" Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Bugs In Space! Eric, all, It seems to me a lot of people believe in the Big Bang theory. If you are among them then you must believe that everything on this planet did in fact come from space. Correct? I mean there was this huge explosion if you will, that when the dust settled formed our wonderful solar system. So if everything on Earth came from this Big Bang then why is there all of this debate about life? Do some of us think that everything came from space except the dirt? No, I think many believe that everything came from the Big Bang and everything means everything. Life fits neatly into the category of everything. Doesn't it?? Therefore life also came from the Big Bang. Seems logical to me! Taking it one step further. If life came to Earth Via the Big Bang then wouldn't some of this life stuff have been launched to other planets as well. Perhaps even launched to other solar systems? If so then we just need to find the planet that welcomes this life stuff. I think Mar's is too cold. The moon seems like it should be okay but it lacks atmosphere and maybe a few other things. So, based on the Big Bang spewing life across space , life must have landed somewhere else. Either that or it is still in route and will land eventually on some planet that likes it as much as we do. Or maybe God created life? Again, my 2 cents. Carl -- Carl or Debbie Esparza IMCA 5829 Meteoritemax Meteorites USA wrote: Hello everyone, Again I feel compelled to respond to such Earth centered thinking. We are NOT the center of everything. Our planet is merely a dot in billions of trillions of other dots in this universe. "...Sorry but imho panspermia is nothing more than religion by the back door..." ok... Not really. "...Some people just cannot accept that life doesn't automatically have to have come from outer space..." Some people cannot except that life COULD come from out there. "...where is the evidence to show that life cannot possibly start on Earth?..." There is lots of evidence to shows life could start here. But that does not mean ALL life is from here. This "Earth centered" idea is flawed in every way. "...It has to start somewhere, and what better place than right here, where the conditions are warm/wet/cold/ideal?..." Again, Earth centered and ultimately wrong. This is not to say that life that is present today on this planet could not have started on this planet. Just because someone says that meteorites might have seeded Earth, does not mean that ALL life was seeded from elsewhere. It's flawed thinking because it leaves out the fact that SOME life could have come from elsewhere. Just because someone says that rocks from space could have brought life to our planet does not mean it is all encompassing or empirical at all because there is evidence. I believe the Panspermia theory may be flawed (or peoples understanding of Panspermia anyway) if they state that all life came from elsewhere simply because if all life came from elsewhere then where did "elsewhere" get the life to begin with? It had to come into existence from somewhere. If you don't believe in evolution, then you believe in God, if you believe in God you most likely don't believe in evolution. But I ask you why you can't believe in both? (rhetorical, please do not answer this as it's NOT related to meteorites ;)) This is NOT the topic I want to get into so I will continue on... So you believe the Earth is the Goldilocks planet. Given that you most likely also believe there is a good chance that there is another system out there with a star similar to our Sun and quite possibly another planet simi
Re: [meteorite-list] Bugs In Space!
Yes---it would like the PRIME MOVER indeed. This singular force had to include ALL OF THE INFORMATION, in the beginning BEFORE the Big Bang, into the Big Bang, that the Universe would ever need to accomplish all of the wondrous things that occur in our Universe to this day. This has been called"The big download" of information. Seems to me that something had to download or put all of this information into the singularity that became the Big Bang BEFORE it exploded into the known Universe. That seems pretty miraculous to me! Kirk..:-) - Original Message - From: "Jerry Flaherty" To: ; ; "Mark Ford" ; "Meteorites USA" Sent: Friday, September 18, 2009 9:05 AM Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Bugs In Space! I have to agree. So too, If the BB is the beginning WHO or if you prefer WHAT started IT? Some would call that a PRIME MOVER. Maybe even, dare I venture, THE prime mover. Jerry Flaherty -- From: Sent: Thursday, September 17, 2009 2:08 PM To: ; "Mark Ford" ; "Meteorites USA" Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Bugs In Space! Eric, all, It seems to me a lot of people believe in the Big Bang theory. If you are among them then you must believe that everything on this planet did in fact come from space. Correct? I mean there was this huge explosion if you will, that when the dust settled formed our wonderful solar system. So if everything on Earth came from this Big Bang then why is there all of this debate about life? Do some of us think that everything came from space except the dirt? No, I think many believe that everything came from the Big Bang and everything means everything. Life fits neatly into the category of everything. Doesn't it?? Therefore life also came from the Big Bang. Seems logical to me! Taking it one step further. If life came to Earth Via the Big Bang then wouldn't some of this life stuff have been launched to other planets as well. Perhaps even launched to other solar systems? If so then we just need to find the planet that welcomes this life stuff. I think Mar's is too cold. The moon seems like it should be okay but it lacks atmosphere and maybe a few other things. So, based on the Big Bang spewing life across space , life must have landed somewhere else. Either that or it is still in route and will land eventually on some planet that likes it as much as we do. Or maybe God created life? Again, my 2 cents. Carl -- Carl or Debbie Esparza IMCA 5829 Meteoritemax Meteorites USA wrote: Hello everyone, Again I feel compelled to respond to such Earth centered thinking. We are NOT the center of everything. Our planet is merely a dot in billions of trillions of other dots in this universe. "...Sorry but imho panspermia is nothing more than religion by the back door..." ok... Not really. "...Some people just cannot accept that life doesn't automatically have to have come from outer space..." Some people cannot except that life COULD come from out there. "...where is the evidence to show that life cannot possibly start on Earth?..." There is lots of evidence to shows life could start here. But that does not mean ALL life is from here. This "Earth centered" idea is flawed in every way. "...It has to start somewhere, and what better place than right here, where the conditions are warm/wet/cold/ideal?..." Again, Earth centered and ultimately wrong. This is not to say that life that is present today on this planet could not have started on this planet. Just because someone says that meteorites might have seeded Earth, does not mean that ALL life was seeded from elsewhere. It's flawed thinking because it leaves out the fact that SOME life could have come from elsewhere. Just because someone says that rocks from space could have brought life to our planet does not mean it is all encompassing or empirical at all because there is evidence. I believe the Panspermia theory may be flawed (or peoples understanding of Panspermia anyway) if they state that all life came from elsewhere simply because if all life came from elsewhere then where did "elsewhere" get the life to begin with? It had to come into existence from somewhere. If you don't believe in evolution, then you believe in God, if you believe in God you most likely don't believe in evolution. But I ask you why you can't believe in both? (rhetorical, please do not answer this as it's NOT related to meteorites ;)) This is NOT the topic I want to get into so I will continue on... So you believe the Earth is the Goldilocks planet. Given that you most likely also believe there is a good chance that there is another system out there with a star similar to our Sun and quite possibly another planet similar to ours that lies within what science calls the habitable zone. Or is that too big of a stretch? Let's just say for the sake of argument there is another planet out there nearby (relative to our system) that is in this zone and that ther
Re: [meteorite-list] Bugs In Space!
I have to agree. So too, If the BB is the beginning WHO or if you prefer WHAT started IT? Some would call that a PRIME MOVER. Maybe even, dare I venture, THE prime mover. Jerry Flaherty -- From: Sent: Thursday, September 17, 2009 2:08 PM To: ; "Mark Ford" ; "Meteorites USA" Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Bugs In Space! Eric, all, It seems to me a lot of people believe in the Big Bang theory. If you are among them then you must believe that everything on this planet did in fact come from space. Correct? I mean there was this huge explosion if you will, that when the dust settled formed our wonderful solar system. So if everything on Earth came from this Big Bang then why is there all of this debate about life? Do some of us think that everything came from space except the dirt? No, I think many believe that everything came from the Big Bang and everything means everything. Life fits neatly into the category of everything. Doesn't it?? Therefore life also came from the Big Bang. Seems logical to me! Taking it one step further. If life came to Earth Via the Big Bang then wouldn't some of this life stuff have been launched to other planets as well. Perhaps even launched to other solar systems? If so then we just need to find the planet that welcomes this life stuff. I think Mar's is too cold. The moon seems like it should be okay but it lacks atmosphere and maybe a few other things. So, based on the Big Bang spewing life across space , life must have landed somewhere else. Either that or it is still in route and will land eventually on some planet that likes it as much as we do. Or maybe God created life? Again, my 2 cents. Carl -- Carl or Debbie Esparza IMCA 5829 Meteoritemax Meteorites USA wrote: Hello everyone, Again I feel compelled to respond to such Earth centered thinking. We are NOT the center of everything. Our planet is merely a dot in billions of trillions of other dots in this universe. "...Sorry but imho panspermia is nothing more than religion by the back door..." ok... Not really. "...Some people just cannot accept that life doesn't automatically have to have come from outer space..." Some people cannot except that life COULD come from out there. "...where is the evidence to show that life cannot possibly start on Earth?..." There is lots of evidence to shows life could start here. But that does not mean ALL life is from here. This "Earth centered" idea is flawed in every way. "...It has to start somewhere, and what better place than right here, where the conditions are warm/wet/cold/ideal?..." Again, Earth centered and ultimately wrong. This is not to say that life that is present today on this planet could not have started on this planet. Just because someone says that meteorites might have seeded Earth, does not mean that ALL life was seeded from elsewhere. It's flawed thinking because it leaves out the fact that SOME life could have come from elsewhere. Just because someone says that rocks from space could have brought life to our planet does not mean it is all encompassing or empirical at all because there is evidence. I believe the Panspermia theory may be flawed (or peoples understanding of Panspermia anyway) if they state that all life came from elsewhere simply because if all life came from elsewhere then where did "elsewhere" get the life to begin with? It had to come into existence from somewhere. If you don't believe in evolution, then you believe in God, if you believe in God you most likely don't believe in evolution. But I ask you why you can't believe in both? (rhetorical, please do not answer this as it's NOT related to meteorites ;)) This is NOT the topic I want to get into so I will continue on... So you believe the Earth is the Goldilocks planet. Given that you most likely also believe there is a good chance that there is another system out there with a star similar to our Sun and quite possibly another planet similar to ours that lies within what science calls the habitable zone. Or is that too big of a stretch? Let's just say for the sake of argument there is another planet out there nearby (relative to our system) that is in this zone and that there is life on that planet. One can safely assume that large asteroidal and cometary debris has at some time in the past slammed into that planet. Perhaps even while life existed on it, thereby ejecting billions of tons of debris into space over time. Some of that debris would no doubt carry some form of microbial life that lives deep inside the soil and rock. (perhaps even insects) Protected from the harshness of the vacuum and cold of space. Now we know that if there's a Goldilocks planet that there are most likely other planets in that system as well, perhaps more, perhaps less than our system, but our knowledge of solar system formation is one that allows us to make an educated guess. The point is most of the debris would be sucke
[meteorite-list] Where all the iron and nickle came from...?
Hello list, These metallic elements are so common in stony meteorites - as we know... now, don't they originally form at the cores of stars, and the traces of these metals that contained during the earliest days of the formation of our Solar System, are the remnants of nearby dead stars that exploded millions or billions of years before the Solar System started to emerge? Regards - Mel _ New: Messenger sign-in on the MSN homepage http://go.microsoft.com/?linkid=9677403 __ http://www.meteoritecentral.com 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 - September 18, 2009
http://www.rocksfromspace.org/September_18_2009.html __ http://www.meteoritecentral.com Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] Bugs In Space!
I did not say all life in the universe is from Earth, read my posts again!! I said the life we find on Earth originated from Earth that's all. As I said there is every possibility life has started else where too. We are not the centre of the universe! I never said we are, please don't misquote me. Best Mark -Original Message- From: Meteorites USA [mailto:e...@meteoritesusa.com] Sent: 17 September 2009 16:18 To: Mark Ford; meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Bugs In Space! Hello everyone, Again I feel compelled to respond to such Earth centered thinking. We are NOT the center of everything. Our planet is merely a dot in billions of trillions of other dots in this universe. "...Sorry but imho panspermia is nothing more than religion by the back door..." ok... Not really. "...Some people just cannot accept that life doesn't automatically have to have come from outer space..." Some people cannot except that life COULD come from out there. "...where is the evidence to show that life cannot possibly start on Earth?..." There is lots of evidence to shows life could start here. But that does not mean ALL life is from here. This "Earth centered" idea is flawed in every way. "...It has to start somewhere, and what better place than right here, where the conditions are warm/wet/cold/ideal?..." Again, Earth centered and ultimately wrong. This is not to say that life that is present today on this planet could not have started on this planet. Just because someone says that meteorites might have seeded Earth, does not mean that ALL life was seeded from elsewhere. It's flawed thinking because it leaves out the fact that SOME life could have come from elsewhere. Just because someone says that rocks from space could have brought life to our planet does not mean it is all encompassing or empirical at all because there is evidence. I believe the Panspermia theory may be flawed (or peoples understanding of Panspermia anyway) if they state that all life came from elsewhere simply because if all life came from elsewhere then where did "elsewhere" get the life to begin with? It had to come into existence from somewhere. If you don't believe in evolution, then you believe in God, if you believe in God you most likely don't believe in evolution. But I ask you why you can't believe in both? (rhetorical, please do not answer this as it's NOT related to meteorites ;)) This is NOT the topic I want to get into so I will continue on... So you believe the Earth is the Goldilocks planet. Given that you most likely also believe there is a good chance that there is another system out there with a star similar to our Sun and quite possibly another planet similar to ours that lies within what science calls the habitable zone. Or is that too big of a stretch? Let's just say for the sake of argument there is another planet out there nearby (relative to our system) that is in this zone and that there is life on that planet. One can safely assume that large asteroidal and cometary debris has at some time in the past slammed into that planet. Perhaps even while life existed on it, thereby ejecting billions of tons of debris into space over time. Some of that debris would no doubt carry some form of microbial life that lives deep inside the soil and rock. (perhaps even insects) Protected from the harshness of the vacuum and cold of space. Now we know that if there's a Goldilocks planet that there are most likely other planets in that system as well, perhaps more, perhaps less than our system, but our knowledge of solar system formation is one that allows us to make an educated guess. The point is most of the debris would be sucked into the orbits and eventually the atmospheres of other planetary and larger bodies in that system. But. Not all of it would be. Would it? Some of it would escape. Eventually... Let's also say for sake of argument the Gliese 581 star system is home to our habitable planet. This system is 20 light years away. In other words it takes light 20 years to travel to Earth. (speed of light is 186,000 miles per second). A light year is 5,865,696,000,000 miles in distance. Remember that number... The question now is, how fast will the debris that is able to escape the system be traveling? Well, I wasn't sure and did a little digging and found this page http://www.madsci.org/posts/archives/2001-03/985224290.As.r.html which explains the speed of an orbiting asteroid to be at 47000 mph. Since I wanted to verify, I check around and found this too: http://www.spaceref.com/news/viewpr.html?pid=14258 which puts the speed of an orbiting asteroid at 67,000 mph. A difference of 20,000 mph. A BIG difference! Still not convinced of the accuracy of the speed, I wanted to know a more exact number I could apply to the debris to calculate the time it would take for it to reach Earth. Then I found this: http://en.wikipedia.org/
