Re: [meteorite-list] Destruction of the Hopewell civilization

[Larry Lebofsky via Meteorite-list]

Anne:

I was aware of this article, but thanks for the quote from it. So comets
have enough metal to make tools. I guess I have been wrong all these years!

Larry Lebofsky

On Thu, Sep 28, 2023, 7:22 AM Anne Black via Meteorite-list <
meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com> wrote:

> Hello,
>
> This was brought to my attention, but I had never heard of the event.
> Anyone?
>
>
> https://www.uc.edu/news/articles/2022/02/did-comets-fiery-destruction-lead-to-downfall-of-ancient-hopewell.html
>
> One interesting line:
> *The Hopewell people collected the meteorites and forged malleable metal
> from them into flat sheets used in jewelry and musical instruments called
> pan flutes.*
>
> It would be interesting to hear more.
>
> Anne Black
> IMPACTIKA.com
> impact...@aol.com
>
> __
> Meteorite-list mailing list
> Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com
> https://pairlist2.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
>
__
Meteorite-list mailing list
Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com
https://pairlist2.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list

Re: [meteorite-list] Giant Impact Crater Might Be Hidden Under Greenland Icesheet

[Larry Lebofsky via Meteorite-list]

>From the pictures in the Space.com article, the meteorite that is
referenced in article is probably the Cape Your Iron.

Larry Lebofsky

> This is interesting. :-)
>
> Scientists Spot What May Be a Giant Impact Crater
> Hidden Under Greenland Ice By Meghan Bartels,
> Space.com, November 14, 2018
> https://www.space.com/42431-giant-impact-crater-hidden-under-greenland-ice.html
>
> Yours,
>
> Paul H.
>
> __
>
> Visit our Facebook page https://www.facebook.com/meteoritecentral and the
> Archives at http://www.meteorite-list-archives.com
> Meteorite-list mailing list
> Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com
> https://pairlist3.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
>


__

Visit our Facebook page https://www.facebook.com/meteoritecentral and the 
Archives at http://www.meteorite-list-archives.com
Meteorite-list mailing list
Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com
https://pairlist3.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list

Re: [meteorite-list] More on meteorite temperature

[Larry Lebofsky via Meteorite-list]

Hi Rob:

Did you remember an object is only illuminated by the Sun half the time?

Larry

> Hi All,
>
> Playing Devil's Advocate, I decided to try coming up with a scenario that
> attempts to maximize the
> thermal equilibrium temperature of a chondritic meteoroid just prior to
> encountering the earth's
> atmosphere. The typical formula for computing the thermal equilibrium
> temperature for an
> object without an atmosphere is:
>
> Te = [S0 * (1-A) / (4*epsilon*sigma)] ^ (1/4)
>
> where the body is assumed to be spherical (the source of the 4 in the
> denominator), S0 is the
> solar constant (mean value 1361 W/m^2), A is the bolometric Bond albedo,
> epsilon is the
> meteoroid's emissivity, and sigma is the Stefan-Boltzmann constant (5.670
> x 10^-8 W/m^2-K^-4).
> A, in turn, can be estimated from the following equation:
>
> A ~= q * pv
>
> where q is the phase integral and pv is the visible albedo. Using Bowell's
> H, G magnitude system,
> we can compute q from:
>
> q = 0.290 + .684*G
>
> The commonly used value for the slope parameter, G, is 0.15, in which
> case:
>
> q = 0.393
> A = 0.393 * pv
>
> For very dark asteroids (e.g. Trojan asteroids, Hildas, Cybeles), the
> albedo can be 5% or lower.
> However, most NEOs have semi-major axes less than 3 a.u. and albedos
> averaging closer
> to 20%.
>
> The final missing value is the emissivity. For regolith, a range of
> 0.9-0.95 is often mentioned.
> However, emissivity and albedo work hand-in-hand (epsilon + pv ~= 1). So
> if we're going
> to choose an emissivity of 0.9, we should set the albedo, pv, to 10%.
>
> So what is a typical equilibrium temperature for a spherical NEO with 10%
> albedo, 0.9
> emissivity, 1 a.u. from the sun?
>
> A = .393*10% = .0393
>
> Te = [1361 * (1-.0393) / (4*0.9*5.67 x 10^-8)]^0.25 = 282.9 K or about
> 49.6 F
>
> So, cool, but certainly not freezing. How can we get a warmer answer?  One
> way is to pick the
> time of year when the earth is closest to the sun (early January) and the
> solar constant is
> higher:  about 1414 W/m^2.  This raises the temperature in the above
> example to 285.6 K,
> or 54.4 F. Still not warm, but warmer. Lowering the emissivity will help,
> too. Let the albedo
> increase to 20%, and set the emissivity to 0.8. With the perihelion solar
> constant, the
> equilibrium temperature is now up to 291.1 K (64.3 F). Lowering the
> emissivity further
> is probably not realistic for most earth-crossing asteroids, so we're at
> the limit of what
> we can achieve via S0 and emissivity.
>
> However, there *is* a way to get a big increase in the equilibrium
> temperature which
> I'll cover in the next installment.  --Rob
> __
>
> Visit our Facebook page https://www.facebook.com/meteoritecentral and the
> Archives at http://www.meteorite-list-archives.com
> Meteorite-list mailing list
> Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com
> https://pairlist3.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
>


__

Visit our Facebook page https://www.facebook.com/meteoritecentral and the 
Archives at http://www.meteorite-list-archives.com
Meteorite-list mailing list
Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com
https://pairlist3.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list

Re: [meteorite-list] Lunar Lava Tubes Could Protect Astronauts

[Larry Lebofsky via Meteorite-list]

Sterling and Paul:

There were also two conferences (at least) on lunar habitats that
discussed the existence and use of lava tubes that were held in 1986 and
1988 (we were "designing" these in our education workshops in the early
90s). Heinlein wrote several books about underground lunar habitats (late
50s to early 60s), but not sure if any of them were actually mentioned to
be built in lava tubes.

> Paul, List,
>
> The earliest references on the
> Marius Hills lava tubes go back
> to 1971-2. See the references in:
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lunar_lava_tube
>
> Then, there was a quiet among
> publications; one in 1992, but
> then after 2000, a flurry of lava
> tube publications, as you can see
> in the bibliography of the above.
>
> A great picture of lunar lava
> tubes at:
> https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/0d/Lunar_collapse_pits.jpg
>
> 2014 saw a raft of publications
> on Martian lava tubes; see the
> bibliography in this:
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martian_lava_tube
>
> Few earlier papers but this great
> photo shows Martian lava tubes:
> https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn9220-lava-tubes-snapped-snaking-acros
> s-mars/
> It was taken by Mars Express in
> 2004 but only released this week.
> Yup! That's the ticket --- sit on
> your data... for a decade.
>
> The surface radiation on Mars
> isn't as bad as on the Moon, but
> humans still need protection
> from it, especially if you intend
> to stay on Mars for long.
>
> And last, a remarkable look into
> a lava tube on Earth, seen as a
> Martian analogue, with lots of
> photos:
> https://walking-on-red-dust.com/2016/01/19/the-cave/
>
> I'm going to say "remarkable"
> again.
>
> And giving credit, the novelist Kim
> Stanley Robinson set much of the
> second book of his Martian Trilogy,
> "Green Mars," written in 1994, in
> Dorsa Brevia, the dorsae being
> believed to be Martian lava tubes.
>
> Sterling Webb
> ---
> -Original Message-
> From: Meteorite-list [mailto:meteorite-list-boun...@meteoritecentral.com]
> On
> Behalf Of Paul via Meteorite-list
> Sent: Friday, June 24, 2016 8:19 PM
> To: Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com
> Subject: [meteorite-list] Lunar Lava Tubes Could Protect Astronauts
>
> Lunar Shelter: Moon Caves Could Protect Astronauts By Nola Taylor Redd,
> Space.com
> http://www.space.com/32795-moon-lava-tubes-protect-astronauts.html
>
> Scientists May Have Spotted Buried Lava Tubes on the Moon by Nadia Drake ,
> No Place Like Home (Blog)
> http://phenomena.nationalgeographic.com/2016/03/25/scientists-may-have-spott
> ed-buried-lava-tubes-on-the-moon/
>
> Marius Hills Pit - Lava Tube Skylight?
> Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter Camera
> NAC M114328462R [NASA/GSFC/Arizona State University]
> http://lroc.sese.asu.edu/posts/202
>
> The Marius Hills pit is a possible skylight in a lava tube in an ancient
> volcanic region of the Moon called the Marius Hills. This LROC image is
> the
> highest resolution image of the pit to date. Image width is 500 meters,
> pixel width is 0.5 meters, NAC M114328462R [NASA/GSFC/Arizona State
> University]
> http://lroc.sese.asu.edu/news/uploads/LROCiotw/M114328462R_thumb.png
>
> Theoretical study suggests huge lava tubes could exist on moon, University
> of Perdue,
> http://www.purdue.edu/newsroom/releases/2015/Q1/theoretical-study-suggests-h
> uge-lava-tubes-could-exist-on-moon.html
>
> Yours,
>
> Paul H.
>
> __
>
> Visit our Facebook page https://www.facebook.com/meteoritecentral and the
> Archives at http://www.meteorite-list-archives.com
> Meteorite-list mailing list
> Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com
> https://pairlist3.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
>
> __
>
> Visit our Facebook page https://www.facebook.com/meteoritecentral and the
> Archives at http://www.meteorite-list-archives.com
> Meteorite-list mailing list
> Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com
> https://pairlist3.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
>


__

Visit our Facebook page https://www.facebook.com/meteoritecentral and the 
Archives at http://www.meteorite-list-archives.com
Meteorite-list mailing list
Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com
https://pairlist3.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list

[meteorite-list] Craters with meteorites

[Larry Lebofsky via Meteorite-list]

Hi Everyone:

I am trying to compile a list of craters that have meteorites associated
with them. Of the 188 impact craters that have been identified, how many
have associated meteorites?

Thanks

Larry Lebofsky

__

Visit our Facebook page https://www.facebook.com/meteoritecentral and the 
Archives at http://www.meteorite-list-archives.com
Meteorite-list mailing list
Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com
https://pairlist3.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list

Re: [meteorite-list] Caltech Researchers Find Evidence of a Real Ninth Planet

[Larry Lebofsky via Meteorite-list]

Everyone:

At the time that Pluto was being "reclassified," Hal Levinson from SWRI
produced a figure that shows the mass that is need to "clear one's orbit"
at any given distance from the Sun. This can be due to either accretion or
scattering of objects. At Pluto's distance of 40 AU, an Earth-mass-sized
body would not be a planet by about a factor of 10. Beyond 200 AU, neither
Uranus or Neptune (15 and 17 times the mass of the Earth) would be large
enough to clear their orbits. At 20 times Neptune's distance from the Sun,
600 AU, an object would have to be something like 80 times the mass of the
Earth, nearly the mass of Saturn, to be able to clear its orbit.

So, if there is an object that is as big as they say and at the distance
the predict (this is just a mathematical model, not an actual discovery),
this object would just be a VERY BIG dwarf planet!!

Larry Lebofsky


>
> http://www.caltech.edu/news/caltech-researchers-find-evidence-real-ninth-planet-49523
>
> Caltech Researchers Find Evidence of a Real Ninth Planet
> Caltech
> January 20, 2016
>
> Caltech researchers have found evidence of a giant planet tracing a
> bizarre,
> highly elongated orbit in the outer solar system. The object, which the
> researchers have nicknamed Planet Nine, has a mass about 10 times that
> of Earth and orbits about 20 times farther from the sun on average than
> does Neptune (which orbits the sun at an average distance of 2.8 billion
> miles). In fact, it would take this new planet between 10,000 and 20,000
> years to make just one full orbit around the sun.
>
> The researchers, Konstantin Batygin and Mike Brown, discovered the
> planet's
> existence through mathematical modeling and computer simulations but have
> not yet observed the object directly.
>
> "This would be a real ninth planet," says Brown, the Richard and Barbara
> Rosenberg Professor of Planetary Astronomy. "There have only been two
> true planets discovered since ancient times, and this would be a third.
> It's a pretty substantial chunk of our solar system that's still out there
> to be found, which is pretty exciting."
>
> Brown notes that the putative ninth planet - at 5,000 times the mass of
> Pluto - is sufficiently large that there should be no debate about whether
> it is a true planet. Unlike the class of smaller objects now known as
> dwarf planets, Planet Nine gravitationally dominates its neighborhood
> of the solar system. In fact, it dominates a region larger than any of
> the other known planets - a fact that Brown says makes it "the most
> planet-y
> of the planets in the whole solar system."
>
> Batygin and Brown describe their work in the current issue of the
> Astronomical
> Journal and show how Planet Nine helps explain a number of mysterious
> features of the field of icy objects and debris beyond Neptune known as
> the Kuiper Belt.
>
> "Although we were initially quite skeptical that this planet could exist,
> as we continued to investigate its orbit and what it would mean for the
> outer solar system, we become increasingly convinced that it is out
> there,"
> says Batygin, an assistant professor of planetary science. "For the first
> time in over 150 years, there is solid evidence that the solar system's
> planetary census is incomplete."
>
> The road to the theoretical discovery was not straightforward. In 2014,
> a former postdoc of Brown's, Chad Trujillo, and his colleague Scott
> Sheppard
> published a paper noting that 13 of the most distant objects in the Kuiper
> Belt are similar with respect to an obscure orbital feature. To explain
> that similarity, they suggested the possible presence of a small planet.
> Brown thought the planet solution was unlikely, but his interest was
> piqued.
>
> He took the problem down the hall to Batygin, and the two started what
> became a year-and-a-half-long collaboration to investigate the distant
> objects. As an observer and a theorist, respectively, the researchers
> approached the work from very different perspectives - Brown as someone
> who looks at the sky and tries to anchor everything in the context of
> what can be seen, and Batygin as someone who puts himself within the
> context
> of dynamics, considering how things might work from a physics standpoint.
> Those differences allowed the researchers to challenge each other's ideas
> and to consider new possibilities. "I would bring in some of these
> observational
> aspects; he would come back with arguments from theory, and we would push
> each other. I don't think the discovery would have happened without that
> back and forth," says Brown. " It was perhaps the most fun year of working
> on a problem in the solar s

Re: [meteorite-list] Meteorite or Space related license plates

[Larry Lebofsky via Meteorite-list]

Hello Ruben:

1 Ceres. That was how we met David Levy who saw our car on the road and
made us pull over so that he could introduce himself (several years before
Comet Shoemaker Levy 9). He wanted to make sure that we submitted a
picture for an article that was coming out in Sky and Telescope.

Larry

> Hello Ruben and List,
>
> Florida plates   SPC ROX
>
> Take Care,
>  Jason Phillips
>
> On Fri, Jan 1, 2016 at 7:32 PM, J Sinclair via Meteorite-list
>  wrote:
>> Rubin and List,
>>
>> We have a truck at work with the tag STARLAB
>> I think Harlan Trammel had MARSROX
>>
>> Many of the tags in Alabama had "Stars Fell On Alabama" as a theme.
>>
>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stars_Fell_on_Alabama#/media/File:2002_Alabama_License_Plate.jpg
>>
>> John
>>
>> On Fri, Jan 1, 2016 at 7:20 PM, Ruben Garcia via Meteorite-list
>>  wrote:
>>> Hi all,
>>>
>>> I've been wondering something for a while.
>>>
>>> I know Mike Farmer. Jim Schwade, Geoff Notkin and myself all have
>>> meteorite or space related license plates.
>>>
>>> Jim Schwade and myseld have METEORS in our respective states.
>>>
>>> Honestly, I don't see them very often - not even in Tucson during the
>>> gem show.
>>>
>>> Who else has one and what is it?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Rock On!
>>>
>>> Ruben Garcia
>>> http://www.MrMeteorite.com
>>> __
>>>
>>> Visit our Facebook page https://www.facebook.com/meteoritecentral and
>>> the Archives at http://www.meteorite-list-archives.com
>>> Meteorite-list mailing list
>>> Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com
>>> https://pairlist3.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
>> __
>>
>> Visit our Facebook page https://www.facebook.com/meteoritecentral and
>> the Archives at http://www.meteorite-list-archives.com
>> Meteorite-list mailing list
>> Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com
>> https://pairlist3.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
> __
>
> Visit our Facebook page https://www.facebook.com/meteoritecentral and the
> Archives at http://www.meteorite-list-archives.com
> Meteorite-list mailing list
> Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com
> https://pairlist3.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
>


__

Visit our Facebook page https://www.facebook.com/meteoritecentral and the 
Archives at http://www.meteorite-list-archives.com
Meteorite-list mailing list
Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com
https://pairlist3.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list

[meteorite-list] Fireball over Florida Nov. 10

[Larry Lebofsky via Meteorite-list]

Hello everyone:

A few days ago, I received a question from a friend of mine in Florida.
His all-sky camera had picked up a -18 magnitude fireball on Nov. 10 and
he was wondering how that translates to the size of the object that
produced it. I told him that velocity was a major factor, but would see if
anyone could give me an estimate of size anyway.

Thanks in advance.

Larry

__

Visit our Facebook page https://www.facebook.com/meteoritecentral and the 
Archives at http://www.meteorite-list-archives.com
Meteorite-list mailing list
Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com
https://pairlist3.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list

Re: [meteorite-list] Ceres' Bright Spots Seen in Striking New Detail

[Larry Lebofsky via Meteorite-list]

Hello from the VATT (cloudy, unfortunately). The problem with mineral
identification is that the spectrometer is not able to do very high
surface resolution spectra. I think this is related to the loss of one or
two of the reaction wheels, so they are limited to more global spectra and
thus mineral ID. Someone please correct me if this is wrong.

Larry Lebofsky

> Hello fellow meteorite (and asteroid) aficionados,
>
> Yes. There is a mapping spectrometer in the visual and infrared on board
> the Dawn spacecraft:
>> VIR, the hyperspectral imaging
>> spectrometer onboard Dawn, with a spectral range
>> 0.25-5.1 μm
> http://www.hou.usra.edu/meetings/lpsc2015/pdf/1365.pdf
>
>
> Don't worry; we all want to know about those mysterious bright spots on
> Ceres. Yesterday I heard a talk by Matthew Izawa (U. of Winnipeg) on
> this very topic. From the Planetary Sciences Institute website:
> http://www.psi.edu/
>>
>>   Composition of Ceres’ Bright Spots
>>
>> Wednesday, September 9, 2015
>> Matthew
>> Izawa
>>
>> Abstract:  The dwarf planet Ceres, located at a mean solar distance of
>> ~2.8 Astronomical Units, is the largest (diameter ~950 km) object in
>> the main asteroid belt between Mars and Jupiter. Several evolution
>> models suggest a differentiated body with potential geologic activity.
>> One of the objectives of the Dawn mission during the Ceres encounter
>> is to search for signs of past or present geological activity,
>> including processes that might be linked to observations of transient
>> water vapour events. One of the most striking features of Ceres’
>> surface are localized bright areas, which are commonly associated with
>> impact craters. Of particular interest is a bright pit on the floor of
>> a 90.5 km diameter crater named Occator that shows signs of activity
>> in the form of water ice sublimation. I will present evidence that the
>> Ceres bright spots are hydrated salt deposits, using a combination of
>> Dawn Framing Camera (FC) multispectral observations, laboratory
>> spectroscopy, and geochemical data from carbonaceous chondrite
>> leaching experiments. Based on previous spectroscopic mineral
>> identifications, a range of candidate high albedo materials were
>> investigated including ice, Mg-carbonates, brucite, saponite and
>> ammonium saponite, (Mg,Na) sulphate salts, and (Mg,Na) halide salts.
>> Of these, the best matches are to mixtures of hydrated Mg sulfates
>> along with dark ‘average Ceres material’, which may be broadly
>> analogous to aqueously altered carbonaceous chondrite. The bright
>> spots may be forming as a result of sublimation of water from brines
>> exposed near the surface, leaving behind a chemical lag deposit of
>> former solutes, which are predicted on experimental and theoretical
>> grounds to be dominated by MgSO_4 hydrates.
>>
>
> Best regards,
> Dolores Hill
> UA-Lunar and Planetary Laboratory
> https://www.lpl.arizona.edu/
> http://www.asteroidmission.org/
>
> On 9/11/2015 12:00 PM, Greg B. via Meteorite-list wrote:
>> There is now a very close up high resolution of the bright spots in
>> one of the craters. Why are we still
>> in the dark as to the composition of the bright material?  Does NASA
>> have a spectrometer on the craft. If so why can't they determine what
>> the white substance is composed of. If they do not have a spectrometer
>> on the craft.
>> ..what were they thinking!!
>> Greg B.
>> __
>>
>> Visit our Facebook page https://www.facebook.com/meteoritecentral and
>> the Archives at http://www.meteorite-list-archives.com
>> Meteorite-list mailing list
>> Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com
>> https://pairlist3.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
>
> --
> Dolores H. Hill
> Sr. Research Specialist
> Lunar & Planetary Laboratory
> Kuiper Space Sciences Bldg. #92
> The University of Arizona
> 1629 E. University Blvd.
> Tucson, AZ 85721
> http://www.lpl.arizona.edu/
>
> OSIRIS-REx Asteroid Sample Return Mission Communication & Public
> Engagement Team
> Lead OSIRIS-REx Ambassadors program
> Co-lead OSIRIS-REx Target Asteroids! citizen science program
> Co-coordinator Target NEOs! observing program of the Astronomical League
>
> http://osiris-rex.lpl.arizona.edu/
> http://osiris-rex.lpl.arizona.edu/?q=target_asteroids
> http://www.astroleague.org/files/u3/NEO_HomePage.pdf
>
> __
>
> Visit our Facebook page https://www.facebook.com/meteoritecentral and the
> Archives at http://www.meteorite-list-archives.com
> Meteorite-list mailing list
> Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com
> https://pairlist3.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
>


__

Visit our Facebook page https://www.facebook.com/meteoritecentral and the 
Archives at http://www.meteorite-list-archives.com
Meteorite-list mailing list
Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com
https://pairlist3.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list

Re: [meteorite-list] NASA mission provides closest ever look at dwarf planet Ceres

[Larry Lebofsky via Meteorite-list]

Hi Shawn:

The short answer is, unfortunately, probably not.

Ceres generally looks similar (but not a match) to CIs and CMs (clay
minerals). This we have known for many years. However, there also seems to
be brucite (magnesium hydroxide) which is an indication of low temperature
hydrothermal alteration  of olivine-rich(?) minerals on Ceres. This is not
inconsistent with what we seem to be seeing on Ceres with what appears to
be bright spots (related to craters or geysers).

http://www.nature.com/ngeo/journal/v2/n4/full/ngeo478.html

Larry

 Hello Lister

 I wonder if I have a meteorite from Ceres in my collection?

 Shawn Alan
 IMCA 1633
 ebay store http://www.ebay.com/sch/imca1633ny/m.html
 Website http://meteoritefalls.com

 Link:
 http://phys.org/news/2015-06-nasa-mission-closest-dwarf-planet.html
 __

 Visit our Facebook page https://www.facebook.com/meteoritecentral and the
 Archives at http://www.meteorite-list-archives.com
 Meteorite-list mailing list
 Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com
 https://pairlist3.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list



__

Visit our Facebook page https://www.facebook.com/meteoritecentral and the 
Archives at http://www.meteorite-list-archives.com
Meteorite-list mailing list
Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com
https://pairlist3.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list

Re: [meteorite-list] Ceres and Meteorites?

[Larry Lebofsky via Meteorite-list]

Hi Mike:

Two short answers:

1. Closest to the CI chondrites

2. Probably no meteorites from Ceres: nothing looks quite like it and I
think it is not near a resonance that would easily ship chunks of Ceres to
Earth (unlike Vesta).

Larry

 Hi List,

 Has Ceres ever been connected to any type of meteorite?

 Best regards,

 MikeG

 --
 -
 Web - http://www.galactic-stone.com
 Facebook - http://www.facebook.com/galacticstone
 Twitter - http://twitter.com/galacticstone
 Pinterest - http://pinterest.com/galacticstone
 -
 __

 Visit the Archives at http://www.meteorite-list-archives.com
 Meteorite-list mailing list
 Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com
 https://pairlist3.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list



__

Visit the Archives at http://www.meteorite-list-archives.com
Meteorite-list mailing list
Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com
https://pairlist3.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list

Re: [meteorite-list] Meteorite Strikes Down Thief During Armed Robbery

[Larry Lebofsky via Meteorite-list]

I used to use their articles in my class and at teacher workshops:

WWII bomber found in a lunar crater (the plane was about the size of the
100 km diameter crater)

I did a teacher workshop about observing the Moon and told them that this
would be their last chance to observe the Moon with their students as the
Moon was predicted to blow up (nuclear waste?) in less than 6 months. The
list goes on...

Larry



 I am pretty sure this is a satirical website.

 The World Weekly News was my favorite pastime while standing in the
 checkout line at the supermarket. I learned plenty and I'm certain I would
 not have found these important stories anywhere else:

 Hitler Seen Riding a Camel by the Pyramids (with photos!)

 The Amazing Bat Boy sightings

 The sordid antics of The Creepy Nils Farbu

 Alien Visits White House (photos with the President!)

 and so on...

 Beyond satire and into the realm of pure BS. Sadly, the readership votes
 :(

 Paul Swartz
 __

 Visit the Archives at http://www.meteorite-list-archives.com
 Meteorite-list mailing list
 Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com
 https://pairlist3.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list



__

Visit the Archives at http://www.meteorite-list-archives.com
Meteorite-list mailing list
Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com
https://pairlist3.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list

Re: [meteorite-list] Meteorite Strikes Down Thief During Armed Robbery

[Larry Lebofsky via Meteorite-list]

Ed

I used to be an editor and need to correct your last sentence. A few
letters missing and a grammar correction. Photos don't lie should have
been Photoshop doesn't lie.

Larry

 Paul, most of what The Weekly World News is fabricated, tongue-in-cheek
 humor.  I used to read the front page headlines while waiting in the
 checkout line at the grocery store.

 However, I can say with 100% certainty that Bat Boy is real, and yes,
 the
 President did meet with a space alien at the white house!  Photos don't
 lie!!!

 ;-)

 Ed

 - Original Message -
 From: Paul Swartz via Meteorite-list
 meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com
 To: meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com
 Sent: Saturday, February 28, 2015 10:31 AM
 Subject: [meteorite-list] Meteorite Strikes Down Thief During Armed
 Robbery


 I am pretty sure this is a satirical website.

 The World Weekly News was my favorite pastime while standing in the
 checkout line at the supermarket. I learned plenty and I'm certain I
 would
 not have found these important stories anywhere else:

 Hitler Seen Riding a Camel by the Pyramids (with photos!)

 The Amazing Bat Boy sightings

 The sordid antics of The Creepy Nils Farbu

 Alien Visits White House (photos with the President!)

 and so on...

 Beyond satire and into the realm of pure BS. Sadly, the readership votes
 :(

 Paul Swartz
 __

 Visit the Archives at http://www.meteorite-list-archives.com
 Meteorite-list mailing list
 Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com
 https://pairlist3.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list

 __

 Visit the Archives at http://www.meteorite-list-archives.com
 Meteorite-list mailing list
 Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com
 https://pairlist3.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list



__

Visit the Archives at http://www.meteorite-list-archives.com
Meteorite-list mailing list
Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com
https://pairlist3.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list

Re: [meteorite-list] Dawn Captures Sharper Images of Ceres

[Larry Lebofsky via Meteorite-list]

Graham:

I am amazed by how cratered (old) the surface looks. I am still
personally very interested in how bright the whitish areas actually are.
Icy?

Larry


 Wonderful!...now seeing good detail...can't wait for a closer look and
 the data analysis.

 Graham

 On Tue, Feb 17, 2015 at 4:44 PM, Ron Baalke via Meteorite-list
 meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com wrote:

 http://www.jpl.nasa.gov/news/news.php?feature=4485

 Dawn Captures Sharper Images of Ceres
 Jet Propulsion Laboratory
 February 17, 2015

 Craters and mysterious bright spots are beginning to pop out in the
 latest images of Ceres from NASA's Dawn spacecraft. These images, taken
 Feb. 12 at a distance of 52,000 miles (83,000 kilometers) from the dwarf
 planet, pose intriguing questions for the science team to explore as the
 spacecraft nears its destination.

 The image is available at:

 http://www.jpl.nasa.gov/spaceimages/details.php?id=PIA19056

 As we slowly approach the stage, our eyes transfixed on Ceres and her
 planetary dance, we find she has beguiled us but left us none the
 wiser, said Chris Russell, principal investigator of the Dawn mission,
 based at UCLA. We expected to be surprised; we did not expect to be
 this puzzled.

 Dawn will be gently captured into orbit around Ceres on March 6. As the
 spacecraft delivers better images and other data, the science team will
 be investigating the nature and composition of the dwarf planet,
 including the nature of the craters and bright spots that are coming
 into focus. The latest images, which have a resolution of 4.9 miles (7.8
 kilometers) per pixel, represent the sharpest views of Ceres to date.

 The spacecraft explored the giant asteroid Vesta for 14 months during
 2011 and 2012. Scientists gained numerous insights about the geological
 history of this body and saw its cratered surface in fine detail. By
 comparing Vesta and Ceres, they will develop a better understanding of
 the formation of the solar system.

 Dawn's mission to Vesta and Ceres is managed by the Jet Propulsion
 Laboratory for NASA's Science Mission Directorate in Washington. Dawn is
 a project of the directorate's Discovery Program, managed by NASA's
 Marshall Space Flight Center in Huntsville, Alabama. UCLA is responsible
 for overall Dawn mission science. Orbital ATK, Inc., of Dulles,
 Virginia, designed and built the spacecraft. JPL is managed for NASA by
 the California Institute of Technology in Pasadena. The framing cameras
 were provided by the Max Planck Institute for Solar System Research,
 Gottingen, Germany, with significant contributions by the German
 Aerospace Center (DLR) Institute of Planetary Research, Berlin, and in
 coordination with the Institute of Computer and Communication Network
 Engineering, Braunschweig. The visible and infrared mapping spectrometer
 was provided by the Italian Space Agency and the Italian National
 Institute for Astrophysics, built by Selex ES, and is managed and
 operated by the Italian Institute for Space Astrophysics and
 Planetology, Rome. The gamma ray and neutron detector was built by Los
 Alamos National Laboratory, New Mexico, and is operated by the Planetary
 Science Institute, Tucson, Arizona.

 For more information about Dawn, visit:

 http://dawn.jpl.nasa.gov

 Media Contact

 Elizabeth Landau
 NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory, Pasadena, Calif.
 818-354-6425
 elizabeth.lan...@jpl.nasa.gov

 2015-061
 __

 Visit the Archives at http://www.meteorite-list-archives.com
 Meteorite-list mailing list
 Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com
 https://pairlist3.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
 __

 Visit the Archives at http://www.meteorite-list-archives.com
 Meteorite-list mailing list
 Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com
 https://pairlist3.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list



__

Visit the Archives at http://www.meteorite-list-archives.com
Meteorite-list mailing list
Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com
https://pairlist3.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list

Re: [meteorite-list] Dawn Captures Sharper Images of Ceres

[Larry Lebofsky via Meteorite-list]

Hi Graham:

The average albedo of Ceres is about 0.09, i.e., it reflects 9% of the
light. Sort of gray. This is from telescopic observations, not Dawn. I
think that makes it at least 50% more reflective than Comet
67P/Churyumov–Gerasimenko. Most dark asteroids have albedos of about
0.05. The best I can get out of anyone I have asked (as of a week or two
ago) is that the white spots are only a little more reflective than the
rest of Ceres.

The bottom line is that I do not know if these images are well-calibrated.
Time will tell.

Maybe someone on the list knows more and is able to clarify this.

The number and size of the craters surprises me.

Larry

 Yes Larry...been waiting a long time to find out what Ceres looks
 likereally looking forward to the next weeks of more detail and
 the analysis of data...and of course the decisions about those whiter
 areasI wonder what the actual brightness is...perhaps it is just
 the camera correction and the surface is mostly very dark...anyone
 know?

 Graham

 On Tue, Feb 17, 2015 at 10:36 PM,  lebof...@lpl.arizona.edu wrote:
 Graham:

 I am amazed by how cratered (old) the surface looks. I am still
 personally very interested in how bright the whitish areas actually are.
 Icy?

 Larry


 Wonderful!...now seeing good detail...can't wait for a closer look and
 the data analysis.

 Graham

 On Tue, Feb 17, 2015 at 4:44 PM, Ron Baalke via Meteorite-list
 meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com wrote:

 http://www.jpl.nasa.gov/news/news.php?feature=4485

 Dawn Captures Sharper Images of Ceres
 Jet Propulsion Laboratory
 February 17, 2015

 Craters and mysterious bright spots are beginning to pop out in the
 latest images of Ceres from NASA's Dawn spacecraft. These images,
 taken
 Feb. 12 at a distance of 52,000 miles (83,000 kilometers) from the
 dwarf
 planet, pose intriguing questions for the science team to explore as
 the
 spacecraft nears its destination.

 The image is available at:

 http://www.jpl.nasa.gov/spaceimages/details.php?id=PIA19056

 As we slowly approach the stage, our eyes transfixed on Ceres and her
 planetary dance, we find she has beguiled us but left us none the
 wiser, said Chris Russell, principal investigator of the Dawn
 mission,
 based at UCLA. We expected to be surprised; we did not expect to be
 this puzzled.

 Dawn will be gently captured into orbit around Ceres on March 6. As
 the
 spacecraft delivers better images and other data, the science team
 will
 be investigating the nature and composition of the dwarf planet,
 including the nature of the craters and bright spots that are coming
 into focus. The latest images, which have a resolution of 4.9 miles
 (7.8
 kilometers) per pixel, represent the sharpest views of Ceres to date.

 The spacecraft explored the giant asteroid Vesta for 14 months during
 2011 and 2012. Scientists gained numerous insights about the
 geological
 history of this body and saw its cratered surface in fine detail. By
 comparing Vesta and Ceres, they will develop a better understanding of
 the formation of the solar system.

 Dawn's mission to Vesta and Ceres is managed by the Jet Propulsion
 Laboratory for NASA's Science Mission Directorate in Washington. Dawn
 is
 a project of the directorate's Discovery Program, managed by NASA's
 Marshall Space Flight Center in Huntsville, Alabama. UCLA is
 responsible
 for overall Dawn mission science. Orbital ATK, Inc., of Dulles,
 Virginia, designed and built the spacecraft. JPL is managed for NASA
 by
 the California Institute of Technology in Pasadena. The framing
 cameras
 were provided by the Max Planck Institute for Solar System Research,
 Gottingen, Germany, with significant contributions by the German
 Aerospace Center (DLR) Institute of Planetary Research, Berlin, and in
 coordination with the Institute of Computer and Communication Network
 Engineering, Braunschweig. The visible and infrared mapping
 spectrometer
 was provided by the Italian Space Agency and the Italian National
 Institute for Astrophysics, built by Selex ES, and is managed and
 operated by the Italian Institute for Space Astrophysics and
 Planetology, Rome. The gamma ray and neutron detector was built by Los
 Alamos National Laboratory, New Mexico, and is operated by the
 Planetary
 Science Institute, Tucson, Arizona.

 For more information about Dawn, visit:

 http://dawn.jpl.nasa.gov

 Media Contact

 Elizabeth Landau
 NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory, Pasadena, Calif.
 818-354-6425
 elizabeth.lan...@jpl.nasa.gov

 2015-061
 __

 Visit the Archives at http://www.meteorite-list-archives.com
 Meteorite-list mailing list
 Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com
 https://pairlist3.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
 __

 Visit the Archives at http://www.meteorite-list-archives.com
 Meteorite-list mailing list
 Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com
 https://pairlist3.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list

Re: [meteorite-list] NEO Asteroids Close Approach Data 2000-2014 Graphs and Analysis 10 LD - 0.1 LD

[Larry Lebofsky via Meteorite-list]

It rains in Tucson in the summer! A great example of observational bias.

Larry

 List,
 Some of you may find this information very interesting!
 NEO Asteroids Close Approach Data 2000-2014 Graphs and Analysis  10 LD -
  0.1 LD
 ©2015 23.1.15- ANALYSIS by ESSICO / LUNAR METEORITE HUNTER
 Source Data NASA/JPL

 http://lunarmeteoritehunters.blogspot.jp/2015/01/neo-asteroids-close-approach-data-2000.html

 Best Regards, Dirk Ross...Tokyo
 __

 Visit the Archives at http://www.meteorite-list-archives.com
 Meteorite-list mailing list
 Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com
 https://pairlist3.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list



__

Visit the Archives at http://www.meteorite-list-archives.com
Meteorite-list mailing list
Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com
https://pairlist3.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list

Re: [meteorite-list] 8,416 Newly Discovered NEOs Since 01JAN2015!

[Larry Lebofsky via Meteorite-list]

Dirk

This is the TOTAL number of all asteroids that have been observed, not
just NEOs.

Larry

 List,
 Some incoming perhaps mostly not.
 WOW! 8,461 NEOs Discovered Since 01JAN2015
 http://lunarmeteoritehunters.blogspot.jp/2015/01/high-number-of-recently-discovered-neo.html

 Thank you to the hundred or so persons that keep an eye on the sky!

 Dirk Ross...Tokyo
 __

 Visit the Archives at http://www.meteorite-list-archives.com
 Meteorite-list mailing list
 Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com
 https://pairlist3.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list



__

Visit the Archives at http://www.meteorite-list-archives.com
Meteorite-list mailing list
Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com
https://pairlist3.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list

Re: [meteorite-list] Vesta

[Larry Lebofsky via Meteorite-list]

Here is the abstract to the original paper published in Science in 1970.

Asteroid vesta: spectral reflectivity and compositional implications.

McCord TB, Adams JB, Johnson TV.

Abstract

The spectral reflectivity (0.30 to 1.10 microns) of several asteroids has
been measured for the first time. The reflection spectrum for Vesta
contains a strong absorption band centered near 0.9 micron and a weaker
absorption feature between 0.5 and 0.6 micron. The reflectivity decreases
strongly in the ultraviolet. The reflection spectrum for the asteroid
Pallas and probably for Ceres does not contain the 0.9-micron band. Vesta
shows the strongest and best-defined absorption bands yet seen in the
reflection spectrum for the solid surface of an object in the solar
system. The strong 0.9-micron band arises from electronic absorptions in
ferrous iron on the M2 site of a magnesian pyroxene. Comparison with
laboratory measurements on meteorites and Apollo 11 samples indicates that
the surface of Vesta has a composition very similar to that of certain
basaltic achondrites.

Larry

 Hi Andre,

 Even before the NASA Dawn program, scientists had made a strong
 connection between the HED meteorites and Vesta.  The brief paper at
 the link below gives a general explanation of the connection.  In the
 years since, Dawn has solidified that connection.

From the text :

 Many lines of evidence indicate that
 meteorites are derived from the asteroid belt but, in
 general, identifying any meteorite class with a particular
 asteroid has not been possible. One exception
 is asteroid 4 Vesta, where a strong case can be made
 that it is the ultimate source of the howardite-eucritediogenite
 (HED) family of basaltic achondrites. Visible
 and near infrared reflectance spectra (Fig. 2) first
 pointed to a connection between Vesta and the basaltic
 achondrites [4]. Experimental petrology demonstrated
 that the eucrites (the relatively unaltered and unmixed
 basaltic achondrites) were the product of approximately
 a 10% melts [5]. Studies of siderophile element
 partitioning suggested that this melt was the residue
 of an asteroidal-scale magma ocean [6]. Mass
 balance considerations point to a parent body that had
 its surface excavated, but remains intact [7]. Modern
 telescopic spectroscopy has identified kilometer-scale
 Vestoids between Vesta and the 3:1 orbit-orbit resonance
 with Jupiter [8]. Dynamical simulations of impact
 into Vesta demonstrate the plausibility of ejecting
 relatively unshocked material at velocities consistent
 with these astronomical observations [9]. Hubble
 Space Telescope images (Fig. 3) show a 460 km diameter
 impact basin at the south pole of Vesta [10].
 Spectroscopic studies of near-Earth asteroids revealed
 three small objects with basaltic composition which are
 arguably the proximal source of the HED meteorites,
 having reached one of Jupiter's resonances faster than
 the objects observed by [10] after which they quickly
 evolved into Mars crossing objects and then near-Earth
 objects. [11].

 Hope this helps.

 Best regards,

 MikeG

 --
 -
 Web - http://www.galactic-stone.com
 Facebook - http://www.facebook.com/galacticstone
 Twitter - http://twitter.com/galacticstone
 Pinterest - http://pinterest.com/galacticstone
 -



 On 1/16/15, Deborah Anne K. Martin via Meteorite-list
 meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com wrote:
 Hello all,

 Could someone explain to me exactly how it was determined that certain
 meteorites, like Tatahouine, originally came from Vesta ?

 I appreciate the help.

 Andre
 __

 Visit the Archives at http://www.meteorite-list-archives.com
 Meteorite-list mailing list
 Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com
 https://pairlist3.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list

 __

 Visit the Archives at http://www.meteorite-list-archives.com
 Meteorite-list mailing list
 Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com
 https://pairlist3.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list



__

Visit the Archives at http://www.meteorite-list-archives.com
Meteorite-list mailing list
Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com
https://pairlist3.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list

Re: [meteorite-list] Science Journal: Earth's water didn't come from comets, scientists now say

[Larry Lebofsky via Meteorite-list]

Hi Kelly:

Thanks for posting this.

I have not read the original article, but I assume that when they present
measurements from asteroids, this is really measurements from meteorites
which came from asteroids.

Larry

 hi, Michael...

 I am curious how such a definitive conclusion can be reached from the
 analysis of a singular cometary body?

 several others have chimed in, but let me try to add something new: it's
 not
 just this one object, really. to date we have D:H ratios for about a dozen
 comets, including one (Halley) measured in situ.

 prior to this result, *all* of the comets derived from the Oort Cloud had
 D:H
 ratios that are much too high to be compatible with Earth - and yet the
 two
 Jupiter-Family Comets that had been measured (by ESA's Herschel space
 telescope) showed D:H ratios *very* close to Earth's. there was hope.

 but 67P is also a JFC, and its D:H ratio is the highest yet measured.
 statistically, based on that alone, it's very unlikely that only JFCs with
 the
 terrestrial D:H ratio would have struck Earth. it also implied that the
 Kuiper
 Belt (source of the JFCs) must comprise objects from a mix of sources.

 a plot of all the D:H ratios determined to date is in the Science paper,
 and
 that plot appears in Sky  Telescope's write-up of this result:
 http://www.skyandtelescope.com/astronomy-news/rosetta-earths-water-not-from-com
 ets-120920141/


 clear skies,
 Kelly

 
 J. Kelly Beatty
 Senior Contributing Editor
 SKY  TELESCOPE
 617-416-9991
 SkyandTelescope.com

 __

 Visit the Archives at http://www.meteorite-list-archives.com
 Meteorite-list mailing list
 Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com
 https://pairlist3.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list



__

Visit the Archives at http://www.meteorite-list-archives.com
Meteorite-list mailing list
Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com
https://pairlist3.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list

Re: [meteorite-list] Still Arguing About Pluto

[Larry Lebofsky via Meteorite-list]

And the Sun is a dwarf star, Sterling.

Larry


 List,

 The argument about Pluto The Planet
 or Pluto The Small Body continues:
 http://www.travelerstoday.com/articles/12524/20141002/pluto-planet-again-sta
 tus-2014-still-undecided-astronomy-debate-ongoing.htm

 The Harvard-Smithsonian Center for
 Astrophysics said in a press release
 that a dwarf fruit tree is still a
 small fruit tree, and a dwarf hamster
 is still a small hamster. In order to
 convince others that Pluto is a planet
 again, the center held a debate Sept. 18
 to figure out the pros and cons. They let
 the audience vote, and the audience
 agreed, therefore for them 'Pluto IS
 a planet again.'

 Some quarrels never end...

 Sterling Webb

 __

 Visit the Archives at http://www.meteorite-list-archives.com
 Meteorite-list mailing list
 Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com
 https://pairlist3.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list



__

Visit the Archives at http://www.meteorite-list-archives.com
Meteorite-list mailing list
Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com
https://pairlist3.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list

Re: [meteorite-list] Meteorite Sculpture Will Be International Space Station’s First Artwork

[Larry Lebofsky via Meteorite-list]

Hi Art:

But not the first meteorite to be brought back to space from the Earth. If
I remember correctly, about 20 years ago (do not remember which mission)
Tom Jones brought a meteorite (do not remember what it was) up in the
Shuttle. It may have been the same flight that he brought a Zuni Fetish up
(and back).

Larry

 Interesting idea and article:
 http://news.artnet.com/art-world/meteorite-sculpture-will-be-international-space-stations-first-artwork-67923

 -Art
 __

 Visit the Archives at http://www.meteorite-list-archives.com
 Meteorite-list mailing list
 Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com
 http://three.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list



__

Visit the Archives at http://www.meteorite-list-archives.com
Meteorite-list mailing list
Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com
http://three.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list

Re: [meteorite-list] Chelyabinsk Meteorite Sheds Light on Dinosaur Extinction Mystery

[Larry Lebofsky via Meteorite-list]

Hi Mike:

That is not what the press release says.

It is still thought that the KT impactor was carbonaceous. There was also
thought, based on being dark and formation age of the BAF (when the parent
body was disrupted), that the BAF was the source of the KT impactor.
However, there is a better spectral match between the Baptistina Asteroid
Family members and the shocked-darkened material seen in the Chelyabinsk
meteorites than there is between these members and carbonaceous
meteorites. This implies that the BAF members are shock-darkened and not
carbonaceous.

Larry

 This is an interesting theory.  But, how does Chelyabinsk completely
 rule out a carbonaceous KT impactor?  Until we recover an extant
 sample of the KT impactor, the question is still unanswered.  Yes,
 there are dark meteorites that are not carbon-rich.  But how does this
 fact rule out a carbonaceous (or any) impactor for the KT impact?  Am
 I missing something?

 Best regards,

 MikeG

 --
 -
 Web - http://www.galactic-stone.com
 Facebook - http://www.facebook.com/galacticstone
 Twitter - http://twitter.com/galacticstone
 Pinterest - http://pinterest.com/galacticstone
 -


 On 7/16/14, Ron Baalke via Meteorite-list
 meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com wrote:


 NEWS RELEASE FROM THE PLANETARY SCIENCE INSTITUTE

 FROM:
 Alan Fischer
 Public Information Officer
 Planetary Science Institute
 520-382-0411
 520-622-6300
 fisc...@psi.edu

 Russian Meteorite Sheds Light on Dinosaur Extinction Mystery

 July 16, 2014, Tucson, Ariz. -- A long-standing debate about the source
 of
 the asteroid that impacted the Earth and caused the extinction of the
 dinosaurs has been put to rest thanks to the Chelyabinsk meteorite that
 disintegrated over Russia in February 2013, a new paper published in the
 journal Icarus shows.

 Astronomers have debated whether the dinosaur killer was linked to the
 breakup of a large asteroid forming the Baptistina Asteroid Family (BAF)
 beyond Mars, some of which ended up on Earth-crossing orbits. The
 asteroid
 impacting Earth is thought to have been dark and carbonaceous. The BAF
 hypothesis was bolstered by them being dark and with a spectral shape
 similar to carbonaceous meteorites.

 Analysis of the Chelyabinsk meteorite shows that shock produced during
 catastrophic disruption of a large asteroid can darken otherwise bright
 silicate material. Shock darkening was first reported by Dan Britt (now
 at
 the University of Central Florida) in the early 1990s. The Chelyabinsk
 meteorite has both bright unshocked and dark shocked material. However,
 the
 details of the spectra of the dark Chelyabinsk material closely
 reproduces
 spectral signatures seen with members of the Baptistina Asteroid Family,
 said Planetary Science Institute Research Scientist Vishnu Reddy, lead
 author of  Chelyabinsk meteorite explains unusual spectral properties
 of
 Baptistina Asteroid Family that appears in Icarus.

 Shock and impact melt can make bright asteroids dark, Reddy said. In
 other words, not all dark asteroids are rich in carbon as once thought.
 The latest measurements rule out the possibility for the Baptistina
 family
 being the source of the K/T impactor, he added.

 'The link between the K/T impacator, thought to be carbonaceous, and
 BAF,
 has been proved invalid, Reddy said.

 Chelyabinsk provided a great opportunity to see the mixture of shocked
 and
 unshocked material in a single meteorite, Reddy said while cautioning
 that
 no clear evidence exists that the Russian meteorite itself came from the
 Baptistina family.

 The new finding has implications for hazards from Near-Earth Objects
 and
 for mining asteroids for space-based resources, Reddy said. A
 potential
 target identified as primitive and rich in volatiles/organics and carbon
 based on its spectral colors could in fact be just shocked material with
 entirely different composition.

 PSI researchers David P. O'Brien and Lucille Le Corre were among the
 co-authors on the paper.

 This research work was supported by grants from NASA's Planetary Mission
 Data Analysis Program, NEOO Program and Planetary Geology and Geophysics
 Program.


 CONTACT:
 Vishnu Reddy
 Senior Scientist
 808-342-8932
 re...@psi.edu

 PSI INFORMATION:
 Mark V. Sykes
 Director
 520-622-6300
 sy...@psi.edu


 __

 Visit the Archives at http://www.meteorite-list-archives.com
 Meteorite-list mailing list
 Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com
 http://three.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list

 __

 Visit the Archives at http://www.meteorite-list-archives.com
 Meteorite-list mailing list
 Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com
 http://three.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list



__

Visit the Archives at 

[meteorite-list] Meteorite found in Croatia seven years ago, question

[Larry Lebofsky via Meteorite-list]

Hi all

We were just told about a meteorite that was found in a park in Croatia
back in 2008 or 2009. Does anyone know the name of it and where it is now?

Thanks

Larry Lebofsky

__

Visit the Archives at http://www.meteorite-list-archives.com
Meteorite-list mailing list
Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com
http://three.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list

Re: [meteorite-list] COMETS AND CARBONACEOUS CHONDRITES

[Larry Lebofsky]

Hi Doug:

Tell this to the astronauts in their space suits.

I wish I still had access to my old thermal model programs so that I could 
give you real answers, but I will do my best.

If you look up the surface temperture of the day side of the Moon, you get 107 
degrees C. However, the noon temperture is well above 120 C (130 C ?).


The mean and high temperture of an object is dependent on:

Distance from the Sun

Its reflectance (how much sunlight it absorbs)

How fast it is rotating

The size of the particles that make up the material (sand vs. rock)

The lower the albdeo, the more sunlight you absorb, the hotter you get.
The faster you rotate and the rockier your surface, the more heat you dump out 
the night side, so the lower your highest temperture.

The Moon's day/night cycle is 29 days (slow) and its reflectance is 12%, so it 
gets fairly hot at noon.

A typical NEO will rotate much faster, but if a C asteroid, it will have a 
much lower albedo (maybe 5% or 6%, but that really is not that much more 
energy since the absorbed energy is 88% vs 95%). Still, the asteroid will 
reach average daytime tempertures very close to 100 degrees C. The interior 
will be cooler (insulated), but will still be warm depending on the object's 
mean distance from the Sun.

If anything is hard pressed to get above freesing at the Earth's distance, why 
does it get so hot on the surface of the Earth in the summer even though the 
Earth reflects 30% of the light that hits it?  Go stand outside in July and 
tell me you are cold!

Remember that the volatiles (water) are lcked in the minerals themselves 
(clays) and can withstand vacuum and moderate heating with being lost to space.

Larry
Quoting MexicoDoug [EMAIL PROTECTED]:

 Hello Larry,
 
 In the case of carbonaceous chondrites, I believe your inference that Just
 being in an orbit that takes them near the Earth would warm them up to 100 c
 or so is way too high, and that the right number in direct Sunlight hovers
 around freezing (0 degrees C).  There is that other related subject of
 whether chondritic meteorites are cool to touch when they land...but I'm not
 going there...
 
 To reach 100 C, by just being in an orbit near X, taking a carbonaceous
 chondrite as a model, I believe you would need to be a third of the way
 closer to Mercury's orbit from Venus' in today's Solar System.
 
 You mention Spitzer data.  For comets on epic journeys through the Solar
 System, which have possibly been orbiting over 4.5 Billion years through all
 phases of development, there are many possible alternate sources of
 meaningful temporary heating during this history that could account for the
 gentle-moderate heating you mention, likely reasonable sized impacts and
 more so, shock heating from barreling through precursor Solar nebula
 components from their own soup they were formed out of in situ, not to
 mention other lower probabilities over time that chance favors.
 
 Maybe you meant something else?  Even a lump of nickel iron is hard pressed
 to make 100 C in the Sunshine in Earth's neighborhood in outer space.  The
 high volatiles concentrations in carbonaceous chondrites are supportive of
 what I say, I think, though of course they are NOT conclusive.
 
 Best wishes,
 Doug
 P.S. The Andromeda Galaxy, which dwarfs our own, may even collide with the
 Milky Way in 3 Billion years, two-thirds of the Sun's current age.
 

__
Meteorite-list mailing list
Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com
http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list

Re: [meteorite-list] COMETS AND CARBONACEOUS CHONDRITES

[Larry Lebofsky]

Hi Sterling:

Not a bad summary. However, do not know where you got the heated above 50 
absolute. Much too low. Just being in an orbit that takes them near the Earth 
would warm them up to 100 c or so. Some clearly have not been heated much 
above that, but at the same time, since they contain water of hydration, they 
had to be warm enough to have had liquid water (clays are an alteration 
product).

Until the Spitzer observations of Deep Impact, it was thought by many people 
(but not all) that one would not find hydrated silicates in comets (too cold). 
There is still some question about the Spitzer observations, but have not seen 
anything is the Lunar and Planetary Science Conference last March.

Larry

Quoting Sterling K. Webb [EMAIL PROTECTED]:

 Hi, E.P.,
 
 
 The truth is we really don't know what comets
 and asteroids actually are, or whether there's a real
 distinction between them, or if they are just keywords
 derived (mistakenly) from the two extremes of a
 continuous spectrum of bodies with every intermediate
 state fully represented.
 
 There are comets that die and turn into
 asteroids, and there are asteroids that suddenly
 develop a coma and become comets. But the
 two terms may not be a descriptions of two
 essentially different classes of bodies at all. After
 we sample and/or visit 50 or 100 of them, we'll have
 a much better idea...
 
 The association of carbonaceous chondrites with
 comets is supposed by many, but not ever demonstrated.
 No meteorite has ever been definitively linked to a comet.
 There are no known samples of cometary material. (We
 may have it, but if we do, we don't know it...) On the
 chance that CC's may be linked to cometary material
 or be similar to it...
 
 Here's a summary on Carbonaceous Chondrites
 (quickly ripped from the Net, not my data-leaky
 brain). The metal content runs from 50% for
 Bencubbinites, 15% for CH type, down to about
 1% for other classes. Some classes have clearly
 never been warmed about 50 degrees absolute;
 some people have suggested that the CH class
 formed intra-Mercurially. Obviously, all carbon
 containing meteorites didn't start out in the same
 single nursery! Another indicator that the heresy
 that the early system was very well stirred might
 be true.
 
 Carbonaceous chondrites account for about
 3% of all known chondrites. They are classified
 according to the proportion and size of the chondrules
 they contain (one rare subclass lacks chondrules).
 The average contents of CC's are:  Carbon, 2.0%;
 Metals, 1.8%; Nitrogen, 0.2%; Silicates, 83.0%;
 Water, 11.0%. At most, they can be 20% water and
 can contain as much as 4% carbon. Carbonaceous
 Chondrites contain around 5% kerogen.
 
 The sub-classes are:
 
 CI chondrites, only a handful of which are known, are
 named for the Ivuna meteorite. They have very few
 chondrules and are composed mostly of crumbly,
 fine-grained material that has been changed a lot by
 exposure to water on the parent asteroid. As a result
 of this aqueous alteration, CI chondrites contain up
 to 20% water in addition to various minerals altered
 in the presence of water, such as clay-like hydrous
 phyllosilicates and iron oxide in the form of magnetite.
 They also harbor organic matter, including polycyclic
 aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) and amino acids,
 which makes them important in the search for clues
 to the origin of life in the universe. It remains uncertain
 whether they once had chondrules and refractory
 inclusions that were later destroyed during the formation
 of hydrous minerals, or they lacked chondrules from
 the outset. CIs have never been heated above 50°C,
 indicating that they came from the outer part of the
 solar nebula. They are especially interesting because
 their chemical compositions, with the exception of
 hydrogen and helium, closely resemble that of the
 Sun's photosphere. They thus have the most primitive
 compositions of any meteorites and are often used as
 a standard for gauging how much chemical fractionation
 has been experienced by materials formed throughout
 the solar system.
 
 CM chondrites are named for the Mighei meteorite
 that fell in Mykolaiv province, Ukraine, in 1889.They
 contain small chondrules (typically 0.1 to 0.3 mm in
 diameter) and similar-sized refractory inclusions.
 They also show less aqueous alteration than, and
 about half the water content of, CI chondrites. Like
 CIs, however, they contain a wealth of organic material -
 more than 230 different amino acids in the case of the
 famous Murchison meteorite. Comparisons of
 reflectance spectra point to the asteroid 19 Fortuna
 or, possibly, the largest asteroid, 1 Ceres, as
 candidate parent bodies.
 
 CV chondites are named for the Vigarano meteorite
 that fell in Italy in 1910. They resemble ordinary
 chondrites and have large, well-defined chondrules
 of magnesium-rich olivine, often surrounded by iron
 sulfide, in a dark-gray matrix of mainly iron-rich olivine.
 They 

Re: [meteorite-list] 2003 EL61, IN PERSON

[Larry Lebofsky]

Sterling:

And you wonder why some of us are concerned with the dynamical definitions for 
planets. Most of us do not understand the models and even the dynamicists 
cannot come to agreement.

Oh, something to remember, when things bump into each other early on, things 
stick thanks to there being a lot of stuff in similar orbits. Once that is 
gone, impact velocities go up and things break up instead of accreate. If 
memory serves me (not very well these days), things should be moving slower 
relative to each other so easier to stick. I will have to check on that.

Larry 

Quoting Sterling K. Webb [EMAIL PROTECTED]:

 Hi, E.P., List,
 
 
  Yes, cometesimals  - about 75 meters or so, which
  themselves can then accrete chaotically over time,
 
 Yes, but nobody thinks cometesimals contain
 enough iron-nickel to form a differentiated body.
 They may, but nobody believes it...
 
 When I expressed a doubt about accreting big
 bodies out in the Kuiper Belt to a professional, he
 said, What else could it be? Good question.
 
  ...over time...
 
 The problem is elbow room and simple geometry.
 How much elbow room do you have? Accretion
 occurs because things bump into each other, because
 the space is crowded, like a NY cocktail party.
 
 Clearly, the Earth accreted. If it sucked up every
 rock from 0.80 AU out to 1.30 AU, it was drawing
 on a zone with an area of about 0.80 square AU's.
 (The area of a circle 1.3 AU in diameter minus the
 area of a circle 0.8 AU in diameter = the Accretion
 Zone.) Yes, it was a volume, because it had thickness,
 but it was a flat disc.
 
 It was crowded. Rocks kept meeting rocks. It
 happened in a hurry -- blam, Blam, BLAM, all done.
 10 million years? 30? 50? Opinions vary, but quick,
 all agree.
 
 Out in the Kuiper Belt, very narrowly defined as
 from 38 AU out to 48 AU, there's 1583 square AU's!
 That's almost 2000 times more room! Your odds of
 bumping into something are 2000 times smaller.
 
 Imagine you're in a ballroom with 3999 other
 people, all 4000 of you milling around in constant
 motion and blindfolded so you can't look where
 you're going: bump, Bump, BUMP.
 
 Now, imagine that you're in the SAME ballroom
 with one other person (just the two of you). What
 are the chances of you two (blindfolded and with
 ear plugs) colliding?
 
 Well, since your odds of meeting up are 2000
 times smaller, it's going to take 2000 times as long
 for it to happen. Hey, no problemo! If the Earth
 accretes in a snappy 10 million years, then objects
 in the Kuiper Belt will accrete in only... scribble,
 scribble... 20 Billion Years!
 
 No, wait! Does that sound wrong to you?
 You see the problem...
 
 Well, the theoretical dynamicists must have
 an answer, something we haven't thought of,
 right? They do indeed have solutions. What
 are they?
 
 Simple, just put 100 times more mass in the
 Kuiper Belt (or 200 times more or 500 times more)
 and it speeds things up to where bodies can accrete
 there in ONLY a billion years or less! Or more...
 
 Wow, the Kuiper Belt must be MASSIVE!
 Oh, no, they reply, the whole thing has less than
 0.10 Earth masses for all objects big and small.
 All that mass is gone...
 
 I smell a problem. It took the inner solar system,
 where things accrete in a flash, 600 million years to
 clean up the leftovers (the Late Bombardment, you
 remember; it was a big hit). The same process in the
 Kuiper Belt? With 100 times the  mass, it will take
 20 times as long (6 billion years). The leftovers
 should still be there. If not, where'd the mass go?
 
 There are lots of mass-wasting theories. I didn't
 invent that silly term; that's what they're called.
 
 Not to go on too long, the answer is: it got swept
 under the rug. There are numerous complicated and
 unlikely scenarios. Julio Fernandez and school push
 a theory in which Neptune, pumped up by a resonance
 with Saturn, spirals outward (while the other giants
 spiral inward), with Neptune pushing the KB in front
 of it, compressing it and making fast accretion happen,
 until Neptune finally stops with the KB on its doorstep,
 where Neptune can then spend billions of years
 perturbing the rest of the mass away, and leaving
 little total mass for the Kuiper Belt.
 
 Of course, they could just be WRONG about the
 mass-poor Kuiper Belt. Look a sharp, economical test
 of Kuiper Belt theory described in:
 http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v442/n7103/full/442640a.html
 The data had already been collected by NASA.
 (The full article is at:
 http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v442/n7103/full/nature04941.html)
 They found perhaps 1000 times more mass than
 theory allows. So maybe the mass is still there?
 
 One prediction of theory is that the Kuiper Belt has
 a sharply cut-off outer edge, and that past that edge,
 there are no more TNO's all the way out to the Oort
 Cloud, a great deserted and empty zone, with a sign
 at 42 AU or 48 AU 

Re: [meteorite-list] re: A break (was All Hail Eris ...) OT

[Larry Lebofsky]

Doug:

While there is no precedent for naming dwarf planets, the Small Bodies 
Nomenclature Committee of the IAU

http://www.ss.astro.umd.edu/IAU/csbn/

has authority over the naming of these objects (per the IAU resolution).

As with ALL asteroids, the discoverer has the naming rights and can use an 
appropriate name. This may be in honor of someone, some place, or a character 
from mythology or literature, for example.

There are certain rules: no political figures and no names that are the same 
or similar to existing asteroids/satellites (though Eris is close to Eros). 
Also, there may be some groups of asteroids that must meet certain naming 
requirements (Trojan asteroids must be characters from the Trojan war). I do 
not think there is any such policy for the Trans-Neptunian Objects, thus the 
names provided by Mike Brown.

I like to give the example of my wife, Nancy, who is proud of the company she 
keeps.

5048 Moriarty 1981 GC Professor Moriarty, character in the Sherlock Holmes 
stories 

5049 Sherlock 1981 VC1 Sherlock Holmes, fictional detective 

5050 Doctorwatson 1983 RD2 Dr. Watson, character in the Sherlock Holmes 
stories 

5051 Ralph 1984 SM * 

5052 Nancyruth 1984 UT3 Nancy R. Lebofsky, American educator [MPC 25443] 


3439 Lebofsky 

Quoting MexicoDoug [EMAIL PROTECTED]:

 All Hail Eris ??  Does the arrogance and sophomoronic Solar System
 smugness ever stop on our glorious stellar merry-go-round?  Even I'm getting
 dizzy from this!
 
 Now we really do have cartoon dogs naming the new planetary discoveries in
 the further reaches of the Solar System without respect - like fire hydrants
 to mark out their territory (Lucy Lawless??, huh??) I heard some more bs
 gossip that Eris was approved as another crude joke.  Backwards it spells
 Sire, a not so discrete comment on those hording the heavenly harems and
 immortalizing themselves as The Fathers siring The new race of bodies in The
 New Solar Order.
 
 What ever happened to the dearly dedicated, royally respectful, warmly
 wholesome, unadulterated and contagious, patiently passionate Clyde
 Tombaugh's of days' past; the suggestions of children -in other countries-
 naming planets.  The kinds of role models that you just can't enjoy anymore
 over the morning waffles.  Sharing, giving, vibrant  enthusiastic attitudes
 of those whose love of the heavens eclipsed all else.
 
 Sterling shall I fire up the cauldrons, ready the Tar and pluck the
 chickens' feathers for you, to finish off decisively what you're starting
 with Marco, for only sharing his thoughts and opinions ... no, I'll just
 find a safe haven somewhere in the Solar System and crawl into it to watch
 the fireworks after letting off this little bottle-rocket into the
 anarchy...
 
 Best wishes, Doug
 Unsolicited Public Defender of Public Defenders

__
Meteorite-list mailing list
Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com
http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list

RE: [meteorite-list] Pluto is Now Just a Number: 134340

[Larry Lebofsky]

Hi Michel:

Before I respond to you, 

Sterling:

I am surprised. I thought that you would have an opinion on this issue! :o)

Everything you say I agree with. Thanks for saying it for me!

And you are right. Technically, the Monor Planets Center (or whatever it 
morphs into) technically does not have the authority to reclassify Pluto. It 
is not a minor planet (or Small Solar System Body) and as such is not under 
the authority of the MPC.

Back to your question Michel:

Yes, introduce SSSBs and dwarf planets. I think that is a done deal. But there 
are still (under SSSB) asteroids and comets (though no longer an asteroid 1 
Ceres since Ceres is not an asteroid).

I think that the intent of the resolutions (trying to read their minds) was to 
create three distinct classes: planets, dwarf planets, and everything else 
that orbits the Sun. By getting rid of the term minor planet, it puts more a 
wall between the first two and the third. Why? My guess.

There is a chance (though not the intent of the vote since they could have 
used the term Classical Planets for the big eight) to consider dwarf planets 
as a class of planets (this is the way many of look at it). Time will tell how 
this works out.

Now back to Small Solar System Bodies. This is the new term for Objects 
Formally Known as Minor Planets. Under this are comets and asteroids. 
Therefore, asteroids and comets still exist and are named the old way (I would 
assume), but they are no longer minor planets. As Sterling pointed out, the 
Minor Planet Center numbers and names minor planets (now SSSBs) so they should 
continue to name asteroids and comets (differently). But, at the moment, there 
is no group with the authority to name planets or dwarf planets.

All I have to say before my morning coffee.

Larry

Quoting Michel FRANCO [EMAIL PROTECTED]:

 Hi Ron,  Sterling and list
 
 TKS for your analysis and comments.
 
 Shall we understand that there not any more asteroïds in the cosmos ? but
 SSSB  Dwarf Planets!
 
 In lecture about our beloved meteorites shall I introduce SSSB and Dwarf
 Planet to the audience.
 
 As non member of the IAU and member of the Met Soc, I'll wait to have our
 society comments. And keep on with asteroïds orbiting between Mars and
 Jupiter orbits. Yes there are some others Amor Athen, etc. but let's make
 it easy for the public.
 
 A recent poll in France showed that one third of the population was
 believing that the Sun was orbiting Earth! No comments.
 
 Best regards.
 
 Michel FRANCO
 www.caillou-noir.com
 
 
 -Message d'origine-
 De : [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] la part de
 Sterling K. Webb
 Envoyé : mercredi 13 septembre 2006 05:24
 À : Meteorite Mailing List
 Cc : Ron Baalke
 Objet : Re: [meteorite-list] Pluto is Now Just a Number: 134340
 
 
 Hi,
 
 
 Nice headline: Pluto is now just a number.
 
 I'd imagine The Planet Pluto is feeling a little
 blue about now. (Anybody checked its UVB
 magnitude lately?) Having the blues usually calls
 for a song. Here it is. (Adapted from Secret
 Agent Man, by P.F. Sloan and S. Barri, 1966.)
 
 PLANET PLUTO MAN
 
 There's a world that leads a life of danger;
 To the inner system it stays a stranger.
 With every move they make,
 Another chance you take;
 Odds are you won't be a planet any longer.
 
 Planet Pluto Man, Xena, Ceres, too:
 They've given you a number
 And taken away your name.
 
 Beware of IAU'ers that you find;
 Bad science hides an evil mind.
 Ah, be careful what you do
 Or they'll get rid of you;
 Odds are you won't be a planet any longer.
 
 Planet Pluto Man, Xena, Ceres, too:
 They've given you a number
 And taken away your name.
 
 
 Meanwhile, what is this Minor Planet Center?
 There is no such thing as a minor planet. That
 old term was submerged and terminated by IAU
 Resolution 5A. I quote item (3) All other objects
 [footnote 3] orbiting the Sun shall be referred to
 collectively as Small Solar System Bodies and
 [footnote 3] These currently include most of the
 Solar System asteroids, most Trans-Neptunian
 Objects (TNOs), comets, and other small bodies.
 (Notice the most?)
 
 Since there's no such thing as a minor planet,
 doesn't Brian have to change the name of his fine
 recording organization first, to The Small Solar
 System Body Center? Of course, the old name
 has a long and honorable history. On the other
 hand, that argument didn't cut much ice for the
 Planet Pluto.
 
 Additionally, the IAU passed Resolution 6A,
 which states The IAU further resolves: PLUTO
 IS A DWARF PLANET by the above definition
 and is recognized as the prototype of a new category
 of trans-Neptunian objects. Not AS an TNO, but
 as a prototype for more trans-Neptunian dwarf planets.
 TNO's are SSSB's, unless they're Dwarf Planets,
 in which case they are NOT SSSB's.
 
 Obviously, Pluto is classified as a dwarf
 planet, NOT a small solar system body (nor
 minor 

Re: [meteorite-list] Pluto is Now Just a Number: 134340

[Larry Lebofsky]

Dear Herbert:

I am sorry, but I have to disagree with you on this.

I have known Brian for years and I have a great respect for the work he and 
the Minor Planets Center have done and are continuing to do.

However, Brian has been a proponent of demoting Pluto for nearly a decade. By 
making Pluto asteroid 10,000, this would have in one way made its demotion 
official long before the IAU vote. It was premature then and what they have 
done is premature now. 

Yes, the Center archives the obsevations, yes, they oversee the numbering and 
naming of asteroids and comets (and satellites). However, as Sterling has 
pointed out, they do not have any jurisdiction over naming of planets (other 
than a provisional number at the time of discovery) and with the IAU vote, it 
is not at all clear that they have any jurisdiction over dwarf planets. That 
is yet to be determined by one of the IAU commissions. 

If we would have followed Brian's suggestion in 1998. That would have 
effectively ended the debate right then. Pluto would have been a minor planet, 
end of story.

Larry

Quoting Herbert Raab [EMAIL PROTECTED]:

 
 Sterling K. Webb wrote:
 
  Marsden has been trying to get jurisdiction over Pluto for a
  long time. If it isn't a planet, why does he want it so badly?
 
 As a matter of fact, the MPC already collects all available
 astrometric observations for Pluto for many yeras now, as it
 does for all minor planets (and that includes those which are
 now called dwarf planets), all comets, and all the outer, irregular
 satellites of the major planets. As you can see, the work of the
 MPC is not strictly limited to minor planets.
 
 Marsden suggested to award numer 10'000 to Pluto in late 1998. Not
 because he wanted to have jurisdiction over it, but because he
 foresaw the many discoveries of large TNOs we have now, and that
 we have either the choice to classify Pluto with the minor bodies
 of the solar system, or the end up in a sloar system with dozens of
 planets.
 
 Marsden wrote: Although it is not unlikely that further Transneptunian
 Objects as large as Pluto will be discovered in the future, Pluto
 obviously holds a very special place in our appreciation of this new
 population, and by assigning to it the number (1), we should
 guarantee that Pluto will be at the head of the Transneptunian list.
 
 Now we have Pluto numbered as 130-thousand and something. Not very
 easy to remember, and far behind a bunch of many fainter and smaller
 objects in that region of the solar system. Oh, I wish that the
 astronomers would have followed Marsden's sueggestion in 1998
 
 Marsden continued: It is also very important to affirm that there is
 absolutely no implied 'demotion' or 'reclassification' of Pluto from
 its positionin the list of the 'planets' (or 'major planets' or
 'principal planets').  Unfortunately, many of the articles that have
 appeared inthe press have accidentally (or deliberately) misinterpreted
 this issue. As with (2060) = 95P/Chiron, (4015) = 107P/Wilson-Harrington
 and (7968) = 133P/Elst-Pizarro, where the choice of 'minor planet' or
 'comet' designation depends on the context, we are proposing that
 Pluto would have dual status as a 'major' and a 'minor' body.
 
 So much about the backdoor invite to demote Pluto.
 
 Greetings,
 
   Herbert Raab
 
 
 
 __
 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] There Were Once 18 Planets...

[Larry Lebofsky]

All:

10 Hygiea (cvorrect spelling, though sometimes seen as Hygeia). Nice asteroid 
(on the list for dwarf planet), looked at it lots of times (C-class).

Larry

Quoting Ron Baalke [EMAIL PROTECTED]:

 
 http://www.spaceweather.com/
 
 SpaceWeather.com
 September 12, 2006
 
 18 PLANETS:  Have you ever heard of the planet Hygea? It's 
 listed in the 1850 Annual of Scientific Discovery along 
 with 17 other planets:
 
 [Full Text Graphic]
 http://www.spaceweather.com/swpod2006/13sep06/Pollock1.jpg
 Courtesy Joe Pollock, Appalachian State University. 
 
 In those days, large asteroids such as Hygea, Ceres and 
 Vesta were widely deemed planets. They appeared so in 
 textbooks and scientific journals. Adding asteroids to the 
 other known planets, Mercury, Venus, Earth, Mars, Jupiter, 
 Saturn, Uranus and Neptune, gave a grand total of 18. Imagine 
 the mnemonic: My Very Educated [insert ten adjectives here] 
 Mother Just Served Us Noodles.
 
 The asteroids were eventually demoted. It was a long, 
 drawn-out affair, marked by decades of disagreement and 
 confusion. (Sound familiar?) By 1900, however, order was 
 restored to the Solar System: the planet count was down to 
 eight.
 
 And then came Pluto...
 __
 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] There Were Once 18 Planets...

[Larry Lebofsky]

Hi Again:

Left out a link. Someone some time ago was also asking about symbols.

http://aa.usno.navy.mil/hilton/AsteroidHistory/minorplanets.html


Larry


__
Meteorite-list mailing list
Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com
http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list

Re: [meteorite-list] Pluto Added To Official 'Minor Planet' List

[Larry Lebofsky]

Hi All:

As an asteroid scientist, I have some words for the people at the Minor Planets 
(oh sorry, there are no minor planets) Small Solar System Bodies Center. I do 
not wish to be barred from this listserv by using any of them. 

I personally think that it is a little premature for them to be redesignating 
Pluto since, in fact, Pluto is NOT a minor planet (or Small Solar System Body) 
by any interpretation of the resolutions that passed at the IAU. It is a dwarf 
planet and not a minor planet (based on the definition) and there are many in 
the astronomical community who are interpreting dwarf planets to be a new class 
of planets (like terrestrial or gas giants). These are things, thanks tho the 
vagueness of what passed, that one hopes will get resolved over the next few 
years. 

If nothing else, they could have made Ceres and Pluto dwarf planets 1 and 2, 
respectively, but this would not be consistent with the (adjective deleted) 
viewpoint of the people involved.

It will be interesting to see what the reaction of the general community of 
planetary scientists will be on this one.

Larry

Quoting Ron Baalke [EMAIL PROTECTED]:

 
 http://www.newscientistspace.com/article/dn10028-pluto-added-to-official-
minor-planet-list.html
 
 Pluto added to official minor planet list
 David Shiga
 New Scientist
 07 September 2006
 
 Pluto will henceforth be known as minor planet 134340 Pluto, according
 to a new designation by the International Astronomical Union's Minor
 Planet Center.
 
 The decision to include Pluto among the many asteroids and comets in the
 minor planet catalog makes official the icy body's recent - and highly
 controversial - demotion from planethood.
 
 Pluto's status was changed from planet to dwarf planet at a meeting
 of the IAU in Prague on 24 August. Many astronomers are unhappy with the
 new planet definition that excludes Pluto and some of them are
 organising a conference to come up with an alternative definition (see
 Astronomers plot to overturn planet definition
 http://www.newscientistspace.com/article/dn9890-astronomers-plot-to-overturn-
planet-definition.html).
 
 But the official catalog of small bodies in the solar system is under
 the authority of the IAU, and it recently added Pluto to its list of
 minor planets.
 
 Tim Spahr, the interim director of the IAU's Minor Planet Center (MPC)
 in Cambridge, Massachusetts, US, says this was done for the sake of
 consistency. That is because the IAU decided that Ceres, an asteroid
 already in the minor planet catalog, is also a dwarf planet.
 
 Spahr says the IAU will soon create a new catalog of dwarf planets.
 Ceres is already in the minor planet catalog, so the simplest thing is
 to put these in the minor planet catalog and the dwarf planet catalog,
 he told New Scientist.
 
 'Scientific heresy'
 
 Initially, there will be three objects in the dwarf planet catalog:
 Pluto, Ceres, and the distant object 2003 UB313, which is unofficially
 named Xena. The IAU will decide on an official name for 2003 UB313 in a
 month or two, he says.
 
 An IAU working group is being set up to decide whether any other objects
 qualify for the dwarf planet list. Other Pluto-like objects, such as
 2005 FY9, will be considered for membership, Spahr says.
 
 Not everyone has been quick to adopt the new planet definition, however.
 On the day of the IAU decision, two members of the California state
 assembly introduced a resolution condemning the mean-spirited IAU for
 its decision on Pluto, calling it a hasty, ill-considered scientific
 heresy.
 
 Introduced by Keith Richman and Joseph Canciamilla, the resolution says
 the fact that Pluto shares its name with the dog made famous in Disney
 cartoons gives it a special connection to California history and culture.
 
 Downgrading Pluto's status will cause psychological harm to some
 Californians who question their place in the universe and worry about
 the instability of universal constants, it adds.
 
 On a more serious note, Alan Stern, project leader for NASA's New
 Horizons mission to Pluto, says the project will not recognise the new
 IAU definition. We will continue to refer to Pluto as the ninth
 planet, he says on the mission's website. I think most of you will
 agree with that decision and cheer us on.
 
 __
 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] Meteorites from the bottom of the ocean - Part 2 of 2

[Larry Lebofsky]

Hi Frank:

There was a nice article about Angra dos Reis in the May issue of Meteorite 
magazine!

Larry


Quoting Frank Cressy [EMAIL PROTECTED]:

 
 Hello Bernd and all,
 
 For those interested in meteorites found from the
 bottom of the sea, there is, of course, Angra dos Reis
 ;-)
 
 A portion of the text from Brazilian Stone
 Meteorites states: The meteorite fell into the bay
 of Angra dos Reis at a water depth of 2 m, immediately
 in front of the church of Bom Fim in the town of Angra
 dos Reis.  Some smoke was noticed in the sky and the
 body apparently traveled from north to south.  The
 material, recovered by a local diver a day after the
 fall, consisted of two small pieces; from an unmatched
 fresh surface it was assumed that a third piece was
 missing.  
 
 And, although not found at the bottom of the sea, but
 a large lake, there is Okechobee, Florida, an L4 found
 in 1916.  From the COM, Fragments weighing about 1kg
 were brought up in a net some 0.75 miles from shore,
 G.P. Merril (1916).
 
 Cheers,
 Frank
 __
 Meteorite-list mailing list
 Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com
 http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
 


-- 
Dr. Larry A. Lebofsky
Senior Research Scientist
Co-editor, Meteorite  If you give a man a fish,   
Lunar and Planetary Laboratory   you feed him for a day.
1541 East University   If you teach a man to fish,
University of Arizonayou feed him for a lifetime.
Tucson, AZ 85721-0063 ~Chinese Proverb
Phone:  520-621-6947
FAX:520-621-8364
e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
__
Meteorite-list mailing list
Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com
http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list

Re: [meteorite-list] Preliminary MOSS meteorite classification

[Larry Lebofsky]

Hi Ed:

That is almost as hard to believe as meteor showers (debris from a comet) 
occurring on the same day each year!

Actually, probably does not have to be every year, just every few years. If 
these come from the breakup of a near Earth asteroid, the debris would 
probably spread out from the asteroid in a manner similar to a comet tail.

Larry

Quoting E.P. Grondine [EMAIL PROTECTED]:

 Hi all - 
 
 Dammit! The only way that you would have an annual
 fall would be if a debris stream intersected the Earth
 at the same time each year.  This is highly unlikely.
 
 What these people (I can't do it myself any longer)
 need to be looking for is regular intervals, and
 multiples of those intervals, between falls.  Then
 they could establish a debris stream's orbit.
 
 If a debris stream intersection period could be
 established, then one could stay up on the appropriate
 nights, watch for bolides, triangulate, and voila,
 meteorites on demand so to speak.
 
 
 good hunting,
 Ed
 
 --- Bjorn Sorheim [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 
  Jeff Grossman wrote:
   Yes, I noticed that too. Could just be a
   coincidence, however. The dates are almost 2 weeks
  apart.
   jeff
  
  But when you look at the other CO3 falls it becomes
  a bit obvious:
  
  Warrenton , Fall 3rd January 1877, 07:15h
  Felix,  Fall 15th May 1900, 11:30h
  Kainsaz, Fall 13th September 1937, 14:15h
  
  Apparently spread out through the year quite
  randomly.
  
  
   At 02:21 PM 8/30/2006, Bjorn Sorheim wrote:
   Michael Farmer wrote:
Hello everyone, well here is the preliminary
classification data on the MOSS Norway
  meteorite fall.
Dr Jeff Grossman is doing the classification
  and he
sent me the following information a little
  while ago.
   .
   
Avg Fa PMD
Kainsaz (CO3.2) 11.8 70
Felix (CO3.3) 18.4 70
Ornans (CO3.4) 19.0 68
Lance (CO3.5) 21.2 63
Warrenton (CO3.7) 33.9 21
   
Moss 19.9 65
   
This puts Moss between Ornans and Lance,
   
   Yes, you are so right Dr Grossman! Just look
  here:
   
   Ornans , Fall 11th July, 19:15h 1868
   Moss, Fall 14th July, 10:15h 2006
   Lance, Fall 23rd July, 17:20h 1872
   
From The Catalogue (2000).
   
   Makes you think, don't it! Seems to be a
  connection here.
   Any info on the trajectory at those falls?
   
although I
don't think that
difference is significant.
  
  Regards,
  Bjørn Sørheim
 
 http://home.online.no/~bsoerhei/astro/meteor/060714/moss.html
   Fresh 'Moss'
  
  
  __
  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
 


-- 
Dr. Larry A. Lebofsky
Senior Research Scientist
Co-editor, Meteorite  If you give a man a fish,   
Lunar and Planetary Laboratory   you feed him for a day.
1541 East University   If you teach a man to fish,
University of Arizonayou feed him for a lifetime.
Tucson, AZ 85721-0063 ~Chinese Proverb
Phone:  520-621-6947
FAX:520-621-8364
e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
__
Meteorite-list mailing list
Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com
http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list

RE: [meteorite-list] Artist conception of view from Pluto (life-size d)

[Larry Lebofsky]

Steve:

Pluto's thin atmosphere is nitrogen, carbon monoxide, and methane and it has a 
haze layer, too. This atmosphere is getting a little thicker now even though 
Pluto is moving away from the Sun, but it is thought that the atmosphere will 
eventually freeze out for the winter as Pluto get further away from the Sun 
and colder. 

Why is the atmosphere getting thicker? Good question: If you look at 
tempertures on the Earth, it is usually warmer in the early afternoon than it 
is at noon (thermal inertia). Also, Pluto, as seen from the Earth and Sun is 
actually getting darker (we may be seeing darker areas of the surface). Thus 
more solar energy is getting absorbed.

Oh, dispite the picture of Pluto, it has one spherical satellite, Charon, 
and two very small satellites of, to the best of my knowledge, unknown shape. 
Nice pictur, though!

Larry

Quoting Steve Schoner [EMAIL PROTECTED]:

 Looks like a planet to me, with two spherical moons.  And I read
 somewhere that Pluto (a planet) may actually have a thin atmosphere of
 hydrogen.
 
 We shall in nine years (if all goes well with the Pluto space mission)
 see how well this representation holds up to fact.
 
 And maybe by then the fact that Pluto is a planet will be resolved.
 
 (Leave it at 9 and anything farther out not)
 
 Steve Schoner
 
 
 [meteorite-list] Artist conception of view from Pluto (life-sized)
 
 Darren Garrison
 Sat, 26 Aug 2006 22:58:49 -0700
 
 http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/e/e7/Plutonian_system.jpg
 __
 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] Astronomers Lean Toward Eight Planets

[Larry Lebofsky]

Hi Sterling:

I am so far behind in reading emails that I am now reading the most recent and 
going backwards. Hence my response to your email from Wednesday.

First, with only about 425 scientists voting on the porposal Thursday, there is 
now a petition for the planetary (and astronomy?) community in support of 
somthing closer to the original proposal (properties of the object, not where 
it is located). A more general one may follow (I will let you all know). 

I agree with you (almost) completely. Except with the composition of Ceres. 
With a density of just over 2.0, there is a lot of water in Ceres. It is 
assumed to be all below the surface (as water ice is not stable on its 
surface), but it is a good match to CI and CM meteorites and so has a good deal 
of water in it. So, it is most likely a very wet rock.

From the HST images, which show white spots, it may even have some water ice 
on 
its surface. I would be thrilled with that since I predicted ice on Ceres and 
then showed that it could not have any since it is too warm. More recent work 
has show that my observational analysis may not have been too far off (Dawn 
will give us the answer).

Larry

Quoting Sterling K. Webb [EMAIL PROTECTED]:

 Hi, Doug and All,
 
 
 1. Since it seems only right to declare your personal biases
 first, I am a 12+ proponent and a firm believer (on the basis
 of faith and a few numerical approximations) that an object
 beyond Pluto and bigger than the planet Mercury exists and
 will be discovered. (Then, the Clasical Eight become the Big
 Seven and Mercury is a solar asteroid!)
 
 2. I firmly agree with Ron Baalke (who's a Pro-Eight) that
 the cultural component of this dispute is a major, maybe THE
 major, consideration. This a great opportunity to make science
 look silly to the populace, something we really don't need
 right now. Once formed, public perception is hard to change.
 What we have to decide is what makes science look sillier,
 or less silly.
 
 3. While I may have made snide remarks about the IAU as
 preferring to dally and postpone, this may well be a time when
 that is the best idea. Declare a cooling off period; send it to another
 committee. The whole vote issue popped up too quickly, and it
 may well be that there just hasn't been time (or calm) enough for
 everybody to think it through.
 
 4. While you are undoubtedly correct, Doug, about Latinate
 terms being appropriate, the Latinate term for cold has unfortunate
 associations in American-English slang, where frig is used as
 a not-too-polite euphemism for an old Anglo-Saxon verb with a
 similar sound. It would be the source of as much (more) classroom
 giggling as the pronunciation of Uranus.  But cryo- and
 cryonic have widespread usage, popularly and scientifically
 (for that very reason, I suspect).
 
 5. Even the guy who declared his love of Pluto in the New
 York Times (Susan's post) says of Pluto: It's mostly ice.
 Everybody calls the Plutonians ICEBALLS when this is
 obviously and unequivocally WRONG. People on this List
 do it all the time; scientists who don't like Pluonians as planets
 do it (and they should know better).
 
 The density of Pluto is 2.08. Ice has a density of 0.92.
 Because water-ice is compressible and then converts to a
 number of polymorphic crystalline structures of higher density,
 depending on the size of the body. (IceIII is the most likely,
 with a density of 1.14.) But the pressures required are very
 great.
 http://www.lsbu.ac.uk/water/phase.html
 
 But basically, a body with a density of 2.08 (Pluto) is best
 explained as containing 70% to 75% rock of density 2.7 and
 a mantle of mixed ices that is only the outer 10% to 13% of
 the planetary radius deep. (A shallow ice mantle limits the
 density of the ice.) That's a mantle if it's differentiated, but
 if it's just mixed, the compositional averages are the same.
 
 The density of Ceres (2.03) is the same as Pluto.  Lots of
 the Plutonians have similar densities. 2003EL61's shape sets
 a density range limited to 2.6 to 3.3 (like the Earth's Moon,
 a well-known rockball). It's 100% rockball -- no ice at all
 (except for the surface dusting). Pluto's a rockball. Ceres
 is a rockball. Can you say ROCKBALL, boys and girls?
 
 If a body is 70%+ rock, why keep calling it an iceball?
 Wassup with that? Because it's cold? Calling Pluto an iceball
 is like calling the Earth a dirtball. I look at Earth's surface and
 it's mostly dirt, so the planet Earth is mostly made of dirt, right?
 
 Please, enough with the iceball!
 
 
 Sterling K. Webb
 -
 - Original Message - 
 From: MexicoDoug [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 To: meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com; Sterling_K_Webb 
 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Sent: Wednesday, August 23, 2006 11:47 AM
 Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Astronomers Lean Toward Eight Planets
 
 
  Hello Sterling, why not throw Pluto a bone 

Re: [meteorite-list] John Hopkins Astronomers ReacttoPluto'sPlanetary 'Demotion'

[Larry Lebofsky]

Size challenged.

Pluto envy

or

planet envy

Larry



Quoting Mark [EMAIL PROTECTED]:

 Too Small To be Counted
 
 Mark
 - Original Message - 
 From: Martin Altmann [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 To: 'MexicoDoug' [EMAIL PROTECTED]; 
 meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com
 Sent: Thursday, August 24, 2006 3:15 PM
 Subject: AW: [meteorite-list] John Hopkins Astronomers 
 ReacttoPluto'sPlanetary 'Demotion'
 
 
  Bah the solar system is in ruin!
 
  dwarf planet is incommensurate with the use of words in publication in
  countries, which obey Political Correctness.
  I'm not a native speaker, so help me to find the right term.
 
  orbitally challenged planet?
  massively challenged planet?
  populatedly challenged planet?
  bureaucratically challenged planet?
 
  Buckleboo!
  Martin
  http://www.dwarfism.org/
 
 
  __
  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
 


-- 
Dr. Larry A. Lebofsky
Senior Research Scientist
Co-editor, Meteorite  If you give a man a fish,   
Lunar and Planetary Laboratory   you feed him for a day.
1541 East University   If you teach a man to fish,
University of Arizonayou feed him for a lifetime.
Tucson, AZ 85721-0063 ~Chinese Proverb
Phone:  520-621-6947
FAX:520-621-8364
e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
__
Meteorite-list mailing list
Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com
http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list

Re: [meteorite-list] Size Counts concerning Pluto?

[Larry Lebofsky]

Hi all:

I have been trying to stay out of the recent discussion until something really 
happens at the IAU. For me, I am concerned with it becoming too personal.

However, two things. When we (DPS) spoke to Rick Binzel last week, the IAU 
committee (Rick was on it) was concerned that world opinion would be that the 
US (ie Lowell Obs) would want to keep Pluto as a plane because is was 
discovered by an American.

Also, if you look at the original counterproposal (being the dominant object) 
which will get rid of Pluto as a planet, it was proposed by a group that 
included 2 from Uruguay, 5 from France, 2 Brazil, 3 Italy, 1 Chech., 1 
Argentina, 1 Mexico, 1 Russia, and 2 US. Not quite American dominated unless 
you mean (North and SOuth America).

Larry

PS OPINION: No matter what ends up being the science behind defining a planet 
(original definition gives us 5 since Earth was not a planet), Pluto, for 
historical reasons, should remain a planet. OPINION: dwarf planet is a stupid 
term and raises all sorts of misconceptions for kids, etc. Why not go with 
size-challenged to be politically correct?

Quoting drtanuki [EMAIL PROTECTED]:

 Hello List,
   It appears that the only reason for dropping poor
 Pluto from the list of planets is an American cultural
 bias in that SIZE COUNTS.  Pluto, as do the rest of
 the planets, orbits the Sun in a somewhat regular
 manner as a planet; therefore leave its classification
 alone.
   Science may change the status of Pluto; but Pluto
 will still exist as it has without any concern of
 Man`s (new-school-biased? Astronomer`s) scheme of
 things. 
   Sincerely, Pluto fan for  9.Dirk Ross...Tokyo 
 
 __
 Meteorite-list mailing list
 Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com
 http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
 


-- 
Dr. Larry A. Lebofsky
Senior Research Scientist
Co-editor, Meteorite  If you give a man a fish,   
Lunar and Planetary Laboratory   you feed him for a day.
1541 East University   If you teach a man to fish,
University of Arizonayou feed him for a lifetime.
Tucson, AZ 85721-0063 ~Chinese Proverb
Phone:  520-621-6947
FAX:520-621-8364
e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
__
Meteorite-list mailing list
Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com
http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list

Re: [meteorite-list] Astronomers Lean Toward Eight Planets

[Larry Lebofsky]

Hi Anne:

Please remember that many scientists [not me :0)] have something to make up 
for their common sense ... their big EGOS. If you have any doubt about this, 
ask Nancy. 

It is the old my theory is better (bigger) than your theory. There are lots 
of ways to define a planet (we have seen many of them over the past few 
days) and some are better than others and none of them is perfect. But, you 
must remember, from the perspective of many scientists, there is no question 
that their theory is better than anyone elses.


Larry

__
Meteorite-list mailing list
Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com
http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list

Re: [meteorite-list] Comet shower

[Larry Lebofsky]

Hi all:

I seem to get into trouble no matter what I say. Yes, I keep promising myself 
to buy the book. 

My response to Darren responded to the article he referred to which talked 
about comet showers lasting thousands of years or more. I assumed that they 
were referring to the long-held theory of a planet X or a passing star as the 
cause of showers of comets, hence, comet shower (and periodic mass 
distructions). I do not think that they were referring to the pieces of a 
single comet that had broken up and hit the Earth. I think that this is a 
fairly recent idea and which at least from an observational point of view is 
supported by SW3 (the breaking up part). I was unaware of any papers or books 
that discuss anything like Cheimgau. I will take your word for this and will 
get a copy of your book. I do not think John Lewis mentions it in his book, 
but I could be wrong. It is some time since I have read it.

Quoting E.P. Grondine [EMAIL PROTECTED]:

 Hi Larry, list - 
 
 Ahem. Hourse manure, as Bess Truman taught Harry to
 say.
 
 Under the strains of traversing the plane of our solar
 system, a comet can fragment into fragemnts, as they
 are technically known, or cometissimals, to put it
 more properly.  Comet Schwassmann Wachmann 3 did this
 quite recently, only a few months back, and Comet
 Encke did it not so long ago, a few millenia back.
 These cometissimals have ranged in size up from around
 50 m or so up to the size of full comets, for
 cometissimals from well condensed old large comets.
 
 These cometissimals have impacted the Earth in mass,
 and in historic times, as at Cheimgau, for one
 example.
 They usually accompany meteor streams. 
 
 While this fragmentation process is not discussed 
 in depth in my book, Man and Impact in the Americas,
 available through amazon.com., you should buy yourself
 a copy of it anyway.
 
 good hunting,
 EP
 
 --- Larry Lebofsky [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 
  
  Hi Darren:
  
  This one I think I can answer and not get into
  trouble with anyone in the 
  astronomy field.
  
  Meteor shower:
  
  Usually related to a comet (or sometimes asteroid;
  extinct comet??) or 
  sometimes not (comet long gone). Comets have tails.
  This material is small 
  (look at Stardust) and spreads out along the orbit
  of the comet. Since this is 
  long (all the way around the orbit) and fairly
  broad, we pass through it each 
  year (sometimes we go through thicker regions and
  get meteor storms). This is 
  a meteor shower and these are named after the region
  of the sky where we see 
  the majority come form. There is no documented
  fall from a meteor shower 
  (stuff too small, so fragile?).
  
  Comet shower:
  
  Humans probably have never witnessed one. This is
  one of the theories for mass 
  extinctions on Earth. A thing (passing star or
  planet X) plows through (or 
  comes close) to the Oort cloud. Lots of objects are
  perturbed out of their 
  orbits and some now have new orbits that bring them
  in close to the Sun (and 
  the Earth). Since there are lots of them and have
  different orbits, they come 
  through the inner Solar System over long periods of
  time. If the thing that 
  does the perturbing is also in orbit around the Sun,
  the perturbing can happen 
  periodically (periodicity of extinctions). 
  
  While we see showers regularly and can associate
  them with certain comets and 
  at soom level predict when there will be more or
  less (a little better than 
  reading tea leaves), this is a real thing. Not so
  for comet showers. No 
  evidence for Planet X, far different than the
  on-going discussion. No 
  evidence for extinctions being periodic or over a
  period of time (many people 
  still claim there is a periodicity, but them more
  people will disclaim it). 
  Still not solid proof and no bit object ever seen
  (though who know for sure).
  
  I hope this answers your question, Darren. The only
  controversy is whether or 
  not comet showers have ever happened and if so, what
  caused them. So far there 
  is little evidence for there ever having been one
  (after the Late Heavy 
  Bombardment 4 billion years ago).
  
  LArry 
  
  Quoting Darren Garrison [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
  
   Okay, this explanation of meteor shower vs.
  comet shower surpasses the
   new
   definition of planet to win Weird Science
  Defintion of the Week.
   
   Is it just me, or would a better answer have been
  to explain how meteor
   showers
   ARE produced by the debris of comets (which is
  where the question seemed to
   be
   leading) and not to interpret the question as
  being do lots of comets hit
   the
   Earth at once?
   
  
 
 http://www.earthsky.org/shows/listenerquestions.php?date=20040417
   __
   Meteorite-list mailing list
   Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com
  
 
 http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
   
  
  
  __
  Meteorite

Re: Re-2: [meteorite-list] Moss Meteorite From A Comet?

[Larry Lebofsky]

Hi all:

Defending Tim Swindle and Humberto Campins. I have known them for years and 
they are very conservative scientists. Their work is good and they are well-
respected scientists. They do not go off (too often) to make wild, 
unsubstantiated, claims., hence, the conclusions in their article. They based 
their Meteorite paper (and their original scientific paper) on what we know. 
We have observations of many comets (Campins has done a lot of this), but we 
have samples from only one comet (Halley), are just now studying Stardust 
material (so too early to say much), and IDPs which are thought to be, at 
least in part, cometary in origin.

Clearly, we need multiple samples from multiple comets --- good luck in our 
lifetime. Therefore you base your theories on the existing information, not 
onwhat you hope to have in the future. That is why people propose new missions 
to comets and asteroids!

We know that not all comets are the same based on our observations and where 
we think they came from. Some of this may be because of how many times they 
have been close to the Sun, some may have to be related to where they came 
from (Kuiper Belt or Oort cloud), and some may have to do with where they were 
formed (which may not have been where we see them coming from). Clearly, a 
chunk of a fresh comet would look very different from a dead comet. Or, as 
been on this listserv recently, could we tell the difference between a chunk 
of a comet or a piece of Ceres? I am not sure I would be willing to say 
anything in print even though I have studied Ceres for years. What, from 
either, would we expect to make it through the atmosphere?

Even if we were to bring back samples from two or three comets, I doubt if 
anyone I know would be willing to say (with respect to the composition of 
comets) that that was their final answer. That is the nature of science.

I really have to stop writing these a 5:00 in the morning, no breakfast and no 
soffee, but this is the quiet time of the day.

Larry



Quoting [EMAIL PROTECTED]:

 Comets ... being 'primitive material' ... we would need
  to have known multiple samples of multiple comets before
  we could say for sure.
 
 Hi Mark and List,
 
 I couldn't agree more and that's why I felt a bit uneasy when I read
 Campins' and Swindle's article in this issue of our METEORITE magazine:
 
 CAMPINS H. and SWINDLE T.D.(2006) Where are the cometary
 meteorites? (Meteorite, May 2006, Vol. 12, No.2, pp. 17-19).
 
 They solely refer repeatedly to Comet Halley and to Halley dust (plus to
 cometary IDPs). Many more comets need to be sampled before we can draw
 definite conclusions!
 
 Best,
 
 Bernd
 
 __
 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] Planet Meteorite Mailing List

[Larry Lebofsky]

Hi Sterling:

Quick response to you about Ceres.

CI or CM (lots of work comparing Ceres to Murchison, but there are 
differences).

Larry

Quoting Sterling K. Webb [EMAIL PROTECTED]:

 Hi, Geoff,
 
 Welcome to the...
 
 Yes, it really is The Meteorite List!
 
 There are usually a number of threads going at once, like
 the talk at a a good party in a room full of people. I listen,
 but I don't hear any. I figure everybody's busy, but if I'm 
 filling a void, well, it's because there IS a void. 
 
 But I get your point...
 
 Let's see... There should be a raft of postings about
 what the poster has for sale on eBay this week... Nope. At 
 least three offers of a trade from... Nope. Hmm.. If we 
 could only get two or even three pugnacious large-scale 
 meteorite dealers to quarrel bitterly with each other, that'd 
 be good for 30-50 postings. 
 
 Nah, better not...
 
 It's the Dog Days of August. The dead slack bottom 
 of the year. Paris is deserted because every French person 
 in the known universe is on holiday. Most of humanity is 
 huddled in a dark air-conditioned place...
 
 I know I am.
 
 Ok.
 
 METEORITE QUESTIONS!!
 
 If Vesta is made a Dwarf Planet, then any meteorite from
 Vesta, either directly chipped off Vesta, or by being chipped 
 off a Vestoid that was itself chipped off Vesta, etc., etc., is now 
 a PLANETARY METEORITE, like a Martian meteorite.
 
 Will that increase the value of a specimen of Vestan origin?
 
 Will Diogenites get pricier? Howardites? Eucrites?
 
 Does everybody who collected them get a free bump in 
 market appreciation?
 
 Is anybody thinking of buying up more Vestan meteorites 
 as just a good thing to get a stronger position in?
 
 Is that why the only other thread going is about IBITIRA,
 a really pretty non-cumulate non-brecciated Stannern eucrite,
 a chunk of the crust of a body that might well be designated 
 a planet?
 
 Have dealers already raised their prices in anticipation of that?
 
 Did I just tip them to do it, and should I shut up in case
 they haven't figured that out yet?
 
 When the Dawn Mission gets to Vesta and does its science
 will there be any isotopic signature that would allow a seller or
 buyer of a specimen to determine that it really was from the
 Dwarf Planet Vesta? Like the way the Viking gas data made it 
 possible to uniquely identify a Martian...
 
 And while we all know about Vesta as a source of metteorites
 that exist in our collections, what about Ceres (the most likely
 body to named a planet, I think)? 
 
 The Dawn mission specifically states that one of the goals 
 of the mission is to look for evidence of such a link:
 
 No meteorites have unmistakably come from Ceres. Possibly 
 the excavating events or dynamics that provided the HED meteorites 
 did not occur at Ceres, but also possibly, the reflectance spectrum 
 of the surface of Ceres is not indicative of its crustal rocks. Microwave 
 studies suggest that Ceres is covered with a dry clay, in contrast to 
 Vesta's basaltic dust layer that reflects its crustal composition. To 
 determine if Ceres-derived meteorites are in our collections and to 
 understand the origin of Ceres, we must travel there and obtain 
 spatially resolved spectra inside fresh craters. We need to determine
  the geologic context for the HED meteorites from Vesta, and search 
 for similar data for Ceres.
 http://dawn.jpl.nasa.gov/science/why.asp
 
 Ceres is big. Ceres has, in the Hubble imagery, what could be
 big impact craters that would have created as many or more meteorites
 than whatever cratered Vesta and sent the HED's our way. Ceres is only
 half an AU further away than Vesta. Ceresian meteorites if they get here, 
 should be almost as common as Vestan. There may be Ceresian meteorites 
 sitting in YOUR collection and you just don't know it. So,
 
 What meteorite type or group do you think is likely to be proved
 as coming from Ceres once we get the data from Dawn?
 
 Gee, would probably be carbonaceous... When's the last time
 one of THOSE fell?
 
 METEORITE list...
 
 
 Sterling K. Webb
 ---
 - Original Message - 
 From: Notkin [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 To: Meteorite List meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com
 Sent: Saturday, August 19, 2006 8:54 PM
 Subject: [meteorite-list] Planet Pluto Mailing List
 
 
  Hi Everyone:
  
  My name is Geoff. I'm a meteorite hunter and collector.
  
  I accidentally subscribed myself to a listserve called Is the Planet 
  Pluto Really a Planet Mailing List. It's been a very interesting 
  discussion, but I actually meant to subscribe myself to something 
  called the Meteorite Mailing List. Anyone heard of it or know where I 
  can find it?
  
  
  Thanks in advance,
  
  Geoff N
  www.aerolite.org
  
  __
  Meteorite-list mailing list
  

Re: [meteorite-list] Moss Meteorite From A Comet?

[Larry Lebofsky]

Hi Jeff:

Read the May issue of Mereorite magazine. An article by Swindle and Campins.

Larry

Quoting Jeff Kuyken [EMAIL PROTECTED]:

 Howdy Bernd, Rick  all,
 
 Just curious because I recently read somewhere (maybe this list actually but
 can't remember) that the CH (or CB?) chondrites may now be the best match to
 a cometary origin. I think this was after Deep Impact. Anyone remember or
 know more?
 
 Cheers,
 
 Jeff
 
 - Original Message -
 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 To: Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com
 Sent: Sunday, August 20, 2006 6:46 AM
 Subject: [meteorite-list] Moss Meteorite From A Comet?
 
 
 Hello Rick and List,
 
 As you are new on this List, I don't really know who I am talking to, how
 old or how young you are, how much you know about meteorites and comets,
 if you already have any meteorites, whether you have already read any books
 about meteorites, etc., etc. Maybe you would like to introduce yourself to
 us and tell us a little bit about you. Thank you in advance!
 
 Your question is interesting and intriguing. Theoretically, some meteorites
 may have a cometary origin but so far they have not been found or recognized
 yet.
 If there are cometary meteorites in our collections, scientists expect them
 to
 have come from the so-called Kuiper belt beyond 30 AU.
 
 Their silicates should be anhydrous, highly unequilibrated, their chemistry
 would
 resemble that of chondrites but there would be a high amount of C and N. But
 if
 these cometary meteorites were altered through the influence of flowing
 water so
 far out in our Solar System, the most likely candidates here on Earth would
 be
 the CI carbonaceous chondrites.
 
 Some xenolithic inclusions in ordinary chondrite regolith breccias are also
 suspects for a cometary origin.
 
 You will probably have seen a Perseid fireball but no matter what you saw,
 some scientists say that many shower meteors can be as dense as carbonaceous
 chondrites or even as dense as ordinary chondrites.
 
 Especially interesting is the fall of the CI chondrite Revelstoke because it
 could be an example of a weak cometary meteorite. A fireball was observed
 for
 hundreds of kilometers and atmospheric effects were measured nearly 1500 km
 away. The fireball must have been as energetic as the Sikhote-Alin
 meteorite.
 The SA fireball produced several craters and tons of meteoritic irons but
 all
 that was found of the Revelstoke fireball was less than a gram of friable
 black
 rock.
 
 If there are cometary meteorites in our collections,
 here are some of the criteria they should meet:
 
 a) as rare as CI carbonaceous chondrites
 b) dark + weak
 c) highly porous + low density (ca. 2 g/cm3)
 d) nearly solar abundances
 e) high abundance of C, N, and organic compounds
 f) anhydrous silicates
 g) highly unequilibrated silicates
 h) very large abundance of interstellar grains
 i) chondrules and CAIs should be rare or absent
 
 It is so difficult to identify cometary meteorites in case they already
 exist
 in our collections because they could easily be misclassified as
 achondrites.
 There are indeed achondrites like the acapulcoites, lodranites, brachinites,
 winonaites that have chondritic chemical abundances, and there are C-rich
 achondrites, for example the ureilites.
 
 And now back to your question: Is the Moss meteorite from a comet?
 
 Let's *suppose* some cometary meteorites do contain chondrules, then C-rich,
 highly unequilibrated CO, CV, or ordinary chondrites might be good
 candidates
 according to:
 
 CAMPINS H. and SWINDLE T. (1998) Expected characteristics
 of cometary meteorites (MAPS 33-6, 1998, pp. 1201-1211).
 
 In other words, in that case even the Moss meteorite - if it should really
 be classified as a CO.x (preferentially x should be 1, 2, or 3) - could
 be of cometary parentage.
 
 Hope this helps ;-)
 
 
 Best regards,
 
 Bernd
 
 __
 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] Comet shower

[Larry Lebofsky]

Hi Darren:

This one I think I can answer and not get into trouble with anyone in the 
astronomy field.

Meteor shower:

Usually related to a comet (or sometimes asteroid; extinct comet??) or 
sometimes not (comet long gone). Comets have tails. This material is small 
(look at Stardust) and spreads out along the orbit of the comet. Since this is 
long (all the way around the orbit) and fairly broad, we pass through it each 
year (sometimes we go through thicker regions and get meteor storms). This is 
a meteor shower and these are named after the region of the sky where we see 
the majority come form. There is no documented fall from a meteor shower 
(stuff too small, so fragile?).

Comet shower:

Humans probably have never witnessed one. This is one of the theories for mass 
extinctions on Earth. A thing (passing star or planet X) plows through (or 
comes close) to the Oort cloud. Lots of objects are perturbed out of their 
orbits and some now have new orbits that bring them in close to the Sun (and 
the Earth). Since there are lots of them and have different orbits, they come 
through the inner Solar System over long periods of time. If the thing that 
does the perturbing is also in orbit around the Sun, the perturbing can happen 
periodically (periodicity of extinctions). 

While we see showers regularly and can associate them with certain comets and 
at soom level predict when there will be more or less (a little better than 
reading tea leaves), this is a real thing. Not so for comet showers. No 
evidence for Planet X, far different than the on-going discussion. No 
evidence for extinctions being periodic or over a period of time (many people 
still claim there is a periodicity, but them more people will disclaim it). 
Still not solid proof and no bit object ever seen (though who know for sure).

I hope this answers your question, Darren. The only controversy is whether or 
not comet showers have ever happened and if so, what caused them. So far there 
is little evidence for there ever having been one (after the Late Heavy 
Bombardment 4 billion years ago).

LArry 

Quoting Darren Garrison [EMAIL PROTECTED]:

 Okay, this explanation of meteor shower vs. comet shower surpasses the
 new
 definition of planet to win Weird Science Defintion of the Week.
 
 Is it just me, or would a better answer have been to explain how meteor
 showers
 ARE produced by the debris of comets (which is where the question seemed to
 be
 leading) and not to interpret the question as being do lots of comets hit
 the
 Earth at once?
 
 http://www.earthsky.org/shows/listenerquestions.php?date=20040417
 __
 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] EVEN THE N. Y. TIMES HAS AN OPINION ON PLANETS

[Larry Lebofsky]

Sterling:

Well, much of the controversy started when that planetarium in New York found 
that it could not fit Pluto into its display because it was too far from the 
Sun to fit in the exhibit hall. There were a number of articles about this at 
the time.

Beign a scientist I did a scientific poll (sort of, but at least the question 
was not biased one way or the other): I polled the Saturday group of people in 
my cardiac rehab class, so the only thing in common is have had heart problems 
at one time, nearer to God (mostly retired, educations from not finishing high 
school to people with multiple degrees (no astronomers) out of 14 people (not 
including myself) all 14 thought it would be stupid to demote Pluto even if 
it did not fit into the definition. Also, most of them were aware that the 
planet was not named after the dog. Several of them were around at the time.

And Sterling, before you start on me, no, I do not know the statistical error 
on the vote!


Quoting Sterling K. Webb [EMAIL PROTECTED]:

 Hi,
 
 
 The New York published an editorial on the
 planet question. Does that settle it?
 Hardly. But it does demonstrate that the
 driving force of the Eight Planet Gang is largely
 emotional and prejudicial.
 
 Sterling K. Webb
 --
 
 http://www.nytimes.com/2006/08/17/opinion/17thur4.html
 
 Text:
 
 Dissing Pluto and the Other Plutons
 Published: August 17, 2006
 
 A panel appointed by the International Astronomical
 Union thinks it has come up with a dandy compromise
 to the years-long struggle over whether we should continue
 to count Pluto as a planet. The trouble is, the new definition
 of a planet will include an awful mélange of icy rocks found
 on the outer fringes of the solar system. It would be far
 better to expel Pluto from the planetary ranks altogether,
 leaving us to bask in the comfortable presence of the eight
 classical planets that were discovered before 1900 and have
 excited wonder ever since.
 
 Pluto, discovered in 1930, never deserved to be called a planet.
 It is far smaller than first thought, smaller in fact than our own
 moon. Its orbit is more elliptical and tilted in a different plane
 than those of the other planets, and its icy, rocky body is more
 like a comet's core. If Pluto were discovered today, it seems
 highly unlikely that anyone would consider it a planet. But Pluto
 has emotional partisans who resent anyone picking on the
 puniest planet, so efforts to demote it invariably meet resistance.
 
 Now a panel of astronomers and historians has come up
 with a new definition of the word planet that will keep
 Pluto in the club. Under the new definition, a planet would
 be any celestial body that orbits around a star and is large
 enough for its own gravity to pull it into a spherical shape.
 That definition would produce an ugly porridge of 12 old
 and new planets, with dozens more on the way.
 
 Ceres, heretofore considered the largest of the asteroids,
 would qualify. The panel suggests that people might
 want to call it a dwarf planet, raising the question of
 why bother to call it a planet at all.
 
 Pluto would still count as a planet but would be shunted
 into a new category called Plutons, which would include
 any object that meets the definition and has an orbit beyond
 Neptune's. Two other bodies already qualify as plutons,
 namely Charon, which had been considered a moon of
 Pluto, and a recently discovered ice ball somewhat bigger
 than Pluto. Many dozens of distant ice balls may ultimately
 qualify for planethood.
 
 All this just to keep Pluto as a planet. Whatever merit the
 new definition may have scientifically, it is an abomination
 culturally. When the astronomical union votes on the matter
 next week, it ought to reject the new definition and summon
 the courage to scratch Pluto from the list of planets. 
 
 
 __
 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: Re: [meteorite-list] NEW PLANETARY NAMES

[Larry Lebofsky]

Hi all:

This is why there is an IAU nomenclature committee. It prevents chaos when 
naming asteroids, comets, satellites, and now planets, I guess.

Larry, 
asteroid 3439 Lebofsky

Quoting Darren Garrison [EMAIL PROTECTED]:

 On Thu, 17 Aug 2006 22:59:55 -0400, you wrote:
 
 Oh...  Why name the planets after a god/godess?  What's wrong with
 Bernhard,
 Mary, Ann, Richard, Mike, etc. etc.
 
 Tradition, I suppose.  But if they name too many objects, they may have to
 start
 looking for other sources.  Like maybe naming them from characters in
 popular
 Science Fiction franchises.  So how about planets Aunt Beru, Captain
 Janeway,
 and Hot Blonde Cylon Chick?
 __
 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] Pluto May Get Demoted After All

[Larry Lebofsky]

Hi Doug:

I am not an expert on dynamics, but the center of mass is the center of mass.

If you have two objects in orbit (revolve, not rotate) around the center of 
mass, if one were larger, its orbit would have to be elliptical in order for 
the center of mass to go outside to inside of it. 
We are not talking about multiple systems with liquid planets, that is going a 
little too far. One body cannot go into and out of another.

I do not understand your first P.D. That is a slap in the face of the people on 
the committee as well as the organizations that recommended and picked them. 
Are you more qualified to have chosen the committee?

To answer your P.D.D., it would help to actually check your facts. The name of 
the planet predates the dog by nearly a year. The kid is still alive and was 
interviewed earlier this year, why not ask her?

Larry

Quoting MexicoDoug [EMAIL PROTECTED]:

  and the Charon aspect specifically for going too far in essentially
  recasting too many small round objects as full-fledged planets.
 Eventually,
  with new discoveries, there would likely be hundreds.
 
 Hello Again, The Charon and the rotating around center of mass outside the
 larger body (Pluto in this case) criterion aspect is very unwieldy for me.
 If a soccer ball, or other object which could have melted and rounded itself
 (or even rubble-pile modeled asteroids) gets into a meta stable orbit around
 the center of mass of the multi-body system in the appropriate conditions,
 it will become a planet for the moments it rotates outside the other members
 crust.  And more interestingly, if the orbit is of high enough eccentricity,
 the center of mass will vary inside and outside the major body.  I guess the
 simple solution would be to refine the definition for convenience to say
 that all bodies are compared as if they orbited the major body of the system
 at X distance, etc.  But this innocent corollary is a needless
 complication and goes against the grain of the intention: to make it a
 fairly independent set of criteria based on a priori physics.  There is
 based on physics and making reference to physics.  Anyone can make
 reference to physics - the IAU committees still hasn't understood that
 though they've come a good way along.  Ganymede and our Luna moons are
 excluded based on what boils down to an arbitrary criterion.  Time to cut to
 the Gordian chase and toss out this criterion.  Anything else will smack of
 arbitrariness.  How scientific can an issue be when you have near 50%-50%
 acceptance/rejection after so many years of debate?  I won't get going on
 dwarf status.  With stars it has real meaning.  However, it is arbitrary
 in its proposed use with the planets and again a cheap shot to put
 pseudoscience masquerading as real science (unethically) by experts in
 something who seems to feel that their diplomas make them experts in
 applying well defined astronomical terms to an amorphous limbo.  If you want
 to call it a dwarf planet - a double planet - any icy planet - a terrestrial
 planet - that's fine and highly context dependent.  Thus the adjective of
 choice is in the domain of the speaker, not in the quaint streets of Prague
 in meetings as astronomers eat up the travel and entertainment bill.
 Best wishes, Doug


 P.D. The IAU Committee has utterly failed by not including a committee
 member of the class and stature of Saul Kripke.  Historians and
 Astronomers...but how about including someone with real experience and
 credentials in aprioricity who has danced with the likes of Kant (and
 usually held his own).  I trust they will remedy this, as good scientists
 not concerned about who shares their turf...
 P.P.D. Pluto was actually named after the Disney Dog character by a British
 child, but was endorsed by astronomers under the auspices we generally
 consider when explaining the logic of planetary nomenclature.
 
 __
 Meteorite-list mailing list
 Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com
 http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
 


-- 
Dr. Larry A. Lebofsky
Senior Research Scientist
Co-editor, Meteorite  If you give a man a fish,   
Lunar and Planetary Laboratory   you feed him for a day.
1541 East University   If you teach a man to fish,
University of Arizonayou feed him for a lifetime.
Tucson, AZ 85721-0063 ~Chinese Proverb
Phone:  520-621-6947
FAX:520-621-8364
e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
__
Meteorite-list mailing list
Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com
http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list

Re: [meteorite-list] Solar System in Perspective

[Larry Lebofsky]

I think EL 61 rotates fairly rapidly and it is thought that this shape was 
frozen in when it was formed. This is where the actual defining of a planet 
gets a little fuzzy and where I start having problems with, if not the 
definition, how do you determine what is and what is not a planet.

The definition is not perfect, but this and how it is implemented are things 
that can be worked out.

Larry

Quoting Darren Garrison [EMAIL PROTECTED]:

 On Fri, 18 Aug 2006 15:36:14 -0400, you wrote:
 
 Apologies, if this link was posted previously.
 
 Some nice, high resolution graphics and a video fly-by, relative to the 
 on-going debate/discussion...
 
 http://www.iau2006.org/mirror/www.iau.org/iau0601/iau0601_release.html
 
 Thanks for supplying these.  I've seen thumbnail sized copies of them
 included
 in news stories before and did a little digging looking for the full images,
 but
 wasn't successful.  This image kind of confuses me, though:
 
 http://www.iau2006.org/mirror/www.iau.org/iau0601/screen/iau0601c.jpg
 
 It shows 2003 EL61 as highly distorted in shape, but shows it as a planet
 candidate, but by their own proposal it wouldn't be concidered a planet if
 it
 had that non-hydrostatic equilibrium shape.
 __
 Meteorite-list mailing list
 Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com
 http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
 


-- 
Dr. Larry A. Lebofsky
Senior Research Scientist
Co-editor, Meteorite  If you give a man a fish,   
Lunar and Planetary Laboratory   you feed him for a day.
1541 East University   If you teach a man to fish,
University of Arizonayou feed him for a lifetime.
Tucson, AZ 85721-0063 ~Chinese Proverb
Phone:  520-621-6947
FAX:520-621-8364
e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
__
Meteorite-list mailing list
Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com
http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list

Re: [meteorite-list] Pluto May Get Demoted After All

[Larry Lebofsky]

As long as Rob Britt quotes me correctly and not out of context, I am happy to 
be worked by him.

By the way, there are a good number of real astronomers who are making very 
strong comments about this resolution. I am not sure that I have ever seen so 
many egos coming out (I trust me and thee and I am not sure about thee).

Almost everything that is being proposed has been said before, but now that 
there is a vote in the works, it is all coming to a head (my idea is better 
than yours). 

Larry


__
Meteorite-list mailing list
Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com
http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list

Re: [meteorite-list] Pluto May Get Demoted After All

[Larry Lebofsky]

Hi Doug:

I never thought that I would admit to agreeing completely with Sterling (just 
kidding), but I am.

I have googled Kripke's credentials and I do not see how he would add anything 
to the committee. As I said before and I will say again, a lot of thought went 
into the formation of this committee from both the astronomical and astronomy 
history community. These are people who know the issues, who know the science 
(the words and concepts are far from arbitrary), and who, in general, did not 
come in with an agenda which was a problem with the first committee. This is 
not a linguistic issue, it is a science issue as to how one draws the line 
between planets and (whatever you want to call something smaller than a 
planet). It has implications with respect to the origin and evolution of our 
Solar System and other stellar systems.

Larry

Quoting MexicoDoug [EMAIL PROTECTED]:

 Hi Sterling, you really don't have to disagree with me because you have
 edited an old message of mine to the point of completely changing its
 meaning - with a new meaning I disagree with as well..
 
 Here's what I said: The IAU Committee has utterly failed by not including a
 committee
 member of the class and stature of Saul Kripke.  Historians and
 Astronomers...but how about including someone with real experience and
 credentials in aprioricity who has danced with the likes of Kant (and
 usually held his own).  I trust they will remedy this, as good scientists
 not concerned about who shares their turf...
 
 Here's what you say I said:
  Mexico Doug said:
   The IAU Committee has utterly failed
   by not including... Historians...
   but how about including someone
   with real experience and credentials
 
 I have no doubt that Owen Gingerich isn't the great historian you researched
 him to be and don't wish you to cut and paste my words erroneously to think
 I would have a different conclusion.  However, you have edited my post to
 appear that I don't recognize the quality of the historians on the
 Committee.  Read it.  I am recognizing the committee has good astronomers
 and historians!!!
 
 A more valid question is why is this committee needed, not taking for
 granted that it is a needed committee.  And if you Google Saul Kripke you
 will find his forte isn't really history at all, but rather he is the
 closest living example we have today of a Nobel laureate
 Philosopher-linguist whose specialty is this tyope of issue, and when words
 and concepts are arbitrary and when they are a priori - and when change is
 in order and when not, I would hastily suppose as well.
 
 Best wishes, Doug
 
 __
 Meteorite-list mailing list
 Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com
 http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
 


-- 
Dr. Larry A. Lebofsky
Senior Research Scientist
Co-editor, Meteorite  If you give a man a fish,   
Lunar and Planetary Laboratory   you feed him for a day.
1541 East University   If you teach a man to fish,
University of Arizonayou feed him for a lifetime.
Tucson, AZ 85721-0063 ~Chinese Proverb
Phone:  520-621-6947
FAX:520-621-8364
e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
__
Meteorite-list mailing list
Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com
http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list

Re: [meteorite-list] 'Plutons' Push Planet Total Up To 12-- Mike Brown's view

[Larry Lebofsky]

Hi again Darren:

Mike Brown makes some interesting and valid points. Others have too. No system 
is going to be perfect. We are dealing with Mother Nature and she has her own 
rules.

However, I am confused by some of what he says. He says that he had nothing to 
do with the writing of the resolution and disagrees with the committee's 
report. Yet, his name is on the list of committee members. Did he not vote on 
this (I was told the decision was unanimous)? Did he just get voted down and 
is now going off to give his own personal view (happens all the time and is 
acceptable)? Brown has always been a rebel. He is the only asteroid/comet 
discoverer (and there are hundreds) who has named his own asteroids without 
going through official channels. And before you say good for him, think what 
this would do if even two or three major meteorite hunters were to come up 
with their own naming/classification system without going through METSOC.

My biggest concern, personally (my favorite asteroid and the one that I 
studied for decades is now a planet!) is how one is going to determine whether 
of not something is or is not a planet based on the information available. One 
needs to know its diameter, its mass (and density), and its shape. That will 
not be easy for the KBOs. Will large KBOs remain in limbo (namewise) until 
we get images and more information on them?

Unless it is buried in the resolution, what about rubble piles? It is easier 
to make a rubble pile round than a solid body. I feel very uncomfortable with 
rubble pile planets. One therefore needs good mass estimates in order to get 
good density estimates: good luck.

As many of you have said, this, in part, is a science vs. public (education) 
issue. People do not like change. Students have enough trouble with 9 planets, 
let along 12 or 24 (the official added list) vs 53 (Mike Brown's list). With 
stars, there are so many and most people do not worry about how they are 
classified. With planets there are only 9 (at the moment) and we all (most or 
at least some) can name all of them. Add a few more and it will get confusing 
even for me (good at ten but then have to take my shoes off to get up to 20).

From a scientific perspective, there HAS to be a scientific definition of 
planet (no you cannot create a new word) so that, in the future, one can deal 
with bigger KBOs, Oort cloud objects and planets around other stars.  
Unfortunately, this is not something that the public can ignor (like a new 
class of stars) and, again, as many of you say, the committee cannot ignor 
when it comes to a final vote. Speaking to one member of the commmittee for 
some time the other day and knowing some of the others on the committee, I 
would think that they were well aware of this problem and that when the 
details are worked out, things will become clearer. 

I personally  commend this committee in its ability to come up with something 
that all could agree on. This is fra better than what happened in the previous 
committee or what has happened when people just ignor the system and do their 
own thing (name a new object or demote a planet).

Larry


__
Meteorite-list mailing list
Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com
http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list

[meteorite-list] Re: THE PLANETARY VOTE

[Larry Lebofsky]

Sterling:

Comments below:

Quoting Sterling K. Webb [EMAIL PROTECTED]:

 Hi, List, Larry,
 
 
 The vote of the planet definition being on August 24th, 
 Space.com ran an article about, not the definition: the vote, 
 just like it was FoxNews reporting on an election. The full article
 is reproduced below. But just like real TV, I'm going to indulge
 in lots of color commentary first...
 
 Caution: Political Commentary: Brian Marsden, an former 
 opponent of the idea, is now in favor. This means the he has 
 been assured by the IAU that the data clearing house that 
 he built over the decades and still runs will continue in its role 
 (as it should), and his funding won't get cut.

I have known Brian for years: I think he is actually planning to retire after 
this IAU meeting and so will no long be the Director of the Minor Pla, oops, 
Small Solar System Bodies Center.
 
 Caution: Political Commentary: David Charbonneau (extra-
 solar planets) is a firm eight-planet guy, saying that the solar
 system produced eight fully-formed planets and that the rest
 is just leftover rubble. He's right ,of course, and that makes what
 he discovers more important because they're real planets. 
 And, if he were an astronomer from the gas giants, he could say 
 that the solar system produced FOUR fully-formed planets and 
 that the rest is just leftover rubble. He'd be right, of course. 
 And, if he were an astronomer from Jupiter, he could say that 
 the solar system produced ONE fully-formed planet and that 
 the rest is just leftover rubble. He'd be right, of course. 
 Don't worry, David, your funding won't get cut.

The terrestrial (note not a real term) planets may have formed in 2 or 3 
million years, not exactly leftover rubble. In fact, Jupiter and Saturn may 
still have been growing which led to the late heavy bombardment (if I read 
things right).

 
 Caution: Political Commentary: The planetary scientists, as
 a body, are in favor of the new idea: more planets means more 
 objects of study means more funding for them. Example: would 
 the idiots in Congress have cut (they restored it) the DAWN 
 mission if Ceres was a PLANET and there would have been
 fewer of them muttering over their rubber chicken, Ceres? 
 Whathahell is a Ceres? You mean, the Wurld Ceres?

  [ha, lost on none-US readers, I missed it first time]

I thought you had a warm spot for Ceres? It is also my license plate (mentioned 
this to you before). We need another female planet (no sure Xena counts). And 
if you think we will get any more money out of NASA, ha!
 
 Caution: Political Commentary: The extra-solar crowd seems
 to be more opposed to the new definition than anybody else.
 Geoff Marcy, THE extra-solar guy, was very direct. What's the
 matter, Geoff? You didn't get famous enough fast enough?
 Ironic, when the scuttlebutt was that the Committee threw in
 the double-planet category as a sop to them. I guess they
 weren't sopped. In fact, they to hate it the worst. My advice: 
 want more funding? Find a planet of less than 3 Earth masses 
 that's not blazing hot nor freezing cold. Our ears will perk up
 a lot more than if you come up with two dozen more boiling 
 super-Jupiters grazing a photosphere...


Yes, a lot of care went into doing things that would benefit the extra solar 
people.
 
 Caution: Political Commentary: Nobody seems to be directing
 the focus of their dis-satisfaction on the idea that the Planet Ceres
 is the Planet Ceres, a very pleasing development to all us closeted
 Ceres lovers. I haven't found even one quote lambasting Ceres as 
 worthless junk, a miserable rockpile, asteroidal po' icewhite trash.

I proposed ice on Ceres in 1980! Convinced myself otherwise (just water of 
hydration), but may be vindicated!
 
 Here's the URL and Space.com's text just as they ran it. Well, 
 I corected their spelling errors, but that's all:

Rob Britt is doing a poll of us planetary scientists too poor to go to IAU on 
our real feelings. Oh I am one of the 12 by the way.
 
 Sterling K. Webb
 
 http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/060817_planet_support.html
 
 Astronomers Sharply Divided on New Planet Definition 
 By Robert Roy Britt
 Senior Science Writer
 posted: 17 August 2006
 10:41 am ET
 UPDATED 2:30 p.m. ET 
 
 A 12-person committee representing the world's 
 largest group of planetary scientists today threw its 
 support behind a new planet-definition proposal that 
 would increase the tally of planets in our solar system to 12.
 More dissent emerged, too, from several prominent 
 planet experts. 
 
 Straw Poll 
 
 SPACE.com conducted an informal straw poll of 
 respected astronomers who study planets and other 
 small objects in our solar system and around other 
 stars. Not all of them are at the IAU meeting where 
 they can vote, but the question is this:
 How would you vote on the planet definition proposal?
 Yes = 5   No = 

Re: [meteorite-list] NOT PLANETS, PLANEMOS

[Larry Lebofsky]

I continue to break my promises.

The original committee that could not come up with a definition for planet did 
state (I assume from some ohter IAU group working on the other end with large 
planets) that there are no free-floating planets. Below deuterium burning 
(brown dwarf) you are a sub-brown dwarf (not making this up).

Larry

Quoting Sterling K. Webb [EMAIL PROTECTED]:

 Hi,
 
 Extra-solar astronomers have planet problems
 of their own: is a star that's not a star a planet?
 Or is a planet that's not a star a star? Or, nobody
 loves a fat jupiterian...
 
 http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/060605_planemos.html
 
 You couldn't find a better word than Plan E Moes?
 
 
 Sterling K. Webb
 
 __
 Meteorite-list mailing list
 Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com
 http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
 


-- 
Dr. Larry A. Lebofsky
Senior Research Scientist
Co-editor, Meteorite  If you give a man a fish,   
Lunar and Planetary Laboratory   you feed him for a day.
1541 East University   If you teach a man to fish,
University of Arizonayou feed him for a lifetime.
Tucson, AZ 85721-0063 ~Chinese Proverb
Phone:  520-621-6947
FAX:520-621-8364
e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
__
Meteorite-list mailing list
Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com
http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list

Re: [meteorite-list] 'Plutons' Push Planet Total Up To 12

[Larry Lebofsky]

Hi Sterling:

Have not read all of your emails. The Scotsman released the news early, shame 
on them. The press found out yesterday at 8:00 am Prauge time and that is 
11:00 pm Monday night in California. We (Planetary Sciences Committee) found 
out Tuesday morning since as the largest group of planetary scientists, we 
would probably be getting the calls to give our opinion and we needed, as an 
organization) a response. We as individuals may not agree with it and may 
speak it (like apparently Brown is doing even though he was on the IAU 
committee).

However, I will respond to your last comment and what clear is pushing your 
button (at least this time). We had a report from on of the committee and the 
decision all has to do with physics. If gravity controls your shape, you may 
be considered a planet. I have no idea where Brown came up with 50 on their 
list. This is not official. The Question and Answer release has nine 
additional TNOs and 3 asteroids as potentially large enough to be in 
hydrostatic equilibrium (but we do not have enough information at the present 
time). Vesta is in this group. Picking a size is arbitrary and the committee 
did not want to do this (say just the size of Mercury or larger or just the 
size of Pluto or larger). 

With respect to Pluto and Charon. They both meet the planet criterion (so do a 
number of planetary satellites including our Moon). However, the center of 
mass is outside either body (their barycenter). The committee used the same 
cirterion as is used to define a binary star system. So, we have a binary 
planetary system! 

The system may be a bit complicated (do not think so), but it is not arbitary 
and relies on the physical nature of the object. Why would you just say 2000 
km (or 2000 miles or 2000 leagues or 2000 stadia; pick a unit)

Larry

PS I will go back through your other comments and try to respond to them. 
While not on the committee, I heard one of the committee explain the reasoning 
and we spent some time in discussing the reasoning.

Quoting Sterling K. Webb [EMAIL PROTECTED]:

 Hi, All,
 
 
 A much more detailed piece about the IAU
 recommendation in The Boston Globe:
 
http://www.boston.com/news/science/articles/2006/08/16/nine_no_longer_panel_dec
lares_12_planets/
 
 It contains an interview with Michael Brown which
 is quite interesting. You'd think he'd be all for it, because of
 2003UB313, but instead he says he doesn't favor it:
 
 There are 53 objects that meet the panel's criteria and
 probably many more to be discovered, according to
 Michael Brown, an astronomer at the California Institute
 of Technology who discovered 2003 UB313. The total
 number of planets, Brown said, could easily climb above
 100.
 A new panel of the astronomical union will be charged
 with designating planets, and it will be its job to determine
 if astronomers have proven that a particular body is
 sufficiently round to qualify.
 A number of scientists said in interviews that they
 expected the new definition would be accepted, but
 others, including Brown, opposed the idea. Calling it
 'a big mess,' Brown said he didn't like the complexity
 of the system, or the idea of a panel determining
 what new planets are.
 
 Another Committee...
 
 A check on the figures shows that the diameter of
 Charon is just slightly great than 50% of the diameter
 of Pluto, so perhaps that's the guideline for defining
 a double planet...
 
 
 Sterling K. Webb
 
  - Original Message - 
  From: Ron Baalke [EMAIL PROTECTED]
  To: Meteorite Mailing List meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com
  Sent: Tuesday, August 15, 2006 10:54 PM
  Subject: [meteorite-list] 'Plutons' Push Planet Total Up To 12
 
 
 
  http://news.scotsman.com/scitech.cfm?id=1194292006
 
  'Plutons' push planet total up to 12
  JOHN VON RADOWITZ
  The Scotsman
  August 15, 2006
 
  A NEW kind of planet, the pluton, could soon be taking its place in the
  Solar System.
 
  Astronomers have agreed on a draft proposal for redefining what
  constitutes a planet.
 
  If approved at a meeting underway in the Czech capital, Prague, school
  science text books will have to be re-written.
 
  The new definition would mean there are 12, not nine planets, and more
  could be added to the list in the future.
 
  They include eight classic planets - Mercury, Venus, Earth, Mars,
  Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus and Neptune - Ceres, currently considered an
  asteroid, and three plutons, one of which is Pluto.
 
  The other plutons are Charon, currently described as a moon of Pluto,
  and the newly-discovered object 2003 UB313, which has not been named
  officially, but is nicknamed Xena.
 
  Ceres is the largest object in the asteroid belt between Mars and
  Jupiter, and like a planet is spherical in shape.
 
  A resolution to accept the new planet definition will be voted on by
  members of the International Astronomical Union (IAU) 

Re: [meteorite-list] 'Plutons' Push Planet Total Up To 12

[Larry Lebofsky]

Hi Sterling:

Yes, Sterling, Ceres is a planet (if this passes the General Assembly). With 
respect to Ceres being a carbonaceous chondrite this comparison has been made 
since the early 80s. Google my name and Ceres and there are many hits for 
water on Ceres.

Larry



Quoting Sterling K. Webb [EMAIL PROTECTED]:

 Hi,
 
 
 Yes, Ceres is a planet again... if a vote of the whole is in favor!
 I predict a cantankerous electorate on August 24th! Ceres was a
 planet officially from 1804 to 1864, In 1855, the Big Four were
 retained as planets but all the others were demoted to minor planets.
 In the US, Ceres continued to be mentioned as a planet up into
 the 1870's.
 
 All planets have official planet symbols, you know. We've
 all seen them; they're on jewelry even. Is there a market for
 a new symbol for the new planets (if they vote'em into the
 club)? Well, Ceres, Vesta, Pallas, and Juno already have
 symbols from back when they were planets the other time.
 Good old Naval Observatory has 'em:
 http://aa.usno.navy.mil/hilton/AsteroidHistory/minorplanets.html
 
 But Xena and the other qualifying crutons, er, plutons
 don't. Probably have to wait until they have names...
 
 Ceres and the rest of the Big Four, even in 1864, were
 thought to be much larger than they really are. At the time...
 the most widely disseminated values for the diameters of
 the first four asteroids discovered were Ceres, 2613 km
 (really 975x909); Pallas, 3380 km (really 570x525x500);
 Juno, 2290 km (really 290x240x190); and Vesta (really
 578x560x458), not more than 383 km. Well, they were
 close on Vesta... You'll notice that only Ceres is really
 ROUND enough...
 
 Ceres density 2.08. Pluto density 2.03. Both densities are
 most easily modeled by a 50-50 mixture of ice 1.0 and rock 3.0,
 or some quibbly variation thereof. However, Ceres is darker
 (albedo 0.113 versus 0.50). There are signs Ceres has a transient
 atmosphere like Pluto. Ceres appears to have complex organic
 chemistry, so it may be the solar system's largest carbonaceous
 chondrite!
 http://www-
ssc.igpp.ucla.edu/dawn/newsletter/html/20030822/ceres_evolution.html
 
 The DAWN mission will get to Vesta October 2011
 and reach Ceres February 2015. Both Vesta and Ceres
 will be full-surface mapped. DAWN will carry two LDR
 LEON2 chip framing cameras as described below:
 http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/database/MasterCatalog?sc=DAWNex=1
 
 The resolution on the low-orbit passes will be a sharp
 5 meters per pixel, roughly comparable to the Mars HiRISE
 camera. It'll be stupendous. I really hope I live until 2015.
 
 Brian Marsden, in the article below:
 http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/050802_planet_definition.html
 is quoted as saying if the Allan Stern definition of a planet
 were used (everything spherical that goes 'round its star
 and doesn't fusion inside), we'd have 24 planets.
 Marsden wasn't in favor of the Stern definition, and
 it appears that the Stern definition is pretty much what
 the IAU Committee submitted for a vote.
 But, the way they're putting it forward is that Pluto
 stays, Ceres gets planet status (again), 2003UB313
 is a planet and Brown gets to apply for a planet name.
 Now, there's a moment in an astronomer's life!
 
 I think Marsden was exaggerating (he's in charge
 of non-planets and the shepperd could lose some sheep)
 when he said 24. Stern says 20... Let's start counting.
 
 Ceres is Planet 5. Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus, Neptune
 all get their numbers bumped up one. Pluto, the nineth
 planet (might be) is now Planet X (for Ten) and Charon
 is Planet 11. If we add 2003UB313 (Xena), 2003FY9,
 2003EL61, Sedna, and Quaoar we have 16 planets.
 Now, can everybody spell Q U A O A R ?
 Can ANYBODY say it?
 
 Whoops! We have to add 90482 Orcus; it's bigger
 than Quaoar. That makes 17 planets. There are five
 more KBO's for which a case could be made, except
 that circularity might be a problem; they're smaller and
 could be irregular. That would be 22 planets. Or 24.
 Or 20. Schoolchildren are going hate us! 17 planets to
 memorize (Do I gotta?!) AND learn how to spell
 QUAOAR?
 
 Somebody is sure to get offensive about 2003EL61
 just because it isn't round. I think we need an exception
 for dynamic distortion. Yeah, true 2003EL61 is about
 1960 x 1520 x 1000 km. Not very round. OK, it had this
 really rough childhood, see... But its density is almost
 as great as the Earth's Moon! This is no iceball! It's
 solid rock. It rotates in 4 hours; it's dynamically distorted,
 So is Jupiter and all other rotating bodies. Even I have a mild
 equatorial bulge and I'm not spinning at all.
 
 
 Sterling K. Webb
 -
 - Original Message - 
 From: Darren Garrison [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 To: Meteorite Mailing List meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com
 Sent: Tuesday, August 15, 2006 11:17 PM
 Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] 'Plutons' Push 

Re: [meteorite-list] 'Plutons' Push Planet Total Up To 12

[Larry Lebofsky]

Hi Daren:

I am reading these backwards, so have waded through Sterling's comments. 
Again, I was not on the committee, but have been (because of the Division for 
Planetary Sciences Committee) briefed by Rick Binzel who was on the 
committee and who we questioned.

Plutons: a class of planets. The committee used a star analogue like T-Tauri 
stars or Cepheid variables. So Plutons are PLANETS with orbital periods 
greater than 200 years. So, Pluto is a planet, it is a pluton, it is a KBO, 
and it is a TNO!

Ceres, as far as I can tell (do not know this for sure) will just be a planet. 
Since terrestrial and jovian (or gas giant) are not recognized by the IAU (see 
their QA), it is not a terrestrial planet (at least officially). So, there 
are the classical planets (not an offical term) and the plutons (an official 
term). Poor Ceres is in neither. IAU does use the term dwarf planet, but that 
will not be an official term. Also minor planet goes away. Asteroids and 
comets are now small Solar System bodies. This just removes the word planet 
from anything that is not a planet. Sounds good to me.

Larry 


__
Meteorite-list mailing list
Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com
http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list

Re: [meteorite-list] 'Plutons' Push Planet Total Up To 12

[Larry Lebofsky]

Darren:

We were getting ready to redo a kids video we did years ago and now we have to 
add three new planets (one without a name yet).

Larry


__
Meteorite-list mailing list
Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com
http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list

Re: [meteorite-list] 'Plutons' Push Planet Total Up To 12

[Larry Lebofsky]

Hi Chris:

Since your two posts on this subjsetc, I think some of the responders have 
gotten a little out of hand and think that they know more than everyone else.

1. This is the second committee to have dealt with the issue of determining a 
definition of a planet.

2. A lot of the discussion of the second committee was based heavily on what 
the first committee did.

3. A lot of effort was put into the formation of this committee to get a 
crosssection of the community from a variety of countries and included a 
premier science writer and an astronomy historian. To some of you listening, do 
you think that in the two or three milliseconds that you thought about what was 
proposed by this IAU committee that you are better qualified to come up with a 
solution?

4. Now that I have vented my splean, I will respond to your emails, Chris. 

5. Yes, the IAU does have the authority to make such decisions! They are the 
organization recognized by ALL astronomers as the organization who can do such 
things. They OK the names of asteroids and comets and are the organization who 
came up with the 88 constellations that we have today. 

6. Which brings me back to your second (I think) email. First a side note to 
Ed, I think (am losing track of the emails, I dumped enough on Sterling). 
Granted there are only 7 continents and 7 seas, should we limit ourselves to 9 
US states because that is all you can remember or 9 countries (I will not go 
there)? 

7. I have spent nearly two decades doing science education (3.5 doing science) 
and one of the most important things that we can teach are kids is that science 
is dynamic and that numbers change. When I grew up there were 32 moons in the 
Solar System and no extra solar planets (and no Kuiper Belt Objects). However, 
I have changes what I teach as we learn more. That is the true nature of 
science. If you were teaching in 1930 would you have left the Solar System with 
8 planets? or in the early 1700s, kept the Solar System at 6 planets? 
Traditionally, the Earth is the center of the universe, why not let well enough 
alone? Get a little off track, sorry.

8. A lot of effort and a lot of thought went into this decision both from a 
SCIENTIFIC (not technical) perspective and from an historical perspective. I 
know all of the people on the first committee and many of the people on the 
second one and I have respect for them and for their decision. While this is 
only a proposal to the IAU General Assembly and may change before next week 
(doubt there will be much of a change), I think that you are doing a disservice 
to your students by telling them that there are only nine planets (it is all 
over the news, how can they miss it).

Chris, if you want to continue this discussion offline, please feel free to 
contact me.

Larry


-- 
Dr. Larry A. Lebofsky
Senior Research Scientist
Co-editor, Meteorite  If you give a man a fish,   
Lunar and Planetary Laboratory   you feed him for a day.
1541 East University   If you teach a man to fish,
University of Arizonayou feed him for a lifetime.
Tucson, AZ 85721-0063 ~Chinese Proverb
Phone:  520-621-6947
FAX:520-621-8364
e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
__
Meteorite-list mailing list
Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com
http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list

Re: [meteorite-list] 'Plutons' Push Planet Total Up To 12

[Larry Lebofsky]

Hi Darren:

I promised myself to not be the one to send out a dozen emails on a subject, 
but I seem to be breaking my own promise.

I do not have the information in front of me, but will attempt to contact the 
person who knows the answer. (how big of an object can still be out there and 
not detected)

What happens when you find something that is say the size of the Moon or just a 
little smaller than Mercury at the outer edges of the Kuiper Belt. This is not 
out of the question. What do you call it then? Just say too bad we have 9 (or 8 
planets) and that is life? Science is not done that way it is dynamic and 
things do change. Granted my example with the Earth-centered system was going 
too far (I admit when I am wrong). When Archaea were first discovered, did 
biologists ignor them because they did not fit into the existing Eukaryota and 
Bacteria scheme? You need to be able to classify things and be willing to 
quantify classifications so that new discoveries can fit into these (or you 
create a new class). 

Saying that this is just the opinion of a group of astronomers shows a 
disrespect for astronomy as a science. Yes, you can have your own opinion. 
However, a lot of time and thought and research went into this proposal. It is 
more than just an opinion. It is solidly based on observation and the physical 
nature of the objects in our Solar System and other objects that are likely to 
be found in the future. Is is perfect? Probably not. But it is necessary.

Larry


Quoting Darren Garrison [EMAIL PROTECTED]:

 On Wed, 16 Aug 2006 09:26:39 -0700, you wrote:
 
 science. If you were teaching in 1930 would you have left the Solar System
 with 
 8 planets? or in the early 1700s, kept the Solar System at 6 planets? 
 Traditionally, the Earth is the center of the universe, why not let well
 enough 
 alone?
 
 The difference is, the idea that the Earth is the center of the solar system
 was
 proven incorrect, so that theory was replaced with one with the sun at the
 center.  Wherther or not Pluto is a planet is a semantic opinion, though--
 little different than debating on how many angels can dance on the head of a
 needle.  People have the right to disagree with opinions, even if it is with
 the
 opinions of the top astronomers in the field.  Myself, I think the opinion
 of
 calling KBOs and Ceres planets seems to be just a way to keep calling Pluto
 a
 planet and makes a royal mess that will just get worse as more KBOs are
 discovered.  So, not only in 1930, in 2006 if I were teaching I'd want to
 teach
 that there are 8 planets, plus KBOs, asteroids, and comets.
 __
 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] 'Plutons' Push Planet Total Up To 12

[Larry Lebofsky]

Hi Sterling:


It is a little more complicated than that! Remember that Pluto is tilted on 
its side (about) and so while in recent years half the time Charon is closer or 
further away, in a mere 50 years or so (1/4 of the orbit) they will be side by 
side.

In response to Rob's last email, yes, the center of mass is outside Pluto (the 
same criterion used for binary stars), so binary planet.

Larry

Quoting Sterling K. Webb [EMAIL PROTECTED]:

 Hi,
 
 
 Pluto and Charon are Planets Ten and Eleven;
 Which is which? Nobody knows, outside of Heaven.
 
 The orbital period of Charon is 6.38723 days. Half
 that time, it's Eleven; half that time it's Ten. But don't
 ask when! Just think of them as Planet 10-11, like 7-11
 or 9-11, as a set, or maybe as Planet EleventyTen. Their
 surfaces are only 16,040 km apart! Just jump real hard!
 I just mean, they're cozy.
 
 I can't see the problem of the redefinition being very 
 large for us, or people generally, or astronomers, or even
 school children, but one thought occurs to me. What 
 about the Astrologers? Are they going to ignore this?
 Or re-write everything? Customers will come in and
 then complain because the aspects of Ceres are not 
 included in their Charts. What about the influence of 
 Charon on their Love Life? You're a Scorpio with
 Xena rising...
 
 What a mess!
 
 
 Sterling K. Webb
 --
 - Original Message - 
 From: David Weir [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 To: Sterling K. Webb [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Cc: Meteorite Mailing List meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com
 Sent: Wednesday, August 16, 2006 10:41 AM
 Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] 'Plutons' Push Planet Total Up To 12
 
 
  Sterling,
  
  In what order would you place the 12 planets? Would the order for Pluto 
  and Charon be based on which is usually closest to the Sun? If so, which 
  would be most often closest to the Sun? I'm having trouble picturing 
  this orbital dance in my head.
  
  David
 
 
 __
 Meteorite-list mailing list
 Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com
 http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
 


-- 
Dr. Larry A. Lebofsky
Senior Research Scientist
Co-editor, Meteorite  If you give a man a fish,   
Lunar and Planetary Laboratory   you feed him for a day.
1541 East University   If you teach a man to fish,
University of Arizonayou feed him for a lifetime.
Tucson, AZ 85721-0063 ~Chinese Proverb
Phone:  520-621-6947
FAX:520-621-8364
e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
__
Meteorite-list mailing list
Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com
http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list

Re: [meteorite-list] 'Plutons' Push Planet Total Up To 12

[Larry Lebofsky]

Chris:

So what are these things that are being discovered around other stars? Clearly 
not planets! As someone else has said, do you go back to the 5 original 
planets? Earth does not wander through the sky, so is it a planet based on 
the original difinition of a planet? Uranus, Neptune, and Pluto are visible 
to the naked eye. When it was determined that the Earth went around the Sun, 
then we redefined a planet from its ancient meaning of wandering star (which 
they are not).

There is nothing wrong with having a scientific definition for an otherwise 
common word. 

Closer to home, who gave the authority for the METSOC to classify meteorites,to 
name them, or to create new classes of meteorites? You need some sort of 
control. You need some authority in a position to make a scientific decision as 
to how something is classified (how it formed, where it came from) based on 
existing and new information. At one point, it was thought that all meteorites 
came from asteroids (that was a definition if you want look at it that way), 
but with new information, scientists determined that there were meteorites from 
the Moon and Mars - they changed the definition of meteorite.


The above may seem silly to you, but one does not have to create new scientific 
words just because a word has a narrow meaning in general use. 

You could also create your own star charts, give stars and constellations their 
own names, sell the names of stars, but it would not be recognized by the 
authority that is recognized to do this: the IAU. You could do the same for 
meteorites.

Quoting Chris Peterson [EMAIL PROTECTED]:

 No, they don't have the authority to redefine words that are in common 
 usage and found in ordinary dictionaries. That is quite different from 
 defining the proper name of bodies, craters, etc. Their definitions are 
 more akin to recommendations than anything binding; I can quite legally 
 call any astronomical object anything I want; of course, it probably 
 won't be accepted by many!
 
 In this case, what they are actually doing is overloading the word 
 planet. That is, they are creating a new definition in addition to 
 those already in use. As a rule, I think overloading words in this way 
 is a bad idea since it is likely to lead to confusion. IMO the wise 
 thing to do would be to worry about the subcategories, which are what 
 really matter (e.g. terrestrial body, icy body, gas giant, etc). The 
 parent category of all these probably doesn't need a rigorously defined 
 name at all, but if given one should be something other than planet. 
 In any case such bodies lie along a continuum of spherocity, barycenter 
 location, etc; attempting a rigorous definition of something that is 
 probably not definable is just asking for trouble.
 
 One of the goals of creating nomenclature should be to avoid breaking 
 things to the greatest extent possible. If this proposal is adopted, it 
 breaks countless books and publications. On the other hand, adopting a 
 new word to describe the sort of bodies we think of as planets would 
 break very little; new publications would simply be a little more 
 precise than older ones. Definitions should be backwards compatible!
 
 Chris
 
 *
 Chris L Peterson
 Cloudbait Observatory
 http://www.cloudbait.com
 
 
 - Original Message - 
 From: Sterling K. Webb [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 To: Meteorite Mailing List meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com; 
 Chris Peterson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Cc: Larry Lebofsky [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Sent: Wednesday, August 16, 2006 3:24 PM
 Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] 'Plutons' Push Planet Total Up To 12
 
 
 Hi, Chris, List,
 
 Actually, the IAU does have the authority, beyond the support of
 every working scientist in the field. The IAU was founded in 1918/9 to
 clear up a horrific mess of everybody naming the SAME Lunar and
 Martian features with their own choice of names, so that you had to
 refer to the crater Prof. X calls Backscat and Prof. Y calls Gribniz
 but Prof. Z calls Tinkerbelle for anyone to know what feature you're
 talking about.
 
 Under a whole array of International Treaties, most of which
 the US is signatory to, they are designated to be the official arbiter
 of this and that, so many times and in so many treaties, that their
 authority is virtually statutory.  For example, the GPS  timing would
 be impossible with the geodetic-celestial coordinate transfer, which
 they defined and implemented. Would you like to be flying around
 the world and have the GPS system change at every national border?
 No thanks. The list of things they do that are essential and absolutely
 necessary is very long.
 
 They're not the Académie Française; they're a lot more
 authoritative! All the Académie Française does is try to bully
 the French into talking like it's the eighteenth century. Prithee,
 what harm in that, sirrah? And while I like to tease them,
 like any European French Model

Re: [meteorite-list] Pluto's Fate to be Decided by 'Scientific andSimp

[Larry Lebofsky]

Hi all:

Depending on albedo, there could easily be Earth-sized bodies beyond the 
Kuiper Belt (do not remember the exact numbers off the top of my head but 
could find out). As far as perturbations are concerned, we are likely to be 
getting comets from the Oort cloud (that is how it was predicted) and these 
could knocked out of the cloud by passing stars the cloud goes out to nearly 
1/2 an AU, so there are stars that do get faily close to that distance.

Larry

Quoting E.P. Grondine [EMAIL PROTECTED]:

 Hi Ron - 
 
 When do we get back the tens of millions of dollars
 spent looking for Nemesis?  The NEO search teams could
 really use it.  There's those 64 fragments of SW3
 coming back around in 2022.  Additionally there's a
 pack of nuts all gearing up to holler about 2012, very
 close to SW3's 2011 return.
 
 If I can get the money back, can I keep a percentage?
 
 good hunting,
 Ed
 
 
 
 --- Ron Baalke [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 
   
   Bigger than Pluto?  At greater AUs'out?
   
   This could explain the comets that come out of the
  blue appear once and
   never return.
   
   Did not astronomers think that it was interstellar
  perturbations that
   jarred the K-belt?
   
   A large planet(s) out there would have much more
  effect than stars
   light years away.
   
  
  We would have seen evidence of a large planet by
  now, which we've haven't.
  Analysis by Myles Standish at JPL indicates that a
  large planet out
  beyond Neptune does not exist.  Some astronomers
  have been searching 
  for a Planet X based on what appeared to be
  irregularities
  in the orbits of Uranus and Neptune.  However, when
  the extremely accurate 
  measurements of the mass of Neptune made by the
  Voyager 2 flyby in 1989
  are inserted in the equations, these irregularities
  vanish.  Prior to the
  Voyager 2 flyby, the mass number used for Neptune
  was off by five-tenths
  of 1 percent.   When the new value for Neptune's
  mass is factored into the
  equations, the orbits of the outer planets are shown
  to be moving as exp
  ected, going all the way back to the early 1800's. 
  The results of Standish's 
  analysis are published in the May 1993 issue of The
  Astronomical Journal
  
  Ron Baalke
  __
  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
 


-- 
Dr. Larry A. Lebofsky
Senior Research Scientist
Co-editor, Meteorite  If you give a man a fish,   
Lunar and Planetary Laboratory   you feed him for a day.
1541 East University   If you teach a man to fish,
University of Arizonayou feed him for a lifetime.
Tucson, AZ 85721-0063 ~Chinese Proverb
Phone:  520-621-6947
FAX:520-621-8364
e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
__
Meteorite-list mailing list
Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com
http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list

Re: [meteorite-list] Cosmic Dust in Terrestrial Ice ENDING

[Larry Lebofsky]

Sterling:

But you should also realize that DHMO in its frozen state (which occurs during 
ice ages) has a high albedo and hence reflects most of the incoming solar 
energy, again cooling things off.

Larry

Quoting Sterling K. Webb [EMAIL PROTECTED]:

 Hi,
 
 Thanks to a defective mouse gone click-crazy, my post got
 sent before it was finished. It ended in mid-sentence:
 
 And, for Rob Matson, I just want to point out, an ice age is
  what happenes when you...
 
 and if I'd finished it, would have read:
 
 And, for Rob Matson, I just want to point out that an ice 
  age is what happens when you control DHMO pollution!
 
 Yes, that nasty greenhouse gas, DHMO is sequestered
 very nicely in an ice age.
 I understand that global warming scientists are still trying to
 decide whether the role of DHMO is to have a net warming or a
 net cooling effect. DHMO, like carbon dioxide, has absorption
 bands for IR, hence heats the atmosphere, but DHMO clouds
 increase the planetary albedo and reflect incoming radiation,
 hence cool the planet. Which effect is strongest, warming or 
 cooling? They puzzle over their computer models.
 Well, one thing an ice age has is clear bright cloudless skies
 and very dry air. There's no doubt about that. Both warming
 and cooling effects of DHMO are reduced, but what is the
 proportionality coefficient?
 Less atmospheric DHMO = cold world. Likely, more DHMO
 = warm world. Of course, it's a feedback cycle and very complex,
 yada, yada. But geological history is a grand laboratory notebook
 of experiments we would never want to perform. Better to just
 look'em up in the book.
 So, it's probably true that DHMO is a dangerous greenhouse
 gas. It's still better than an ice age...
 
 
 Sterling K. Webb
 
 
 __
 Meteorite-list mailing list
 Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com
 http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
 


-- 
Dr. Larry A. Lebofsky
Senior Research Scientist
Co-editor, Meteorite  If you give a man a fish,   
Lunar and Planetary Laboratory   you feed him for a day.
1541 East University   If you teach a man to fish,
University of Arizonayou feed him for a lifetime.
Tucson, AZ 85721-0063 ~Chinese Proverb
Phone:  520-621-6947
FAX:520-621-8364
e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
__
Meteorite-list mailing list
Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com
http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list

Re: [meteorite-list] Cosmic Dust in Terrestrial Ice MORE

[Larry Lebofsky]

Hi Sterling:

Some of my best friends (who are atmospheric scientists) do not believe in 
global warming. I agree that there are just too many factors involved and you 
can get almost any answer you want. While I personally believe that cutting 
CO2 emissions is not a bad idea, it should be realized that Mars is having a 
warming trend and I am not sure anyone really knows why. Is the Sun 
responsible?

Larry

Quoting Sterling K. Webb [EMAIL PROTECTED]:

 Hi, Mike, Larry,
 
 Mike, Rob Matson posted a very funny 
 website URL:
 http://www.dhmo.org/
 outlining the consumer hazards of DHMO, 
 which is DiHydrogen MonOxide, which many
 non-scientific persons call just plain WATER.
 The website is hilarious.
 
 Larry, there are many components to calculating
 warming vs. cooling for the overall hydrology at any
 temperature, so many that none of the models can agree
 on any result for the overall role of water, so all the 
 global warming models are fudging their results in
 this regard with simple plug-ins which ignore water, 
 yet we're supposed to take them seriously. Pul-eeze.
 
 I'm just saying that the perfect summation of all effects
 is to be found in reality, but whether the climate drives
 the water or the water drives the climate, who can tell?
 
 The same is true of CO2 and climate. Which is the
 driving factor? The global warming version is that
 CO2 drives climate. William Ruddiman (UVa) has 
 just published an analysis that concludes that climate
 drives CO2:
 http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2006/07/060725074044.htm
 Complete text (.pdf) at:
 http://www.clim-past.net/2/43/2006/cp-2-43-2006.pdf
 
 Two years ago, Ruddiman published a paper that
 concluded that human activities that increased CO2
 levels accelerated the end of the last glacial period and
 precipitated the interglacial we now enjoy. (According
 to the Milankovich cycles, it was early).
 
 Personally, I think that about the time we get everybody
 on board with global warming and are committed to
 and exercising real control of CO2, the climate will turn 
 colder. I call it the Principle of Perversity. The one thing 
 you can count on weather and climate doing? Change.
 
 
 Sterling K. Webb
 -
 - Original Message - 
 From: Mike Fowler [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 To: meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com
 Cc: Mike Fowler [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Sent: Saturday, August 05, 2006 7:01 PM
 Subject: [meteorite-list] Cosmic Dust in Terrestrial Ice ENDING
 
 

__
Meteorite-list mailing list
Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com
http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list

Re: [meteorite-list] Southern Delta Aquarids METEOR SHOWER

[Larry Lebofsky]

Hi Dean:

There are lots of sites that give the major showers. Here is one that also 
gives estimated numbers per hour.

http://www.amsmeteors.org/showers.html#major


Just remember, the number that you will see will depend on how dark it is and 
where the Moon is (light from the Moon).

The South Delta Aquarids (SDA) should have maxed out at about 20/hour and 
there was not much Moon, so you may have been limited by sky brightness and by 
the time of night (best after midnight as the Earth moves through the meteor 
stream, like bugs on a wind screen)

Larry




Quoting dean bessey [EMAIL PROTECTED]:

 I saw my first meteor shower last night at kumue
 observatory in Auckland. Probably not as impressive as
 some people have seen meteor showers but we we getting
 more than one a minute. Once I saw two at the same
 time, a skinny and a fat one that came from the same
 area (It was sort of cool and had the illusion of
 starting in the same place as if it broke apart). 
 Apparantly at the star party 100 miles away last
 weekend there were lots also and my friend said that
 he saw one in his telescope (I missed the party
 unfortunately).
 We were stargazing and the meteors were unexpected.
 I got the name Southern Delta Aquarids a few minutes
 ago from searching google wondering if there was
 indeed supposed to be a meteor shower going on now but
 I dont know if I have the name right. 
 This was my first ever meteor shower and the first
 time I was ever able to look up and really expect to
 see a meteor. I had my 4 month old baby with me so it
 was kind of special - even if it was only one meteor a
 minute. How does that compare to normal meteor
 showers? 
 The only negitave was that none appear to have fallen
 all the way down.
 Cheers
 DEAN
 
 __
 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] Southern Delta Aquarids METEOR SHOWER

[Larry Lebofsky]

Hi again Dean:

My bad!

I thought you said one an hour! One a minute is great!! I should stop reading 
emails before my morning coffee.

I just caught your last statement about none falling all the way down. To the 
best of my knowledge, no meteorite has ever fallen from a meteor shower. If 
you look at the stuff that Stardust brought back to Earth, that is the size of 
the typical meteor. Not very large and not what you see in the movies!

Larry

Quoting dean bessey [EMAIL PROTECTED]:

 I saw my first meteor shower last night at kumue
 observatory in Auckland. Probably not as impressive as
 some people have seen meteor showers but we we getting
 more than one a minute. Once I saw two at the same
 time, a skinny and a fat one that came from the same
 area (It was sort of cool and had the illusion of
 starting in the same place as if it broke apart). 
 Apparantly at the star party 100 miles away last
 weekend there were lots also and my friend said that
 he saw one in his telescope (I missed the party
 unfortunately).
 We were stargazing and the meteors were unexpected.
 I got the name Southern Delta Aquarids a few minutes
 ago from searching google wondering if there was
 indeed supposed to be a meteor shower going on now but
 I dont know if I have the name right. 
 This was my first ever meteor shower and the first
 time I was ever able to look up and really expect to
 see a meteor. I had my 4 month old baby with me so it
 was kind of special - even if it was only one meteor a
 minute. How does that compare to normal meteor
 showers? 
 The only negitave was that none appear to have fallen
 all the way down.
 Cheers
 DEAN
 
 __
 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

[meteorite-list] Seeking Articles for Meteorite magazine

[Larry Lebofsky]

Hi Bernd:

Well it was only 74 F at noon here in Tucson (it was 109 last week). We finally 
have some rain!

But, down to business. Yes, I am back in Tucson (dry heat) after six months in 
Arkansas and it is time to think about the next two issues of Meteorite 
magazine. We already have three or four articles for the next issue and more 
promised, but things happen, and so we are here to ask for contributions (of 
articles) for November and February. The deadline for November is August 18 and 
for February, mid November. The success of Meteorite depends on the readership 
and the authorship, so please keep those articles coming (I hate having to beg, 
but have been known to do it). If you have an idea for an article, please pass 
it by us and we can let you know what we think.

Nancy and I have already proofed the August issue, so it should be out soon.

Oh, a reminder, since I always forget. When you you send in an article, please 
send in a picture of yourself and a short bio so that the readership knows who 
you are and what you do in real life.


Thanks in advance.

Larry and Nancy
-- 
Dr. Larry A. Lebofsky
Senior Research Scientist
Co-editor, Meteorite  If you give a man a fish,   
Lunar and Planetary Laboratory   you feed him for a day.
1541 East University   If you teach a man to fish,
University of Arizonayou feed him for a lifetime.
Tucson, AZ 85721-0063 ~Chinese Proverb
Phone:  520-621-6947
FAX:520-621-8364
e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
__
Meteorite-list mailing list
Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com
http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list

RE: [meteorite-list] Chladni's Heirs NORWAY field report

[Larry Lebofsky]

Moni:

http://www.authentichistory.com/audio/1920s/Billy_Jones-
Yes_We_Have_No_Bananas.html

Note: the link is longer than one line, so be careful with the wrapping.

Larry



Quoting moni Waiblinger-Seabridge [EMAIL PROTECTED]:

 Hi list members,
 
 Stefan Ralew
 Andi Gren
 Martin Altmann and Morten Bilet,
 
 Thank you for this report!!!
 
 Its so wonderful to find out more of this fall without having to spend all 
 this money to get there, unless of course one finds a piece!
 Well, let's see how our American friends will do!   ;-)
 
 
 With best regards,
 Moni
 
 PS. Martin, what is the melody for this song?
 
 
 __
 Meteorite-list mailing list
 Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com
 http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
 


-- 
Dr. Larry A. Lebofsky
Senior Research Scientist
Co-editor, Meteorite  If you give a man a fish,   
Lunar and Planetary Laboratory   you feed him for a day.
1541 East University   If you teach a man to fish,
University of Arizonayou feed him for a lifetime.
Tucson, AZ 85721-0063 ~Chinese Proverb
Phone:  520-621-6947
FAX:520-621-8364
e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
__
Meteorite-list mailing list
Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com
http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list

Re: [meteorite-list] Chladni's Heirs NORWAY field report

[Larry Lebofsky]

Last one, I promise:

If you are one of those people who they warned about who go on private 
property, then there is always the song redone by Tiny Tim (see song 1). 
Written in 1929:


http://www.counterpoint-music.com/specialties/tinytim.html


Larry

__
Meteorite-list mailing list
Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com
http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list

Re: [meteorite-list] Antarctic comet dust perhaps in better conditionthan Stardust

[Larry Lebofsky]

Hi Adam:

Here is my attempt to give a short answer based on very little information on 
what they found, but comparing this to what we have seen from Stardust and 
what has been collected in the past.

1. From U2 dust collection studies (Brownley Particles), there are mainly two 
types of Interplanetary Dust Particles: Chondritic Smooth (amorphous exterors, 
hydrated silicates, thought to be related to asteroids(?)). Chondritic Porous 
(anydrous, fluffy, cpntain samll rains that may perdate the Solar System, 
comet dust(?)).

2. From what I have seen so far, much of the Stardust material has still 
been altered. If you look at the images, while they did not have the effects 
of sitting in space for a few million years and going through Earth's 
atmosphere, they did impact the aerogel at a fairly good speed.

Based on this and on the abstract, I am assuming this they found lots of small 
particles that are similar to Interplanetary Dust Particles, but that have 
made it to the ground (the old look in a barrel of water and you will find 
micrometeorites, but on a much longer timescale).

I am not sure that I can give a more better answer until I have actually seen 
pictures (or their detailed discussion), so this is a (sort of) educated guess.

Larry

Quoting Adam Hupe [EMAIL PROTECTED]:

 How could this dust be in better condition than Stardust samples when only a
 third of it might have been contributed by a comet?  How can they be sure
 this material came from a comet? With Stardust you know with 100% certainty
 where it came from plus there is no terrestrial contamination.
 
 Check out this exact quote from the article:
 
 When they melted the snow and filtered out anything more than 25
 micrometres across, almost a third of the particles they found were from
 space.
 
 The whole thing stinks of posturing to me!
 
 Adam
 
 
 
 - Original Message - 
 From: Darren Garrison [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 To: meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com
 Sent: Wednesday, July 12, 2006 12:21 PM
 Subject: [meteorite-list] Antarctic comet dust perhaps in better
 conditionthan Stardust
 
 
 Anyone have access to the full article?
 
 http://www.newscientistspace.com/article/mg19125594.100.html
 __
 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] Kepler Crater As Seen By SMART-1

[Larry Lebofsky]

Hi:

Part (all) of the distortion could be due to parallax as the spacecraft is 
moving above the surface of the Moon (Moon not at an infinite distance and 
viewed from different perspective). 

How about something in the field of view of the camera? Not a UFO, but just 
the fact that the environment around a spacecraft is never really clean 
(firing attitude jets, etc.) The would at least explain the big fuzzy one (out 
of focus so very close).

Larry

Quoting Darren Garrison [EMAIL PROTECTED]:

 On Sat, 1 Jul 2006 12:49:52 +1000, you wrote:
 
 There's also another much bigger but fainter one just below the centre of
 the image. Maybe just a photographic or processing aberation?
 
 I would think that this looks more like an artifact in the camera than in
 the
 processing.  You can see the artifacts and distortions better in this:
 http://webpages.charter.net/garrison6328/crater_bigger_faster.gif
 __
 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] Meteoritics Course

[Larry Lebofsky]

Hello:

University of Arizona does not do any on-line courses in meteoritics, but they 
do teach regular classes in that area. I do not see anything for the fall and 
do not know the sprint schedule. You should contact Hal Larson:

[EMAIL PROTECTED]

He is the head of the curriculum committee and would know when it will be 
taught the next time. Note, that it may be a graduate course. I am not sure, 
but at least check with him.

Larry

Quoting [EMAIL PROTECTED]:

 Hello,
 I would like to take a course in meteoritics.
 Does anyone know of an online course in meteoritics?
 Do they have anything at the University of Arizona?
 
 thanks~
 
 j. karl 
 
 
 
 __
 Meteorite-list mailing list
 Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com
 http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
 


-- 
Dr. Larry A. Lebofsky
Senior Research Scientist
Co-editor, Meteorite  If you give a man a fish,   
Lunar and Planetary Laboratory   you feed him for a day.
1541 East University   If you teach a man to fish,
University of Arizonayou feed him for a lifetime.
Tucson, AZ 85721-0063 ~Chinese Proverb
Phone:  520-621-6947
FAX:520-621-8364
e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
__
Meteorite-list mailing list
Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com
http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list

Re: [meteorite-list] Pluto's Twin Moons Get Their Names

[Larry Lebofsky]

I am surprised that they actually accepted that at all. They reeally do try to 
avoid confusion of names.

I have observed in one night asteroid 1036 Ganymed and Jupiter's moon Ganymede 
and on another night asteroid 52 Europa and Jupiter's moon Europa (need to be 
very careful with one's observing log).

Larry

Quoting Darren Garrison [EMAIL PROTECTED]:

 On Tue, 20 Jun 2006 18:05:07 -0700 (PDT), you wrote:
 
 Because an asteroid with the name Nyx already
 exists, the IAU decided to use a slightly different spelling for the
 inner one of the two small Plutonian moons, to avoid confusion. 
 
 Hm.  If it is as simple as that, I'm sure that we could come up with some
 alternate spellings for Persephone.
 __
 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] Three New 'Trojan' Asteroids Found Sharing Neptune's Orbit

[Larry Lebofsky]

Hi again Sterling:

I have to keep this short since I have a journal article to review and a 
magazine to edit.

Even an asteroid scientist can learn something once in a while:

The Lagrange points (the stable ones) are gravity lows (they can get in but 
they can't get out). I knew that.

1. To be in a Jupiter Trojan orbit, you have to be between 5.05 and 5.40 AU 
from the Sun (Earth is 1 AU from the Sun, if there is anyone here not familiar 
with that term and Jupiter 5.20 AU). I just learned that.

2. If you go to the Minor Planets Center site,

http://cfa-www.harvard.edu/iau/lists/JupiterTrojans.html


there is a list of all the Trojan asteroids and their orbital elements. Some 
of the Jupiter Trojans have orbital inclination over 40 degerees (I didn't 
know that).

So, with even higher velocities at the distance of Jupiter, and that high of 
an inclination, you would again think that they would be running into one 
another. But, space is big and space is dark to quote a t-shirt.


Oh, Sterling, going back to Planet V (remember that?) One of the models for 
the formation of the Solar System (and for the late heavy bombardment) is the 
moving of the planets: Jupiter moves in, Satuen moves out (when Saturn's 
orbital period is twice that of Jupiter, asteroids get flung all over the 
place), and Uranus and Neptune also move out. In some models, Neptune starts 
out being closer to the Sun than Uranus!
Quoting Sterling K. Webb [EMAIL PROTECTED]:

 Hi, Larry, List,
 
 It is a little puzzling, but I assume that what
 they're describing is the discovery of an asteroid
 in an orbit identical to Neptune's but tilted 25 deg
 to Neptune's and having an asteroid in the Trojan
 position to where Neptune would be if Neptune
 were in that orbit instead of the orbit that Neptune
 actually is in, if a woodchuck could chuck wood
 
 What's unclear to me is why an asteroid would
 settle down in the Trojan position of an asteroid
 in an orbit identical to Neptune's but tilted 25 deg
 to Neptune's and having that asteroid in the Trojan
 position to where Neptune would be if Neptune
 were in that orbit instead of the orbit that Neptune
 actually is in, if Neptune isn't actually IN that orbit,
 providing the gravitational situation which makes
 the Trojan position stable?
 
 I spoze that Neptune's gravitational influence
 out there in them thar wide open spaces is great enough
 to provide stability even to an inclined co-orbit. My
 first thought was that maybe Neptune's influence on
 an inclined orbit was only strong enough to sustain
 Trojans in a zone near to Neptune's orbit, but then
 I realized that all these inclined orbits would have
 nodes with the orbit of Neptune, so that the Neptune
 Trojans in inclined orbits would pass through Neptune's
 orbit at two points, the nodes.
 
 Since, as Larry pointed out, the Trojans of a major
 planet like Jupiter are actually a cloud of asteroids.
 He says, ...they can be inclined to the orbit of Jupiter
 slightly closer or further from the Sun, or slightly in front
 of or behind the 60 degree point. To indulge is Science's
 favorite sport, the Quibblefest, only the ones slightly
 above and below the major planet's orbit have a
 different inclination; the examples cited vary in axis
 and time of perihelion passage, but of course the vast
 majority of those Trojans vary in all three parameters.
 Such a cloud should be roughly ellipsoidal stretched
 to banana shaped and lying within the boundary wherein
 the major planet's gravitational influence greatly exceeds
 that of all other bodies, which in the case of major
 planets in the wide open spaces of the outer system is
 probably a pretty big ranch.
 
 An object in ANY inclined orbit that was in the
 Neptune position would smack right into Neptune,
 so we can expect this point and all the orbital territory
 even near to it to be completely empty by now! And,
 unless the pictures in my head are all wrong (it could
 happen), the Neptune Trojan point should also pass
 through Neptune's Neptune Trojan point!
 
 This raises the prospect of what I can only call an
 example of really heavy cross-town traffic as the asteroids
 of the inclined Trojans slice through the regular Neptune
 Trojans at the inclined angle. This is not as exciting and
 video-game-like as it sounds, since the orbital speed out
 in them thar wide open spaces is only 5.43 km/sec mph.
 Still, it must get interesting at times... Particularly since
 all the differently inclined orbits' Trojan points should
 be making that passage at pretty much the same time!
 Every 165 years...
 
 This raises some interesting considerations. How could
 such a population of inclined Trojans arise?. Method One:
 start with asteroids everywhere and stir and churn for 4 billion
 years until only the stable ones are left. Fly in Ointment: four
 billion years isn't long enough. Method Two is more intriguing...
 Suppose that there are largish objects (500 to 2000 km) 

Re: [meteorite-list] Three New 'Trojan' Asteroids Found Sharing Neptune's Orbit

[Larry Lebofsky]

Hi, Sterling:

Not to burst your bubble, but a Trojan asteroid is called such because it is 
in a stable position with respect to the planet it is co-orbiting with.

There are 5 what are called Lagrange points: L, L2, L3, L4, and L5.

L1 is between the planet and the Sun (but lined up)

L2 is outside the planet and again lined up.

These two are unstable thanks to the pull of the gravity of the planet and the 
Sun. I think that there are man-made satellites in both of these, but they 
need small rockets to keep them there (I think SOHO is in L1 and that James 
Webb telescope will be at L2). Since they are closer or further from the Sun, 
their orbital periods would normally be shorter or longer than the Earth's 
(Kepler's Laws), but the gravity of the Earth helps a bit.

L3 is on the other side of the Sun (anybody remember Man from Planet X or 
Journey to the Far Side of the Sun). Again, not a stable orbit due to the pull 
of the Sun and the planet.

Finally, there are L4 and L5 (remember the L5 Society?). L4 is co-orbital with 
the planet and 60 degrees in front of it while L5 is co-orbital and 60 degrees 
behind. These are fairly stable points (actually regions) which is why there 
are the leading and trailing Trojans of Jupiter. I think the four that are now 
known for Neptune are all in the leading zone.

Actually, if you look at where the Jupiter Trojans are, they are 
actually  clouds, not points. I am not sure of the size of these, but they 
can be inclined to the orbit of Jupiter (as in the case of one of the Neptune 
ones), slightly closer or further from the Sun, or slightly in front of or 
behind the 60 degree point. In the case of Neptune, that is probably a fairly 
large volume.

However, I still do not understand where they come up with the idea that they 
are more numerous than the asterod belt. All they have are four and yes, there 
may be bunches that are net seen because they are small and relatively far 
from the precise trojan points, but that is a long way from saying that there 
are more though, similar to what Sterling is saying, the volume is huge.

Larry



Quoting Sterling K. Webb [EMAIL PROTECTED]:

 Hi, Everybody,
 
 
 I think you know I am not too easily boggled (as in
 That's mind-boggling!), but one sentence in this press
 release boggled me: Evidence suggests that the Neptune
 Trojans are more numerous than... the asteroids in the
 main belt  MORE Neptune Trojans than Main Belt
 Asteroids, Gracie?  Did I hear that right?
 
 My first thought was, Where you going to put them
 all? and then I realized that if instead of just being in or
 along Neptune's orbit, they are scattered all over Neptune's
 orbital sphere, why, they would cover the surface of a
 sphere with a diameter of 7,500,000,000 miles, and a
 sphere with a diameter of 7,500,000,000 miles covers
 one heck of a lot of real estate! (Way too many zero's
 for this email!) Lots and lots of room to fit those millions
 of big rocks into!
 
 The second realization was that the statement, The methods
 used to observe the asteroids are not sensitive to objects so far
 out of tilt with the rest of the solar system is a complete mouthful
 of weasel-words for We never bothered to point the big tube
 in that direction. Doh. If you never point the scope at where
 they are, your method is solidly 100% non-sensitive to them!
 
 Seriously, all searches are restricted to a band within a certain
 selected number of degrees of the ecliptic on the assumption
 that there are no more highly inclined objects to look for, on
 a statistical likelihood.  Guess what?
 
 More Neptune Trojans than Main Belt Asteroids, huh?
 Are any of'em as big as Ceres? At closest approach a bright
 Ceres-sized asteroid at Neptune's distance would be 535
 times dimmer than Ceres is, about magnitude 13, fading
 to 15 or 16 at other parts of its orbit, and if it were a
 reddened object like so many other outer system objects,
 still fainter by another magnitude or so.
 
 It's well to recall the disputed 2003 EL61, discovered by
 Brown with a Big Gun but not announced and by a Spanish
 team with a smaller telescope and announced, and verified by
 getting a shot of it through a lousy 12-inch scope. Bright as it
 was, it should have been discovered long ago but had never
 been noticed, because of the fact that it's OUT OF PLANE!
 Nobody looked...
 
 A slew of big bumpers beyond Pluto, some with moons,
 and a Planet bigger than Pluto... er, CUSE ME, an object
 bigger than the Planet Pluto. Now an asteroid belt as big or
 bigger than the Main Belt, of probable planetesimals for those
 Plutonian Planets I posted so tediously about last year... It's clear:
 THE OUTER SYSTEM IS WHERE'S IT'S HAPPENING!
 
 Been thinking about Migrating to Mars?
 Been saying that someday you're going to get in on the
 Mining Boom in the Main Belt?
 Forever threatening to Jump Off for Jupiter?
 Yearning to buy that ticket for the Shuttle to 

Re: [meteorite-list] It's a star, it's a planet, it's a 'planemo'

[Larry Lebofsky]

Hi again Sterling:

While I normally do not disagree with you (never did get back to you on Planet 
V, but that is another issue), I think the issue here is a matter of physics 
and a matter of nomenclature.

While the issue of what is a planet (orbiting a star is not as clear cut), it 
is less so for things out in space.

By the way, I know a number of the people on IAU and they are not all French. 
The commission that deals with planets and satellites is actually dominated by 
people from the US with mamembers from a number of countries including the 
Vatican.

If you are big enough to burn hydrogen, you are a star

If you are big enough to burn deuturium, you are a brown dwarf.

If you are smaller than that, you are a sub-brown dwarf (as far as I know 
includes things that are planet-sized, whatever that means. It is unlikely 
that we will ever observe things as small as Earth or Pluto, at least in the 
near future). This has already been an issue when someone discovered a free-
floating planet that turned out just to be a brown dewarf.

I agree with your statement that any object that is not in orbit around 
another object (star) is not a planet. However, I think you went too far with 
all of your decimal points. I am not a stellar physicist and as far as I can 
tell, the brown dwarf/planet size boundary keeps changing as models get more 
detailed.

With respect to your examples, when do call two thing revolving around one 
another a binary system and when do you call such a thing a planet and a 
satellite or an asteroid and  a satellite? This I cannot answer.

Nature does not define planet/asteroid/comet, etc. At some level, though, it 
(and physics define star). So, at some pint if you have to deal with names and 
claims, you have to come up with nomenclature: it is a fact of life. You want 
it to be physically meaningful, as in the case of planet vs. asteroid. In the 
case of free-floaters, it avoids someone coming along and naming planets 
that have escaped from stars or from coming up with a new class of objects 
the planemos (which is what started this) or asteros or cometos (or is that 
comatose). If this naming thing is a game, talk to the biologists, gthey do 
much more of this.

Maybe we can recycle the term asteroid since the proper term is minor 
planet, which really does make sense (minor star?).

Larry

Quoting Sterling K. Webb [EMAIL PROTECTED]:

 Hi, Larry, List
 
 
 I never argue with old Isaac.
 
 Well, the IAU has its agenda. Being entirely French,
 their agenda is to equivocate as long as possible and then
 just a bit longer to be absolutely sure to avoid  any
 embarrassment...
 
 The problem is that the definition of planet is both
 endogenous and exogenous, by innate characteristics
 (size, composition, temperature, etc.) and circumstantial,
 orbitally subservient to what other object. I suppose that
 any object that is not in orbit around another object that
 is not a star is not a planet.
 
 So, according to the IAU, an 8-Jupiter-mass body
 in orbit around a 15-Jupiter-mass body is a planet, since
 the 15-Jupiter-mass body can fuse deuterium and the
 8-Jupiter-mass body cannot. But if the 8-Jupiter-mass
 body is on its own, it's a star.
 
 Have I got that right?
 
 What if it's a 7.99-Jupiter-mass body in orbit around an
 8.00-Jupiter-mass body? Is one a planet and one a star,
 both cold, dark, and dead? Or is it a sub-brown-dwarf
 binary system?
 
 What if it's a 1-Jupiter-mass body on its own? Is it
 still a star, a sub-sub-sub-brown-dwarf, a cold, dark,
 dead star? It's not a planet...
 
 Hey, maybe it's an asteroid! Since deuterium burning
 is only possible at 12 or 13 Jupiter-masses, I guess an
 11.99-Jupiter-mass body is like, the Universe's biggest
 asteroid!
 
 See, we went and wasted asteroid on minor planets,
 when it literally means tiny star, ASTER being Greek
 for star. It would have been the perfect terminology!
 
 This definition game is tiring, like playing handball.
 My wrists hurt. The IAU can have it.
 
 
 Sterling K. Webb
 ---
 - Original Message - 
 From: Larry Lebofsky [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 To: Sterling K. Webb [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Cc: Meteorite List meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com
 Sent: Tuesday, June 06, 2006 12:38 PM
 Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] It's a star, it's a planet, it's a 'planemo'
 
 
  Hi Sterling:
 
  1. According to the IAU, there are no free floating planets. Their 
  official
  name is sub-brown dwarf. This is probably to avoid people trying to name
 
  them
  or run into problems when you really do not know their mass acurately and 
  so
  they may just be on the smallish end of brown dwarves.
 
  2. What is the difference between an object orbiting another and the two
  revolving around each other? Thanks to Newton, any two objects revolve 
  around
  their center of mass. So, for example, the center of mass of the 
  Jupiter/Sun
  system

Re: [meteorite-list] It's a star, it's a planet, it's a 'planemo'

[Larry Lebofsky]

Hi Sterling:

1. According to the IAU, there are no free floating planets. Their official 
name is sub-brown dwarf. This is probably to avoid people trying to name them 
or run into problems when you really do not know their mass acurately and so 
they may just be on the smallish end of brown dwarves. 

2. What is the difference between an object orbiting another and the two 
revolving around each other? Thanks to Newton, any two objects revolve around 
their center of mass. So, for example, the center of mass of the Jupiter/Sun 
system is 46,000 km OUTSIDE the surface of the Sun. So does Jupiter orbit the 
Sun or do they revolve around one another?

Larry


Quoting Sterling K. Webb [EMAIL PROTECTED]:

 Hi,
 
 
 It's a star, it's a planet, it's a 'planemo'
 http://news.com.com/Its+a+star,+its+a+planet,+its+a+planemo/2100-11397_3-
6080197.html
 
 Too lightweight to be stars but bigger than most planets, a handful of hot, 
 young, free-floating objects have the raw materials to make their own 
 miniplanetary systems, astronomers reported on Monday.
 
 Just like some young stars, these so-called planemos have discs of cosmic 
 dust and gas circling them. These kinds of discs contain the ingredients for
 
 planets; astronomers believe Earth and the other planets in our solar system
 
 were forged from such a disc.
 
 But planemos--short for planetary mass objects--are unlike normal planets 
 because they do not orbit stars, said Ray Jayawardhana of the University of 
 Toronto. He and other researchers presented their findings at a meeting of 
 the American Astronomical Society in Calgary, Alberta.
 These things are not orbiting a star. They're by themselves, Jayawardhana 
 said in a telephone interview.
 
 The researchers detected four newborn planemos, just a few million years 
 old, in a star-forming region about 450 light-years from Earth, a relative 
 stone's throw in cosmic terms. A light-year is about 6 trillion miles, the 
 distance light travels in a year.
 
 All four of these objects had dust discs around them, the astronomers 
 reported.
 Scientists also found a disc-skirted planemo interacting with a brown 
 dwarf--a failed star--even closer to Earth, just 170 light-years away.
 
 Such a planet-sized object might have been expected to be pulled into orbit 
 around the brown dwarf, but instead the two revolve around each other, and 
 both have the makings for more satellites.
 
 These objects, with several times the mass of the giant planet Jupiter but 
 100 times less massive than our sun, are cosmic infants only a few million 
 years old.
 
 Even Jupiter had a disc when it was young, and its dozens of moons were 
 formed from the dust and gas it contained. However, Earth's rocky moon 
 probably was born when our world collided with another heavenly body early 
 on, and Mars' moons were asteroids captured by the planet's gravity.
 
 But planemos are a relatively new player on the cosmic scene, filling the 
 gap between the least massive stars and the most massive planets, 
 Jayawardhana said.
 
 These are the lowest-mass brown dwarfs or really big giant planets, 
 especially when they're young, he said.
 
 When young, planemos are still warmed by the heat of formation and are more 
 like stars, he said. But as they age, these planet-esque objects shrink and 
 cool.
 
 Other researchers do not use the term planet to describe any satellites 
 that might be formed around a planemo, referring to these as moons or 
 moonlets.
 
 If such bodies do form, they would be inhospitable to Earth-type life. If a 
 satellite formed very close to a young planemo, it might be temporarily warm
 
 enough for liquid water to exist, and water is a requirement for earthly 
 life.
 
 But Jayawardhana acknowledged that in the long run, life would have dim 
 prospects: Any kind of planet that forms around them is committed to an 
 eternal freeze.
 
 Story Copyright © 2006 Reuters Limited. All rights reserved. 
 
 
 __
 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] Satellite Reentry Witness

[Larry Lebofsky]

Hi:

Make that 2!

Sorry for the delayed response, but weeks behind reading all of my email.

Long ago, when I was a graduagte student (early 1970s), two of us were driving 
up Mt. Wilson (north of Pasadena, CA) to observe. We saw something out of the 
window and actually had time to stop. I loked like a bolide, but was moving 
relatively slowly. At first we thought it could have been a plane or something.

When we got to the top of the mountain, we happened to mention it to some of 
the other astronomers up there. Ten minutes later, I was live on a local (Loos 
Angeles) radio station as an expert on things falling from the sky!

I had no idea what the heck it was, but given that it was too slow for a 
bolide (I thought) I took a chance and said that maybe it was a satellite.

Sure enough, the next day, the newspaper quoted me, but said that it had been 
identified by government officials as a Russian booster!

At least I got one thing right as a graduate student.

Larry

Quoting Kevin Fly Hill [EMAIL PROTECTED]:

  How many on this list have ever seen a satellite
 reentry?  I'd be surprised if the answer is more than one.
 
 You might want to start with at least a startled look.
 
 March 25, 1988.  Big'un -- Discarded Soviet cargo vessel came in over Texas 
 (on it's way to Canada).  Wildest thing I've ever seen in the sky. 
 Witnessed by about two hundred people in Tyler, Texas at public gathering. 
 This thing had reports in from all over the country.  It was everything that
 
 the Space Shuttle was except at night - A major piece with multiple chunks 
 giving off red, green and blue streaks.  It moved South to North straight 
 overhead going down to the horizon.  I had just turned to wave goodbye to 
 some friends as I was leaving a tour of historic homes -- The McClendon 
 Home, when I spotted the fireball.  I began shouting to alert the other 
 folks and we all watched it slowly move off.
 
 __
 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] Kerala Red Rain Was From A Comet, Study Suggests

[Larry Lebofsky]

Hi all:

So was this like Bart's Comet (for those of you who know the Simpson's 
cartoon) where Bart discovers a comet and it is always over Springfield as it 
comes crashing to Earth. Actually the discovery was more accurate than any of 
the disasteroid movies that come out at about the same time!

How do you get a comet raining down material for three months over one city? 
It would have to be geosynchronous (revolving once around the Earth in 24 
hours so that is always over the same spot). For some reason, I doubt this.

Larry

Quoting Mike Bandli [EMAIL PROTECTED]:

 I have been following this story for a while now and am surprised that the
 media has not had much coverage on it. Personally, I think it is a
 fascinating theory, though stranger things have rained from the sky like
 frogs, fish, and sticky white goo, which was later determined to be bee
 poop.
 
 Here is another (older) link with some good info:
 
 http://education.vsnl.com/godfrey/
 
 Best,
 Mike Bandli
 
 
 
 -Original Message-
 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ron Baalke
 Sent: Wednesday, May 31, 2006 9:36 AM
 To: Meteorite Mailing List
 Subject: [meteorite-list] Kerala Red Rain Was From A Comet, Study Suggests
 
 
 http://www.chennaionline.com/colnews/newsitem.asp?NEWSID=%7BEC0520F4-92DC-45
 2E-AB55-AD89E642DF32%7DCATEGORYNAME=National  
 
 Kerala red rain was comet disintegration
 Ceannai Online
 May 31, 2006
 
 Kottayam, May 31: The red rains in Kerala five years ago was the result 
 of the atmospheric disintegration of a comet, according to a study.
 
 The study conducted at the School of Pure and Applied Physics of the MG 
 University here by Dr Godfrey Louis and his student a Santosh Kumar 
 shows that red rain cells were devoid of DNA which suggests their 
 extra-terrestrial origin.
 
 The findings published in the international journal 'Astrophysics and 
 Space Science' state that the cometery fragment contained dense 
 collection of red cells.
 
 Commenting on the study at a press conference here, Dr N Chandra 
 Wikramesinghe, Director of Cardiff Centre for Astrobiology, UK, said 
 what makes this study most important is the similarity of the red 
 particles with living cells.
 
 If the red rain cells are finally proved to be of extra-terrestrial 
 origin then that would be one of the most important discoveries in 
 human history. It will change our concept about the universe and 
 life, he added.
 
 The red coloured rains were reported in different parts of Kerala 
 from July to September 2001.
 __
 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] Giant Asteroid Fragment Makes Impact

[Larry Lebofsky]

Hi,

Why does the impactor need to have been one piece when it hit or even before 
it entered the atmosphere?


Larry

Quoting Ron Baalke [EMAIL PROTECTED]:

  
  Hi,
  
  The rational for survivor fragments of an impactor is
  that they are from the far back side of the impactor. The
  transformation of the impactor's mass from a solid to a
  plasma proceeds from the front or impacting surface.
  A shock wave from this explosive vaporization preceeds
  the actual transformation, traveling at the impact speed
  of the body plus the rate of expansion of the vaporization.
  If this shock wave speed exceeds the speed of sound in
  the impacting body, the shock wave will fracture, pulverize
  and even vaporize (if it's fast enough) the body of the
  impactor ahead of it.
 
 Another possibility is the meteorite fragment they found was from
 another fall, and not from the impactor that created the crater.
  
  The models say the transient crater is deep, but it would
  shallow up dramatically from rebound and ends up as
  an extremely shallow crater for its size. If there was
  little shock melting, is it possible that rebound melting
  occured? Or the release of local vulcanism? I don't know
  if we know enough about this crater to be sure.
 
 
 Bear in mind a lot can happen geologically in 144 million years since
 the crater was formed, not to mention erosion effects.  The depth 
 the crater is at today is probably not the depth it was when it was 
 created.
 
 Ron Baalke
 __
 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] Elementary School Show n Tell

[Larry Lebofsky]

Hi Gary and Bob:

These are great stories. Are there more stories out there? I know there are 
other who do similar things.

One of the main reasons Nancy and I decided to become editors of Meteorite 
magazine was because of its potential for education outreach. For the teachers 
on this list, asteroids, meteors, and meteorites are in the standrads in many 
states (many times with embedded misconceptions). Are they in the science 
curricula of other countries?

While it is relatively easy to hold a star party or to tell people what is up 
in the sky (planets and constellations) and other special events (comets, 
meteor showers), other than meteor showers (which does little good in the 
city), what can one do for teachers and their students, planetarium staff (who 
generally know little about asteroids and meteorites; there are exceptions), 
and the general public? 

Your stories are good ones and could be used by others to reach out.

Ultimately, I would like to have this written up for the magazine and possibly 
distributed beyond the magazine to organizations that do outreach like the 
Astronomical Society of the Pacific or the Astronomical League.

Could the two of you send me short write-ups of what you did? I would also 
want pictures.

The big question is what do the kids go away with? In astronomy, they could 
get their parents to buy them a small telescope. There is even a lot that can 
be done without a telescope! Other than give kids a small meteorite (which is 
a wonderful idea), what can we do? Name an asteroid after them: the 
International Meteorite and Asteroid Registry (just kidding)?

Thanks in advance.

Larry

-- 
Dr. Larry A. Lebofsky
Senior Research Scientist
Co-editor, Meteorite  If you give a man a fish,   
Lunar and Planetary Laboratory   you feed him for a day.
1541 East University   If you teach a man to fish,
University of Arizonayou feed him for a lifetime.
Tucson, AZ 85721-0063 ~Chinese Proverb
Phone:  520-621-6947
FAX:520-621-8364
e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
__
Meteorite-list mailing list
Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com
http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list

[meteorite-list] Meteorite magazine: Call for Papers

[Larry Lebofsky]

Hi All: 
 
Many of you have finally gotten the February issue of Meteorite. The rest 
should be getting them soon (we have no control of the postal system). For 
those of you who wrote articles for the February issue, your extra copies 
should also be on their way. Thanks to all of you who let us know that your 
copies have arrived and for your comments on the magazine. They are greatly 
appreciated. If you have any subscription questions please send your emails to: 
 
 [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
 
The May issue has been edited and is now being typeset. In the May issue, we 
have a new feature: Pictures of all of our authors! We hope you like this. We 
may also try something new for the August issue. 
 
Now, the reason for this email! 
 
Nancy and I are looking for contributors for the August issue of Meteorite. 
The deadline for submission is May 19, only 5 weeks away. For those of you who 
have never written for Meteorite before, we are always seeking new authors. We 
are especially looking for young authors who may never have written for a 
magazine before. This includes students who want the experience of writing a 
scientific paper (for a more general audience) before writing for a 
professional journal, or young and/or new meteorite hunters who want to tell 
everyone about their experiences out in the field. 
 
For old authors, yes, the deadline is much earlier than when Joel was 
editor. Unfortunately, we do not have Joel's 11 years of experience behind us. 
We want to keep up the quality of Meteorite and it takes us a little longer to 
do this. 
 
Authors get 5 free copies of the issue that their article appears in. 
 
Papers can be sent to either of the addresses below. If you want to know if 
what you want to publish is appropriate, just email us with your idea(s). 
We will get back to you quickly. Check out our website 
(http://meteoritemag.uark.edu). We should have more detailed Instructions for 
Authors posted soon. We have only a few requests: 
 
1. Articles should, be 2,000 to 3,000 words (or shorter). 
 
2. Include pictures and captions. If you want to send a few extra, that is 
fine, we sometimes need to fill up small spaces. 
 
3. If you have references, PLEASE make them as complete as possible (saves me 
a lot of searching time) 
 
4. Include a full postal address and email address so that we can publish the  
email address
 and send you your extra copies (not everyone is a subscriber) 
 
5. Send us a photo of yourself and a short description of what you do in your 
real life. We want readers to see who you are. 
 
We do have a small backlog of papers, but articles submitted by the deadline 
(May 19) will come out in the August or November issue. Please note that we do 
sometimes reject papers for a number of reasons. 
 
Any question? Any suggestions? Please contact us. 
 
We look forward to serving you as editors and hope that you continue to enjoy 
Meteorite. 
 
Larry and Nancy Lebofsky 

Co-editors, Meteorite magazine 
 
e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
or 
e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]


__
Meteorite-list mailing list
Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com
http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list

Re: [meteorite-list] Meteorite Magazine arrived!

[Larry Lebofsky]

Dear Peter:

Thanks for letting me know. It is good to hear that it made it to Europe 
already!

I will pass the message on. That is greatly appreciated.

Larry

Quoting Peter Marmet [EMAIL PROTECTED]:

 Hello All,
 
 the Meteorite Magazine has just arrived here in Switzerland via  
 priority airmail.
 
 The new editors and publishers have done a great job! Many thanks to  
 Larry and Nancy, Hazel and Derek!
 
 Peter Marmet
 __
 Meteorite-list mailing list
 Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com
 http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
 


-- 
Dr. Larry A. Lebofsky
Senior Research Scientist
Co-editor, Meteorite  If you give a man a fish,   
Lunar and Planetary Laboratory   you feed him for a day.
1541 East University   If you teach a man to fish,
University of Arizonayou feed him for a lifetime.
Tucson, AZ 85721-0063 ~Chinese Proverb
Phone:  520-621-6947
FAX:520-621-8364
e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
__
Meteorite-list mailing list
Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com
http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list

Re: [meteorite-list] A must for every meteorite, er medicine cabinet

[Larry Lebofsky]

Hi Martin:

Thanks for this, but when was the last time you took a math class? It is some 
time for me, but I can still add:

4 oz size = 160 to 800 doses 
Pellets are 80% sucrose, 20% lactose 
Homeopathic Medicine 

80% plus 20% = 100%, which does not leave much space for anything else.

Larry
 




Quoting Martin Horejsi [EMAIL PROTECTED]:

 http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B0001KJWQM/qid=1144551014/sr=8-
46/ref=sr_1_46/002-0760012-0800849?%5Fencoding=UTF8v=glancen=3760901
 __
 Meteorite-list mailing list
 Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com
 http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
 
 


-- 
Dr. Larry A. Lebofsky
Senior Research Scientist
Co-editor, Meteorite  If you give a man a fish,   
Lunar and Planetary Laboratory   you feed him for a day.
1541 East University   If you teach a man to fish,
University of Arizonayou feed him for a lifetime.
Tucson, AZ 85721-0063 ~Chinese Proverb
Phone:  520-621-6947
FAX:520-621-8364
e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
__
Meteorite-list mailing list
Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com
http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list

Re: [meteorite-list] Meteorite magazine

[Larry Lebofsky]

Hi Mark:

Thanks, we are now up to 3 or 4 (all rather local in Kansas, Texas, and Tenn.).

Larry

Quoting MARK BOSTICK [EMAIL PROTECTED]:

 Hello Larry,
 
 I got mine Fridayand I live in Kansas.  In case this is of interest.
 
 I have not had the time to look it over yet, but will try to tonight before 
 I lay down.  First glance...it looks like the high quality magazine we have 
 all grown to enjoy.
 
 Nice meeting you in Tucson.
 
 Mark Bostick
 www.meteoritearticles.com
 
 
 


-- 
Dr. Larry A. Lebofsky
Senior Research Scientist
Co-editor, Meteorite  If you give a man a fish,   
Lunar and Planetary Laboratory   you feed him for a day.
1541 East University   If you teach a man to fish,
University of Arizonayou feed him for a lifetime.
Tucson, AZ 85721-0063 ~Chinese Proverb
Phone:  520-621-6947
FAX:520-621-8364
e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
__
Meteorite-list mailing list
Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com
http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list

Re: [meteorite-list] Meteorite magazine

[Larry Lebofsky]

Hi Don:

Where are you located? You are the second person to say they got their issue. 
The first was in Tenn.; I think I could have walked it there faster.

Larry

PS I hope it was worth the wait. We should be faster with the next issue (I 
hope).

Quoting Don Edwards [EMAIL PROTECTED]:

 Mine arrived yesterday.
 
 Don
 
 --- [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 
  Greetings all,
  I was just reading another fine issue of Meteorite Times and clicking
  on
  the various links there. According to the Meteorite Magazine link,
  the Feb.
  issue was mailed in late March. Has anyone received their copy yet?
  Like
  many of you, I've been anticipating this issue for some time.
  Thanks,
  Bob King
  
  
  mail2web - Check your email from the web at
  http://mail2web.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
 


-- 
Dr. Larry A. Lebofsky
Senior Research Scientist
Co-editor, Meteorite  If you give a man a fish,   
Lunar and Planetary Laboratory   you feed him for a day.
1541 East University   If you teach a man to fish,
University of Arizonayou feed him for a lifetime.
Tucson, AZ 85721-0063 ~Chinese Proverb
Phone:  520-621-6947
FAX:520-621-8364
e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
__
Meteorite-list mailing list
Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com
http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list

Re: [meteorite-list] Early Mercury Impact Showered Earth

[Larry Lebofsky]

Hi Sterling:

You left out the most recent of the impact theories: how do we get so many 
Trans Neptunian Objects with satellites? Large impacts! 

Larry


__
Meteorite-list mailing list
Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com
http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list

Re: [meteorite-list] Arizona Meteor Crater Holds Deep Fascination

[Larry Lebofsky]

Hi Mike:

The major error: 50,000 (have seen as recently as 30,000 years), not 
50,000,000 years (factor of 1000)!

I do not know all of the details about the amount trucked off but I do 
remember there being some question about that.

I know there are lot of serious and casual collectors on this list. How many 
of you have ever held a meteor? Yeh, I know I am a fussy scientist!

One other fussy thing: red sndstone depths. Since I do not have any of my 
textbooks with me, I had to Google this:

Stratigraphy:

  9 m of red sandstone (Moenkopi)
 81 m or yellow/orange limestone (Kaibab)
200 m of gray sandstone (Coconino)


PS

If you subscribe to Meteorite magazine, please let me know when you get it 
(was sent to the post office the middle of last week).

Quoting [EMAIL PROTECTED]:

 Hi Larry
 Actually they are only off by a factor of 100X on the error I see.
 
 I also noticed the article mentions a size of 550 feet deep and 4000 feet 
 across. This made me curious as I collect meteor crater postcards and
 remembered 570 as the most often used figure. I decided to look at all my
 cardsalmost 125 and see if the figure 550 was ever used. The most common
 number mentioned in these cards is 570 ft  4000 ft. The second most common
 is 600 feet  4000 ft. There are also cards with 700 ft and 800 ft but these
 were produced before 1940. Then it seems sometimes in the 80's it became 4150
 ft across and in the 90's it was now only 550 ft deep. So the figure MC
 Enterprises uses most often now is 550 ft deep and 4150 feet across. I guess
 it is getting further across and that material is filling the interior. So I
 guess the reporter chose to use the 550 ft and round the distance across to
 4000 ft.
 
 The article also mentioned that:
 Miners, reports indicate, loaded as much as 20 tons of meteor fragments onto
 
 trains bound for smelting facilities in Texas where it was made into tools.
 
 We discussed this on the list several years ago. If I remember correctly
 there 
 was some debate as to the accuracy of this story. One of the problems with
 the 
 story was the quantity. That would be 18,200 kg. How long would it take to 
 collect that much material? Can any of you long time members remember the 
 outcome of the discussion?
 
 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] Arizona Meteor Crater Holds Deep Fascination

[Larry Lebofsky]

Hi all:

I caught at least one really big mistake in this article.

Larry

Quoting Ron Baalke [EMAIL PROTECTED]:

 
 http://www.denverpost.com/news/ci_367
 
 Ariz. meteor crater holds deep fascination
 By Rich Tosches
 Denver Post 
 April 5, 2006
 
 There is a hole in the ground near this ghost town on the desert
 plateau, a place where the Rocky Mountains become little more than
 small, rocky hills.
 
 The hole is 550 feet deep and 4,000 feet across. As you stand on the rim
 of the crater and gaze into its red sandstone depths, you can't help but
 imagine that day, once upon a time, when something almost unthinkable
 happened in this place.
 
 The first known written note about the crater was penned in 1871 by a
 scout for Gen. George Armstrong Custer.
 
 For decades after word got out, scientists studied the hole. Some
 believed a volcano was the culprit. Others thought it was the work of a
 meteor. (Today, a smaller group clings to a third compelling theory that
 involves baseball star Barry Bonds dropping a dumbbell on his way to
 spring training 200 miles south in Scottsdale.)
 
 Turns out the meteor theory was the right one. It came, scientists say,
 some 50 million years ago, a 150-foot-wide bundle of iron and nickel
 weighing several hundred thousand tons, burning through the sky and
 slamming into our planet at some 40,000 mph.
 
 And out here on the dusty land in north-central Arizona where lizards
 now scamper and the occasional jackrabbit races across the sand, woolly
 mammoths died on that very loud day.
 
 All of which is not lost on Carolyn Sprinkles, who works in the gift
 shop at Meteor Crater and sells, among other things, small packets
 labeled fossilized dung for $1.25 each.
 
 I walk by that hole out there all the time and I'm always in awe, said
 Sprinkles, who just began her third year working at the tourist
 attraction and living in an RV just down the road from the crater, an RV
 she shares with her husband, who works in the Meteor Crater ticket booth.
 
 The hole in the ground is owned mostly by the family of the man who
 spent a large chunk of his life down inside the crater. Daniel
 Barringer, a mining engineer from Pennsylvania, became dazzled by the
 site in the early 1900s and spent decades drilling holes in the bottom
 of the crater. He thought he'd find the great ball of iron that made
 the depression. He found nothing.
 
 In 1929, a final drill bit became stuck in the ground at a depth of
 1,376 feet. Then the drill cable broke. Then Barringer ran out of money.
 And time. He died later that same year.
 
 Today, the Barringer family has a partnership with the Bar T Bar Ranch,
 a cattle operation that was started here in the 1880s. In 1955, the
 ranch owners formed Meteor Crater Enterprises, Inc.
 
 Goodbye cows.
 
 Hello gift shop and ticket booth.
 
 While most of the meteor that hit at what is officially known as the
 Barrington Meteor Crater vaporized upon impact, many pieces remained.
 The largest known chunk weighs over 1,400 pounds and is on display at
 the Crater Museum, near the gift shop. And before Barrington sealed off
 the area for his drilling work, reports indicated that settlers carted
 off hundreds and perhaps thousands of tons of the meteor's iron.
 
 Miners, reports indicate, loaded as much as 20 tons of meteor fragments
 onto trains bound for smelting facilities in Texas where it was made
 into tools.
 
 NASA, which used the Arizona crater to train Apollo astronauts, says the
 hole is the first to ever be positively identified as an impact crater
 and calls it the best preserved crater on Earth.
 
 Which makes Carolyn Sprinkles smile. And makes longtime Texas high
 school principal Bill Cranfill proud.
 
 I live here at the crater, in one of those apartments right there,
 said the retired educator, now the manager of the facility, pointing
 across the parking lot to a row of crater housing units where he has
 lived for the past five years. In the summer we'll get 1,500 people a
 day, seven days a week.
 
 But this odd place on a remote plateau 40 miles east of Flagstaff is,
 for Cranfill, more than just a tourist site.
 
 For five years now, whenever I get a minute, he said, I stand on the
 rim of that hole. And I just try to imagine what happened that day.
 
 __
 Meteorite-list mailing list
 Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com
 http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
 


-- 
Dr. Larry A. Lebofsky
Senior Research Scientist
Co-editor, Meteorite  If you give a man a fish,   
Lunar and Planetary Laboratory   you feed him for a day.
1541 East University   If you teach a man to fish,
University of Arizonayou feed him for a lifetime.
Tucson, AZ 85721-0063 ~Chinese Proverb
Phone:  520-621-6947
FAX:520-621-8364
e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
__

Re: [meteorite-list] A little bit of a Deep Impact article

[Larry Lebofsky]

Hi Darren:

There were 5 or 6 articles that were released early by Space Daily. It is 
not unusual for an article to be sent to the press, but embargoed until after 
the journal comes out or the paper is given at a conference. It gives the 
press time to do a little of their own background searching in case they want 
to add something to their own article or do an interview prior to the official 
release of the news item. This was the case here. So, it has nothing to do 
with the quality of the results, it was just that Space Daily jumped the gun 
in releasing the article.

Larry


Quoting Darren Garrison [EMAIL PROTECTED]:

 What you see on Google News:
 
 X-Rays Reveal 25 Tonnes Of Water Released By Deep Impact
 Space Daily, CA - Mar 30, 2006
 ... The Swift observations reveal that far ... The more material liberated,
 the
 more X-rays are produced ... total mass of water released by the impact was
 250,000 tonnes
 
 But when you click the link, the article has been removed, and googlecache
 doesn't have it.
 
 
http://www.spacedaily.com/reports/X_Rays_Reveal_25_Tonnes_Of_Water_Released
_By_Deep_Impact.html
 __
 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] Impact Structures - Simple vs Complex?

[Larry Lebofsky]

Hi all:

I know that I am responding to my own message, but now have hard numbers 
(spoke to someone who actually knows what is happening).

1. The size of the transition from simple to complex craters goes as 1/g 
(gravity), with a little having to do with the material.

Therefore:

2. The transitions:

Earth: 3 km
Mars: 7 km
Mercury: 10 km
Moon: 17 km

Larry

Quoting Larry Lebofsky [EMAIL PROTECTED]:

 Hi Jeff:
 
 It has been some time since I studied this (will ask around here at the Lunar
 
 and Planetary Science Conference), but I think that it is basically: size 
 matters!
 
 How big of a hole can you maintain in a bowl shape before gravity and the 
 strength of the material take over?
 
 Larry
 
 Quoting Jeff Kuyken [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
 
  Here's a question for those of you more familiar with impact structures on
  Earth. I believe I saw somewhere that craters fall into 2 main categories?
  simple and Complex with the later having a central uplift, concentric
 rings,
  etc among other things.
  
  My question is: How small can a complex crater be? Is there a definitive
  size restraint or does it completely depend on a multitude of variables
 such
  as the make-up of the impacting body, velocity, impact angle, target rock,
  etc?
  
  Any help is appreciated,
  
  Jeff Kuyken
  Meteorites Australia
  www.meteorites.com.au
  
  
  
  __
  Meteorite-list mailing list
  Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com
  http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
  
 
 
 -- 
 Dr. Larry A. Lebofsky
 Senior Research Scientist
 Co-editor, Meteorite
 
 __
 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] Impact Structures - Simple vs Complex?

[Larry Lebofsky]

Hi Jeff:

It has been some time since I studied this (will ask around here at the Lunar 
and Planetary Science Conference), but I think that it is basically: size 
matters!

How big of a hole can you maintain in a bowl shape before gravity and the 
strength of the material take over?

Larry

Quoting Jeff Kuyken [EMAIL PROTECTED]:

 Here's a question for those of you more familiar with impact structures on
 Earth. I believe I saw somewhere that craters fall into 2 main categories?
 simple and Complex with the later having a central uplift, concentric rings,
 etc among other things.
 
 My question is: How small can a complex crater be? Is there a definitive
 size restraint or does it completely depend on a multitude of variables such
 as the make-up of the impacting body, velocity, impact angle, target rock,
 etc?
 
 Any help is appreciated,
 
 Jeff Kuyken
 Meteorites Australia
 www.meteorites.com.au
 
 
 
 __
 Meteorite-list mailing list
 Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com
 http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
 


-- 
Dr. Larry A. Lebofsky
Senior Research Scientist
Co-editor, Meteorite

__
Meteorite-list mailing list
Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com
http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list

Re: [meteorite-list] Strange Newspaper Headline About Meteorites

[Larry Lebofsky]

Paul:

Did a Google search and found the following on CCNet Digest. 

http://abob.libs.uga.edu/bobk/ccc/cc082198.html


Event occurred in Dec. 1997!

Larry

Co-editor Meteorite magazine

PLEASE NOTE: 

Information circulated on the cambridge-conference network is for 
scholarly use only. The attached text may not be reproduced 
or transmitted without prior permission of the copyright holder. 



* 

CCNet DIGEST, 21 August 1998



(1) INTERSTELLAR METEOROIDS
Duncan Steel [EMAIL PROTECTED] 

(2) METEORITE DUST TO BE TESTED
The Electronic Telegraph

(3) GREENLAND IMPACTOR MAY HAVE COME FROM INTERSTELLAR SPACE
MSNBC Space News
http://www.msnbc.com/news/189444.asp

(4) DOUBTS ABOUT INTERSTELLAR ORIGIN OF GREENLAND METEORITE
Mike DiMuzio [EMAIL PROTECTED] 

(5) TASK COMPLETED IN GREENLAND
The Tycho Brahe Expedition
http://www.astro.ku.dk/tycho/tbe98/english/status/

===
(1) INTERSTELLAR METEOROIDS

From Duncan Steel [EMAIL PROTECTED] 

Dear Benny,

Item from The Daily Telegraph (21 August 1998) appended.

The existence of meteoroids and/or comets arriving from interstellar
space is a subject which has been contentious for decades; see:

A.D. Taylor, W.J. Baggaley  D.I. Steel, Discovery of interstellar dust 
entering the Earth's atmosphere, Nature, 380, 323-325 (1996).

Duncan Steel

--- 
(2) METEORITE DUST TO BE TESTED

From the Electronic Telegraph
International News
Friday 21 August 1998   Issue 1183

Meteorite dust to be tested

DUSTY remains of a meteorite that crashed into Greenland are to be 
tested to see if it came from outside our solar system.

The extreme speed of the object, recorded on video film, suggests it 
may have come from interstellar space, which would mark a first if 
confirmed. A giant fireball was seen on 9 December over a large part of 
southern Greenland. Some reports said that night was turned into day 
and others likened it to a giant millipede of fire with yellow, 
glowing legs.

The meteorite was calculated to weigh at least a ton. An expedition to 
the south-western part of the Greenland ice cap found no large 
meteorite fragments, only about 200 samples of dust.

END

Copyright 1998, The Daily Telegraph 

===
(3) GREENLAND IMPACTOR MAY HAVE COME FROM INTERSTELLAR SPACE

From MSNBC Space News
http://www.msnbc.com/news/189444.asp

Sleuths bring meteorite dust from Greenland: Space rock may have come 
from beyond solar system

REUTERS
   
COPENHAGEN, Denmark, Aug. 20 — A meteorite which crashed into Greenland 
last December may have come from outside our solar system, a Danish
astronomer said Thursday. He said that would be a “world first” in the 
meteorite field.

A FOUR-WEEK EXPEDITION to the southwestern part of the Greenland ice 
cap failed to find fragments of the meteorite but returned home 
Wednesday with about 200 samples of dust.

Astronomer Lars Lindberg Christensen of Denmark’s Tycho Brahe 
Planetarium, a member of the seven-man expedition, said analysis of the 
dust samples could yield clues to the origin of the meteorite.

“It may have come with enough speed that it actually originated outside 
our solar system. That would make it a world first,” he told Reuters by 
telephone.

The center has collected more than 100 eyewitness reports, three 
seconds of videotape and data from a U.S. defense satellite of the 
meteorite’s plunge through the Earth’s atmosphere.

Calculations based on the video frames of the meteorite’s descent, 
which lit up the night sky over Greenland on Dec. 9, put its velocity 
at 35 miles per second, or one and a half times the maximum speed of 
any known meteorite in our solar system, Christensen said.

At such a speed, the object would have disintegrated, and the only 
traces would be dust, he said.

“It also means that it is most likely that the snow samples contain 
dust from the meteorite,” he said.

The expedition collected enough dust to allow the particles to be 
examined thoroughly, revealing their molecular and atomic composition.

If analysis shows the dust particles are more than 4.5 billion years 
old, that would confirm that the meteorite originated in interstellar 
space, he said. Our solar system is thought to have formed 4.5 billion 
years ago.

Preliminary findings from the Niels Bohr astrophysics and geophysics 
institute and the geological institute of the University of Copenhagen 
could be ready in a matter of months, Christensen said.

Traces of more than 10,000 meteorites have been found on Earth, but the 
Greenland find is special because it is one of the few that have been 
seen plunging from space.
 
© 1998 Reuters Limited. All rights reserved.


(4) DOUBTS ABOUT INTERSTELLAR ORIGIN OF GREENLAND METEORITE

Re: [meteorite-list] Park Forest Fireball Question

[Larry Lebofsky]

Hi All:

I spoke to my wife, Nancy (Meteorite co-editor), and she said: so is that 
what shook the house last night. So it seems that the sonic boom was a 
Northwest Tucson thing.

Larry

__
Meteorite-list mailing list
Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com
http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list

Re: [meteorite-list] Largest Crater in the Sahara Desert and LDG

[Larry Lebofsky]

Sterling:

Sounds good to me (though I study big rocks that you can see with a 
telescope). It sounds like it is time for me to start reading up on tektites 
too!

As a novice, would you basically say that tektites come from volatilized 
material that has recondensed while an impactite derives from melted material 
that never got hot enough to vaporize.

Obviously, you would have ranges of materials (hotter vapor or hotter and more 
devolatilized liquid).

Larry

PS Did you see the comet? Never been clear enough and no access to a telescope 
where I am.

Quoting Sterling K. Webb [EMAIL PROTECTED]:

 Gee, Doug,
 
 For once, I am not creating a crackers theory of my own.
 I am merely explaining how a certain geochemical test procedure
 works. Not being a geo- or a cosmo- chemist, I am taking the
 word of Matthies, D. and Kroeberl, C., Fluorine and Boron
 Geochemistry of Tektites, Impact Glasses, and Target Rocks,
 Meteoritics, 26 (1991), 41-45, both of whom AM geochemists.
 Also, see K. H. Wedepohl, Handbook of Geochemistry (1978).
 Blah, blah.
 
 Think about it. You gotta rock. Mixture of complicated
 crystals. Many elements. Huge heating event. Rock melts.
 Rock vaporizes. Molecules dissociate. Now it's a plasma,
 composed entirely of elements, too hot to form compounds.
 The volatile elements in this plasma escape from the plasma
 faster than the less volatile, which in turn escape faster
 than the refractory (who are stubborn and hang around).
 The plasma continues to heat. Volatiles go faster and faster.
 At a high enough temperature, the mean free path of atoms
 and their rate of escape is pretty much totally determined
 by the thermal energy of the plasma and the mass of the atom
 and the chemical characteristics of the substance matter not
 at all. It's physics now, not chemistry. Element 5 (mass 11)
 and element 9 (mass 19) are both moving like there was
 a 38,000 degree plasma on their tail (and there is). They
 now escape at a similar rate. Get the literature. Look at
 the pretty graphs that show how it works. There's some
 chemical reason why this happens about the time they're
 at the same concentration, but I forget it. It's chemistry.
 Me, when I look at things like equilibrium condensation
 diagrams or the reverse of same, my eyes start to glaze
 over... So I just take their word for it. But as a physical
 phenomenon, it fits my intuition. Look at the other light
 atoms. Not many of them hanging around either.
 
 Makes silly hand gestures, points to self. I no chemist.
 Physicist. Like big things (universe, stars, planets, rocks
 the size of countries). Like little things (quarks, leptons,
 cute little bosons, petite atoms). Don't like things inbetween.
 That's why God made chemists and botanists. Let them
 sort it out. They like that sort of thing for some reason...
 In 1962, when the number of elementary particles
 officially went over 200, Enrico Fermi, getting old and
 cranky, yelled, Look at this f***g zoo! If I wanted this
 mess, I'd have become a botanist! (He was right; how
 can you have more elementary particles making up
 elements than there are elements? Maybe it means that
 making elements is hard.)
 Crusty old physicists. Show me String Theory when
 you can put the whole thing on ONE PAGE. Otherwise,
 go back and work on it some more.
 
 Deep breath. The F/B ratios for ALL terrestrial rocks
 comes from Kroeberl and Company (all of this does). That's
 for the bulk compositional analyses of crustal rocks everywhere
 that geologists have made 100,000's of for the last century
 or so. Boring... Boron's just not as common as fluorine. The
 ratios run 10:1, 20:1, 30:1. Earth rock just isn't (in bulk)
 boronic. That crusty stuff in Death Valley doesn't count...
 If boron was common, would they have send Ronald Reagan
 and those 20 mules into Death Valley? (Old TV referrence.)
 If you think this is all hooey, complain to Kroeberl and Co.
 Also Wedepohl, who publishes thick books full of endless
 tables of  bulk elemental compsitions. Lemme know what
 happens.
 
 Seriously, I am miffed. I don't think this stuff is whacky
 enough to be one of my whacky notions, and I'm insulted
 that anyone should think so... Obviously, I'm not being
 whacky enough.
 
 I'm quiting. It's late enough that I could go out
 and wave at that comet myself.
 
 Sterling K. Webb
 --
 
 
 __
 Meteorite-list mailing list
 Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com
 http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
 


-- 
Dr. Larry A. Lebofsky
Senior Research Scientist
Co-editor, Meteorite 

__
Meteorite-list mailing list
Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com
http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list

[meteorite-list] February Issue of Meteorite Magazine

[Larry Lebofsky]

Geoff and all:

Please remind me not to go away from my computer for a few hours again (had 
some meetings to go to)!

Geoff, thanks for responding.

Nancy and I finished the proofing of Meteorite about two weeks, so the magazine 
is now in the capable hands of the publishers Hazel and Derek Sears. The 
magazine is at the printers and should be mailed out soon (I cannot give you a 
firm date, but please be patient as this is our first issue). 

As Geoff also said, existing subscriptions will be honored for the coming year. 
If you still have concerns, please contact Hazel Sears directly at:

[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Also, as Geoff said, we are already working on the next issue of Meteorite 
which should be out in May and we hope back on schedule. A few people still owe 
us articles -- you know who you are :o)

Let me take this opportunity to thank all of the people (and there are many) 
who have helped us keep Meteorite magazine going. Editing a magazine is new 
experience for us and we could not have done it without the support of many of 
you out there. Thanks to all of you who have made this an enjoyable experience.

I hope you all enjoy Meteorite when you get our first issue and I hope to hear 
from many of you as Nancy and I look for articles for future issues.

Larry


__
Meteorite-list mailing list
Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com
http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list

Re: [meteorite-list] Elementary school presentation tips?

[Larry Lebofsky]

Gary:

I have been doing this with kids from elementary school up through college for 
some time.

Everyone does this differently since we all have different backgrounds and 
expertise. Don't be afraid to say that you do not know the answer. This is 
better than giving them bad information. I am an asteroid scientist so I know a 
lot (but not everything) about asteroids and a lot less about meteorites. That 
is a part of why we do what we do: to learn more.

1. Keep it fairly simple (but be prepared for some good questions). You might 
start out by asking them simple questions about what is in the Solar System. 
Good chance to feel them out. At this age they may know about Cassini and other 
recent missions or they might not know there are nine (or 10) planets.

2. Make connections: show pictures of asteroids and meteors. Explain asteroid, 
meteoroid, meteor, meteorite.

3. LET THEM HOLD THE STUFF (if not too fragile or valuable). If you have an 
iron (best because it is different), hand it around with an equal-sized 
meteorwrong. It makes a point. Most other meteorites look like rocks so it is 
difficult for young kids to relate to these coming from space.

4. Have fun, get excited: you may get a few converts to science (or at least an 
interest in meteorites).


Hope this helps.

Larry 

Quoting Gary K. Foote [EMAIL PROTECTED]:

 Hi Everyone,
 
 Ron Wesel has been gracious to offer some samples of NWS to me for a couple
 of class 
 presentations I will make on meteorites this coming month.  I've been reading
 all the 
 books and think I know it all now [HA!]
 
 Ron and a few others had some good advice [thanks everyone], but I wonder if
 anyone else 
 can offer me some tips on making a good, lasting impression on 8 year olds.
 
 __
 Meteorite-list mailing list
 Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com
 http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
 


-- 
Dr. Larry A. Lebofsky
Senior Research Scientist
Co-editor, Meteorite  If you give a man a fish,   
Lunar and Planetary Laboratory   you feed him for a day.
1541 East University   If you teach a man to fish,
University of Arizonayou feed him for a lifetime.
Tucson, AZ 85721-0063 ~Chinese Proverb
Phone:  520-621-6947
FAX:520-621-8364
e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
__
Meteorite-list mailing list
Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com
http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list

Re: AW: [meteorite-list] Elementary school presentation tips?

[Larry Lebofsky]

Gary:

Went away for a few hours and now trying to catch up on the emails.

If you do the comet (not sure I would do the comet AND meteorites on the same 
day -- too much for just about any grade level), be sure to do it safely --- 
gloves and eye protection.

As an aside, I might be one of the few people to be paid big bucks for doing 
this demo: Discovery Channel flew someone in from England to do the interview, 
hired a local camera person, and spent 3 hours taping 4 or 5 comets (we had to 
provide the supplies). My wife assisted, but only her hands were seen (so they 
did not have to pay her), Michael Dorn (Worf from Startrek) was the narrator, 
and I got paid 4 quarters!!! Over 25 cents an hour!

With respect to doing the Solar System model, there are a number of scale 
models around. We do one with macrame (see how that translates; the stuff you 
hang plants with) so that they get a good feel for the scale of the Solar 
System. If you have enough space (pun intended) with a 1/2 inch (1.25 cm) Sun, 
Pluto is 200 feet (60 meters) away. Perfect for a playground and you can get 
the kids to revolve around the Sun.

Larry

Quoting Gary K. Foote [EMAIL PROTECTED]:

 Thanks for the link Martin.
 
 Gary
 
 On 14 Feb 2006 at 10:30, Dave Mouat wrote:
 
  Hi Martin and fellow Listees
  
  Martin reminded me of what else I threw in: ammonia; but I only had
 ammonia-laced
  soap.  That added a bit-- The school never checked the ingredients I used
 and
  might not have known what was controlled.
  
  Dave
  
  Martin Horejsi wrote:
  
   Hi Walter and all,
  
   The dry ice comet is a great demo if you are allowed to do it.
   Sometimes dry ice and ammonia are on the elementary school banned
   list.
  
   This activity is one of the more accurate demos possible, and usually
   you can get great off-gassing jets projected using an overhead.
  
   The activity can be found here under comet basics:
  
   http://stardust.jpl.nasa.gov/classroom/guides.html
  
   And a cool pic if you haven't seen it is in my latest Accretion Desk
   article at the Meteorite Times .com is a pic of Carolyn Shoemaker and
   Paul Wild are building a dry ice comet. Here is the pic's caption:
  
   In a most memorable convergence of people in time, Paul Wild who
   discovered comet Wild2 in 1978, and Carolyn Shoemaker, the discoverer
   of more comets than anyone else on this planet build a model comet
   with dry ice, ammonia and sand.
  
   Cheers,
  
   Martin
  

__
Meteorite-list mailing list
Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com
http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list

[meteorite-list] Titan Movie

[Larry Lebofsky]

All:

Thought that you might be interested in this movie. Go to the site below and
click on Movie Details


Recently, Jason Barnes (Lunar and Planetary Lab) completed 
an animated gif using VIMS imagery
gathered during the last three Titan flybys.  It is posted on the JPL
website and is quite fascinating. It can be found at

http://saturn.jpl.nasa.gov/home/index.cfm

Larry

-- 
Dr. Larry A. Lebofsky
Senior Research Scientist
Co-editor, Meteorite  If you give a man a fish,   
Lunar and Planetary Laboratory   you feed him for a day.
1541 East University   If you teach a man to fish,
University of Arizonayou feed him for a lifetime.
Tucson, AZ 85721-0063 ~Chinese Proverb
Phone:  520-621-6947
FAX:520-621-8364
e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
__
Meteorite-list mailing list
Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com
http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list

Re: [meteorite-list] Harvey Awards - New Catagory

[Larry Lebofsky]

Greg:

Yes!

Larry

Quoting Greg Hupe [EMAIL PROTECTED]:

 Dear List Members,
 
 A month or two ago I posted to the list that I felt that Steve Arnold - IMB 
 and Phil Mani should be nominated for a Harvey Award for their Huge Brenham 
 Main Mass discovery and also Geoff Notkin for his tireless work on behalf of
 
 the Hurricane Katrina Fund Raiser among other too-numerous to list 
 meteorite-related activities.
 
 I know that Geoff and Steve originally set up the Harvey Awards where they 
 could not nominate themselves for an award. I would like all list members to
 
 join me here on the list to nominate these fine gentleman for a Harvey Award
 
 an encourage them to make a new category where they could receive an award 
 if enough of us voted YES to this. Maybe they could create a People's 
 Choice award or something along these lines.
 
 Everyone in favor, send the list a resounding YES and lets acknowledge 
 their contributions and achievements in public.
 
 Consider this my YES vote...
 
 Best regards,
 
 Greg Hupe
 The Hupe Collection
 NaturesVault (eBay)
 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 IMCA 3163
 
 __
 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