Re: [meteorite-list] A question????? another answer
My notes from Dr. Frederick D. Leonard's Meteoritics 118 class which I took at UCLA (I believe in1962) say: A meteorite is any object of sub-planetary mass which has landed on Earth, or some other astronomical body, and still retains its original cosmic characteristics. (Little did he know that someday we would photograph meteorites residing on the surface of Mars!) Ron Hartman - Original Message - From: Mr EMan mstrema...@yahoo.com To: Pete shu...@clearwire.net pshu...@clearwire.net; metlist meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com Sent: Friday, June 05, 2009 1:08 PM Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] A question? another answer Pete sometime let me tell you about the First Church of the Navelites.. but to your question They would be called meteorites until identified as originating from the Earth--then the debate is opened up again. Recently someone at NASA or in the IAU stated the new definition of meteorite includes any rocky object falling onto the surface of any planet should be regarded as a meteorite (my translation) I recently read a calculation of the number of Earth originating rocks gone to meteorites on the moon and on Mars and it was a fairly high number within the realistic realm of being identified as such. A further subset of missing nomenclature is what to call returning non tektite ejecta that may have orbited a while and get returned much later. The Reis impactor is a candidate for having been able to eject rocks into orbit. As I've mentioned it before, it hurled some multi-ton limestone boulders over 60 miles up a mountain side in Austria. A meteorite could not eject material into space from earth but an asteroid sized impactor most certainly has in the past. That is the physics don't prohibit it. Elton --- On Fri, 6/5/09, Pete shu...@clearwire.net pshu...@clearwire.net wrote: From: Pete shu...@clearwire.net pshu...@clearwire.net Subject: [meteorite-list] A question? To: meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com Date: Friday, June 5, 2009, 12:02 AM We have the Martian type meteorite, and we have the Lunar meteorite and last, the asteroid 4Vesta meteorite. These we know where they come from. Now the question---given enough energy, can a meteorite hit earth and eject debris which (maybe) land on the moon or Mars? What would we call such a meteorite---Earthoid, or maybe Earthite? Just contemplating my navel here. Pete __ http://www.meteoritecentral.com Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list __ http://www.meteoritecentral.com Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list __ http://www.meteoritecentral.com Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] A question????? another answer
Pete sometime let me tell you about the First Church of the Navelites.. but to your question They would be called meteorites until identified as originating from the Earth--then the debate is opened up again. Recently someone at NASA or in the IAU stated the new definition of meteorite includes any rocky object falling onto the surface of any planet should be regarded as a meteorite (my translation) I recently read a calculation of the number of Earth originating rocks gone to meteorites on the moon and on Mars and it was a fairly high number within the realistic realm of being identified as such. A further subset of missing nomenclature is what to call returning non tektite ejecta that may have orbited a while and get returned much later. The Reis impactor is a candidate for having been able to eject rocks into orbit. As I've mentioned it before, it hurled some multi-ton limestone boulders over 60 miles up a mountain side in Austria. A meteorite could not eject material into space from earth but an asteroid sized impactor most certainly has in the past. That is the physics don't prohibit it. Elton --- On Fri, 6/5/09, Pete shu...@clearwire.net pshu...@clearwire.net wrote: From: Pete shu...@clearwire.net pshu...@clearwire.net Subject: [meteorite-list] A question? To: meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com Date: Friday, June 5, 2009, 12:02 AM We have the Martian type meteorite, and we have the Lunar meteorite and last, the asteroid 4Vesta meteorite. These we know where they come from. Now the question---given enough energy, can a meteorite hit earth and eject debris which (maybe) land on the moon or Mars? What would we call such a meteorite---Earthoid, or maybe Earthite? Just contemplating my navel here. Pete __ http://www.meteoritecentral.com Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list __ http://www.meteoritecentral.com Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] A question????? another answer
Elton, There you go again providing the perfect answers. Thank you. I have a few follow-up questions for you; If an Earth meteorite (terrene) were to return back to Earth, would we be able to identify it correctly? That is to say would we not simply ASSume it came from the moon? As a moon meteorite would also have Earth air or isotopes? We make new supposed Lunar meteorite discoveries with new materials all the time. So again I ask is there a way to be certain where it came from? I ask because if is not mostly plagioclase, it seems to me most investigators would simply toss it aside and say; it is not a meteorite, that is a rind or weathered Earth rock not fusion crust. So, another question would be this; if it clearly has a fusion crust complete with the gas bubbles would there be a way to prove it is in fact a genuine fusion crust??? Thanks Carl Esparza IMCA 5829 Mr EMan mstrema...@yahoo.com wrote: Pete sometime let me tell you about the First Church of the Navelites.. but to your question They would be called meteorites until identified as originating from the Earth--then the debate is opened up again. Recently someone at NASA or in the IAU stated the new definition of meteorite includes any rocky object falling onto the surface of any planet should be regarded as a meteorite (my translation) I recently read a calculation of the number of Earth originating rocks gone to meteorites on the moon and on Mars and it was a fairly high number within the realistic realm of being identified as such. A further subset of missing nomenclature is what to call returning non tektite ejecta that may have orbited a while and get returned much later. The Reis impactor is a candidate for having been able to eject rocks into orbit. As I've mentioned it before, it hurled some multi-ton limestone boulders over 60 miles up a mountain side in Austria. A meteorite could not eject material into space from earth but an asteroid sized impactor most certainly has in the past. That is the physics don't prohibit it. Elton --- On Fri, 6/5/09, Pete shu...@clearwire.net pshu...@clearwire.net wrote: From: Pete shu...@clearwire.net pshu...@clearwire.net Subject: [meteorite-list] A question? To: meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com Date: Friday, June 5, 2009, 12:02 AM We have the Martian type meteorite, and we have the Lunar meteorite and last, the asteroid 4Vesta meteorite. These we know where they come from. Now the question---given enough energy, can a meteorite hit earth and eject debris which (maybe) land on the moon or Mars? What would we call such a meteorite---Earthoid, or maybe Earthite? Just contemplating my navel here. Pete __ http://www.meteoritecentral.com Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list __ http://www.meteoritecentral.com Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list __ http://www.meteoritecentral.com Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] A question????? another answer
This is a recurrent theme, one I am interested in myself and when I first joined this list I heard a lot of really good stuff but never saved the mails. Earth vs lunar is quite easy to nail down. The geology of lunar meteorites tend to be rather similar despite different physical appearances. There are only 4 major minerals in lunar meteorites (which is fewer even than Holland's geology). Oh, and they're all anhydrous. So many terrestrial minerals can only be formed in the presence of water and this leads to a greater diversity of rocks here despite being isotopically matched to the moon. Everything else you pointed out seems to be hitting the nail right on the head. I've heard reports (from previous postings to this list) that suggest meteorites have been found that have been discarded because they were terrestrial. Somebody else with more experience and knowledge may want to clarify this, but wasn't Ninninger one of the people who thew out a load of meteorites because they were terrestrial and at least one other person collected stuff but never formally had them studied because he feared being ridiculed for saying his rocks were meteorites when he knew darn well the rocks were of terrestrial origin. They had clear fusion crusts and everything else. Most likely, many terrestrial meteorites would be discarded for these reasons. Once a fusion crust is gone, they'd simply be unrecognised. What it really needs is for an observed fall to be confirmed as terrestrial. Chances of that are pretty low, though. As yet, there is no observed Lunar fall and only a few martians. Rob --- On Fri, 6/5/09, cdtuc...@cox.net cdtuc...@cox.net wrote: From: cdtuc...@cox.net cdtuc...@cox.net Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] A question? another answer To: Mr EMan mstrema...@yahoo.com, meteoritelist meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com Date: Friday, June 5, 2009, 9:56 PM Elton, There you go again providing the perfect answers. Thank you. I have a few follow-up questions for you; If an Earth meteorite (terrene) were to return back to Earth, would we be able to identify it correctly? That is to say would we not simply ASSume it came from the moon? As a moon meteorite would also have Earth air or isotopes? We make new supposed Lunar meteorite discoveries with new materials all the time. So again I ask is there a way to be certain where it came from? I ask because if is not mostly plagioclase, it seems to me most investigators would simply toss it aside and say; it is not a meteorite, that is a rind or weathered Earth rock not fusion crust. So, another question would be this; if it clearly has a fusion crust complete with the gas bubbles would there be a way to prove it is in fact a genuine fusion crust??? Thanks Carl Esparza IMCA 5829 Mr EMan mstrema...@yahoo.com wrote: Pete sometime let me tell you about the First Church of the Navelites.. but to your question They would be called meteorites until identified as originating from the Earth--then the debate is opened up again. Recently someone at NASA or in the IAU stated the new definition of meteorite includes any rocky object falling onto the surface of any planet should be regarded as a meteorite (my translation) I recently read a calculation of the number of Earth originating rocks gone to meteorites on the moon and on Mars and it was a fairly high number within the realistic realm of being identified as such. A further subset of missing nomenclature is what to call returning non tektite ejecta that may have orbited a while and get returned much later. The Reis impactor is a candidate for having been able to eject rocks into orbit. As I've mentioned it before, it hurled some multi-ton limestone boulders over 60 miles up a mountain side in Austria. A meteorite could not eject material into space from earth but an asteroid sized impactor most certainly has in the past. That is the physics don't prohibit it. Elton --- On Fri, 6/5/09, Pete shu...@clearwire.net pshu...@clearwire.net wrote: From: Pete shu...@clearwire.net pshu...@clearwire.net Subject: [meteorite-list] A question? To: meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com Date: Friday, June 5, 2009, 12:02 AM We have the Martian type meteorite, and we have the Lunar meteorite and last, the asteroid 4Vesta meteorite. These we know where they come from. Now the question---given enough energy, can a meteorite hit earth and eject debris which (maybe) land on the moon or Mars? What would we call such a meteorite---Earthoid, or maybe Earthite? Just contemplating my navel here. Pete __ http://www.meteoritecentral.com Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list __ http
Re: [meteorite-list] A question????? another answer
You are too kind, Carl. Let me address your questions inside your quote: --- On Fri, 6/5/09, cdtuc...@cox.net cdtuc...@cox.net wrote: Q: I have a few follow-up questions for you; If an Earth meteorite (terrene) were to return back to Earth, would we be able to identify it correctly? A: Yes and No. IF you look at the locations of recent major impacts(80 Million years or later) and consider the bedrock/ target rock-type at the launch origin. It narrows the filed of possible rock types. The best candidate is Reis crater in Germany which lies on limestone. The Canadian shield cluster and Popogui impacts are far too (old we think) and that leaves Chesapeake, Chicxulub, The un-named crater in the North Sea off Scotland and Wetumpka Al. So far as I know all these excavated down to deep crystalline basement rock so most have a component of igneous rock mixed with the sedimentary kinds. Statistically the older the impact the more likely that any orbitally ejected material will have already fallen back long before mankind existed. Someone somewhere did a study of the physics on what sized crater had enough energy to eject material at escape velocity and seems like it was in the range of 5 miles/8km someone with a better database might chime in. Chicxulub target rocks included slates,sandstone, sulfate rocks and weathered lavas . The sulfates are generally too fragile. Sandstone has a wide range of hardness and is more difficult to predict launch integrity and space survival. Quartzite remains the best candidate for launch, survival and recognition but Popagui in Siberia is over 200 myo(?)(Geoff Notkin knows, he fed the mosquitoes there one summer). The crystalline bedrocks are usually pyroxene, mica, feldspar, and silica(quartz) mixtures. Earth rocks tend to have larger grain and clast sizes. Certain grain sizes could only come from Earth as no other planet other than Venus could grow them. That leaves a granitoid rocks and quartzite for best chance of survival and recognition. A fusion crust on those: granite --white to brown with specs of black. Quartzite probably a frosty clear glass coating. When Limestone is heated it does not melt but turns into highly soluble lime (CaO) and Carbon dioxide ( CO2)...so there isn't a fusion crust. It would be white until the first rain. Q: That is to say would we not simply ASSume it came from the moon? As a moon meteorite would also have Earth air or isotopes? A: Owing that the Earth and Moon came from the same stock we share the same isotope abundances so there is no isotope ratio test to differentiate them. Again grain size and clast sizes would be larger on material from Earth We make new supposed Lunar meteorite discoveries with new materials all the time. So again I ask is there a way to be certain where it came from? I ask because if is not mostly plagioclase, it seems to me most investigators would simply toss it aside and say; it is not a meteorite, that is a rind or weathered Earth rock not fusion crust. Yes there is so much industrial slag about even regular moon meteorites look like it but I will keep looking for out of place rocks. Moon material from the Mares is hard to differentiate from earth basalt save for the clasts. The feldspars could come from anywhere in New Hampshire, Vermont-- actually most all of New England, so again anyone looking would need a very trained eye. I think the first identified Earthite will be the one that crashes through a roof and makes someone take a hard look. Right now unless it were very very old due to an extremely large orbit that took 700-1300 million years to decay-- there are no candidate craters on Earth that are in feldspar-rich bedrock that come to mind. Actually Nininger(?) or someone--found a limestone object that was reported to be a fall and in fact he thought it to be a meteorite but it was so unlike anything known it was unable to prove it. The where-a-bouts of the object is unknown. It is listed as a psuedo-meteorite in the Natural History (British) Museum's Catalog of meteorites Q: So, another question would be this; if it clearly has a fusion crust complete with the gas bubbles would there be a way to prove it is in fact a genuine fusion crust??? The short answer: Cosmic ray tracks and enriched tritium from solar wind would be proof that the material had been in space. Fusion crust in my book is over rated as proof owing to the wide occurrence of industrial glass so widely spread on Earth AND poorly understood/recognized accurately as everyone claims fusion crust when in fact the crust is long gone and they are looking at the ablation surface. An ablation surface can look like water or wind-worn surfaces. You are Welcome, Elton __ http://www.meteoritecentral.com Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] A question????? another answer Correction#1
OOps Popagui is spelled Popigai and is almost the same age as Chesapeake Bay. I am aware there is a lot of brecciated quartzite in the rim so it is another candidate for producing Earthites Elton __ http://www.meteoritecentral.com Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] A question????? another answer
Hi, E and List, Bret Gladman's simulations of rocks blasted off the Earth by impact show about 50% of them being re-captured from independent orbits and returning as meteorites. The time scale for re-capture varies from 10,000 years to 10,000,000 years. So, if there were any returns from the Ries impactor, they would already be here, mostly likely. Sedimentary meteorites are discussed here: http://meteorite-identification.com/mwnews/BLECKENSTAD.htm Monica Grady, looking for a possible Martian sedimentary stone, wrote a paper requesting museums and collections to look for such anomalous stones as might be found in their dusty drawers or cabinets in this publication (p. 77): http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19960027473_1996032004.pdf Sterling K. Webb - - Original Message - From: Mr EMan mstrema...@yahoo.com To: meteoritelist meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com Sent: Friday, June 05, 2009 10:58 PM Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] A question? another answer You are too kind, Carl. Let me address your questions inside your quote: --- On Fri, 6/5/09, cdtuc...@cox.net cdtuc...@cox.net wrote: Q: I have a few follow-up questions for you; If an Earth meteorite (terrene) were to return back to Earth, would we be able to identify it correctly? A: Yes and No. IF you look at the locations of recent major impacts(80 Million years or later) and consider the bedrock/ target rock-type at the launch origin. It narrows the filed of possible rock types. The best candidate is Reis crater in Germany which lies on limestone. The Canadian shield cluster and Popogui impacts are far too (old we think) and that leaves Chesapeake, Chicxulub, The un-named crater in the North Sea off Scotland and Wetumpka Al. So far as I know all these excavated down to deep crystalline basement rock so most have a component of igneous rock mixed with the sedimentary kinds. Statistically the older the impact the more likely that any orbitally ejected material will have already fallen back long before mankind existed. Someone somewhere did a study of the physics on what sized crater had enough energy to eject material at escape velocity and seems like it was in the range of 5 miles/8km someone with a better database might chime in. Chicxulub target rocks included slates,sandstone, sulfate rocks and weathered lavas . The sulfates are generally too fragile. Sandstone has a wide range of hardness and is more difficult to predict launch integrity and space survival. Quartzite remains the best candidate for launch, survival and recognition but Popagui in Siberia is over 200 myo(?)(Geoff Notkin knows, he fed the mosquitoes there one summer). The crystalline bedrocks are usually pyroxene, mica, feldspar, and silica(quartz) mixtures. Earth rocks tend to have larger grain and clast sizes. Certain grain sizes could only come from Earth as no other planet other than Venus could grow them. That leaves a granitoid rocks and quartzite for best chance of survival and recognition. A fusion crust on those: granite --white to brown with specs of black. Quartzite probably a frosty clear glass coating. When Limestone is heated it does not melt but turns into highly soluble lime (CaO) and Carbon dioxide ( CO2)...so there isn't a fusion crust. It would be white until the first rain. Q: That is to say would we not simply ASSume it came from the moon? As a moon meteorite would also have Earth air or isotopes? A: Owing that the Earth and Moon came from the same stock we share the same isotope abundances so there is no isotope ratio test to differentiate them. Again grain size and clast sizes would be larger on material from Earth We make new supposed Lunar meteorite discoveries with new materials all the time. So again I ask is there a way to be certain where it came from? I ask because if is not mostly plagioclase, it seems to me most investigators would simply toss it aside and say; it is not a meteorite, that is a rind or weathered Earth rock not fusion crust. Yes there is so much industrial slag about even regular moon meteorites look like it but I will keep looking for out of place rocks. Moon material from the Mares is hard to differentiate from earth basalt save for the clasts. The feldspars could come from anywhere in New Hampshire, Vermont-- actually most all of New England, so again anyone looking would need a very trained eye. I think the first identified Earthite will be the one that crashes through a roof and makes someone take a hard look. Right now unless it were very very old due to an extremely large orbit that took 700-1300 million years to decay-- there are no candidate craters on Earth that are in feldspar-rich bedrock that come to mind. Actually Nininger(?) or someone--found a limestone object that was reported to be a fall and in fact he thought it to be a meteorite
