Re: [meteorite-list] Amusing Chicago Sun-Times Article
I think Mr. Stimpson should clean them all up and put together a much vaunted puzzle stone. Bill -- Original message -- From: Jeff Kuyken [EMAIL PROTECTED] Another way to look at it is by past finds. How about Huckitta!? THE largest pallasite. Actually, the largest stony/iron I think. The main mass is 1411kg but it was found with another tonne of shale fragments. Does this mean it really weighs ~2.4 tonnes??? Looks like the precedent may have already been set and Steve's Brenham record is safe for now! ;-) Cheers, Jeff - Original Message - From: Michael L Blood To: Al Mitterling ; Geoff Notkin ; Meteorite List Sent: Saturday, July 08, 2006 6:56 AM Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Amusing Chicago Sun-Times Article Hi Al and all, The fact that it was one of the largest masses of Brenham is irrelevant. It is not now one of the largest masses. Before it all entered the earth's atmosphere all Brenham might all have been one mass - or, in the asteroid belt it might all have been one mass, so, the fact that 1500 LBs might have been one mass in that hole at some time I just don't see how you can get close to comparing that to Steve's find - which IS the largest Brenham mass known. (AND is a spectacularly oriented specimen, to boot!) But then, I could be wrong, my wife tells me I am all the time. Best wishes, Michael on 7/7/06 11:13 AM, almitt at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi Geoff and Listees, I think you have hit the nail on the head in regards to this find which is in pieces. I am sure he wants this to be larger than Steve Arnolds orientated specimen. How can we be sure that what is in the hole he has found isn't other fragments from other finds? I guess if they can put them all together then I'd be satisfied that it WAS one of the largest masses of the Brenham fall. Other wise anyone can accumulate fragments from this fall and claim the largest specimen. I have to go with the largest intact fragment as counting as the largest main mass. Otherwise we might be subject to others gathering fragments and claiming to have the main mass. An example of this is Long Island (at the Field Museum) which is in may fragments and somewhat put together and at one time was a larger specimen. Hope this doesn't get into a main mass discussion :-; --AL Mitterling __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list -- The greater a person's sense of guilt, the greater his or her need to cast blame on others. Anon. -- Is our children learning? I know the human being and fish can coexist peacefully. More and more of our imports come from overseas. The very act of spending money can be expensive. George W. Bush __ 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] Amusing Chicago Sun-Times Article
On Fri, 7 Jul 2006 10:58:47 -0700, you wrote: Anyway, 1,500 pounds of fragments doesn't count as a single largest meteorite. If those 1,500 pounds were found in contact with each other in that one hole (as the article seems to be saying) then would you not agree that it was probably a single 1,500+ pound piece that has rotted in situ? Wherther or not the description of the find is accurate isn't solidly established, but if it was found as described-- 1,500 pounds, one hole, close contact with each other, I don't think it unfair to think it was from a 1,500+ pound individual. There is more detail and a photo in this version of the article that I posted a few days ago: http://www.kansas.com/mld/kansas/14956160.htm __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] Amusing Chicago Sun-Times Article
Hi Geoff and Listees, I think you have hit the nail on the head in regards to this find which is in pieces. I am sure he wants this to be larger than Steve Arnolds orientated specimen. How can we be sure that what is in the hole he has found isn't other fragments from other finds? I guess if they can put them all together then I'd be satisfied that it WAS one of the largest masses of the Brenham fall. Other wise anyone can accumulate fragments from this fall and claim the largest specimen. I have to go with the largest intact fragment as counting as the largest main mass. Otherwise we might be subject to others gathering fragments and claiming to have the main mass. An example of this is Long Island (at the Field Museum) which is in may fragments and somewhat put together and at one time was a larger specimen. Hope this doesn't get into a main mass discussion :-; --AL Mitterling __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] Amusing Chicago Sun-Times Article
Hi Al and all, The fact that it was one of the largest masses of Brenham is irrelevant. It is not now one of the largest masses. Before it all entered the earth's atmosphere all Brenham might all have been one mass - or, in the asteroid belt it might all have been one mass, so, the fact that 1500 LBs might have been one mass in that hole at some time I just don't see how you can get close to comparing that to Steve's find - which IS the largest Brenham mass known. (AND is a spectacularly oriented specimen, to boot!) But then, I could be wrong, my wife tells me I am all the time. Best wishes, Michael on 7/7/06 11:13 AM, almitt at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi Geoff and Listees, I think you have hit the nail on the head in regards to this find which is in pieces. I am sure he wants this to be larger than Steve Arnolds orientated specimen. How can we be sure that what is in the hole he has found isn't other fragments from other finds? I guess if they can put them all together then I'd be satisfied that it WAS one of the largest masses of the Brenham fall. Other wise anyone can accumulate fragments from this fall and claim the largest specimen. I have to go with the largest intact fragment as counting as the largest main mass. Otherwise we might be subject to others gathering fragments and claiming to have the main mass. An example of this is Long Island (at the Field Museum) which is in may fragments and somewhat put together and at one time was a larger specimen. Hope this doesn't get into a main mass discussion :-; --AL Mitterling __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list -- The greater a person's sense of guilt, the greater his or her need to cast blame on others. Anon. -- Is our children learning? I know the human being and fish can coexist peacefully. More and more of our imports come from overseas. The very act of spending money can be expensive. George W. Bush __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] Amusing Chicago Sun-Times Article
On Fri, 07 Jul 2006 13:56:27 -0700, you wrote: The fact that it was one of the largest masses of Brenham is irrelevant. It is not now one of the largest masses. snip have been one mass in that hole at some time I just don't see how you can get close to comparing that to Steve's find - which IS the largest Brenham mass known. I wouldn't give 1,500 pounds of fragments anything like the same wow factor as a single 1,400 pound piece either. But if the story is accurate and not-- shall we say-- embelleshed by the finder, then 1,500 pounds of fragments in one hole surrounded by 20 feet of rust would still be an important piece of the story of the fall. And it might be a sign that there are still bigger pieces to be found, deeper down. __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] Amusing Chicago Sun-Times Article
Another way to look at it is by past finds. How about Huckitta!? THE largest pallasite. Actually, the largest stony/iron I think. The main mass is 1411kg but it was found with another tonne of shale fragments. Does this mean it really weighs ~2.4 tonnes??? Looks like the precedent may have already been set and Steve's Brenham record is safe for now! ;-) Cheers, Jeff - Original Message - From: Michael L Blood To: Al Mitterling ; Geoff Notkin ; Meteorite List Sent: Saturday, July 08, 2006 6:56 AM Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Amusing Chicago Sun-Times Article Hi Al and all, The fact that it was one of the largest masses of Brenham is irrelevant. It is not now one of the largest masses. Before it all entered the earth's atmosphere all Brenham might all have been one mass - or, in the asteroid belt it might all have been one mass, so, the fact that 1500 LBs might have been one mass in that hole at some time I just don't see how you can get close to comparing that to Steve's find - which IS the largest Brenham mass known. (AND is a spectacularly oriented specimen, to boot!) But then, I could be wrong, my wife tells me I am all the time. Best wishes, Michael on 7/7/06 11:13 AM, almitt at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi Geoff and Listees, I think you have hit the nail on the head in regards to this find which is in pieces. I am sure he wants this to be larger than Steve Arnolds orientated specimen. How can we be sure that what is in the hole he has found isn't other fragments from other finds? I guess if they can put them all together then I'd be satisfied that it WAS one of the largest masses of the Brenham fall. Other wise anyone can accumulate fragments from this fall and claim the largest specimen. I have to go with the largest intact fragment as counting as the largest main mass. Otherwise we might be subject to others gathering fragments and claiming to have the main mass. An example of this is Long Island (at the Field Museum) which is in may fragments and somewhat put together and at one time was a larger specimen. Hope this doesn't get into a main mass discussion :-; --AL Mitterling __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list -- The greater a person's sense of guilt, the greater his or her need to cast blame on others. Anon. -- Is our children learning? I know the human being and fish can coexist peacefully. More and more of our imports come from overseas. The very act of spending money can be expensive. George W. Bush __ 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
