No, the DCAs will simply require coordinates, like everywhere else. The proof
condition is dropped. The NWA 9000s will be skipped.
Believe it or not, nobody has submitted a request to reclassify Al Hag 001 or
its siblings. Has there been a paper published on it? All I'm finding are
To amplify on Carl's response...
For the past 15 years, any meteorite from this region (except falls)
would get an NWA number unless there was compelling documentation of the
coordinates of the find. This might include a photo of the meteorite in
situ with an active GPS. But this was rarely
I wouldn't get too excited about this. Lots of enstatite meteorites
(chondrites and achondrites) are melt rocks and melt breccias, and
they've been described for decades by Alan Rubin and others, e.g.
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0016703796003353
.
And I took the liberty of editing Peter's email when I answer it.
And I just did it again.
Anne M. Black
www.IMPACTIKA.com
impact...@aol.com
-Original Message-
From: Galactic Stone Ironworks meteoritem...@gmail.com
To: Peter Scherff petersche...@rcn.com
Cc: Jeff Grossman jgross
Answer: you can't. The classification scheme is lousy.
Jeff
On 4/11/2014 1:21 PM, Michael Mulgrew wrote:
Two sequences, one for aqueous alteration and one for thermal
metamorphism (http://www.meteoritemarket.com/PetTypeGroup.jpg). Makes
one wonder how we would classify a meteorite that is
Yes, Alan and I would call this object a real meteorite, but not
tektites, which never escaped from Earth's gravity well.
It's a bit of a stretch and model dependent, but in a way, lunar
meteorites may be considered as this type of meteorite.
Jeff
On 4/8/2014 7:18 AM, Peter Scherff wrote:
... well, on second thought, it's too much if a stretch since nothing of
the original texture and mineralogy suggesting an Earth origin remains
in lunar meteorites... so scratch that.
On 4/8/2014 1:38 PM, Jeff Grossman wrote:
Yes, Alan and I would call this object a real meteorite
be considered an artificial body?
2) I am 99.9% sure that the word itself refers to the meteorite (as opposed
to the body on which the meteorite lands). Correct?
Mendy Ouzillou
From: Jeff Grossman jngross...@gmail.com
To: meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com
Sent
Mendy and list,
My comments:
Oxygen: I would say that O isotope heterogeneity as described here is not a
good measure of metamorphism. Oxygen heterogeneity in these objecbulk
samplests will be a function of sample size, as fine matrix grains
equilibrate much more quickly than coarse ones. If
If somebody told me about it, it would have been back up earlier! Write
next time...
Jeff
On 3/13/2014 7:43 PM, Galactic Stone Ironworks wrote:
The Met Bulletin appears to be back up and running normally. :)
__
Visit the Archives at
Actually, there is no such thing as CV3-ung. If it's CV, it's
grouped. The MetBull lists this as CV3-anomalous, and from the two
abstracts I can find on it, I'm not entirely convinced it's anomalous,
but maybe. It's at the high end of the CV oxygen isotope trend and
closely resembles
Two things:
Many meteorites are heterogeneous. When we say Katol is L6 or NWA 869
is L3-6 or Almahata Sitta is an anomalous urelite, these are collective
terms. Katol refers to everything that fell that day in India. It
has been classified as L6. However, it is possible (and for Almahata
It would probably be best not to use a lithologic term in a numbering
scheme. Some specimens may defy such a descriptor, and in other cases
it may simply be hard to tell what it is at the time of numbering. And
it would really be good not to use numbers in the same format as dense
collection
PM, Jeff Grossman wrote:
Can't resist doing some arm-chair science... usually a bad move, but
oh well... I'll probably end up retracting much of this speculation...
There IS something strange about this meteorite to me. I don't know
how good the XRF analysis is, but it is not what I would
Mike's photo in posted in the database now.
Jeff
On 1/1/2014 1:19 PM, Jim Wooddell wrote:
Hi Anne!
One can not post pictures in the proper place using the EOM method.
They all go into the uncertain category. Jeff places them in the
correct areasomething an EOM member can not do.
All,
Here are the top 10 meteorite searches from the MetBull database in
2013, in decreasing order of popularity.
Sikhote-Alin (Iron, IIAB)
Chelyabinsk (LL5)
Northwest Africa 7325 (Achondrite-ung)
Hoba (Iron, IVB)
Fukang (Pallasite, PMG)
Northwest Africa 7034 (Martian (basaltic breccia))
On Dec 31, 2013, at 11:47 AM, Jeff Grossman jngross...@gmail.com wrote:
All,
Here are the top 10 meteorite searches from the MetBull database in 2013, in
decreasing order of popularity.
Sikhote-Alin (Iron, IIAB)
Chelyabinsk (LL5)
Northwest Africa 7325 (Achondrite-ung)
Hoba (Iron, IVB)
Fukang
Can't resist doing some arm-chair science... usually a bad move, but oh
well... I'll probably end up retracting much of this speculation...
There IS something strange about this meteorite to me. I don't know how
good the XRF analysis is, but it is not what I would expect from an L
Many here will be interested that I just released a revised
classification and description of NWA 869 in the MetBull Database.
http://www.lpi.usra.edu/meteor/index.php?code=31890
Jeff
__
Visit the Archives at http://www.meteorite-list-archives.com
50% is not even close. I counted the peer-reviewed papers in the 2012
volume of MAPS. In the 58 non-review papers that reported analyses of
physical samples of meteorites, 52% used falls, 12% used non-desert
finds, 24% used hot desert meteorites, and 28% used Antarctic
meteorites. (this
As I've pointed out a number of times before, the scientific impact of
past research on Antarctic meteorites vastly outweighs that of work on
Saharan and other warm-desert meteorites. The reasons for this are
historical and curatorial. And as a person who has done a lot of
research on
If it is the Meteoritical Bulletin you are seeking, it hasn't been at
the USGS for 3 years, although the old address does redirect. The
current address is:
http://www.lpi.usra.edu/meteor/metbull.php
Jeff
On 10/5/2013 9:46 AM, Steve Richey wrote:
Clear your browser cache Jim, it ain't
Actually, Taoudenni was approved in 2010, and the provisional name NWA
5178 was assigned in 2008. NomCom was not aware that the provisional
name and Taoudenni referred to the same meteorite until it was reported
to us this week.
Jeff
On 9/7/2013 4:38 PM, Galactic Stone Ironworks wrote:
Hi
I'm happy to add images to the Bulletin. We don't usually get them.
Jeff
On 9/1/2013 7:38 AM, karmaka wrote:
Hi Jim,
I'm very sorry if the term 'picture book' was misleading. With this word
I was referring to the great photos that are included in the met bull entries
of the more interesting
I can find no instructions and it's not on the proposal form
to do this.
Thanks!
Jim
On Sun, Sep 1, 2013 at 4:05 PM, Jeff Grossman jngross...@gmail.com
mailto:jngross...@gmail.com wrote:
I'm happy to add images to the Bulletin. We don't usually get them.
Jeff
On 9/1/2013 7:38
Oh, there are other ureilites with at least 90% olivine. A very quick
search finds that Singletary and Grove (2003) list GRA 95205 and GRO
95575 with 94% and 90% olivine, respectively.
Jeff
On 7/24/2013 6:29 PM, Greg Hupé wrote:
Hi All who showed interest so far in the 'only' Dunitic
or as finder, or refer to you in
the write-up.
Here is the one Adam already filled out:
http://www.lpi.usra.edu/meteor/MetBullCollectionInfo.php?coll=AHupe
Jeff
On 7/13/2013 2:35 PM, Adam Hupe wrote:
I think they may be testing a new feature in the database. Jeff Grossman is
adding some
Fabien, I think this is an error compounding another error. NWA 6435
was never assigned to your diogenite. It was assigned to the 444 g
brachinite with field name K-134, now known as NWA 5435. K091 (235 g)
was assigned the provisional number NWA 5133 in 2008 and was classified
by Ted Bunch
Just to back up what Carl said, MetBull is not decades behind... it may
be decades out of date though. MetBull does not attempt to log new
discoveries of additional pieces of meteorites, so it is not behind in
this task. It is, in general, a one-time publication with a date on it,
like a
This is a long thread and I haven't read all of it. But here are the
facts about provisional names and approvals of new meteorites:
Provisional names are ONLY given to meteorites from dense collection
areas. The reason is that the geographic part of the name is already
agreed upon. The
://cosmochemists.igpp.ucla.edu/Rubin.html
- Original Message - From: Jeff Grossman jngross...@gmail.com
To: meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com
Sent: Saturday, April 06, 2013 6:24 PM
Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Sign Up Now for your Mineral Rights
(Mining Asteroids for Platinum)
I just did my own
I just did my own calculation... at pure metal prices, I find most
chondrites are worth around $100/metric ton, with Pt dominating the
calculation. Of the major groups of carbonaceous, ordinary, and
enstatite chondrites, H chondrites are worth the most... I get $162/ton
($80 of which is Pt,
A strength
of the splashing model is that it can explain why chondrules are
mostly between 1.5 and 2.5MYr younger than CAI The sentence
should read older, no younger.
Dr. Jeff Grossman, would love to hear your thoughts on this paper.
Mendy Ouzillou
responses! Argh.
Jim Wooddell
On Wed, Mar 13, 2013 at 3:28 AM, Jeff Grossman jngross...@gmail.com wrote:
I second what Alan wrote, at the 90% level. With my remaining finger,
I'll add that the worst problem may be that these molten planetesimals
must magically keep metallic and silicate
Ok, take a deep breath. It took years of research on Semarkona to understand
its properties. It is clear that this one has some similar properties, but it
will take serious research to fully understand how the two compare. Also,
Semarkona is a very well preserved fall, with virtually no
There are actually many carbonaceous chondrites that have experienced, most
likely, less heating than Semarkona. That includes nearly every CR and most CM
chondrites. Semarkona's reign is over the OC kingdom.
Jeff
Sent from my iPad
On Mar 6, 2013, at 4:22 PM, Greg Hupé gmh...@centurylink.net
There has been discussion in the literature about how Semarkona is ever so
slightly more heated than things like CR chondrites, and so you will find
mention of elevating its petrologic type by a few hundredths. But this is very
qualitative. It is still a type 3.00 using the scheme of Grossman
in the know...have these been
initially classified with lesser x.xx distinction and will possibly be
revisited with further research-class-distinguishing-techniques not explored
before the initial classifications?
Richard Montgomery
- Original Message - From: Jeff Grossman
. C., Jr.
http://www.lpi.usra.edu/meetings/lpsc2002/pdf/1547.pdf
Enjoy
Shawn Alan
IMCA 1633
ebay store
http://www.ebay.com/sch/imca1633ny/m.html
http://meteoritefalls.com/
From: Jeff Grossman jngross...@gmail.com
To: Meteorite-list
An ungrouped chondrite is a chondrite with properties that do not fit
into the existing named groups. Right now, this means it is not an H, L,
LL, R, CI, CM, CV, CO, CK, CH, CB, CR, EH, or EL chondrite. It is
something different. There are many ungrouped carbonaceous chondrites,
and number of
Why is this a problem? -jeff
On 2/16/2013 9:46 PM, Mendy Ouzillou wrote:
Why are two consecutive numbers assigned to the same group of stones. EL6, two
stones and same classifiers. I don't get it ...
Mendy Ouzillou
On Feb 16, 2013, at 10:20 AM, Galactic Stone Ironworks
Meteorite group names are not invented by NomCom, and certainly not by
NASA. The come from usage in the scientific literature.
I think we have to remember why names like shergottite and nakhlite came
into being. Scientists like to group similar things to help bring order
to chaos. When you
There are two reasons why we can't get rid of carbonaceous chondrite
group names. First, unlike Martian meteorites, we don't know where C
chondrites came from. We can't point to a single asteroid as the source
for any of them, let alone all of them. So the group names are still
serving
Don't forget ALH 84001, the pyroxenite.
SNCPB?
If we use the N from NWA instead of B, and the A from ALH, how about CANNS?
Or maybe we should just do the sensible thing and call them Martian
meteorites?
Jeff
On 1/24/2013 4:42 PM, h...@meteorhall.com wrote:
Hi Paul,
I like the SNCB. It
of New Mexico
Albuquerque NM 87131-1126
Tel: (505) 750-7172
Fax: (505) 277-3577
Email: a...@unm.edu
http://meteorite.unm.edu/people/carl_agee/
---
Message: 19
Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2013 10:43:04 -0500
From: Jeff Grossman jngross...@gmail.com
Subject: Re
I'm not sure if the message below got sent... getting weird bounce
messages fr
On 1/5/2013 9:25 AM, Jeff Grossman wrote:
I should add: my first two categories are types of falls, whereas the
last three are types of finds.
Jeff
On 1/5/2013 8:12 AM, Jeff Grossman wrote:
In all seriousness, I
In all seriousness, I have considered refining, or at least qualifying
the definition of fall. The categories I've considered are these, and
the definitions are first passes:
Observed fall: observed to fall, either visually or with instruments,
and collected soon after the event. The event
I should add: my first two categories are types of falls, whereas the
last three are types of finds.
Jeff
On 1/5/2013 8:12 AM, Jeff Grossman wrote:
In all seriousness, I have considered refining, or at least qualifying
the definition of fall. The categories I've considered
There are several other very small meteorites...
Khatyrka, announced in June. Although it is listed as 0.1 g in the MB
database, if you read the text, you see that there are only 10
particles, all 1 mm. These could well have an actual cumulative mass
of 10 mg.
Hadley Rille: a named
Yes, sounds like a mistake. I'll investigate.
Jeff
On 11/8/2012 2:26 PM, jason utas wrote:
Hello MIke,
Perusing the data, I noticed the following phrase in the description
of the EL5: Opaque phases are mainly kamacite and troilite, almost
completely weathered to iron oxides. -- And yet, the
In confirmation of what Chris responded, this comes from Mike Zolensky, who
studies cosmic dust and curates the NASA collection. -jeff
Hi Brandon
I can take a stab at answering your questions. Many persons have tried this
experiment in the past, and invariably they have found that the collected
I am not an expert in this area, but the way I understand it, the Code
of Federal Regulations, which have the force of law, grant certain
agencies regulatory authority in certain areas. The new BLM policy
cites the sections of the CFR under which they are claiming authority to
regulate the
All,
For those of you who don't know, I contribute to this list as a private
citizen, but I work at NASA headquarters, with duties that extend to
oversight of curation and research programs. I will be reading all
posts on the list pertaining to this issue.
Jeff
On 9/20/2012 6:37 PM, Jim
No, olivine diogenite is a classification that is accepted for the Met
Bull, and there are several in press in MB100.
I remind everybody that there is no such thing as official nomenclature
[of meteorite classifications]. The nomcom tends to be conservative,
and generally does not start
Who out there is the luckiest person when it comes to being in the right
place at the right time? How many recovered meteorite falls have you (A)
witnessed to fall or (B) have fallen within, say, 30 km of your location
at the time of fall? My fall number (A+B) is a pathetic 0+1=1. I
wonder
experience with other falls that I see meteorites that
fell only a few days ago, but as of the time of this writing no one has actually seen meteorites first-hand (or at
least reported it yet).
Cheers,
Marc Fries
On Aug 26, 2012, at 11:01 AM, Jeff Grossman wrote:
Who out there is the luckiest
Here is how Rubin and Grossman (2010) [MAPS 45, 114-122] dealt with this:
Another difficult situation arises when considering projectiles that
strike a spacecraft. For example, publications reporting on the Long
Duration Exposure Facility (LDEF), which was exposed to interplanetary
space in
The shield is clearly protecting against meteoroids. I don't think this
is ambiguous at all. Similarly, one might want to protect Earth from
asteroid impacts, but you would not say it needed protection from
meteorites. It isn't the leftover bits that present the hazard... it is
the incoming
The community is welcome to direct questions and suggestions about the
MetBull Database to me. I am the editor, author, and programmer of the
database.
The pulldown item Unclassified meteorites captures the ones called
unknown. Alternatively, you can click the Classes radio button and
If you go to any entry for which oxygen isotope data are present, you'll
see the a link to the plots, e.g.:
NWA 2986: http://www.lpi.usra.edu/meteor/metbull.php?code=33436
Jeff
On 7/30/2012 11:49 AM, MikeG wrote:
Hi Bulletin Watchers,
There are 6 new approvals today, 3 from NWA and 3 from
That's why we call these NWA. We report what we are told about the
meteorites. If we can resolve conflicting information, we will. But
often it is impossible or difficult.
Jeff
On 7/30/2012 2:56 PM, Prof. Zelimir Gabelica Université de Haute Alsace
ENSCMu, wrote:
Dear Jeff, list,
I
Carl,
What's the difference between the two lithologies visible in the first
of these two photos?
Jeff
On 5/25/2012 2:19 PM, Carl Agee wrote:
http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=4042491099560set=a.1076549432872.2012978.1200325441type=1ref=nf
Yes, I recently handled one of the Apollo 17 plaques, and it contained a
nice chip, maybe a cm across.
Jeff
On 5/23/2012 6:23 PM, Benjamin P. Sun wrote:
The Apollo 11 Goodwill moon rocks are fragments of about 50mg for each plaque.
But the Apollo 17 Goodwill moon rocks have a fragment of
For those of you who are disappointed in the classification, be
patient. Science sometimes takes time. I'm sure various groups will be
refining this in coming days and weeks.
Jeff
On 5/22/2012 5:25 PM, karmaka wrote:
The guidelines were not relaxed... they were changed.
On 5/22/2012 5:32 PM, meteorh...@aol.com wrote:
Glad to see they stuck with Sutter's Mill as the name. In an era where we no
longer need to turn to the index in the back of a physical atlas to locate
where in it a particular meteorite was
-Original Message-
From: Jeff Grossman
Sent: 22 May 2012 21:31:47 GMT
To: meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com
Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] SUTTER'S MILL in MetBull
For those of you who are disappointed in the classification, be patient.
Science sometimes takes time. I'm sure various groups
It is important, and we really needed to get the name announced in order
not to impede science (e.g., the MetSoc abstracts are due in a matter of
days) and to end the controversy around what to call it.
If you read Zolensky's description in the bulletin, it's clear that he
thinks the
Once again, I've gotta take issue with calling a stone that is only 10%
of the total recovered mass the main mass. I don't think this is a
reasonable usage. Allende, Murchison, Holbrook, and now this meteorite
simply don't have a single main mass. Give Ward credit for the largest
known
I'm not sure what you're referring to with this statement... an entry in
MetBull will probably be published very soon. After that, there are no
Meteoritical Society bylaws or anything else concerning the release of
information. Of course, some authors may not release all of his/her
data
of Meteorite Men
--Original Message--
From: Jeff Grossman
To: meteorh...@aol.com
Cc: Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com
Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Sutter's Mill slices question, Impact Melt?
Sent: May 17, 2012 2:30 PM
I'm not sure what you're referring to with this statement... an entry
Mike,
Surely, this must be Glorieta Mountain, which has the synonym Pojoaque.
Jeff
On 4/28/2012 9:40 AM, Michael Gilmer wrote:
Hi List,
I tried to post this yesterday, but emails were not going through to
the List. I contacted a couple of other List members who confirmed
that they were
The way it works is that meteorites are named based on how much
certainty we have about where they come from. When we think the
coordinates are accurate, we can name them after very local features.
For things like NWA and Sahara meteorites, we have some confidence that
they come from
Just to clarify, I only send out announcements of interesting types of
meteorites on the RSS feed (anything other than H/L/LL type 4-6).
jeff
On 2/1/2012 2:49 AM, Jeff Kuyken wrote:
Hi John all,
For those of you who may not be aware, the Met Bull has a great RSS feed
where new approvals
, but then we could drop some fancier names to
describe that 'degenerate' case.
Just sounding off
Kindest wishes
Doug
-Original Message-
From: Jeff Grossman jngross...@gmail.com
To: meteorite-list meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com
Sent: Tue, Jan 24, 2012 11:33 am
Subject: Re
A main mass list? Heck, there isn't even a main mass definition
everybody agrees on! Here's mine:
An individual stone/iron or piece of an individual stone/iron that
comprises the majority ( 50%) of the known mass of a named meteorite.
Jeff
On 1/24/2012 10:08 AM, Bob Loeffler wrote:
Hi
I guess this means that the Smithsonian, AMNH (New York) and Natural
History Museum (London) curators don't recognize rarity and value.
Perhaps it's something else.
The fact of the matter is that large institutional collections are, in
general, rather lacking in NWAs, Libyan, and Omani
Erik,
This would be a nearly impossible exercise to do. What I can say is
this: There are 29050 classified Antarctic meteorites in the world's
colletions, and 12664 classified non-Antarctic meteorites. If we assume
that all of the Antarctics are government-collected and most of the
The question was in universities and museums. This means accessioned
specimens. So the vast amount of NWA debris, some of which I've seen in
Marvin Killgore's collection, is mostly not relevant. -jeff
On 1/17/2012 7:44 PM, Adam Hupe wrote:
29,050 Antarctic meteorites divided by 5 pairings
...except that it is unlikely that the primary target of a sample return
mission to Mars would be basalt! That is not to say that this isn't an
exciting event. But it does not accomplish what a sample return mission
would, nor does it make such a mission less important.
Jeff
On 1/15/2012
No.
On 1/3/2012 2:41 PM, Greg Hupé wrote:
Very interesting! Does this meteorite have a name or number yet?
Best Regards,
Greg
Greg Hupé
The Hupé Collection
gmh...@centurylink.net
www.LunarRock.com
NaturesVault (eBay)
IMCA 3163
Click here for my
Yes, I was asked to enter this synonym, Tata, into the MetBull
database a year ago, but the person who requested it wasn't sure which
specimens the name referred to other than 1430. It never went past
there. What do you all think? Is Tata exclusively used for NWA 1430,
or are there other
Also, a provisional name is something that the NomCom gives out for
likely new meteorites in dense collection areas prior to final
classification. Provisional names are essentially official temporary
names.
Jeff
On 12/28/2011 8:55 PM, Galactic Stone Ironworks wrote:
Hi Darryl and List,
Falls (if this is one) do not get dense collection area numbers. NomCom
guideline 3.3a says, In the event that a meteorite falls near the same
locality as an existing named meteorite, the new fall should not be
assigned... a numeric designation... It gets a unique name.
Jeff
On 12/28/2011
So a question: why is this being called a fall, when the web page says
This new martian meteorite is possibly associated with a large fireball
observed during day, around noon, in July 2011?
Sounds like the fall status is still an open question. Or is there more
to the story?
Jeff
On
Some PACs do in fact contain relict chondrules, especially
acapulcoites and winonaites.
Some chondrites have no chondrules (CIs and highly altered ones, plus
some type 6 and 7) and some PACs do. Life is not always simple!
Jeff
On 12/5/2011 9:22 PM, MexicoDoug wrote:
There are relict
Type 7 is considered by most of those who use it to represent the
highest degree of thermal metamorphism that a chondrite can experience
without melting. As implied in that first sentence, some petrologists
don't distinguish these from type 6. The term primitive achondrite is
widely taken to
NomCom did not publish either the term paleo or fossil, nor do I
think we have ever published these terms for any meteorite. I don't
think they are particularly well defined. We put the term fossil in
quotes in Alex Bevan's description of the Gove meteorite, but we listed
it according to the
Actually, there are hundreds of these from the last 5 years. They are
all equilibrated ordinary chondrites classified by magnetic
susceptibility. Because no thin section was prepared, the petrologic
type is fairly uncertain. Actually, if there is a lot of weathering,
even the chemical group
Some of you may be interested in the news that the Nomenclature
Committee has voted to discredit Inningen as a meteorite name. It has
been shown to be a piece of Sikhote-Alin. See
http://www.lpi.usra.edu/meteor/metbull.php?code=12038
Jeff
__
Bonus questions:
What is the only meteorite name to use all the vowels, including y
(a-e-i-o-u-y), where each vowel is used only once?
There are 8 meteorite names (that I can find) for which all of the
letters in the name occur in alphabetical order. The longest has 6
letters. What is it?
-o-u-y), where each vowel is used only once?
May I partcipate in the bonus question (and what's the prize?)
My entry is (valid entry under the honor system):
Sierra County
Kindest wishes
Doug
-Original Message-
From: Jeff Grossman jngross...@gmail.com
To: meteorite-list meteorite
All,
I'm compiling a list of all meteorites that have named masses. The two
well-known examples are Cape York and Campo del Cielo, which each have
many large pieces that are known by informal names, e.g., Ahnighito (CY)
and El Patio (CdC).
How many others can people come up with? This is
I released it just now:
http://www.lpi.usra.edu/meteor/metbull.php?code=53877
Jeff
On 8/27/2011 7:50 PM, Dave Gheesling wrote:
Michael All,
Dr. Wasson submitted his classification of the Conception Junction pallasite
(PMG) to the Nomenclature Committee last month, and presumably it will be
[This email was written by me as a private citizen, and does not reflect
any kind of official position by NASA]
If you want to see the loan agreements that are used today, please read:
http://curator.jsc.nasa.gov/lunar/sampreq/LunarAllocHandbook.pdf
Agreements such as the one shown here have
What law are you talking about?
On 6/25/2011 7:55 PM, Michael Gilmer wrote:
Hi Jeff and List,
What strikes me here is that NASA has 842 pounds of lunar material and
they are apparently bent out shape over a few milligrams of dust
clinging to a piece of scotch tape. It's absolutely silly and
These tildes have been used before. Here is a rundown of all the
special notation you may see in chondrite classifications.
For petrologic types:
~ (tilde) means that the petrologic type was not determined very
precisely -- maybe just with a visual guess. H~5 is an H chondrite that
is
I think the Weisberg divisions are by no means in general usage.
Meteorite classification is chaotic and there is no standard system. I
wrote most of the wikipedia article on this subject:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meteorite_classification
Take a look at the discussion there, which is
Reclassifications in the MetBull can occur when somebody submits to the
NomCom, or NomCom independently finds, sufficient evidence to warrant
publication of an erratum. For simple errors, the evidence can be very
simple (e.g., this meteorite was published as an LL5, but it actually
has Fa19
The ents are not currently, and have not previously discussed the
issue. So the question is indeed moot.
jeff
On 6/8/2011 8:38 AM, Michael Gilmer wrote:
Hi Dan,
The Al-Haggounia issue comes up here regularly from time to time and
it has been discussed extensively. The general consensus is
The definition in the Nomenclature Committee guidelines is this: All
meteorites found, reported to be found, or purchased in Morocco and
adjacent parts of the surrounding countries.
Surrounding countries has been interpreted to mean the adjacent
countries (Western Sahara and Algeria), and
1 - 100 of 392 matches
Mail list logo
