[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Found meteorite

Looks very terrestrial to me, some sort of intrusive or at a reach possibly volcaniclastic.
It appears to have travelled in a watercourse (rounded shape) and any parallel grooves would suggest glacial transport making this a quite a solid, competent rock. Do any non-iron meteorites get strong enough to survive alluvial  (as compared to glacial) transport?

If the black phenocryst thingy's are not carbon but hornblende then an igneous intrusive might be a good bet and would be competent enough for the transport. If they are carbon then it reminds me of a lamproite, a kimberlite-like type of diatreme which could pick up chunks of a carbonaceous shale locally as it blasts up through the crust. Diamond-rush anyone?
cheers
Mark
 

Jan Flora wrote:

This came from the geology newsgroup. The image looks terrestrial to me.

        Jan

>Date: Sun, 18 Jan 1998 03:43:33 -0900
>From: snowshoe@xyz.net (Jan Flora)
>To: snowshoe@xyz.net
>Subject: Re: Found meteorite
>Status:
>
>In article <69krhl$ejb$1@tron.sci.fi>, Veijo Saarikko <veijo@sci.fi> wrote:
>
>>The stone is composed of cray substance and is covered
>>with black crystallized material, rather like solid carbon. The
>>surface of the stone is relatively smooth with only parallel
>>crooves runing from top to bottom. The grooves are only
>>some fraction of a millimeter deep. Density of the stone
>>is not mesured very accurately but is around 3.1 kg/dm3.
>>The picture of this object is to see on my webpage:
>>
>>http://www.sci.fi/~veijo
>>
>>If some expert have a  clue whether the stone is a
>>meteorite, could you please contact me through e-mail
>>on my webpage.
>

 
References: