[meteorite-list] Feldspar minerals in the inclusions in earthly/lunar bas...

Mail actions: [ respond to this message ] [ mail a new topic ]
Contemporary messages sorted: [ by date ] [ by thread ] [ by subject ] [ by author ]

From: LITIG8NSHARK_at_aol.com <LITIG8NSHARK_at_meteoritecentral.com>
Date: Thu Apr 22 10:06:14 2004
Message-ID: <66.29d38a5a.2afdda42_at_aol.com>

--part1_66.29d38a5a.2afdda42_boundary
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Good evening Folks,

I must say that I am grateful that I am not paying for the current lesson in
meteoritics. I couldn't afford it. Education like this is invaluable. Thank
you very much Mark for your expertise.

Best Regards to all of you,

Paul

In a message dated 11/8/2002 10:08:23 PM Eastern Standard Time,
mafer_at_domafer.com writes:

> Minerals, regardless of where they are from, earth, moon or mars, are still
> those minerals and as such have properties that will identify them as such.
> I guess what I'm saying is that the elements of which the minerals are made
> of are the same, no matter if from here or there, and so, the minerals which
> are made of them will be made according to the same rules. Some form only
> under high presure and temperature, others form onder other conditions of
> temperature and pressure. And! some can only form in the presence of water.
> So, from these knowns, researchers know that, from extensive evaluation of
> earths lava fields and the plutonic outcroppings ( a pluton is magmatic
> material which has never been extruded on the surface and is exposed after
> millenia of weathering and erosion), the stoney irons cannot be from earth
> for we see no occurances of olivine and metal together "on" earth.
> Therefore, knowing how they formed individually (temps and pressures) they
> summise that these meteorites come from a core mantle boundry. Something we
> have not any first hand proof of. Inclusions, on the other hand, of
> feldspars, are quite common in cooled magmas and the resulting stone is
> called a porphory if the inclusions are large enough to be seen and are
> relatively well formed. Other tests, such as fizzing in hcl only provides a
> indication that a basic mineral (carbonate or such) is present. The fact
> that you, if I'm understanding right, are seeing what appears to be
> feldspars, most likely points to a magmatic origin. vesicle size is not a
> determinate of being magmatic or not, andesites can often have extemely
> small vesicles. And, if I'm not wrong, I believe in Sweden is quite a bit of
> plutonic rock, so its probable to be able to find lavas since plutons are
> but cooled magma chambers.
> Hope this helps, long winded as it is.
>

--part1_66.29d38a5a.2afdda42_boundary
Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<HTML>Good evening Folks,
 
 I must say that I am grateful that I am not paying for the current lesson in meteoritics. I couldn't afford it.  Education like this is invaluable.  Thank you very much Mark for your expertise.
 
 Best Regards to all of you,
 
 Paul
 
 In a message dated 11/8/2002 10:08:23 PM Eastern Standard Time, mafer_at_domafer.com writes:
 
 
 <BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE style="BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px">Minerals, regardless of where they are from, earth, moon or mars, are still
 those minerals and as such have properties that will identify them as such.
 I guess what I'm saying is that the elements of which the minerals are made
 of are the same, no matter if from here or there, and so, the minerals which
 are made of them will be made according to the same rules. Some form only
 under high presure and temperature, others form onder other conditions of
 temperature and pressure. And! some can only form in the presence of water.
 So, from these knowns, researchers know that, from extensive evaluation of
 earths lava fields and the plutonic outcroppings ( a pluton is magmatic
 material which has never been extruded on the surface and is exposed after
 millenia of weathering and erosion), the stoney irons cannot be from earth
 for we see no occurances of olivine and metal together "on" earth.
 Therefore, knowing how they formed individually (temps and pressures) they
 summise that these meteorites come from a core mantle boundry. Something we
 have not any first hand proof of. Inclusions, on the other hand, of
 feldspars, are quite common in cooled magmas and the resulting stone is
 called a porphory if the inclusions are large enough to be seen and are
 relatively well formed. Other tests, such as fizzing in hcl only provides a
 indication that a basic mineral (carbonate or such) is present. The fact
 that you, if I'm understanding right, are seeing what appears to be
 feldspars, most likely points to a magmatic origin. vesicle size is not a
 determinate of being magmatic or not, andesites can often have extemely
 small vesicles. And, if I'm not wrong, I believe in Sweden is quite a bit of
 plutonic rock, so its probable to be able to find lavas since plutons are
 but cooled magma chambers.
 Hope this helps, long winded as it is.
 Mark</BLOCKQUOTE>
 
 </HTML>

--part1_66.29d38a5a.2afdda42_boundary--
Received on Fri 08 Nov 2002 10:25:54 PM PST

This message: [ Message body ]
Next message: Sharkkb8_at_aol.com: "[meteorite-list] look to the skys"
Previous message: mafer_at_domafer.com: "[meteorite-list] Feldspar minerals in the inclusions in earthly/lunar basalts"
Next in thread: mafer_at_domafer.com: "[meteorite-list] Feldspar minerals in the inclusions in earthly/lunar bas..."
Reply: mafer_at_domafer.com: "[meteorite-list] Feldspar minerals in the inclusions in earthly/lunar bas..."

Mail actions: [ respond to this message ] [ mail a new topic ]
Contemporary messages sorted: [ by date ] [ by thread ] [ by subject ] [ by author ]

StumbleUpon

del.icio.us

Yahoo MyWeb