[meteorite-list] NP Article, 06-1958 Tektites from Moon projection calculated

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

From: MARK BOSTICK <thebigcollector_at_meteoritecentral.com>
Date: Thu Apr 22 10:20:59 2004
Message-ID: <BAY4-DAV147mLk4xAG700005cc3_at_hotmail.com>

------=_NextPart_001_0017_01C343F3.ADEBEDE0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Paper: Coshocton Tribune =20
City: Coshocton, Ohio =20
Date: Thursday, June 12, 1958
Page: 7
Scientists Uncertain on Orgins of Strange "Moon Bits" Found in U.S.
By Delos Smith
NEW YORK - (UPI) - A hot scientifc arguement of this very moment is over =
the question of whether or not little pieces of the moon are scattered he=
re and there on the earh's surface.
There are little pieces of something scattered around all right, and if t=
hey're not pieces of the moon then what on earth are they? The origin of =
these strange, glassy rounded bits called tektites have puzzled scientist=
s for generations.
C. M. Varsavsky, brilliant young Argentine astrophysicists who is taking =
advanced studies at Harard, started the argument by producing mathematica=
l calculations intended to show that tektites are pieces of the moon.
His idea was that meteors colliding with the moon chipped off pieces, whi=
ch is most plausible. The moon is pock-marked with innumerable craters ev=
idently made by meters. It is logical to assume that collisions of such f=
orce would have had to send parts of the moon hurtling into space. Varasa=
vsky's mathematics showed how these pieces could have spiraled, ever so s=
lowly, down to earth.
But now come three distinguished scientists, including Dr. Harold C. Urey=
, famous atomic scientists and Nobel Prize winner of the University of Ch=
icago, with arguments designed to shatter his theory into pieces even sma=
ller then tektites.
Urey objected chiefly on chemical grounds. Tektites are largely silica an=
d alumina. They are bits of rocks which evidently were made in extremely =
hot and long enduring fire. If tektites were moon pieces then the moon's =
fire - made rocks are quite different from earth's, which Urey though mos=
t unlikely.
The principal objection of Dr. Virgil T. Barces of the University of Texa=
s, was on the matter of distribution. Barnes, by the way was the first ma=
n to identify a belt of tektite deposits in the United States. It is in T=
exas. IIf the theory were correct, he reasoned, you'd find tektites distr=
ibuted in a wide belt around the earth. Furthermore, you'd find then in a=
ll the earth's layers of rocks because the spiraling of moon pieces would=
have been going on over eons of time.
But tektites have been found only in widely separated groups - in Indones=
ia, in Australia, in the Libyan Desert, and among ancient rocks along a 1=
20-mile strip through five Texas counties. And they're found in only a fe=
w of the earth's rock layers and these few are widely separated. This sho=
ws there has been no more or less continuous rain of moon pieces or of te=
ktites.
Dr. Zdeoek Kopal, astronomer of the University of Manchester, England,obj=
ected to Varsavasky's mathematics. He granted that Varsavsky had construc=
ted mass particles trajectories which could bring something from the moon=
to the earth. But if tektites were chipped off the moon by meteors, the =
beginning of their trajectories toward the earth would have been differen=
t that Varsavsky calculated, and the chips wouldn't have reached earth. K=
opal said.
In Kopal's opinion, the origin of tektites "must be sought neared to the =
terrestiral surface than the moon." In other words, science doesn't know =
where they came from, but they didn't come from the moon.

Please visit, www.MeteoriteArticles.com, a free on-line archive of meteor=
and meteorite articles.

------=_NextPart_001_0017_01C343F3.ADEBEDE0
Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<HTML><BODY STYLE=3D"font:10pt verdana; border:none;"><DIV> Paper: Coshocton Tribune City: Coshocton, Ohio Date=
: Thursday, June 12, 1958 Page: 7 Scientists Uncertain =
on Orgins of Strange "Moon Bits" Found in U.S. By Delos Smith =
NEW YORK - (UPI) - A hot scientifc arguement of this very moment is ov=
er the question of whether or not little pieces of the moon are scattered=
here and there on the earh's surface. There are little pieces of =
something scattered around all right, and if they're not pieces of the mo=
on then what on earth are they? The origin of these strange, glassy round=
ed bits called tektites have puzzled scientists for generations. C=
. M. Varsavsky, brilliant young Argentine astrophysicists who is taking a=
dvanced studies at Harard, started the argument by producing mathematical=
calculations intended to show that tektites are pieces of the moon. =
His idea was that meteors colliding with the moon chipped off pieces, =
which is most plausible. The moon is pock-marked with innumerable craters=
evidently made by meters. It is logical to assume that collisions of suc=
h force would have had to send parts of the moon hurtling into space. Var=
asavsky's mathematics showed how these pieces could have spiraled, ever s=
o slowly, down to earth. But now come three distinguished scientis=
ts, including Dr. Harold C. Urey, famous atomic scientists and Nobel Priz=
e winner of the University of Chicago, with arguments designed to shatter=
his theory into pieces even smaller then tektites. Urey objected =
chiefly on chemical grounds. Tektites are largely silica and alumina. The=
y are bits of rocks which evidently were made in extremely hot and long e=
nduring fire. If tektites were moon pieces then the moon's fire - made ro=
cks are quite different from earth's, which Urey though most unlikely.</P=
> The principal objection of Dr. Virgil T. Barces of the University of=
Texas, was on the matter of distribution. Barnes, by the way was the fir=
st man to identify a belt of tektite deposits in the United States=
. It is in Texas. IIf the theory were correct=
, he reasoned, you'd find tektites distributed in a wide belt around the =
earth. Furthermore, you'd find then in all the earth's layers of rocks be=
cause the spiraling of moon pieces would have been going on over eons of =
time. But tektites have been found only in widely separated groups=
- in Indonesia, in Australia, in the Libyan Desert, and among ancient ro=
cks along a 120-mile strip through five Texas counties. And they're found=
in only a few of the earth's rock layers and these few are widely separa=
ted. This shows there has been no more or less continuous rain of moon pi=
eces or of tektites. Dr. Zdeoek Kopal, astronomer of the Universit=
y of Manchester, England,objected to Varsavasky's mathematics. He granted=
that Varsavsky had constructed mass particles trajectories which could b=
ring something from the moon to the earth. But if tektites were chipped o=
ff the moon by meteors, the beginning of their trajectories toward the ea=
rth would have been different that Varsavsky calculated, and the chips wo=
uldn't have reached earth. Kopal said. In Kopal's opinion, the ori=
gin of tektites "must be sought neared to the terrestiral surface than th=
e moon." In other words, science doesn't know where they came from, but t=
hey didn't come from the moon. Please visit, www.Meteor=
iteArticles.com, a free on-line archive of meteor and meteorite articles.=
</DIV></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_001_0017_01C343F3.ADEBEDE0--
Received on Sun 06 Jul 2003 08:20:37 PM PDT

This message: [ Message body ]
Next message: Mark Jackson: "[meteorite-list] Mars Meteorite Helps Caltech Student Prove His Thesis"
Previous message: Michael Cottingham: "[meteorite-list] Fw: 1st $700.00 takes this beauty!"

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