[meteorite-list] Measuring Density - Alcohol Use

From: John Gwilliam <jkg_at_meteoritecentral.com>
Date: Thu Apr 22 10:23:51 2004
Message-ID: <4.2.0.58.20030325094328.009966d0_at_mail.theriver.com>

Hello All,
Sorry if some of you think my reply is off topic, but I thought it might be
of interest to some of you.

Colin's post was made in jest, and I found it humorous, however, there may
be some individuals on this list that might get the idea that the ethyl
alcohol we soak our meteorites in is the same as the stuff we drink thus
considering their soaking solution to be a dual purpose liquid.

  Not so.

Several years ago, I was talking with my chemical supplier, Eric, about
alcohol and using it to displace water from meteorite specimens. He
recommended that I change to isopropanol for several reasons. First,
isopropanol evaporates faster than ethanol (ethyl alcohol). Even though it
evaporates quicker out of your soaking container, which should always be
covered, it also evaporates faster when it comes in contact with your skin
thus lessening the chance of absorption. In addition, isopropanol is less
hazardous to your health than ethanol.

Technical grade ethanol is only 99% pure. This is due to a regulation that
requires an additive be included in ethyl alcohol to prevent it from being
drank. This 1% additive can be methanol, aviation gas, jet fuel, or an of
a number of different compounds. If you drink 99% tech grade ethanol, you
WILL become violently ill.

One final thing. I have noticed that when ethanol evaporates completely
from a soaking container, there is a bit of sticky residue left
behind. This is not the case with isopropanol.

Anyone have any additional or conflicting information...or opinions?

Best,

John Gwilliam



At 07:21 PM 3/25/03 +0300, colin wade wrote:
>Hi folks
>If I may suggest a more meteorite friendly determination
>
>substitute the water for ethyl alcohol , with a correction of. 0.88?
>for the water density
>
>the fluid must be carfully & ecollogically disposed by dilution 10 - 14- 1
>with carbonated water with a trace of quinnine and prepared for the
>disposal by passing through the human kidney.
>the determination may need repeating several times to reduce experimental
>error .... but no meteorites will be harmed during the process
>the murchisons & tagish may end up a tad less organic & the determinator
>may lose a little spatial resolution
>may even catch on
>;-)
>
>searches are off at the mo.... deserts even more hostile
>god bless & all the best
>col
>
>>----- Original Message -----
>>From: <mailto:freewu2000_at_yahoo.com>Howard Wu
>>To: <mailto:meteorite-list_at_meteoritecentral.com>meteorite-list
>>Sent: Tuesday, March 25, 2003 6:48 AM
>>Subject: [meteorite-list] Measuring Density
>>
>> Unfortunately the normal way to measure density( specific gravity) is
>> to weight the stone UNDER WATER. This is compared to the weight in air.
>> This give the displacement with water having a density of 1gm/cc.
>>
>>Howard Wu
>>
>>
>>
>><http://uk.yahoo.com/mail/tagline_xtra/?http://uk.docs.yahoo.com/mail_stor
>>age.html>With Yahoo! Mail you can get a bigger mailbox -- choose a size
>>that fits your needs
Received on Tue 25 Mar 2003 12:08:38 PM PST