[meteorite-list] Rumuruti 5- It's alive!
From: Howard Wu <freewu2000_at_meteoritecentral.com>
Date: Thu Apr 22 10:25:42 2004 Message-ID: <20030521060007.24045.qmail_at_web9307.mail.yahoo.com> --0-359907562-1053496807=:23634 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Ok, folks. I agree with some comments by both collectors. Field Science isn't alway neat. This classification really deserves to be straighten out. These R5's are an important new find but we need to get all the facts on the table. Please stop the food fight. Both your opinions are valuable leads and untill proven to the contrary are worth debate. Question? Where did the 77 gram TKW number come from for NWA 1585 and how does that fit with Dean's 26.5grams. Observation: I've been up in the wee hours starring at both Dean's"NWA 1585" slice and my "NWA 1668" from Blaine Reed, and they do look distinct. Not scientific proof that they aren't paired, but they're are some real differences. I don't have any of Mike's R5, but his photos do look more like the "NWA1668" material than the "NWA1585" material in my eye. Another independant owner of a Dean partslice wrote me with the same conclusion. I think Dean has something unique. That doesn't rule out the possiblity that Mike doesn't have a unique stone either though he believes they are all paired. Maybe they are and the visible differences are misleading. NWA1668 just appeared in Colorado and not much is know about it history. Another NWA... There was another R5 on ebay last week with an analysis posted without any provisional no., seller from Ontario Canada: http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=2173444994&category=3239 "Very fresh genomict breccia with fresh fusion crust. Chondrules are sparse in both clasts and matrix. Mostly olivine (Fa38.9), clinopyroxene (Wo43.7Fs11.7), orthopyroxene (Wo1.4Fs30.2), troilite and titanian chromite, with minor sodic plagioclase and rare grains of awaruite (72wt.% Ni-28wt.% Fe metal; associated with pentlandite). The olivine composition, high Ni contencts in the mafic silicates (0.13 wt.% in olivine, 0.43 wt.% in clinopyroxene, 0.16 wt.% in orthopyroxene), relatively high Ti content in chromite, presence of awaruite and absence of iron rich metal are all diagnosic characteristics of R chondrites. With the exception of Rumuruti, this sample may be the freshest known representative of this extremely rare meteorite class." Who is did the work on this or any of these R5? I suppose we should after all be glad that there is so much new R5 material to work with. That is the scientist and not the collector in me talking. Howard Wu Howard Wu <freewu2000_at_yahoo.com> wrote: Hello List, I've been trying to get straight what information is available on R5 meteorites. This week Mike Farmer offered on ebay a small .4g piece of "NWA 1585" which he said there's about a kilo TKW. He also made claim that this was the only R5 available to the collecting public. Early this year I bought a slice of a "NWA 1585" from Dean Bessey of which he said was the only known R5 but claimed a TKW of 26.5grams. So if there's a kilo of this meteorite around I'd like to know. Then at Tuscon I meet Blaine Reed who had an R5 named " NWA1668" with a TKW of about 700gms. Ok, I thought that this is even newer. I recently found a posting of this on " A Systemic Classification of Meteorite" site. (http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/9278/systemat.htm ) Here is listed four R5's. There is nothing searchable on "NWA1585." Now I'm thinking I and everybody else is just catching up to these new finds. But all new facts are not in agreement or there is too little information available for me to know what really is what with this rare classification. I've writen to both Mike and Dean and had conversations with Blaine about this. Mike thinks this is a pairing though my two specimens look quite different. Dean is in disagreement based on these differences. Blaine hadn't heard of NWA 1585 till I told him about it. Dean and Mike hadn't heard of NWA 1668 till I brought this up. I don't wish to start another food fight on line, but would like to hear others knowledgable opinion on this meteoritic type. Does anyone else wish to weigh in on this one? Howard Wu --------------------------------- Yahoo! Plus - For a better Internet experience --------------------------------- It's Samaritans' Week. Help Samaritans help others. Call 08709 000032 to give or donate online now at http://www.samaritans.org/support/donations.shtm --0-359907562-1053496807=:23634 Content-Type: text/html; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit <DIV> <DIV>Ok, folks. I agree with some comments by both collectors. Field Science isn't alway neat. This classification really deserves to be straighten out. These R5's are an important new find but we need to get all the facts on the table. Please stop the food fight. Both your opinions are valuable leads and untill proven to the contrary are worth debate.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Question? Where did the 77 gram TKW number come from for NWA 1585 and how does that fit with Dean's 26.5grams.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Observation: I've been up in the wee hours starring at both Dean's"NWA 1585" slice and my "NWA 1668" from Blaine Reed, and they do look distinct. Not scientific proof that they aren't paired, but they're are some real differences. I don't have any of Mike's R5, but his photos do look more like the "NWA1668" material than the "NWA1585" material in my eye. Another independant owner of a Dean partslice wrote me with the same conclusion. I think Dean has something unique. </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>That doesn't rule out the possiblity that Mike doesn't have a unique stone either though he believes they are all paired. Maybe they are and the visible differences are misleading. </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>NWA1668 just appeared in Colorado and not much is know about it history. Another NWA... </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> There was another R5 on ebay last week with an analysis posted without any provisional no., seller from Ontario Canada: </DIV> <DIV><A href="http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=2173444994&category=3239" target=_blank><FONT color=#0000ff>http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=2173444994&category=3239</FONT></A></DIV> <DIV><BR> <CENTER></CENTER>"Very fresh genomict breccia with fresh fusion crust. Chondrules are sparse in both clasts and matrix. Mostly olivine (Fa38.9), clinopyroxene (Wo43.7Fs11.7), orthopyroxene (Wo1.4Fs30.2), troilite and titanian chromite, with minor sodic plagioclase and rare grains of awaruite (72wt.% Ni-28wt.% Fe metal; associated with pentlandite). The olivine composition, high Ni contencts in the mafic silicates (0.13 wt.% in olivine, 0.43 wt.% in clinopyroxene, 0.16 wt.% in orthopyroxene), relatively high Ti content in chromite, presence of awaruite and absence of iron rich metal are all diagnosic characteristics of R chondrites. With the exception of Rumuruti, this sample may be the freshest known representative of this extremely rare meteorite class." </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> Who is did the work on this or any of these R5? </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>I suppose we should after all be glad that there is so much new R5 material to work with. That is the scientist and not the collector in me talking.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Howard Wu</DIV> <DIV><BR><BR><B><I>Howard Wu <freewu2000_at_yahoo.com></I></B> wrote:</DIV> <BLOCKQUOTE style="PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #1010ff 2px solid"> <DIV>Hello List,</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>I've been trying to get straight what information is available on R5 meteorites. This week Mike Farmer offered on ebay a small .4g piece of "NWA 1585" which he said there's about a kilo TKW. He also made claim that this was the only R5 available to the collecting public. Early this year I bought a slice of a "NWA 1585" from Dean Bessey of which he said was the only known R5 but claimed a TKW of 26.5grams. So if there's a kilo of this meteorite around I'd like to know. </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Then at Tuscon I meet Blaine Reed who had an R5 named " NWA1668" with a TKW of about 700gms. Ok, I thought that this is even newer. I recently found a posting of this on " A Systemic Classification of Meteorite" site. (<A href="http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/9278/systemat.htm">http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/9278/systemat.htm</A> ) Here is listed four R5's. There is nothing searchable on "NWA1585." Now I'm thinking I and everybody else is just catching up to these new finds. But all new facts are not in agreement or there is too little information available for me to know what really is what with this rare classification. </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>I've writen to both Mike and Dean and had conversations with Blaine about this. Mike thinks this is a pairing though my two specimens look quite different. Dean is in disagreement based on these differences. Blaine hadn't heard of NWA 1585 till I told him about it. Dean and Mike hadn't heard of NWA 1668 till I brought this up.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>I don't wish to start another food fight on line, but would like to hear others knowledgable opinion on this meteoritic type. Does anyone else wish to weigh in on this one?</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Howard Wu</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <P> <P><BR> <HR SIZE=1> <A href="http://uk.rd.yahoo.com/evt=8613/*http://uk.yahoo.com/mail/tagline_plus/?http://uk.promotions.yahoo.com/yplus/btoffer.html"><B><FONT face=Arial size=2>Yahoo! Plus - For a better Internet experience</FONT></B></A><BR></BLOCKQUOTE></DIV><p><p><br><hr size=1><a href="http://uk.rd.yahoo.com/mail/tagline/samaritans/?http://www.samaritans.org/support/donations.shtm"><b><font face="Arial" size="2">It's Samaritans' Week. Help Samaritans help others. <br> Call 08709 000032 to give or donate online now at <br> http://www.samaritans.org/support/donations.shtm</font></b></a> --0-359907562-1053496807=:23634-- Received on Wed 21 May 2003 02:00:07 AM PDT |
 StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit Yahoo MyWeb
|