[meteorite-list] Loaves and fishiness
From: Paul H <bristolia_at_meteoritecentral.com>
Date: Wed Jul 7 22:51:59 2004 Message-ID: <20040708025157.3685.qmail_at_web50607.mail.yahoo.com> Marc D. Fries wrote: >I'm rather intrigued with Shirokovsky. Yes, I agree, it is an interesting X-File type of object. I might track down some metallurgists, whom I know, to see what they have to say. Also, my Russian wife can translate into and type letters in Russian on my Russified Mac, if needed. >In looking at the pictures, a couple of things >jump out - first off, most of the pieces are shaped >like loaves of bread, or like ingots. In terms of being "...then sand-cast the resulting melt into fine sand pre-forms roughly pounded out to look like meteorites.", they seem to be too ingot-like to have been made as deliberate fakes formed to look like meteorites. To me, the ingot-like forms suggest some sort of industrial by-product, not something shaped to deceive. My (naive?) impression is that we are dealing with self-delusion on a massive scale instead of fraud. That the olivines are of a type associated with Ni-Cu ores and of the approximate age of Ni-Cu ores associated such deposits suggests to me that whatever created the Shirokovsky material might have something to do with the smelting of such ores. The local Ural olivines are far too old and not associated with Ni-Cu ores from what I can tell and, thus can't be their source. If Shirokovsky was made simply as a fake, the people involved logically wouldn't have ignored local olivines,in favor of more distance olivines associated with the Ni-Cu ores. (Also, it doesn't look like it has been underwater for 44 years. (Of course the water is cold, but still there should be some obvious corrosion.) >Secondly, the comment that the olivines did not >equilibrate with the metal matrix, but rather >"cooled quickly in a strongly oxidizing environment" >is interesting. An oxidizing environment such as >...air?? This is a devasating argument. Quick cooling in an oxidizing environment certainly puts the stake in heart, as if it was needed, of the meteorite interpretation. Also, I get the feeling that the promoters of it make much of a nonexistent connection between the hole in the ice and what was found on the bottom of the reservoir. Given that the fall happened in 1956, how do they know exactly where to search in 2002 some 44 years later? Are there any records of someone determining the location of the hole in 1956 with a survey before the ice melted? It would be interesting to find out what sort boat and barge traffic uses the Kosva River near Shirokovsky. If there is any sort of commercial or industrial traffic, there is almost an unlimited variety of stuff that could get dumped into the reservoir. I suspect the promoters of this material as a meteorite likely don't realize that all sorts of really weird stuff gets dumped into reservoirs. Yours, Paul Baton Rouge, LA __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Take Yahoo! Mail with you! Get it on your mobile phone. http://mobile.yahoo.com/maildemo Received on Wed 07 Jul 2004 10:51:57 PM PDT |
StumbleUpon del.icio.us Yahoo MyWeb |