[meteorite-list] Repository of photos...

From: Matt Morgan <mmorgan_at_meteoritecentral.com>
Date: Sun Nov 21 14:44:57 2004
Message-ID: <000201c4d002$8c22a810$6400a8c0_at_D14191145L2K>

Berhard:
This is a great resource, but the archive we need should be to
scientific standards.
For example each photo should at least have a scale, name, principal
scientist who classified it (with email), size of the piece classified,
and links to any chemistry that was done along with thin section
observations.
Photos of hand specimen and thin section would be great.

It seems that NAU has a fledgling archive.

Matt

-----Original Message-----
From: meteorite-list-bounces_at_meteoritecentral.com
[mailto:meteorite-list-bounces_at_meteoritecentral.com] On Behalf Of
Bernhard Rems
Sent: Sunday, November 21, 2004 11:55 AM
To: 'Nicholas Gessler'
Cc: Meteorite-list_at_meteoritecentral.com
Subject: AW: [meteorite-list] Repository of photos...


:-)

I think you will be getting tired of hearing this, but I invested a lot
of time to create a free repository for meteorite photos at
http://www.meteoritegallery.com

I know this doesn't fit scientific standards, but hey, it's a beginning
and could be very useful at least for collectors wanting to know how a
certain meteorite looks like. That is, if people upload pics there.

All I can say is: USE IT, FOLKS.

Bernhard

-----Urspr?ngliche Nachricht-----
Von: meteorite-list-bounces_at_meteoritecentral.com
[mailto:meteorite-list-bounces_at_meteoritecentral.com] Im Auftrag von
Nicholas Gessler
Gesendet: Sonntag, 21. November 2004 19:48
An: John Birdsell; Jeff Grossman
Cc: meteorite-list_at_meteoritecentral.com
Betreff: [meteorite-list] Repository of photos...

Hi Jeff, et al,

Regarding a repository of photos, I too think it would be
extraordinarily
useful.
To this end, I noticed that Marvin Kilgore has a book in press to
partially
satisfy this need.
It would be nice to have some professional reviews of it.
Jeff, Alan, are you game?
Marvin had a galley proof at the Costa Mesa show.
Perhaps he'd loan a copy for review?

Cheers,
Nick

At 10:34 AM 11/21/2004, John Birdsell wrote:
>Hello Jeff and thanks for your email. I think a repository of high
quality
>photos of type specimens would be extremely useful for the entire
>meteorite community.
>
>Cheers
>-John
>
>Jeff Grossman wrote:
>
>>There are several reasons for this result. Among these are:
>>
>>1) Not all scientists are equally skilled at classifying meteorites.
>>2) Not all samples are representative of the whole. It used to be
that a
>>lab would have the entire mass to examine and could see the entire
>>structure. With meteorites in commercial hands, they often just get a

>>small chip. Given that lots of chondrites and achondrites are
breccias,
>>this can be a problem.
>>3) Some meteorites are borderline between types. Many of us try to
make
>>a decision as to which it is, and two people might come down on
opposite
>>sides of the line. If it actually matters, somebody will do careful
work
>>and publish on the subject. In most cases the error doesn't
>>matter. Researchers all know that classification errors of this sort
happen.
>>4) Nobody has ever standardized the way that brecciated meteorites
should
>>be described. Someday this will be fixed.
>>5) Some areas of meteorite classification are controversial (e.g., the

>>use of type 7).
>>
>>We already have a consortium of labs... it is all of those labs that
>>agree to house type specimens and make them available for research
>>whenever an important scientific question arises. We already have a
>>network for data sharing... it includes the Meteoritical Bulletin and
the
>>numerous scientific journals that publish abstracts and peer-reviewed
>>research. If there is a need for a repository of photos, for example,
one
>>could be set up in short order. Is there?
>>
>>On the question of pairing... for most meteorites, pairing studies are
of
>>little scientific interest and not worth taking the time to do. Visual

>>pairings are almost worthless. For the important meteorites, pairings
>>get worked out in the scientific literature over time. This
may
>>be unsettling for some dealers, but that's the way it is.
>>
>>jeff
>>
>>At 11:11 AM 11/21/2004, Matt Morgan wrote:
>>
>>>Just to add a note...
>>>There is a fundamental scientific problem of classifying meteorites.
>>>
>>>Try sending two pieces of the same meteorite to different labs.
Chances
>>>are you will get different results.
>>>For instance, I have "L5's" that came back as "L4's" and "L6's".
>>>"Regolith" this and "Primitive" that. I heard the same situation
>>>happening for NWA 1929, either howardite
OR
>>>eucrite. I understand some of it is "interpretive".
>>>
>>>The system itself is flawed.
>>>
>>>Ideally, we need an NWA consortium of labs to correct this and have
type
>>>specimens on hand.
>>>
>>>This SEEMS to be an easy fix, but university politics plays a huge
role.
>>>
>>>So all you scientists who study NWA's, how about a network for
meteorite
>>>"data sharing"? It will make ALL our lives easier...
>>>
>>>Matt Morgan
>>>Mile High Meteorites
>>>
>>>-----Original Message-----
>>>From: meteorite-list-bounces_at_meteoritecentral.com
>>>[mailto:meteorite-list-bounces_at_meteoritecentral.com] On Behalf Of Rob

>>>Wesel
>>>Sent: Sunday, November 21, 2004 2:38 AM
>>>To: Michael Farmer; meteorite-list_at_meteoritecentral.com
>>>Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Meteorite numbers
>>>
>>>
>>>While I truly believe this practice is ultimately costly to the
>>>collector, truer words have never been spoken. Thanks Mike:
>>>
>>>"Virtually every dealer including myself has been or is guilty of
this,
>>>we are in the process of correcting the situation and to start people

>>>MUST immediately comply or this will just spiral downward as we see
>>>tonight."
>>>
>>>So, for now, we make it right. We follow the rules and pay out to
prove
>>>pairings. We wait longer to get to market and costs go up because
repeat
>>>lab
>>>fees and repeat type specimens factor into prices per gram. I don't
like
>>>it
>>>one bit but that's what we do. I will be finishing off my "likely
>>>paired" howardite as such but new specimens are already off to the
>>>lab, specimens I
>>>know are paired.
>>>While I seriously doubt the law has any holding here, the NomCom asks
>>>this
>>>of us. Bottom line, if two folks buy bread from the same
baker...they're
>>>
>>>eating the same bread. The full weight of this ruling will soon be
felt
>>>by
>>>all as we bog down institutions who want to study meteorites with
>>>incessant pairings, not much grant money in pairings, not much
>>>recognition. But this
>>>is what we do...for now.
>>>
>>>Rob Wesel
>>>------------------
>>>We are the music makers...
>>>and we are the dreamers of the dreams.
>>>Willy Wonka, 1971
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>----- Original Message -----
>>>From: "Michael Farmer" <meteoritehunter_at_comcast.net>
>>>To: <meteorite-list_at_meteoritecentral.com>
>>>Sent: Saturday, November 20, 2004 7:56 PM
>>>Subject: [meteorite-list] Meteorite numbers
>>>
>>>
>>> > To clarify something that is obviously causing some problems in
the
>>> > meteorite world right now, I want everyone to know that NWA 788,
>>> > 787, and NWA 482 are numbers that came from rather large
or
>>> > meteorites with hundreds of pieces bought during one of my
>>>expeditions.
>>> > The Hupes and many other people have the right to those numbers.
>>> > Now, there are other numbers being widely used without proper
title
>>>(as Dr
>>> > Grossman has stated publicly and with finality that people do not
own
>>> > numbers, but numbers are assigned to specific meteorite specimens
and
>>>must
>>> > not be used with other meteorites just because you heard or
someone
>>>told
>>> > you it is the same).
>>> > Let's all please stop this practice as it is really hurting our
>>>business
>>> > and hobby. Virtually every dealer including myself has been or is
>>>guilty
>>> > of this, we are in the process of correcting the situation and to
>>>start
>>> > people MUST immediately comply or this will just spiral downward
as we
>>>see
>>> > tonight.
>>> >
>>> > I perused eBay today and it is still rampant with sellers using
>>> > numbers they seem to have drawn from a hat. So please ask you
>>> > seller next
time
>>>you
>>> > buy something, how they got that number, who it was assigned to
and if
>>>not
>>> > them, just how they came to call it that.
>>> > Mike Farmer
>>> >
>>> > ______________________________________________
>>> > Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list_at_meteoritecentral.com
>>> > http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
>>> >
>>>
>>>
>>>______________________________________________
>>>Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list_at_meteoritecentral.com
>>>http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
>>>
>>>
>>>______________________________________________
>>>Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list_at_meteoritecentral.com
>>>http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
>>
>>
>>Dr. Jeffrey N. Grossman phone: (703) 648-6184
>>US Geological Survey fax: (703) 648-6383
>>954 National Center
>>Reston, VA 20192, USA
>>
>>
>>______________________________________________
>>Meteorite-list mailing list
>>Meteorite-list_at_meteoritecentral.com
>>http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
>
>______________________________________________
>Meteorite-list mailing list
>Meteorite-list_at_meteoritecentral.com
>http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list


______________________________________________
Meteorite-list mailing list
Meteorite-list_at_meteoritecentral.com
http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list

______________________________________________
Meteorite-list mailing list
Meteorite-list_at_meteoritecentral.com
http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Received on Sun 21 Nov 2004 02:44:40 PM PST