[meteorite-list] NOT MAGNETISM (Was magnetism)+ (Was Pasamonte...)

From: David Freeman <dfreeman_at_meteoritecentral.com>
Date: Tue Sep 7 12:47:45 2004
Message-ID: <413DE644.9060300_at_fascination.com>

Dear Doug;
I think my point here is: I have about 1,500 folks in SW Wyoming,
Colorado, Utah, and Michigan; involved in some passive form of hunting
rocks that may have fell from the sky (meaning non-magnetic
meteorites).
 I don't know where they get the initial idea from (... ;-) ), probably
from the University of Wyoming's traveling NASA Space Rock Education
Program, but, fact is about one third of those that initially make
contact with me here locally seem to think that meteorites ARE magnetic.
 They burn all the way down to the sage brush too. Even caught the
Great Lake States on fire in 1871! ...it glowed in the dark when we
brought it in the house. The cat seen it talk.
One of the down sides is that if the specimen doesn't pick up a paper
clip, they tell me horror stories of just leaving the suspected (by me
to be possibly) meteorites behind (seriously this has happened more than
a few times).
Another of my favorite fantasies is that it landed on the top of White
Mountain, just over the hill. Well, I just drop what I'm doin' and go
lookin'!
You tell me..... It's hard enough to dispel the glow-in-the-dark,
caught-the-field-on-fire, only-my-basalt-comes-from-the-moon grand
illusionists with out help from the meteorite community. Do you tell
others to hunt for your "magnetic meteorites"? ...worse yet, do you
hunt magnetic meteorites? Geezh! Diamond meteorite here we come!
We can now feel safe in using our compass to point to meteorites as we
saunter about the desert? Be a lot of undiscovered lunar and martian,
and L, LL's out there.

It is a shame that those in the know, meaning us here vern; can't help
the problem instead of add to the confusion. What a urban legend to
start, or even fuel....magnetic meteorites. New field testing apparatus
for meteorites, a paper clip on a string! On the other end of the new
style of detector, you put a safety pin to attach the device to your
shirt ...and to hold the paper with yer name on it, ...in case we get
lost and confused in all that magnetism from a strewnfield.

Could we have a show of hands, is it fair for someone that should know
better to term meteorites as magnetic, and accept it as permissible?

Next story, drowning fishes, flying with wax wings, and the Earth is
only 5,000 years old (revisit # 523).

 From the Western front of Galaxie-Meteorite-Country (meaning east of
Utah),
Dave Freeman (already on a string, and pointing south)

MexicoDoug_at_aol.com wrote:

>Dave "Magnetic Personality" Freeman asked:
>
>>...car engine blocks...made of iron but not magnetic...
>>hematite, magnetite (except lodestone) not magnetic...
>>...Incorrect use of word magnetic...
>>Could you clarify the use of "man is it magnetic"?
>>
>
>"Magmatic Personality" Doug responds:
>
>Well, aren't you being a stickler! It's Ok to call
> disoriented kitchen sink variety iron magnetic! I thought
> engine blocks were made mostly from aluminum nowadays, so I
> agree those wouldn't be very magnetic, unless you put it in
> the context of passing a directional electrical current
> through them and voila, electromagnet!
>
>If I must explain myself, I guess I would have to clarify
> the "man it is magnetic!" to be:
>
>"Fellow males and females of the Homo sapiens sapiens
> subspecies, when the piece of suspected hematite is
> introduced into a magnetic field created by a strong
> permanent ferromagnetic material at ambient conditions, the
> specific sample of suspected antiferrimagnetic hematite
> exhibits a statistically significant paramagnetism not
> observed even weakly in the other samples collected in the
> same locality under apparently similar conditions raising
> suspicion that the assumption of similar sample histories
> could be wrong, or could be a "random" statistical
> fluctuation. The adjective magnetic, thus, is perfectly
> correct to use to describe the phenomenon produced when the
> listener has been warned in context that the magnetic
> properties are induced by the magnetic field of the rare
> earth magnet, as was patently clarified."
>
>Now when you say a magnet is magnetic, I'll not be a pain in
> the ass, and agree with you as I muse what this means in the
> total absence of infrared radiation or other heat generating
> sources. The maglev train engineers could probably clarify
> that better. The point being I understand from context you
> mean at ambient conditions when nothing funny is going on.
>
>Your steel engine block may not be magnetic now, but if you
> touch your meteorite cane's magnet to it, it shall be, though
> it won't become a permanent magnet unless you magnetize it,
> which isn't very hard to do. But it is always magnetic in
> ambient conditions when in a magnetic field. Such are
> paramagnetic materiales...
>
>And the fact that many geologists choose to distinguish "being
> attracted to a magnet" vs. "attracting magnetic elements" is
> a convenience, but certainly not a reason to call the use of
> the word "MAGNETIC" incorrect. Your beef seems more that I
> didn't specify whether it was a permanent magnet or not.
> That's a different question, and rather than being correct or
> incorrect, it is simply an unknown in my case.
>
>Wait...I checked it. It is a very weak permanent magnet and
> thus correctly "magnetic" even by your English useage
> convention. The test I just did was: a non-magnetized cold
> rolled steel chisel as the control and the sample as the
> unknown. Chisel failed to orient iron filings from my latest
> plumbing project mess, but the sample oriented them, proving
> it produces a very weak magnetic field. Whether this was
> present before I briefly tested it with the meteorite cane in
> the field, I don't know, as I suppose it is worth
> investigating whether that the rare earth magnet could have
> magnetized it.
>
>And finally, when a permanent magnet produces a magnetic
> field, it's usually not worth getting philosophical on
> whether the permanent magnet is attracting the sample, or
> whether the sample is attracting the permanent magnet. I'll
> stick with "magnetic" unless my communication becomes
> ambiguous (let alone incorrect!) for a specific item or some
> rabid geologist threatens to beat me up.
>Is that clear now:)
>Saludos MagmaticDoug
>
>Subj: Re: [meteorite-list] Pasamonte magnetism
> Date: 9/7/2004 1:35:20 AM Eastern Daylight Time
> From: David Freeman <dfreeman_at_fascination.com>
> To: MexicoDoug_at_aol.com
>
>Dear MexicoDoug, and all;
>I see the phrase "...man is it magnetic" used below. I find that most folks use "magnetic" in meaning the rock is attracted to a magnet...and that is a non correct use of the word. A magnet is magnetic, as is natural lode stone. Car engine blocks although made of iron, are not magnetic. Hematite, magnetite (except for lode stone), and banded iron
>formation (iron ore) are not magnetic.
>Could you clarify the use of "man is it magnetic"?
>
>Magnetic personality,
>Dave F.
>
>MexicoDoug_at_aol.com wrote:
>
>>Hola Martin,
>>
>>Your question about Pasamonte is a very interesting one for me, because last night I was pondering the same thing for some terrestrial rocks found while meteorite hunting Sunday. I got a total of about 40 "hematite nodules" shaped from nice kidney-rose balls to a crinoidal replacement, and even a few poor examples of hexagonal crystalline specimens.
>>
>>All but one were non-magnetic to a powerful rare earth magnet which can lift 8 poinds of iron when its 2 square cm surface are is in contact.
>>
>>The odd thing is that the unique one that scared the daylights out of me in the field me by audibly snapping to the magnet, a rather non-descript small slightly blacker weathered fragment, polishes red and leaves red streak, but man is it magnetic.
>>
>>Now besides really being interested in your Pasamonte observation for that special meteorite itself, the link your question has to my own curious situation is ... "Is the certain piece really special, not random" or is it just a perhaps part of the typical Gaussian tail, i.e. statistically a little bit of magnetic iron material getting distributed realitively widely during formation. My case is for hematite "nodule" growths at the bottom of an ancient sea (now desert). That opens some interesting musing about Vesta "geo"logy itself and what processes might have been at work locally on Pasamonte's Vesta parent locality to create the diverse conditions you are suggesting...
>>
>>Pretty post, I pray prominent Pasamonte piece proprieters produce prime & pertinent points.
>>Saludos, Doug
>>
>>
>>Michael Blood escribe:
>>Hi Martin & list,
>>I used one of the rare earth magnets (about 1 oz - identical to
>>the one taped very near the end of my meteorite cane). These magnets are so powerful you will get a blood blister if any flesh is between the surfaces when you put one within 4 to 6 inches of iron. VERY difficult to remove from an even metal surface. THE most intense magnet I have come across.
>>
>>The Pasamonte individual is the 12.6g oriented whole stone of
>>Ninninger fame. I carefully held it as I slowly approached it with the magnet with NO discernable effect clear up to contact.
>>However, when I very precariously ballanced the stone on its
>>side in my hand and slowly approached it with the magnet, it did lean toward it when it got within about 1/4 to 1/2 inch.
>> That's my report from San Diego.
>> Best wishes, Michael
>>
>>on 9/6/04 1:47 PM, martinh_at_isu.edu at martinh@isu.edu wrote:
>>
>>>Hi All,
>>>
>>>I have two very nice partial individuals of Pasamonte, both with crust and
>>>Nininger numbers. However one is highly attracted to a magnet, while the other
>>>is not.
>>>
>>>Before jumping to all kinds of speculation, I would like to ask a favor of
>>>this List that really uses the power of a discussion group like this forum.
>>>Could those of you with pieces of Pasamonte (the 1933 eucrite fall) hold a
>>>strong magnet to your you piece(s) and report back as how your Pasamonte piece
>>>responded to the magnet. It might also help if you noted the rough size of the
>>>piece and the relative strength of the magnet.
>>>
>>>Thanks, and let the amateur science begin!
>>>
>>>Martin
>>>
>
>
Received on Tue 07 Sep 2004 12:48:04 PM PDT