[meteorite-list] 1864: fiction or fact? help!

From: Tom AKA James Knudson <peregrineflier_at_meteoritecentral.com>
Date: Tue Sep 21 10:47:13 2004
Message-ID: <002701c49fe9$aeda1260$2d107918_at_Michelle>

"the whole mass is covered in a certain black
> >enamel, from 3 to 9 ? inches thick. "

That there is some thick crust!

Thanks, Tom
peregrineflier <><
IMCA 6168
http://www.frontiernet.net/~peregrineflier/Peregrineflier.htm
----- Original Message -----
From: "G?ran Axelsson" <axelsson_at_acc.umu.se>
To: <meteorite-list_at_meteoritecentral.com>
Sent: Tuesday, September 21, 2004 7:38 AM
Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] 1864: fiction or fact? help!


> It's hard to tell anything definite unless you know the size of the
> object but
> if what I found is right then a "Rod (rd) A unit of length equal to 16.5
> feet".
>
> This would give the object a size of 150x225 meter! I don't think you
> would find a meteorite of that size intact. You would have a major crater
> instead. (OK, I'm pretty shure on it :-)
> A meteorite strike of that size is a regional catastrophy according to a
> NASA scientist.
>
> The mineralogical part doesn't sound like a meteorite, although I'm more
> at home with earth mineralogy and geology. The talc and carbonates
> is common in earth environments.
>
> The geological part is also all wrong. To find granite in the center
sounds
> to me like a granitic intrusion in a serpentinite and that the altered
rocks
> around the granite got more resilient towards weathering.
> We have a few serpentinite mountains in Sweden that stands out from the
> surrounding geology. The surface is also quite different from the
> surrounding
> rocks. It's in the background of this photo.
> http://www.geology.neab.net/photos/atok001.jpg
> Theese mountains are tough enough to withstand an ice age. The last one
> was 7000 years ago and the thickness at least 500m above the peak
> of the mountain.
>
> It is by all means a meteowrong and a earthbased geological feature.
>
> As a sidenote there were a meteorite found in sweden almost 100 years
> ago with fossiles in it. Anyone want to debunk that one?
>
> :-)
>
> /G?ran
>
> chris aubeck wrote:
>
> >Dear list,
> >
> >I would very much like to know how much of the
> >following may be based on scientific procedure and
> >observation, and whether as a whole it makes any sense
> >at all. I found the text in an article dated
> >originally to 1864 and have translated it to the best
> >of my ability from Spanish (in which I'm fluent, but
> >this was very technical). It was published in
> >Argentina.
> >
> >As usual with this kind of thing, I don't know where
> >to turn, except to the experienced guys on this list.
> >
> >I'll be doing the internet equivalent of sitting
> >"glued to the screen" hoping someone can enlighten me!
> >
> >Very best,
> >
> >Chris
> >
> >*****************************************************
> >
> >
> >I came across a great black rock, ovoid in shape and
> >measuring around 30 rods in diameter in its widest
> >part by 45 rods in length. I was quite astonished on
> >seeing such a large, isolated stone, in the middle of
> >the plains; what caught my attention above all was its
> >dark and vitrified appearance at first sight. I
> >examined it thoroughly and shortly I had no doubt, I
> >was standing before an aerolite? but few of such
> >enormity have been found to date.
> >
> >Enthused by my discovery I telegraphed Mr. Smith (a
> >geologist and a friend of mine who was then in C?rdoba
> >on the way to the mountains) to come and examine this
> >curious piece of planetary matter. This he did and a
> >few days later my friend Mr. Smith, Mr. Jones and I
> >went off to investigate the aerolite scientifically.
> >On the afternoon of the same day we began to bore a
> >hole into it to analyze the diverse materials of which
> >its interior was composed, and for this purpose we
> >employed an Argentine laborer named Jes?s Villegas.
> >A notable feature, at first sight, are the cracks and
> >crags from which considerable pieces must have come
> >loose: the whole mass is covered in a certain black
> >enamel, from 3 to 9 ? inches thick. The interior
> >contains 5% graphitic carbon, magnetic iron sulphate,
> >a magnesium and iron carbonate, which could be
> >considered a kind of breu merite, an extremely rare
> >substance; silica, talc, some complex minerals that
> >are not to be found on earth, for example,
> >Sheibirsite, which is a double phosphorus of iron and
> >nickel, ammonium hydrochloride, a very volatile salt,
> >whose presence in the aerolite proves that the candent
> >state of the surface did not last a long time and that
> >the heat did not penetrate to the interior of the
> >mass, and this concords with the low conductivity of
> >its composition, and finally it contained cesium and
> >some alkaline silicates that we are not familiar with.
> >
> >At seven rods we have found ophite; at 15, granite.
> >The stone was very hard and our boring progressed very
> >slowly.
> >
> >******************************************************
> >
> >=====
> >http://embark.to/magonia
> >
> >C / Mayor 51, 3 B,
> >28013 Madrid
> >Spain
> >
> >Tel: 600376311 (with image capabilities)
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >___________________________________________________________ALL-NEW Yahoo!
Messenger - all new features - even more fun! http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com
> >______________________________________________
> >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 Tue 21 Sep 2004 10:45:44 AM PDT