[meteorite-list] Iron Meteorite found on Mars: "Done what could be done"

From: MexicoDoug_at_aol.com <MexicoDoug_at_meteoritecentral.com>
Date: Wed Jan 19 18:53:09 2005
Message-ID: <104.58f4e2c8.2f204ce0_at_aol.com>

Dear List,

The initial articles forwarded kindly to the list mentioned that "scientists
were not interested in the meteorite" quite bluntly. That to me was really
a slap in the face to all of us, including the meteoritical society. After
all, the significance of the find, especially to us meteoritical folks is
completely incredible -as an understatement-, I would suggest.

So I looked up Dr. McSween, a past president of the Met Soc and of course,
the author of a priceless book in many of our libraries: "Meteorites and their
Parent Planets". In addition to being a contributor to the Rover mission
itself (in what capacity I do not know), I thought, if anyone would be more
interested and able to do something about that, it would be the esteemed Dr.
McSween.

I received an answer today from the kind and respectful Professor, though it
was sort of sad in many ways - in the sense of being informed that one's
meteorite is really a meteorwrong. Apparently, the meteorite was used in "brush
mode to brush away whatever could be" and then he mentioned that the RAT
actually "could not grind metal" apparently at all. And what "could be done
probably was done".

Analysis of this data to me, could have been the subject of several exotic
and exciting PhD theses, grants toward the study of meteoritics, etc., but
alas 'twas not in the cards. As I personally was hoping for a better prepared
grinder, that news sort of went over like a wet blanket. The point of saving
it to the end, thus is not very promising if the capability simply isn't
there. And if Hap say what was done, was done, as hard as it is to accept, well,
I'll be chalking this one up to a case of terrible reporting to a public
conscious and interested in meteorites, a design/poorly anticipated issue
overlooked on the RAT team, and hopefully a mistake to be learned from next mission
when earth sends state of the art geological tools.

Sterling, I appreciate your comments. While the statistical argument of Ron
of course is true, they are comments like yours that gets humankind in high
gear to find out and do exploration in the first place. That extra curiosity
factor that got the Rovers to Mars in the first place. Probably whoever
uttered that dumb comment about scientists not being interested in the meteorite
at all and got me unwound too, is going to cause both the constructive (your
type of brainstorming comments which are at the foundation of scientific
thought) ideas to take a slap for the insensitive and foolish ones (like to
press release we read initially). Also the press release would seem to have
mischaracterized the capability of the RAT suggesting it was possible whenin fact
it appears that it simply is not. Anyway that is how I'm reading this one
unless someone comes up with a more plausible explanation on why that first
asteroid ever encountered and "touched" in a controlled manner, in an alien
environment is simply going to have tire tracks going by it like all those we've
seen in the Sahara desert, until someone actually recognizes how precious
and what storehouses of information are meteorites.
 
Back to blueberries and strawberries and wake up music for the moment I
guess, until the next great discover of this vastly successful mission and its
participants.
Saludos, Doug




En un mensaje con fecha 01/19/2005 2:09:39 PM Mexico Standard Time,
baalke_at_zagami.jpl.nasa.gov escribe:
> >They don't want to damage the RAT
> >and save it for the rest of the mission.
>
> Well, like I pointed out last night, how about the end of the mission?
>
The mission will probably end when a critical component on the rover
fails, and we don't know when that will happen. Also, the Rover will
continue its exploration into new territory, and will be moving away
from the meteorite.
 
Received on Wed 19 Jan 2005 06:53:04 PM PST