[meteorite-list] Term Main Mass

From: Arizona Skies Meteorites <johnbirdsell_at_meteoritecentral.com>
Date: Fri Jan 20 00:46:35 2006
Message-ID: <20060120054624.88157.qmail_at_web51508.mail.yahoo.com>

Adam please feel free to tell the members of the Nom.
Com., Ted Bunch, Tony Irving and all of the other
scientists that have written and published their NWA
classifications using the term "main mass" that you
don't agree with the way they are doing things, and
that you feel that they are being "misleading" and
"dishonest" as you put it in your previous post. For
our part, we think they are making the best of a
complicated situation, and as long as people
understand the NWA numbering system there really is no
problem with the way it is currently used.


As most of us are aware, NWA numbered meteorites are
not in any way analogous to meteorites coming out of a
well characterized strewn field-that's precisely why
they are given NWA numbers. Those that understand the
NWA numbering system also understand that the main
mass of one NWA numbered group may or may not be the
'biggest piece' of the presumed "fall". In fact, the
use of the term 'main mass' in respect to NWA
meteorites has nothing to do with the 'fall' per se,
but rather is the term used to refer to the largest
piece in a group of meteorites assigned a particular
NWA number. Even the "pairing" of meteorites does not,
and can not guarantee that they are part of the same
fall. This is especially true in the case of northwest
Africa where meteorites are collected over a vast area
with little or no record of their coordinates. Since
it will never be known whether "paired" NWAs are
actually part of the same fall or not, it seems that
the term main mass is appropriate unless one can
unambiguously state with complete certainty that two
NWA numbers are from the same fall. This can not be
done without a precise record of coordinates. In our
opinion this discussion over the use of "main mass" is
just a matter semantics, and has nothing to do with
science what-so-ever. That said we can probably bring
this thread to an end.


Cheers


-John

 

--- Adam Hupe <raremeteorites_at_comcast.net> wrote:

> Hi John and List,
>
> I do not agree that there can be more than a single
> Main Mass per fall. That
> is liking saying two Main Masses came out of the
> Brenham strewnfield. I
> don't think Steve Arnold would like that.
>
> Take Care,
>
> Adam
>
>
> ______________________________________________
> Meteorite-list mailing list
> Meteorite-list_at_meteoritecentral.com
>
http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
>

Arizona Skies Meteorites
Received on Fri 20 Jan 2006 12:46:24 AM PST