[meteorite-list] Meteorite in New Hampshire

From: Gary K. Foote <gary_at_meteoritecentral.com>
Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2007 22:50:26 -0500
Message-ID: <45DE1E32.11172.35D671E_at_gary.webbers.com>

Hi sterling,

First, I realize the odds are against this being a meteoric created hole. That being
said let me shed some light on some of your questions;

On 22 Feb 2007 at 20:48, Sterling K. Webb wrote:

> The ice is obviously quite thick now.
> How thick was it when the hole appeared?

It was totally frozen over the and 2 feet+ of snow fell the night that the hole appeared.
 I assume the ice was at least 6 to eight inches thich though we did b=neglect to measure
the depth of ice in the non-modified ice. :( Live and learn.


> the hole is in the "center" (more or less) is always a
> suspicious piece of data. Lakes and ponds freeze from
> the shallow shore to the deep center, in that order. The
> center (or the deepest spot) is always the last place to
> freeze and the ice is always thinnest there.

The pond is only 7 feet deep at the point of the hole and with our regular below zero
weather the center would have been just as frozen as the edges. In fact, around here it
is at the shores where the ice is thinnest as the warmth of the underlying land warms the
ice and keeps it from freezing as fast as at the deeper points. Its always near the edge
where people go in thru the ice early in winter - either there or where there is a
current that keeps the water from sitting still enough long enough to freeze as rapidly
the more steady water does.

> Particularly when the temperature drop is recent and
> not long-term, you will find lakes and ponds with thick
> stampable ice over the shallow margins (and farm ponds
> tend to have broad shallows) while in the center sits a
> universal invitation to a sudden thermal excursion.

If there is a tendency to thermal excursion to the center of a shallow pond I'm not aware
of it. Doesn't mean its not true - just that I've not heard of this phenomenon. I'd be
interested in anyone's pointers to greater knowledge in this area. Further, this is not
only a stream fed pond, but a spring fed pond. the landowner assurred us the spring was
a good 50 feet from the hole.

> The owner's assertion of "no tracks" has to be weighed
> against the time that may have elapsed, the wind drift factor,
> the chance of snow since the incident, and the likelihood
> of quick wet prancing (and very annoyed) feet leaving prints.

The snow, as stated before, fell on the night of the phenomenon's appearance. Maybe
this is a factor in its appearance. I just don't know. I do know it is a fairly remote
area and the landowner has a dog who is kept inside and she and her dog were the first
ones on the scene in the morning. The landowner noted no tracks the very next morning.
It was also clearly noted that there were no footprints anywhere on the pond the day we
arrived seven days later. Footprints persist in snow until the next snowfall and there
has been no significant snow since, so I feel there had been nobody near the area at all.

> No hunt for a space rock is ever wasted, though. Alan
> Hildebrand, of the MIAC - Prairie Meteorite Search project
> in Canada, with very reasonable assumptions, estimates that
> ~1.4 meteorites >100 g mass occur in each km2 (or about
> 4.5 meteorites >10 g mass). That's about one 100+ gm
> meteorite for every 175 acres, or one 10 gm every 56 acres.
> Read: http://miac.uqac.ca/MIAC/pmsearch.htm

This is one of the facts that gives me hope. I must admit to some disappointment, but
like you said, the hunt itself is a worthy learning exercise.

> I'm sure that your "particles" contain meteoritic material;
> every open body of water in the world collects cosmic dust!
> In fact, Jerry Flaherty posted a story about kids collecting
> meteor "dust" on the night of major meteor showers using
> a big flat pan of water. You can also find cosmic "stuff"
> in the muck that lines the bottom of your gutters. Scrape
> out your gutters, put the gunk in a plastic bucket, dilute
> with water, drag a supermagnet through it, and Voila! Star
> Dust.

I remember this post by Jerry. To avoid being foolde by cos=mic dust we will be looking
for not only visual analysis, but nickel content analysis. Does cosmic dust contain
nickel in the 'right quantities? Again I don't know.

> There's a long list of natural occurances that can punch
> holes in new-iced ponds. But one of them is... Meteorite!
> My problem is that I can't find any rendition of a meteorite
> having been found that way.

I know. wouldn't it be lovely if CJ and I were the first to claim this particular find
method? The splash patterns of water around the hold are compelling though...

Thanks for your comments and information Sterling. We will continue the pursuit, though
the odds seem to be against us at this point. :)

Gary
Received on Thu 22 Feb 2007 10:50:26 PM PST