[meteorite-list] Ordinary chondrites - rarest to the most common classes

From: Galactic Stone & Ironworks <meteoritemike_at_meteoritecentral.com>
Date: Wed, 16 Dec 2009 20:21:19 -0500
Message-ID: <e51421550912161721p347ff409ud6a20b034093010f_at_mail.gmail.com>

Hello List,

In keeping with the current discussion on uncommon common chondrites,
I would like to announce that I have my first official classification
underway. The paperwork has been submitted to the MS for a NWA
number.

The meteorite in question is the same small stone that I suspected was
a CR2 type, and I posted some photos to the List asking for advice.

Well, I sent a sample to UCLA for classification and the results are
back. It is an LL3.6 chondrite. :)

I will post more information about it when the classification is
complete. Unfortunately for collectors, very little will be available
on the open market. I am keeping a small slice, selling a tiny end
cut, and the rest of the mass was donated to the UCLA collection for
study.

I'm at the hospital currently, so I don't have access to the photos
stored on my own laptop.

Best regards,

MikeG

On 12/16/09, Martin Altmann <altmann at meteorite-martin.de> wrote:
> Hi Doug,
>
> never I'd dare so. It was only an observation.
> In former times there weren't 3.05 etc and as you know, we frequently give
> type-3s in classification. Some classifier make decimal places, some not or
> not yet.
>
> Neither I had said something about the rareness.
> And I fully agree about the pleasure to take a bath in as pristine
> chondrules as thinkable.
>
> My observation was a simple quantifying one.
>
> No time, to harvest the database (I'm currently waiting to be on the road,
> but due blizzards roads in half of the country of my destination are
> closed).
>
> But I suppose, that half of the type-3s weren't checked yet more detailed,
> so that we can hope for more extremely unequilibrated ones!
>
> (Especially if you keep in mind, that there is almost no meteorite with name
> nor with an Antarctic number, which couldn't be rivalled by a hot desert
> find, concerning the sole material).
>
>
> Let it snow, let it snow, let it snow.
> (But not exactly now!!)
>
> Martin
>
>
>
> -----Urspr?ngliche Nachricht-----
> Von: Mexicodoug [mailto:mexicodoug at aim.com]
> Gesendet: Mittwoch, 16. Dezember 2009 18:01
> An: news at chladnis-heirs.com; Meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com
> Betreff: Re: [meteorite-list] Ordinary chondrites - rarest to the most
> common classes
>
> Martin wrote:
> "Where one has to say, that it's maybe too early to say that, Because
> the classification with decimal places, (even with two!), is a
> relatively new occurrence..."
>
> Dear Martin,
>
> Your comment sounds to me like the hungry man's dubitable evaluations
> of the quality of the the world's leading pancake expert, which
> persisted until he ate his fill of her goodies.
>
> Ref: "The Perfect Pancake" by Virginia Kahl http://tinyurl.com/ygjnju6
>
> There are many parallels between say, beach combing and meteorite
> collecting. While beauty is in the eye of the beholder and a thousand
> and one contortions of the word "rarity" can and will be made by the
> interested, I would personally say there is tendency of beachcombers to
> want shells that are intact, whether it be for aesthetic reasons or
> scientific study to best figure out everything from the evolution to
> the habits of the mollusk who created his shell. The case is similar
> with meteorites. Jeff's comment (as did mine) referred to the
> scientific value of pristine examples which have not been cooked or
> watered down. That is undeniable for those interested in the question
> of genesis. Jeff and I have side-stepped the question of "rarity".
> Personally I think it is moot here. If someone wants to study something
> else like an LL3/LL4 smash up, or all the power to them regarding
> "rarity" claims, since, like Semarkona LL3.00, only one of them appears
> in the database.
>
> Without considering Plutoing the R-chondrites, and with all respect
> that each meteorite is unique in its own way, here?s the overview on
> LL3 classification:
>
> LL's are the rarest of the H-L-LL tribe (representing only 14%),
> LL3 represents only 0.8% of OC's, the least frequent in the database.
> Petrological grade 3's of any type (H-L-LL) are also the "rarest"
> well-established classification - just 5%.
>
> That would make LL3 a natural regarding "rarity", above and beyond its
> scientific desirability to leading researchers like Jeff. Again the
> words "holy grail" for OC's come to mind. The association of low
> petrological grade (3) with scarcity for recovered meteorites is only
> being extrapolated to the extreme with Semarkona, and is of very
> arguably special scientific value:
>
> Here?s the current LL3 situation in numbers:
>
> Type # %LL's
> LL3.X or LL3.XX 157 58.58%
> LL3 102 38.06%
> LL3-XX 8 2.99%
> LL3/4 1 0.37%
>
> To the point: As you can see, there is plenty more than a natural human
> inclination towards perfection (with respect to raw sampling of the
> unaltered first meteorites to condense from the soup) in the database
> to argue that a LL3.00 or LL3.01 is hard to to find. I?m hopeful you
> are right and more "most primitive" OC's are found as classification
> gets more complex, but the tendency that many will be is just not there
> if you look over the numbers so far covering (in this case) over half
> of all LL3's.
>
> If you want to say, for example, the "rarest" is the "H7"
> classification - all nine of them- such as NWA 2898, I won't argue.
> Many scientists have purposefully avoided that classification which is
> another story. It just depends where your interests lie and all
> meteorites have their unique story. I don't think we can look at this
> as a bell curve with a 3 end and "7" end as the tails, though. If we
> hypothesize that there is an OC-type origin point I hope we are having
> a go at a singularity and elucidation of commonality In the
> Beginning... I know, most of us would rather remain on the fence eating
> all flavors of pancakes :-) ... it's such a loaded question ...
> Kind wishes, and happy holidays
> Doug
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Chladnis Heirs <news at chladnis-heirs.com>
> To: Meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com
> Sent: Wed, Dec 16, 2009 8:27 am
> Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Ordinary chondrites - rarest to the most
> common classes
>
>
>>
>
>
> ______________________________________________
> http://www.meteoritecentral.com
> Meteorite-list mailing list
> Meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com
> http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
>

-- 
.........................................................
Michael Gilmer (Florida, USA)
Member of the Meteoritical Society.
Website - http://www.galactic-stone.com
FaceBook - http://www.facebook.com/galacticstone
MySpace - http://www.myspace.com/fine_meteorites_4_sale
Twitter - Twitter - http://twitter.com/GalacticStone
eBay - http://shop.ebay.com/merchant/maypickle
..........................................................

Received on Wed 16 Dec 2009 08:21:19 PM PST