[meteorite-list] Biophysicist confirms Liberal boy's meteorite discovery

From: Fries, Marc D <marc.d.fries_at_meteoritecentral.com>
Date: Thu, 19 Nov 2009 11:47:57 -0800
Message-ID: <C72AE0ED.DE37%Marc.D.Fries_at_jpl.nasa.gov>

That hole has definitely been dug up. But it also doesn?t appear to be a
foot deep. Perhaps in a 10 year old?s imagination it is.

I just ran the numbers, and if we assume a spherical body (which I have to
do) moving at its aerodynamically-limited speed then a 48 g iron meteorite
would be moving around 70 m/s (~150 mph) when it reached the ground. I can
picture it digging itself in a bit on impact.

Like Mike, I?m not going to proclaim this one to be the genuine article but
I?m also not ready to dismiss it completely. I?m curious to see how it pans
out. Would be nice to get some composition data to compare it with SA or
other meteorites.

Cheers,
MDF
>
>
> On 11/19/09 10:38 AM, "Michael Fowler" <mqfowler at mac.com> wrote:
>
>> Well, they say a picture is worth a thousand words, and I would certainly
>> agree! Thanks, Graham.
>>
>> A small meteorite could never make a big hole like in the picture, but people
>> could, while digging around to find the meteorite at the bottom, so my
>> hypothesis has not been conclusively falsified, yet. However, this does
>> shift the balance of evidence back toward it being a hoax.
>>
>> Time will tell.
>>
>> Mike
>>
>>> Another picture here showing the so called impact place/pit!!
>>>
>>> http://208.62.60.4/78/printer_1564.shtml
>>>
>>> Could a small iron like that falling at terminal velocity produce that in
>>> what looks like very hard ground?....looks artificial to me. (unless some
>>> excavation was done to retrieve it)
>>>
>>> I would have thought though that Don must have seen many meteorites and
>>> respect his thoughts....but as the latest discussion has shown...very few
>>> fresh irons have been seen just after they fell and I still think this does
>>> not look like it should....unless the photographs are very poor, making it
>>> look browner and glossier than it really is?
>>>
>>> Would be interesting to have it tested to see if it has been cleaned and
>>> treated in some way.
>>>
>>> I could be wrong, but....
>>>
>>> Graham UK
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ---- Michael Fowler <mqfowler at mac.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Meteorite Hoax, or meteorite exaggeration?
>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>> As a meteorite hoax, it is missing many of the classic symptoms, no flaming
>>>> trail, no red hot iron at the bottom of the hole etc.
>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>> Let me propose an alternate explanation: The size of the hole and the
>>>> material shooting 5 feet high was an exaggeration, but it actually is a
>>>> real fall.
>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>> Mike Fowler
>>>
>>>> Chicago
>> ______________________________________________
>> http://www.meteoritecentral.com
>> Meteorite-list mailing list
>> Meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com
>> http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
>>
Received on Thu 19 Nov 2009 02:47:57 PM PST