[meteorite-list] New Australian fall

From: Jason Utas <meteoritekid_at_meteoritecentral.com>
Date: Fri, 18 Sep 2009 18:45:04 -0700
Message-ID: <93aaac890909181845y5e82cab0l74e5a7a35dd8606d_at_mail.gmail.com>

Good point; and seeing as such meteorites haven't been
reclassified/re-typed, it seems as though this brings up a very valid
flaw in the classification system of basaltic achondrites. Perhaps
there are some scientists out there who can shed some light on why
meteorites such as these are called Eucrites when they are apparently
from different parent bodies. I'd be curious of the general
scientific opinion of the current classification scheme; is it
adequate or should there be more, if not classes, at least meteorites
deemed 'ungrouped.'
Jason

On Fri, Sep 18, 2009 at 6:37 PM, Michael Fowler <mqfowler at mac.com> wrote:
>> And in case you didn't check the met-bull, the Bunburra Rockhole
>> meteorite has been classified as a typical Eucrite.
>> He stated that said meteorite is not from Vesta, but Eucrites are
>> widely accepted to have come from Vesta.
>> I suppose we don't have solid proof of that yet, but it is generally
>> accepted to be true, based on reflected light analyses.
>> Go figure.
>> Jason
>
> Hi Jason,
>
> Sorry if I ruffled your feathers earlier.
>
> I did check the met bulletin, and it is described as: ?" meteorite is a
> basaltic eucrite monomict breccia "
>
> http://tin.er.usgs.gov/meteor/index.php?code=48653
>
> However I note that many meteorites are not correctly classified on their
> first appearance in the Met Bul, ?including of course Ibitria, which is
> still listed as a Eucrite Monomict, even though we know it is not from
> Vesta,
>
> http://tin.er.usgs.gov/meteor/index.php?sea=ibitira&sfor=names&ants=&falls=&valids=&stype=contains&lrec=50&map=ge&browse=&country=All&srt=name&categ=All&mblist=All&rect=&phot=&snew=0&pnt=no&code=11993
>
> However back to, Bunburra Rockhole, ?can someone comment or whether the
> mineral composition as stated in the met bul is consistent, or anomalous for
> a eucrite?
>
> Mineral compositions: Pyroxene, Fs62.5Wo3.6 (Fe/Mn-31.1) with augite
> (Fs27.7Wo43.0) lamellae; plagioclase, An84.1 to An88.2.
>
> Of course, the final word is probably the O isotope work, which Dr Bland
> says has already been done, although I couldn't find any additional
> reference.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Mike
>
>
>
>
> ______________________________________________
> http://www.meteoritecentral.com
> Meteorite-list mailing list
> Meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com
> http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
>
Received on Fri 18 Sep 2009 09:45:04 PM PDT