[meteorite-list] Portion of strewn field being hunted

From: Matson, Robert D. <ROBERT.D.MATSON_at_meteoritecentral.com>
Date: Wed, 21 Apr 2010 12:42:37 -0700
Message-ID: <7C640E28081AEE4B952F008D1E913F17033D2170_at_0461-its-exmb04.us.saic.com>

Hi Steve,

Jason is correct about there always being far more small stones than
large ones, so the short end of the fall ellipse should have more
distinct meteorites per square mile than the long end. The only
aspect of Jason's post that could be called questionable was his
tentative assumption that hunters have actually been working the
"light" end. (Note that he ~did~ qualify it with "they *may* be
at the light end") As I posted a little earlier, I believe they
are hunting the middle, which is perfectly understandable since
that's where the initial finds were made. When people don't know
the exact trend line, they are naturally hesitant to stray too far
uprange or downrange from known finds. --Rob

-----Original Message-----
From: meteorite-list-bounces at meteoritecentral.com
[mailto:meteorite-list-bounces at meteoritecentral.com] On Behalf Of Steve
Witt
Sent: Wednesday, April 21, 2010 12:26 PM
To: Meteorite-list; Jason Utas
Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Nothing wrong with "just west of Mineral
Point"

Hi Jason,

If I may ask, what are you basing this on?

thanx,
Steve


Steve Witt
IMCA #9020
http://imca.cc/


--- On Wed, 4/21/10, Jason Utas <meteoritekid at gmail.com> wrote:

> From: Jason Utas <meteoritekid at gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Nothing wrong with "just west of Mineral
Point"
> To: "Meteorite-list" <meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com>
> Date: Wednesday, April 21, 2010, 1:54 PM

 Not really - with every
> large, fragmented fall there are almost always more smaller rather
> than larger stones.
> In other words, while they may be at the "light" end of the
> strewnfield, meteorite density is probably going to be the greatest
> there.
> Regards,
> Jason
Received on Wed 21 Apr 2010 03:42:37 PM PDT