[meteorite-list] Small Asteroid 2010 AL30 Will Fly Past TheEarth

From: Jason Utas <meteoritekid_at_meteoritecentral.com>
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 2010 22:49:15 -0800
Message-ID: <93aaac891001122249t72bd96acj43d9dcd9aa8c1bc3_at_mail.gmail.com>

Hello Sterling, Larry, All,
Interesting - there's another problem with Sterling's initial
definition, of which the following statement was a component:

"2010 AL30 could be a "meteoroid" if it would hit and
leave a piece to be recovered. Just be very patient and
live a long time... (Always a good idea anyway.)"

As per that definition, though, there's a problem when it comes to
single crater-forming meteorites that don't leave pieces to be
recovered. Yes, they hit the earth, but if they can't be recovered in
any way, can they really be called meteorites (because they don't
technically produce recoverable 'meteorites')?

Admittedly that argument is only a problem if we're using the outdated
version of the definition, but it raises another question.

If an interplanetary object does strike the surface of the earth - and
vaporizes upon impact, is it still considered a meteorite?
Are craters formed by meteorites? Asteroids? I assume a meteoroid
wouldn't be large enough to vaporize itself on impact, but even the
faintest of shooting stars produce dust particles which will
eventually reach the ground.
- So there's a minimum size limit on "meteorites" - they must be
larger than the dust produced by fireballs themselves (apparently),
but as for crater-forming bodies...I've always simply called them
meteorites because, well, in my mind, they've struck the surface of
the earth, so they're meteorites.
Trouble arises if the language of the currently used definition is
specific enough to note that for a meteorite to be a meteorite,
fragments must be recoverable. And if that's the case, then many
craters were in fact formed by...Asteroids? This definition would
also change on individual crater's with time, as older craters might
have arrived with recoverable fragments, but such pieces could have
since been lost to time and weathering (craters generally outlast
meteorite fragments, after all).

So...yeah. A few problems.
Any thoughts?

Regards,
Jason

On Tue, Jan 12, 2010 at 10:04 PM, <geozay at aol.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>>>"My" definition of "meteoroid" is ?just the standard
> textbook definition. Before it hits the Earth, it's
> a ?"meteoroid." While in fiery flight through the
> atmosphere, it's a "meteor." ?If a piece lands on the
> Earth (and somebody finds it), it's a ?"meteorite."<<
>
> I understood that a meteoroid is a small bodied ?natural object, in a
> separate solar orbit from that of earth's. When it enters ?the earths atmosphere
> and in the incandescent phase, the visible phenomena is a ?meteor.
> Afterwards, during the dark phase, its no longer in a separate solar ?orbit from that
> of the earth's. It has yet to hit the ground to become a ?meteorite. What
> is this object called during the dark phase? I personally call ?it a
> meteorite since its under the control of the earth at that point and not
> independent of the earth. Also there has been detected by various space probes ?out
> around Jupiter, "meteoroids" that are too fast to be in solar orbit and thus
> of interstellar origins. Are these still called meteoroids?
> GeoZay
>
> ______________________________________________
> Visit the Archives at http://www.meteoritecentral.com/mailing-list-archives.html
> Meteorite-list mailing list
> Meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com
> http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
>
Received on Wed 13 Jan 2010 01:49:15 AM PST