[meteorite-list] Pairing discussion/questions

From: Galactic Stone & Ironworks <meteoritemike_at_meteoritecentral.com>
Date: Mon, 18 Jan 2010 11:12:30 -0500
Message-ID: <e51421551001180812x76c39a9cq9ba490f4139dc185_at_mail.gmail.com>

Good question Greg. I'm curious to see if you'll hear anything other
than crickets in response. ;)

On 1/18/10, Greg Catterton <star_wars_collector at yahoo.com> wrote:
> I have often wondered and after some discussion with others I wanted to get
> the community feeling on the issue of pairings.
>
> If a meteorite say NWA 1877 for example is out there and more is recovered
> and verified to be the same material from the same strewnfield, should the
> new material share the NWA number and the TKW be updated?
> I have noticed many pairings with NWA 1877 and many other meteorites.
> Same material with different numbers and TKWs listed.
>
> Would it not be in the best interest to have all the paired samples share on
> number? This would surely cut the amount of NWA material by 1000 or more.
> Why is this not done?
>
> What is the process for pairing material to share the NWA number?
> Is it up to the dealer or the person who did testing?
>
> What affect would it have on value if something with a listed TKW of 200g
> suddenly was paired with the 3 other numbers assigned to the same material
> and the TKW was pushed to 1kg or more?
> Surely it would decrease as supply grew. Is this a concern for some?
>
> I am trying to better understand the politics/red tape that goes with this
> area.
>
> Thanks, hope everyone is doing well.
>
> Greg C.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ______________________________________________
> 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 Mon 18 Jan 2010 11:12:30 AM PST