[meteorite-list] question about olivine diogenites

From: Marc Fries <fries_at_meteoritecentral.com>
Date: Fri, 11 Jun 2010 13:13:53 -0700
Message-ID: <6CE367D7-BBFB-49C2-AA80-F59FE8686C50_at_psi.edu>

The others here have already nailed the technical discussion... For my part, I'll just say that I was lucky enough to be there when MIL 07001 was discovered and would argue in favor of classifying it as a 'frickinbeautifulite'. It was a roughly softball-sized, sparkling green stone parked on a big open field of blue ice. It looked remarkably like the peridotite xenoliths scattered here and there in McMurdo, with fusion crust substituting for the clinging bits of basalt on the xenoliths. That particular find was probably the highlight of the whole field season.

Cheers,
Marc Fries


On Jun 11, 2010, at 12:55 PM, Greg Stanley wrote:

>
> List:
>
> I find this interesting and it reminds me of something I've thought about for a while.
>
> How and for what reasons are meteorites re-classified and then changed?
> I've seen this occur on a number of meteorites. Why does this happen, and how does it start? Some examples have been mentioned in this post. Is it requested by the finder? Does the finder send another sample to a second institution? Or are specimens randomly re-analyzed? Look at ALH84001 - that was originally a diogenite.
>
> I've always wondered if there are any other meteorites that have the wrong classification sitting in someones display cabinet.
>
> Greg S.
>
> ----------------------------------------
>> Date: Fri, 11 Jun 2010 12:18:04 -0700
>> From: tbear1 at cableone.net
>> To: meteoritemike at gmail.com; kieron.heard at ukonline.co.uk
>> CC: meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com
>> Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] question about olivine diogenites
>>
>> Simply put, the NOM COM has no self-imposed authority to establish new
>> classification nomenclature. Because there is not yet a peer-reviewed paper
>> on the issue of olivine-rich diogenites being an "official" designation,
>> this classification is not "officially" recognized. A paper is in progress,
>> that involves Tony Irving, NAU, and others, that will hopefully resolve the
>> matter.
>>
>> Consider how frustrating the classification mess is when we have attempted
>> to classify stones that are>90 vol % olivine, which in terrestrial
>> terminology is a dunite, only to have the "official classification" given as
>> diogenite. Wrong! The definition of diogenite is "achondritic stony
>> meteorite composed essentially of pyroxene minerals". Olivine is not a
>> pyroxene.
>> We (Prof. Irving and NAU) are addressing this and other classification
>> problems.
>>
>> Have PATIENCE, providing that we live long enough, the problems may be
>> resolved.
>>
>> Ted
>>
>> IMCA #1110
>>
>> On 6/11/10 10:27 AM, "Galactic Stone & Ironworks"
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Kieron and List,
>>>
>>> I'll take a stab at this one - although I could be wrong, here is my theory -
>>>
>>> Perhaps "olivine diogenite" is not fully-accepted nomenclature by all
>>> scientists and institutions, so maybe it depends on who does the
>>> classification and who submits the write-up?
>>>
>>> Best regards,
>>>
>>> MikeG
>>>
>>> On 6/11/10, Kieron Heard wrote:
>>>> Thanks for your replies chaps but I am still mystified. I accept that NWA
>>>> 1459 is another example of an olivine diogenite, but why then is its
>>>> recommended classification in the MetBull Database simply 'diogenite' and
>>>> not 'diogenite-olivine'?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Regards, Kieron
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: Greg Hupe [mailto:gmhupe at htn.net]
>>>> Sent: 11 June 2010 17:30
>>>> To: Greg Stanley; kieron.heard at ukonline.co.uk;
>>>> meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com
>>>> Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] question about olivine diogenites
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Hello Kieron, GregS and List,
>>>>
>>>> The first recognized Olivine Diogenite was NWA 1459, then came along NWA
>>>> 1877(w/ pairing 5603, and others), then NWA 5480 (and pairings). I am not
>>>> familiar with GRA 98108.
>>>>
>>>> Hope this helps.
>>>>
>>>> Best regards,
>>>> Greg
>>>>
>>>> ====================
>>>> Greg Hupe
>>>> The Hupe Collection
>>>> NaturesVault (eBay)
>>>> gmhupe at htn.net
>>>> www.LunarRock.com
>>>> IMCA 3163
>>>> ====================
>>>> Click here for my current eBay auctions:
>>>> http://search.ebay.com/_W0QQsassZnaturesvault
>>>>
>>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>>> From: "Greg Stanley"
>>>> To: ;
>>>> Sent: Friday, June 11, 2010 12:13 PM
>>>> Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] question about olivine diogenites
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> List:
>>>>>
>>>>> Is not NWA 5480 an olivine diogenite too?
>>>>>
>>>>> Greg S.
>>>>>
>>>>> ----------------------------------------
>>>>>> From: kieron.heard at ukonline.co.uk
>>>>>> To: meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com
>>>>>> Date: Fri, 11 Jun 2010 10:13:49 +0100
>>>>>> Subject: [meteorite-list] question about olivine diogenites
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi Folks,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I wonder if anyone can offer some advice? I am pleased to have obtained a
>>>>>> sample of NWA 6149 (prov) - an olivine diogenite. This prompted me to do
>>>>>> some research on the MetBull Database, and I see that there are only
>>>>>> three
>>>>>> meteorites that are classified there as 'olivine diogenites' (MIL 07001,
>>>>>> NWA
>>>>>> 5603 and NWA 6157). Other stones that have in the past been described as
>>>>>> olivine diogenites (such as GRA 98108 and NWA 1459) have recommended
>>>>>> classifications of 'diogenite', despite seeming to have a significant
>>>>>> olivine content.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> So my question is, What is the requirement for a meteorite to be recorded
>>>>>> in
>>>>>> the database as as 'olivine diogenite'?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks in advance for any information.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Regards, Kieron
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ______________________________________________
>>>>>> 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
>>>>>
>>>>> _________________________________________________________________
>>>>> Hotmail is redefining busy with tools for the New Busy. Get more from your
>>>>> inbox.
>>>>>
>>>> http://www.windowslive.com/campaign/thenewbusy?ocid=PID28326::T:WLMTAGL:ON:W
>>>> L:en-US:WM_HMP:042010_2
>>>>> ______________________________________________
>>>>> 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
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> ----
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> No virus found in this incoming message.
>>>> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
>>>> Version: 9.0.829 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/2931 - Release Date: 06/11/10
>>>> 02:35:00
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ______________________________________________
>>>> 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
>>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> ______________________________________________
>> 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
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> The New Busy think 9 to 5 is a cute idea. Combine multiple calendars with Hotmail.
> http://www.windowslive.com/campaign/thenewbusy?tile=multicalendar&ocid=PID28326::T:WLMTAGL:ON:WL:en-US:WM_HMP:042010_5
> ______________________________________________
> 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 Fri 11 Jun 2010 04:13:53 PM PDT