[meteorite-list] [Fwd: RE: Specific Gravity Question]

From: David Gunning <davidgunning_at_meteoritecentral.com>
Date: Thu, 30 Sep 2010 08:08:56 -0400 (EDT)
Message-ID: <2439.69.50.53.154.1285848536.squirrel_at_webmail.fairpoint.net>

--------------------------- Original Message ----------------------------
Subject: RE: [meteorite-list] Specific Gravity Question
From: "David Gunning" <davidgunning at fairpoint.net>
Date: Thu, September 30, 2010 7:55 am
To: "Peter Scherff" <peterscherff at rcn.com>
-------------------------------------------------------------------------

Howdy,

Thanks for the e-burp.

There was no link, however, to the "published data for hundreds of
meteorites", mentioned in your e-burp. Why allude to information that
cannot be referenced and verified?

While it's interesting to read of your specific gravity bead method,
there are other less convoluted ways or dealing with the fear of
potential contamination in meteorites and mineral samples, in general.

What particularly interests me is exploring ways and utilizing lower tech
methods that bring the ordinary collector into the the loop.

Your suggested method would seem to exclude that possibility.



> Hi,
>
> Here is the way around contamination
> http://www.psrd.hawaii.edu/Aug99/densityMeasure.html. Guy Consolmagno has
> published data for hundreds of meteorites.
>
> Peter
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: meteorite-list-bounces at meteoritecentral.com
> [mailto:meteorite-list-bounces at meteoritecentral.com] On Behalf Of David
> Gunning
> Sent: Thursday, September 30, 2010 6:46 AM
> To: meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com
> Cc: davidgunning at fairpoint.net
> Subject: [meteorite-list] Specific Gravity Question
>
>
> Hi All,
>
> I'm a confessed specific gravity advocate for all things mineralogical,
> including meteorites. It seems to me that there is very little useful
> specific gravity information on the web concerning meteorites, with the
> singular exception of Randy L. Korotev', excellent website at Washington
> University in St. Louis; an informative website listing various specific
> gravity values for various meteorite types and classifications.
>
> It occurs to me that many people may not be taking specific gravity
> measurements of their meteorite specimens because of some sort of biased
> but unfounded fear of specimen contamination. Is this true?
>
> One of the benefits of measuring specific gravity is in being able to
> spot density anomalies in meteorites. For example, you procure a small
> meteorite specimen of a meteorite has been classified as an "L" ordinary
> stoney chondrite, with a range of specific gravity values, as found on
> Professor Korotev' s.g. list, of between 2.50 and 3.96 (with an average
> s.g. of 3.35). When you, yourself, measure the specific gravity of your
> L chondrite, and it's s.g. value comes in at 4.06, what does that mean?
>
> Would such a s.g. reading #1: be possible? And #2: be meaningful?
>
> Are meteorite specific gravity values exclusively constrained to the
> range of values that the scientists peg them at?
>
> And, if not, if actual specific gravity measurements cam occur outside
> the conventionally accepted range of values of the "experts", should
> anyone give a hoot one way or another?
>
> Best wishes,
>
> Dave Gunning
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ______________________________________________
> 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 Thu 30 Sep 2010 08:08:56 AM PDT