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

From: Sterling K. Webb <sterling_k_webb_at_meteoritecentral.com>
Date: Thu, 30 Sep 2010 12:16:12 -0500
Message-ID: <16A8A9F130FF4AC68B6BCED4F2167EF3_at_ATARIENGINE2>

Hi, Dave,

You should try actually reading the references that
people give to help you with your question. If you
had, you would have found the citation to the published
data in about 30 seconds, just like I did:

Consolmagno, G. J. and D. T. Britt, 1998, The Density
and Porosity of Meteorites from the Vatican Collection,
 Meteoritics and Planetary Science, vol. 33, p. 1231-1241.

Getting unpaid internet access to a scholarly journal is
another matter, though.


Sterling K. Webb
----------------------------------------------------------------------
----- Original Message -----
From: "David Gunning" <davidgunning at fairpoint.net>
To: <meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com>
Cc: <davidgunning at fairpoint.net>
Sent: Thursday, September 30, 2010 7:08 AM
Subject: [meteorite-list] [Fwd: RE: Specific Gravity Question]


> --------------------------- 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
>>
>>
>
>
>
> ______________________________________________
> 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 01:16:12 PM PDT