[meteorite-list] Mercury data

From: cdtucson at cox.net <cdtucson_at_meteoritecentral.com>
Date: Mon, 20 Jun 2011 19:33:44 -0400
Message-ID: <20110620193344.LSN9G.925455.imail_at_fed1rmwml35>

Carl.,
Thank you so much for this very good information. So,
If as you say the FeO is such a big deal. Why then would they have neglected to mention it if they found it?
Is it possible Mercury is extremely depleted in FeO?
I mean how could they miss it if it's there?
And if it's not there. What kind of basalt would that match?
Thank you.
Carl

--
                                                             
"Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for dinner. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote". 
  
 
---- Carl Agee <agee at unm.edu> wrote: 
> Of course it's still early days on understanding the Mercury data
> coming back from Messenger, but I think there are a few simple things
> that can be said about the two geochemical graphs that were part of
> the press release. The major element graph of Al/Si versus Mg/Si
> clearly shows that the measured Mercurian surface is similar to
> basaltic and mantle rocks from the Earth. They plot along the Earth
> array and look to be a bit more olivine-rich than mid-ocean ridge
> basalts, but not as olivinerich as mantle peridotites, perhaps more
> like Archean Earth komatiites. The measured Mercurian surface is NOT
> delpleted in aluminum, like Martian basalts or Angrites. Also,
> Messenger is clearly not measuring rocks like the lunar anorthositic
> highlands. The major element that is still missing from this puzzle is
> iron. The data do not say anything about the FeO content of the
> Mercurian surface -- this is a pretty big deal, and until that is
> known it will difficult to know exactly what we are looking at -- let
> alone if there is a match for any known meteorite type.
> 
> The potassium/thorium plot shows that Mercury is a lot like the other
> terrestrial planets in terms of volatile element content. It seems to
> be closest to the K/Th of Mars which is quite surprising, since Mars
> is thought to be the most volatile rich of the rocky planets. This
> runs counter to the idea that the inner solar system is chemically
> zoned with volatile elements concentrated out at Mars and lower in
> towards the Sun. But who knows? Maybe Mercury formed farther from the
> Sun and migrated inwards.
> 
> There was a brief mention of substantial amounts of sulfur, but no
> data in the multimedia press release, so it would be interesting to
> know what they mean by "substantial amounts". Also, why do they think
> it is in the form of sulfide and not sulfate?
> 
> See how important these missions of planetary exploration are and how
> fragmentary our understanding is?
> 
> Just my opinion....
> 
> Carl Agee
> 
> --
> Carl B. Agee
> Director and Curator, Institute of Meteoritics
> Professor, Earth and Planetary Sciences
> MSC03 2050
> University of New Mexico
> Albuquerque NM 87131-1126
> 
> Tel: (505) 750-7172
> Fax: (505) 277-3577
> Email: agee at unm.edu
> http://epswww.unm.edu/iom/pers/agee.html
> ______________________________________________
> 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 20 Jun 2011 07:33:44 PM PDT