[meteorite-list] Weston Hammer reference?
From: Michael Gilmer <meteoritemike_at_meteoritecentral.com>
Date: Tue, 15 May 2012 20:48:27 -0400 Message-ID: <CAKBPJW-Ab0gz8T7aRKiHJ3_hpWi-yBzUEkrJPfPEFiFSTJTegg_at_mail.gmail.com> Dear Listees and Innocent Bystanders, A few words about the jargon used to describe the so-called hammer meteorites... When I first entered the hobby, back in 2007, if you searched the internet for meteorites that had struck things, you would inevitably land on Michael Blood's website or a small handful of other meteorite dealers. The term "hammer" simply does not exist in any official nomenclature used by scientists or academia. Hammer is part of a terminology used by the esoteric and niche community of meteorite collectors. Collectors who focus primarily or exclusively on "hammers" are even more scarce. Since there are so few of us (I consider myself a "hammerhead"), it shouldn't be hard to find some agreement on the terminology used to describe meteorites that strike people or constructs made by people. Some would include animals as accepted targets for "hammer" meteorites - horse, cow, dog, termite, chupacabra, etc. So, when I first entered the hobby, I used Michael Blood's definition of hammer and I read through each and every description on every page of his catalog. I learned that a meteorite which strikes the target is a "hammer stone" or simply "hammer". A good example is Claxton. One stone. It struck a mailbox. It was documented. What are the freakin chances that a single stone from a main belt asteroid would wallop of mailbox in rural Georgia? That is awesome. I want a piece of that! And that is how a hammer collector thinks. It gets the imagination going and inspires of sense of awe at the sprawling randomness of the cosmos. Like a kid skipping rocks across a vast lake, the forces of creation and chaos skipped a rock across the void and it landed in a Georgia mailbox. Less than 10 years later something similar happened and a Chevy Malibu was mortally wounded by a single stone from space. (and I wanted a piece of that car-smasher also!) Thankfully for collectors, Claxton and Peekskill are available on the collector's market in small macro or micro type part slices and fragments. Neither fall is considered "unobtainium". In both cases, there was a single stone (known) that struck something manmade. Those stones are "hammers" or "hammer stones". Period. I don't think any interested collector would argue that. By extension those falls like Claxton and Peekskill could also be called "hammer falls". The term hammer fall does not appear in any official nomenclature used by the Meteoritical Society. In addition, that term does not exist in any academic or scientific publication. So, the term is open to interpretation by default. Unless someone is going to come forward and assert themselves as the King of Hammers, the best we can hope for (as a group of collectors) is to use language that is clear, concise, and effective in conveying the necessary information to the curious collector. Is it necessary for every last collector or dealer to use the same terminology to describe their specimens? No, with the condition that the words they use in describing their specimens are not intentionally vague or misleading. I think it may be argued, therefore, that Claxton or Peekskill could be referred to by four different terms, each of which are valid but have varying degrees of acceptance. 1) FALL - this is the word that science and academia uses to describe any meteorite that was witnessed to fall to Earth. This holds true whether the meteorite hits a dentist's office or falls across undeveloped farmland or desert. This is also the word used most commonly by the media, authors, and others who write about meteorites. 2) WITNESSED FALL - this word is used widely by private dealers and collectors. It is also used casually on rare occasion by academics and appears in some literature of the field. 3) HAMMER FALL - this word is used by some private collectors and dealers to refer to a meteorite fall (or witnessed fall) that strikes a person, artificial construct, edifice, or in some cases, an animal (typically a mammal, single-celled organisms need not apply). If we include diatoms as valid targets, then every meteorite slams into the ocean is a hammer because it will invariably kill some living organism. Note - the criteria that defines what qualifies as a valid target for "hammerhood" has already been argued to death on this List previously, on more than one occasion. Let us not assault that dead horse again. Suffice to say, for the sake of this argument, Claxton and Peekskill can be referred to as hammer falls. 4) HAMMER - obviously, this is short casual speak for a hammer fall. Claxton and Peekskill (as fall events) could be called "hammers". The meteorite specimens (as objects) could also be referred to as "hammers". Besides these two obvious and relatively-recent examples of hammer falls, we also have some meteorite falls that involved multiple stones and multiple targets that were struck. One very recent example of such a fall is Park Forest. I won't repeat what is already documented in this List's archives, but it is generally agreed that several manmade objects or structures were hit by stones from a larger shower of meteorites that took place over an entire strewnfield that included the Park Forest area of Illinois. Each one of those meteoritess that struck a manmade construct is a hammer stone. However, there were many specimens that fell and hit the grass or ground without ever touching anything man-made. I think most collectors would agree that these specimens should not be called "hammer stones". Nor should any specimen derived from one of these stones be referred to as a "hammer". But, Park Forest is a fall, a witnessed fall, and (whether everyone likes it or not) a "hammer fall". As long as everyone agrees that not every individual specimen from a hammer fall involving multiple meteorites is a "hammer stone" - only those specific stones that actually struck a valid target are rightfully described as such. Holbrook is another example - more than one stone struck a valid target, and therefore those particular meteorites are hammer stones and the larger Holbrook hammer fall involved many many more stones which did not strike anything other than the unpopulated Arizona countryside. Those latter stones are not hammer stones and are generally not referred to as such. Now, here is where terminology gets a little confusing and some people argue over the semantics - Holbrook could be referred to as a "hammer fall" and *any* Holbrook stone could be referred to as coming from the Holbrook "hammer fall" But only those specific specimens that struck manmade constructs (or livestock) are legitimately referred to as "hammer stones". If one really wants to get silly about all of this, we can coin a new term - witnessed hammer fall. And then we can argue over whether or not the meteorite is a "witnessed hammer stone" only if a living witness saw the meteorite striking the target - and not a case where the witness ran discovered the damaged target after the moment of impact. Such an example would be the New Orleans meteorite. If a meteorite strikes a desk, and nobody is there to hear it, does it really happen? ;) If the humble reader has followed my rambling for this long, then please have a drink. In light of this recent dustup over the semantics of meteorites that hit things, I have changed the description and header for the part of my website dedicated to "hammers" and/or specimens from those witnessed falls that may also be referred to as "hammer falls". That new description is basically a condensed version of what I just said above. I think it makes clarfies if a given micromount or specimen originates from a meteorite that struck something, or it is a specimen that did not strike something from the hammer fall event in question. Ultimately, as long as this terminology is not being used to mislead or misrepresent a specimen, it doesn't really matter - only a handful of people care enough to discuss or debate it. ;) Best regards, MikeG -- ----------------------------------------------------------- Galactic Stone & Ironworks - MikeG Web: http://www.galactic-stone.com Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/galacticstone Twitter: http://twitter.com/GalacticStone RSS: http://www.galactic-stone.com/rss/126516 ----------------------------------------------------------- On 5/15/12, Monty Robson <mcrobson at charter.net> wrote: > Dear List, > > This morning Mal Bishop offered the following as a reference for > Weston being a ?hammer?: ?At least one stone hit a building during the > Weston Fall according to Nininger's, "Find A Falling Star" -- reference > the 1st page of Chapter One ( The Path Behind ), 3rd paragraph, last > sentence.? > Mr. Bishop is correct, just as he says, Nininger does say ?A little > stone struck a nearby building and rolled away into the grass.? > There is no question that Prof. Nininger made wonderful > contributions to meteoritics, including being a founder of what today is > the Meteoritical Society. But this is just another example of fiction > posing as fact in the literature of Weston. > Nininger opens his autobiography with Weston and devotes the > entire first page (page 3) to the observations of ?a certain Judge > Wheeler?, but he does not document any of this. Nathan Wheeler was > Silliman and Kingsley?s star witness of the Weston event. If a piece had > fallen nearby Wheeler, would have read about it in their reports. Isaac > Bronson goes further and specifically says that Wheeler did not hear the > whizzing of the stones since he was so far from where any fell. > I must conclude, in the absence of further documentation, that > Weston is not a ?hammer?. > > Best regards, > > Monty > > > > On Tue, May 15, 2012 at 6:03 AM, Mal Bishop wrote: > >> At least one stone hit a building during the Weston Fall according to >> Nininger's, "Find A Falling Star" -- reference the 1st page of >> Chapter One ( The Path Behind ), 3rd paragraph, last sentence. >> >> Mal >> >> On 5/15/2012 2:00 AM, Shawn Alan wrote: >>> I ment BENARES (a) :) as for Weston I love that stone cause its the >>> first meteorite fall in the new world and help put Yale and America >>> in the limelight of science in the international scene. >>> Shawn Alan >>> IMCA 1633 >>> eBay store http://www.ebay.com/sch/ph0t0phl0w/m.html? >>> >>> >>> >>> ----- Original Message ----- >>> From: Frank Cressy<fcressy at prodigy.net> >>> To: Shawn Alan<photophlow at yahoo.com>; Meteorite >>> Central<meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com> >>> Cc: >>> Sent: Tuesday, May 15, 2012 1:46 AM >>> Subject: Weston >>> >>> Shawn, >>> >>> Please show me the reference that Weston hit some manmade object. >>> I've never >>> run across that and didn't see it in Silliman and Kingsley's report. >>> I think that it's on Michael Blood's site but believe he's in error. >>> >>> Thanks, >>> >>> Frank >>> >>> >>> >>> ----- Original Message ---- >>> From: Shawn Alan<photophlow at yahoo.com> >>> To: Meteorite Central<meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com> >>> Sent: Mon, May 14, 2012 10:05:57 PM >>> Subject: [meteorite-list] AD: MURRAY, LA002 Mars meteorite, NWA2999, >>> Barbotan >>> man killer meteorite, LUCE', Forest City, Barwell& more meteorites >>> ending on >>> eBay soon! >>> >>> >>> I am going to say my words and leave it at that on this Hammer Fall >>> Stone Fall >>> Hammer man made hitting meteorite definition.... >>> >>> As for the Hammer Stone Fall phase, I guess I did morph it by >>> accident from >>> Michael Bloods phase which is Hammer Fall, for some reason I thought >>> he used >>> Hammer Stone Fall but I checked and its worded as Hammer Fall when a >>> stone from >>> the fall hits a man made object. The Sutter's Mill meteorite fall is >>> a Hammer >>> Fall because one of the stones from that fall hit a man made object. >>> That stone >>> that hit the man made object is called a Hammer Stone, and I can see >>> the >>> confusion and thats why I changed it to Hammer Fall. So by Michael's >>> definition >>> when a meteorite hits a man made object that meteorite fall is a >>> METEORITE >>> HAMMER FALL. >>> >>> Documented Hammer Falls >>> Sylacauge >>> Barbotan >>> L Aigle >>> Weston >>> Park Forest >>> Paltusk >>> Barwell >>> and now Sutter's Mill >>> >>> From Micheal's website >>> >>> 1). "Hammer" - any >>> individual which is part of a hammer >>> fall in which one or more of the >>> individuals struck an >>> artifact, animal or human..... >>> Most of us hammer heads, however, >>> will collect >>> what is available from any hammer fall, though, of course, >>> hammer stones, themselves, >>> will be most valued." >>> >>> Shawn Alan >>> IMCA 1633 >>> eBay Store >>> http://www.ebay.com/sch/ph0t0phl0w/m.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 >>> >>> >> >> >> ______________________________________________ >> >> 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 Tue 15 May 2012 08:48:27 PM PDT |
 StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit Yahoo MyWeb
|