[meteorite-list] Chelyabinsk - IMB or SMB? The nomenclature of Melts.

From: Michael Farmer <mike_at_meteoritecentral.com>
Date: Thu, 25 Apr 2013 07:43:02 +0600
Message-ID: <933AD2EA-1E0F-41AE-9AC9-1466ADD4ADE5_at_meteoriteguy.com>

I did not say they all separated:) but many did, and they are mostly devoid of fusion crust and totally different than the more chondritic material.
Amazing meteorite. Thins sections should beautiful.

Sent from my iPhone

On Apr 25, 2013, at 7:20 AM, Anne Black <impactika at aol.com> wrote:

> Sorry but those nodules did not always separate from the matrix. And they are entirely feature-less.
> As proof here is a slice with both lithologies (thank you Serge!)
>
> http://www.impactika.com/chely-slice.jpg
>
> Sorry, not for sale, will be made into thin-sections (large ones with both lithologies).
>
>
> Anne M. Black
> www.IMPACTIKA.com
> IMPACTIKA at aol.com
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Michael Farmer <mike at meteoriteguy.com>
> To: Galactic Stone & Ironworks <meteoritemike at gmail.com>
> Cc: Meteorite List <meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com>
> Sent: Wed, Apr 24, 2013 6:55 pm
> Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Chelyabinsk - IMB or SMB? The nomenclature of Melts.
>
>
> The meteorite is an IMB. These nodules being harder than the matrix were
> separated into individuals when the meteorite exploded.
> They are like thousands of Cat Mountains.
> Michael Farmer
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On Apr 25, 2013, at 6:41 AM, "Galactic Stone & Ironworks" <meteoritemike at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Hi List,
>>
>> We keep hearing about the "IMB nodules" that have been recovered -
>> these have an all-black lithology with no chondrules, shock veins, or
>> grey matrix material.
>>
>> However, these nodules were not created on impact. Had there been
>> such an impact, we would have a visible crater and the nodules would
>> be located in a radius directly adjacent to the crater amidst the
>> ejecta. Instead, these nodules were apparently created during the
>> fragmentation events that took place while the body was still in
>> atmospheric flight.
>>
>> If this is true, shouldn't these nodules be called "shock melt" and
>> not "impact melt" ?
>>
>> Is there any distinction in the official nomenclature between an
>> impact melt and a shock melt?
>>
>> Is it correct to continue using IMB in reference to these Chelyabinsk
> specimens?
>>
>> Best regards,
>>
>> MikeG
>>
>> --
>> -------------------------------------------------------------
>> Web - http://www.galactic-stone.com
>> Facebook - http://www.facebook.com/galacticstone
>> Twitter - http://twitter.com/GalacticStone
>> Pinterest - http://pinterest.com/galacticstone
>> RSS - http://www.galactic-stone.com/rss/126516
>> -------------------------------------------------------------
>> ______________________________________________
>>
>> Visit the Archives at http://www.meteorite-list-archives.com
>> Meteorite-list mailing list
>> Meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com
>> http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
> ______________________________________________
>
> Visit the Archives at http://www.meteorite-list-archives.com
> Meteorite-list mailing list
> Meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com
> http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
>
>
Received on Wed 24 Apr 2013 09:43:02 PM PDT