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

From: plagioklas at arcor.de <plagioklas_at_meteoritecentral.com>
Date: Fri, 26 Apr 2013 12:40:43 +0200 (CEST)
Message-ID: <1842616671.1208991.1366972843028.JavaMail.ngmail_at_webmail15.arcor-online.net>

I thought SMB and IMB are two abbreviations for the same things.

Impact is an event, where an shock occurs. And melting shocks are caused by impacts. And melt breccia is melt with breccia of unmelted or not completely melted remains. An melt without unmelted or not completely melted remains should have the name Impact melt.

Or is my english wrong?

----- Original Nachricht ----
Von: Jim Wooddell <jimwooddell at gmail.com>
An: Meteorite List <meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com>
Datum: 26.04.2013 04:11
Betreff: Re: [meteorite-list] Chelyabinsk - IMB or SMB? The nomenclature of
        Melts.

> Hi Mendy,
> I read it in Meteoritics & Planetary Science, Volume 48 Number 3 2013
> March.
>
> Jim
>
>
> On Thu, Apr 25, 2013 at 5:57 PM, Mendy Ouzillou <ouzillou at yahoo.com> wrote:
> > where can one read this paper?
> >
> > Best,
> >
> >
> > Mendy
> >
> > ________________________________
> > From: Jim Wooddell <jimwooddell at gmail.com>
> > To: Meteorite List <meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com>
> > Sent: Thursday, April 25, 2013 5:29 PM
> > Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Chelyabinsk - IMB or SMB? The nomenclature
> of
> > Melts.
> >
> > Hi All!
> > Just a point of information. I just read Dr. Rubin's paper, Multiple
> > melting in a four-layered barred-olivine chondrule with
> > compositionally heterogeneous glass from LL3.0 Semarkona
> > Whew! That's a title for a paper!
> > While we are on the subject of melts, I thought I'd point out this
> > paper. Enjoyed reading it the first time....actually understood some
> > of it and will read it once again after thinking about it for a while.
> > You folks might enjoy reading it when you get a chance!
> > Thanks Alan!!
> >
> >
> >
> > Jim Wooddell
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Apr 24, 2013 at 8:24 PM, Jim Wooddell <jimwooddell at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >> Hi Jeff!
> >>
> >> To me, Impact Melt should mean total melt to liquid...no fragments of
> any
> >> kind. In the case of the classified S4, partial melting occurred,
> >> confirmed by fragments. Still, various flavors understandable
> especially
> >> at
> >> boundaries.
> >> Yep, I think nodules is the keyword that is questionable. Graphite
> >> "nodules"
> >> are found in Canyon Diablo, for example. Once they find large enough
> >> pieces
> >> of this meteorite, they might confirm nodules but they would not be
> >> abnormal
> >> or a special anomaly if they are impact melt.
> >>
> >> Jim
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On Wed, Apr 24, 2013 at 7:53 PM, Jeff Kuyken <info at meteorites.com.au>
> >> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Definitely IMB although you will find variations within different
> stones.
> >>> Some will be shocked to the point of melt and others will not quite get
> >>> there. Personally I think IMB and SMB are the exact same terms as both
> >>> are
> >>> "melt breccias" and shock is derived from impact.
> >>>
> >>> The official classification of Chely states: "A significant portion
> (1/3)
> >>> of
> >>> the stones consist of a dark, fine-grained impact melt containing
> mineral
> >>> and chondrule fragments."
> >>>
> >>> http://www.lpi.usra.edu/meteor/metbull.php?code=57165
> >>>
> >>> I personally don't think "nodules" is really the correct terminology
> >>> either.
> >>> They are just individuals / fragments of the same material shocked to a
> >>> higher degree in the parent body. For example... compare it to Gao. We
> >>> don't
> >>> call the IMB pieces, nodules. They are IMB individuals. The term
> >>> "nodules"
> >>> would seem to me to be better reserved for things like "iron nodules"
> in
> >>> a
> >>> stony Mesosiderite or a "Troilite nodule" in an iron meteorite.
> >>>
> >>> Good question Mike.
> >>>
> >>> Cheers,
> >>>
> >>> Jeff
> >>>
> >>> -----Original Message-----
> >>> From: meteorite-list-bounces at meteoritecentral.com
> >>> [mailto:meteorite-list-bounces at meteoritecentral.com] On Behalf Of
> >>> Galactic
> >>> Stone & Ironworks
> >>> Sent: Thursday, 25 April 2013 10:42 AM
> >>> To: Meteorite List
> >>> Subject: [meteorite-list] Chelyabinsk - IMB or SMB? The nomenclature of
> >>> Melts.
> >>>
> >>> 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
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> Jim Wooddell
> >> jimwooddell at gmail.com
> >> 928-247-2675
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Jim Wooddell
> > jimwooddell at gmail.com
> > 928-247-2675
> > ______________________________________________
> >
> > 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
> >
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Jim Wooddell
> jimwooddell at gmail.com
> 928-247-2675
> ______________________________________________
>
> 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 Fri 26 Apr 2013 06:40:43 AM PDT