[meteorite-list] WANTED: small unclassified type 3's

From: Jeff Kuyken <info_at_meteoritecentral.com>
Date: Fri, 7 Jun 2013 18:23:08 +1000
Message-ID: <002901ce6358$3faedf60$bf0c9e20$_at_meteorites.com.au>

Totally agreed Rob. As someone who collects primitive chondrites, I can say
that there are heaps of examples you might think are Type-3 but turn out to
be 4's. You absolutely need a thin section to tell with 100% certainty.

Cheers,

Jeff


-----Original Message-----
From: meteorite-list-bounces at meteoritecentral.com
[mailto:meteorite-list-bounces at meteoritecentral.com] On Behalf Of Rob Matson
Sent: Friday, 7 June 2013 4:19 PM
To: 'William Feek'; meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com
Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] WANTED: small unclassified type 3's

Hi William,

> Michael, No need to get all anal about the verbage, this ain't a Supreme
Court
hearing.
> I guess I could have inserted the word "possible", maybe even used the
word
"potential",
> but thankfully there's reasonable people who've displayed the capability
of
understanding
> what I was getting at without the use of crystal clear lawyer speak such
as
what's written
> in a software User Agreement. Go ahead and critique every line and word
that I
wrote,
> I'll be the first to agree that it's probably wrought with problems, but
I'm
not going to
> rewrite it, nor am I going to take draft's of future documents to the
english
department
> of the nearest college for correction before posting.

You're being overly reactionary in your reply to Michael. He raised a
perfectly
valid
point: there is absolutely no way you can determine with confidence that an
uncut
meteorite (especially from NWA) is unequilibrated (type-3).

> By the way, I can tell the difference between a Murchison and NWA 2086,
and
would
> you beleive I can do so without the use of analysis.

That is a completely different matter.

> Similarly, there just so happens to be the existence of some stones which
can
be
> determined to be type 3 without the use of analysis ...

No -- not "similarly." William, you need to be disabused of this notion,
unless
your
"some stones" is extremely restrictive.

> ... so you mean to tell me that you'd have trouble being able to tell if a
stone
> such as Begga was a type 3 or not without the use of analysis?

YES, ABSOLUTELY, if that stone is uncut. No meteoriticist would ever claim
an
uncut stone was unequilibrated without seeing a thin section.

Cheers,
Rob


______________________________________________

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 07 Jun 2013 04:23:08 AM PDT