[meteorite-list] "Great Discovery" maybe ;-) NOT

From: MEM <mstreman53_at_meteoritecentral.com>
Date: Thu, 28 Mar 2013 20:09:18 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <1364526558.26997.YahooMailNeo_at_web142406.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>

Thanks Peter, I had forgotten how large Zagami really was. ? So much for going strictly by memory.? That would make an upward limit much higher for initial size especially if one uses 50% ablation loss.? I personally don't think it is that high but that is still a approximately up to a hefty 40kg original mass.? Zagami was high in glass and probably pushing the limits of mass and acceleration without turning completely to glass-- else vaporizing.? I just looked and there were 4 or 5 Martians falling between 7 and 18 kgs and those lie outside the theoretical argument I just put forth.? No matter how it is tweaked, an upward limit of 7 kg initial is obviously wrong.


As to the press release, it claims "US record" size so I don't think this is the Tissint mass of Anne's letter.?

Regards,
Elton



----- Original Message -----
> From: Peter Scherff <PeterScherff at rcn.com>
> To: 'Anne Black' <impactika at aol.com>; mstreman53 at yahoo.com; meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com; COMeteoriteClub at yahoogroups.com
> Cc:
> Sent: Thursday, March 28, 2013 10:19 PM
> Subject: RE: [meteorite-list] "Great Discovery" maybe ;-) NOT
>
> Hi,
>
> Zagami is 18 kg but that is nowhere near the size of this rock(s).
>
> Peter
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: meteorite-list-bounces at meteoritecentral.com
> [mailto:meteorite-list-bounces at meteoritecentral.com] On Behalf Of Anne Black
> Sent: Thursday, March 28, 2013 10:12 PM
> To: mstreman53 at yahoo.com; meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com;
> COMeteoriteClub at yahoogroups.com
> Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] "Great Discovery" maybe ;-) NOT
>
> Yes, Elton, certainly bogus.
> But I wonder if it is in anyway connected to another email I found in my spam
> box today. Here is most of it:
>
> "We are writing you regarding a special offer. We think you have already
> heard of the Tissint meteorite, the Martian meteorite that crashed in Morocco in
> July 2011 and the Natural History Museum has bought one of its pieces lately
> (1.1 kg).
> In fact, That 1.1 kg stone of Tissint Martian meteorite is just a small piece of
> the mother Tissint meteorite which we still have safe and sound. The latter is
> about 800-1000 times bigger than the meteorite which is at the Natural History
> Museum gallery at the moment. We recovered the whole Martian rock soon after it
> fell, then we hid it in a professional way following the advice tips of some
> experts to prevent any contamination,so if you would like to buy from us,
> contact us through our email address: meteoritebusiness at gmail.com Reply only if
> interested please,"
>
> Well, I am not interested. But 800-1000 times bigger than the 1.1kg piece would
> make it 900 to 1100 kg mass.
> About the same size than that the one in that announcement.
> Coincidence?? Same scam?
>
> Oh, and BTW, they want to sell it as one piece! No the price is not mentionned.
> Did anyone else get that email?
>
>
> Anne M. Black
> www.IMPACTIKA.com
> IMPACTIKA at aol.com
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: MEM <mstreman53 at yahoo.com>
> To: Anne Black <impactika at aol.com>; meteorite-list
> <meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com>; COMeteoriteClub
> <COMeteoriteClub at yahoogroups.com>
> Sent: Thu, Mar 28, 2013 8:00 pm
> Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] "Great Discovery"? maybe ;-) NOT
>
>
> It has bogus written all over it.? Here is a big why-- 387 kg exceeds
> the mass
> of ejectable material from the surface of Mars by about 380? kgs. The
> problem is
> the "Goldielocks conundrum:? Not too small-not too large but just
> right".? A
> size small too small might make escape velocity but, may be too small
> to survive
> entry.? The launching wack has to be just right-- too hard and the
> target gets
> vaporized. Too large a a target rock and the inertia results in melting
> entirely
> before it can get moving.? The "not too small--not too large" envelope
>
> is
> theoretically between approx. 2kg up to 5-7(?) kg sized chunks at the
> surface
> which survive the "just right"-- sized impactor.
>
>
> To fit this "find" scenario, multiple rocks--all most identical in
> size, adding
> up to 387 kg is statistically impossible in that no less than 76x10kg
> sized
> rocks would have to have been gently blasted from the surface of Mars,
> fly in
> formation through a perfect trajectory all arriving as a meteor storm
> loosing
> not more than half their mass during entry and every last stone would
> have to
> have been recovered.
> What we believe we know about orbital physics says this is impossible.?
> We have
> already ruled out the possibility of a single mass making it into orbit
> so this
> 387 TKM could not be just a few stones-- and really be from Mars.
>
>
> Any single stone in this recovery(sic) exceeding 5-7kg(no ablation
> loss) is
> automatically over the physical limit for a? max-sized Martian
> meteorite as I am
> going by memory.? Someone might want to consult McSween's Meteorites
> and their
> Parent Bodies to see is calculations. I though he placed a limit of
> around 2?kg
> for recovered stone but I believe we did recover a 3-4 kg Martian. Some
> inquiring mind might want to post the largest single mass or TKW for a
> single
> Martian meteorite.? Note this doesn't rule out the paired falls we
> have where
> multiple hand -sized stones were recovered over a very large area.
>
> The fact that the levels of copper, silver, and gold are discussed is
> another
> read flag.? I don't keep up with what is commercially mine-able ore but
> for
> copper I assume it has to be 5 or more oz per ton for copper and? I
> don't
> remember any meteorite chemistry that had more than a few ppb of any of
> those
> metals.? The sulfate type ore deposit has yet to be identified on Mars
> but those
> are even more fragile than silicate deposits.? Oh and where is the zinc
> this is
> after all a sulfate type ore occurrence according to the press release?
>
> The only Glyn Howard I can find a reference to is Glyn Howard, science
> teacher/meteoritics scientist, ... Successful Music Teacher and Author
> Continues
> Streak of Popular Kids' Books... He has not ever published a peer
> reviewed
> classification for a meteorite that I can find but the press release
> says he
> classified it himself...? In addition to having bogus written all over
> it, I can
> detect the smell of Curry in there somewhere....
>
>
> Elton
>
>
>
>> ________________________________
>> From: Anne Black <impactika at aol.com>
>> To: meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com;
> COMeteoriteClub at yahoogroups.com
>> Sent: Thursday, March 28, 2013 8:37 PM
>> Subject: [meteorite-list] "Great Discovery"? maybe ;-)
>>
>> Just in case you missed this "great" announcement:
>>
>> http://world.einnews.com/247pr/337148
>>
>> Enjoy!
>>
>>
>> Anne M. Black
>> www.IMPACTIKA.com
>> IMPACTIKA at aol.com
>>
>> ______________________________________________
>>
>> 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 Thu 28 Mar 2013 11:09:18 PM PDT