[meteorite-list] Chelyabinsk trajectory modeling -- how welldid we do? Part 1 of 2

From: Galactic Stone & Ironworks <meteoritemike_at_meteoritecentral.com>
Date: Fri, 18 Oct 2013 12:02:38 -0400
Message-ID: <CAKBPJW_a-8zJawy_hfHjVMeNJ8H=Ykbn321Wq3jQQ3N2QD7qcw_at_mail.gmail.com>

Hi Jeff, Mendy and List,

Jeff is obviously the voice of the Bulletin here, but here is
something for collectors and dealers to consider....

The Bulletin is not designed or intended for collectors and dealers.
It is for science. As laymen (advanced or not), we are privileged to
have free and open access to it. This is very generous of the
Meteoritical Society, because they could easily gate it off and
require a password to access it. This would prevent issues like the
recent crash brought on by a high-traffic Facebook post. But it would
also deny the general public a very useful resource.

TKW is a number that is constantly in a state of flux as recoveries
are made over time, and it is a number that is very difficult to
verify on an authoritative level. This is especially true with
showers that produce large numbers of meteorites on the ground, i.e.
Chelyabinsk.

Petrologic type, composition, O-isotope, and other analytical data can
be reproduced independently. TKW information is harder to verify and
involves more of the honor system to varying degrees.

For example, I have kept a running total of the Sutter's Mill TKW
since the day after the fall. And I consider my number to be very
accurate to the best of my ability to collect and verify this
information. The vast majority was gathered via email reports and a
minority via telephone calls. None of this information was collected
by me first-hand in the field. So, if asked how authoritative my TKW
might be, I cannot answer with any level of certainty that would be
required for scientific use. Some fruitloop could lie to me or
someone could honestly make a mistake when reporting a find, so who
really knows?

Sutter's Mill Tally page - http://www.galactic-stone.com/pages/lotus

Recent Meteorite Falls page - http://www.galactic-stone.com/pages/falls

I think both of the above resources are quite accurate and are useful
for collectors, dealers, and laymen. But verifying such information
is an ongoing and imperfect process.

Best regards and happy huntings,

MikeG

-- 
-------------------------------------------------------------
Web - http://www.galactic-stone.com
Facebook - http://www.facebook.com/galacticstone
Twitter - http://twitter.com/galacticstone
Pinterest - http://pinterest.com/galacticstone
-------------------------------------------------------------
On 10/18/13, Mendy Ouzillou <ouzillou at yahoo.com> wrote:
> Jeff,
>
> You raise an interesting question that impacts MANY other bulletin entries.
> What is an "authoritative" report or who is capable of making one? Would a
> member or the IMCA or a reputable dealer qualify?
>
> The big concern is double (or even triple) reporting masses that have been
> sold or traded but at some point the "official" TKW becomes completely
> irrelevant. Perhaps the scientific community is not so concerned with TKW,
> but the collector community certainly is. The problem however is very
> relevant to collectors who are not aware that the low TKW achondrite they
> want to buy is not so rare.
>
> I, of course, realize that TKW is only a small part of the story since what
> the collector really cares about is how much material is actually available
> outside in the market. However, updating the TKW or maybe creating a new
> category called "unofficial TKW" would go a long way to help.
>
> Regards,
>
> Mendy Ouzillou
>
>
>
>>________________________________
>> From: Jeff Grossman <jngrossman at gmail.com>
>>To: meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com
>>Sent: Friday, October 18, 2013 5:58 AM
>>Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Chelyabinsk trajectory modeling -- how
>> welldid we do? Part 1 of 2
>>
>>
>>It will, if and when we get an authoritative report.
>>
>>Jeff
>>
>>
>>On 10/17/2013 11:54 PM, Galactic Stone & Ironworks wrote:
>>> Will the Met Bulletin database entry be updated to reflect the new TKW
>>> that includes this large mass?
>>>
>>> The previous TKW shown in the Bulletin is 100kg and the following
>>> additional note in the write-up : "The total mass collected by local
>>> people is certainly >100 kg and perhaps > 500 kg."
>>>
>>> Best regards,
>>>
>>> MikeG
>>>
>>
>>______________________________________________
>>
>>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 Fri 18 Oct 2013 12:02:38 PM PDT