I always want a doubly-polished thin section to do classification of stony
meteorites. To determine the petrologic type of a chondrite, it is useful
to gauge the degree of recrystallization (best done in transmitted light)
and look for the size of plagioclase grains (which can be done in an SEM,
BSE mode of an electron microprobe, and in reflected light, since
plagioclase is a darker gray than olivine or pyroxene). To assess the
degree of weathering, reflected light is most useful. The probe, of course,
will give you the olivine, pyroxene, plagioclase, kamacite, etc.
compositions. But in general, in order to get a feel for a stony meteorite
(in terms of shock, brecciation, recrystallization, abundance of matrix
material, etc.), I want to be able to use the probe and see the rock in
transmitted and reflected light. I can also then probe interesting features
that reveal themselves with the petrographic microscope. I don't worry so
much about the fuzzy line between classification and research.
Alan
Alan Rubin
Institute of Geophysics and Planetary Physics
University of California
3845 Slichter Hall
603 Charles Young Dr. E
Los Angeles, CA 90095-1567
phone: 310-825-3202
e-mail: aeru...@ucla.edu
website: http://cosmochemists.igpp.ucla.edu/Rubin.html
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jim Wooddell" <jim.woodd...@suddenlink.net>
To: <meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com>
Sent: Monday, January 06, 2014 7:57 AM
Subject: [meteorite-list] What is more important in classification?
Hi all!
Just a few general questions...
The involves a mount and a thin section.
What is more important now-a-days in classification? This mainly revolves
some questions I have that I am
not sure how to ask...mainly to those that classify.
If you have a million dollar Scanning Election Microscope and can probe
around and
can determine classification from the geochem and BSE images, how
important is it to see the transmitted and reflected features in a
petrographic microscope?
I suppose my thoughts and questions are possibly in reference to new
technology vs. old
technology....maybe not...but close and really deeper than just yes and no
answers. Not that SEM's are new technology...just saying.
I was told a while back you can not classify without both. So Why??? Are
the SEM's not capable of doing what
a petrographic microscope can do?
Thanks!
Jim
--
Jim Wooddell
jim.woodd...@suddenlink.net
http://pages.suddenlink.net/chondrule/
______________________________________________
Visit the Archives at http://www.meteorite-list-archives.com
Meteorite-list mailing list
Meteorite-list@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@meteoritecentral.com
http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
