Re: [meteorite-list] Chelyabinsk - IMB or SMB? The nomenclature of Melts.
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 jimwoodd...@gmail.com An: Meteorite List meteorite-list@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 ouzil...@yahoo.com wrote: where can one read this paper? Best, Mendy From: Jim Wooddell jimwoodd...@gmail.com To: Meteorite List meteorite-list@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 timeactually 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 jimwoodd...@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 i...@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-boun...@meteoritecentral.com [mailto:meteorite-list-boun...@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 - __
Re: [meteorite-list] Chelyabinsk - IMB or SMB? The nomenclature of Melts.
In classification I think there is this: Impact melt breccias = Shock melted rocks with unmelted clasts Impact melt breccia clasts = Clasts of impact melts with enclosed unmelted debris Impact melt clasts = Fragments solely of impact melt (Ref: http://www.lpi.usra.edu/books/MESSII/9013.pdf) When the term shock-melt appears is in the description of components... there is evidence of shock melt. the are numerous shock melt veins. Jim On Fri, Apr 26, 2013 at 3:40 AM, plagiok...@arcor.de wrote: 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 jimwoodd...@gmail.com An: Meteorite List meteorite-list@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 ouzil...@yahoo.com wrote: where can one read this paper? Best, Mendy From: Jim Wooddell jimwoodd...@gmail.com To: Meteorite List meteorite-list@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 timeactually 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 jimwoodd...@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 i...@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-boun...@meteoritecentral.com [mailto:meteorite-list-boun...@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
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 timeactually 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 jimwoodd...@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 i...@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-boun...@meteoritecentral.com [mailto:meteorite-list-boun...@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@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 -- Jim Wooddell jimwoodd...@gmail.com 928-247-2675 -- Jim Wooddell jimwoodd...@gmail.com 928-247-2675 __ 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
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 ouzil...@yahoo.com wrote: where can one read this paper? Best, Mendy From: Jim Wooddell jimwoodd...@gmail.com To: Meteorite List meteorite-list@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 timeactually 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 jimwoodd...@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 i...@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-boun...@meteoritecentral.com [mailto:meteorite-list-boun...@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@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 -- Jim Wooddell jimwoodd...@gmail.com 928-247-2675 -- Jim Wooddell jimwoodd...@gmail.com 928-247-2675 __ Visit the Archives at http://www.meteorite-list-archives.com Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com
[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@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] Chelyabinsk - IMB or SMB? The nomenclature of Melts.
The meteorite is an IMB. These nodules being harder than the matrix were separated into individuals when the meteorite exploded. They are like thousands of Cat Mountains. Michael Farmer Sent from my iPhone On Apr 25, 2013, at 6:41 AM, Galactic Stone Ironworks meteoritem...@gmail.com wrote: 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@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
Re: [meteorite-list] Chelyabinsk - IMB or SMB? The nomenclature of Melts.
Hi Mike and List, Ok, so these nodules were present in the meteoroid before it fell to Earth. The body contained these nodules, and they separated from the body during the mid-air explosions. That is where I was confused. I thought that the nodules were created during the explosions. Stupid question now - how can we tell if the nodules were present before the explosions or were created during the explosions? Best regards, MikeG On 4/24/13, Michael Farmer m...@meteoriteguy.com wrote: The meteorite is an IMB. These nodules being harder than the matrix were separated into individuals when the meteorite exploded. They are like thousands of Cat Mountains. Michael Farmer Sent from my iPhone On Apr 25, 2013, at 6:41 AM, Galactic Stone Ironworks meteoritem...@gmail.com wrote: 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@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list -- - 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@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] Chelyabinsk - IMB or SMB? The nomenclature of Melts.
The explosions in the atmosphere destroy the meteorite, it does not affect the makeup other than destruction or making fusion crust. Michael Farmer Sent from my iPhone On Apr 25, 2013, at 7:00 AM, Galactic Stone Ironworks meteoritem...@gmail.com wrote: Hi Mike and List, Ok, so these nodules were present in the meteoroid before it fell to Earth. The body contained these nodules, and they separated from the body during the mid-air explosions. That is where I was confused. I thought that the nodules were created during the explosions. Stupid question now - how can we tell if the nodules were present before the explosions or were created during the explosions? Best regards, MikeG On 4/24/13, Michael Farmer m...@meteoriteguy.com wrote: The meteorite is an IMB. These nodules being harder than the matrix were separated into individuals when the meteorite exploded. They are like thousands of Cat Mountains. Michael Farmer Sent from my iPhone On Apr 25, 2013, at 6:41 AM, Galactic Stone Ironworks meteoritem...@gmail.com wrote: 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@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list -- - 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@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] Chelyabinsk - IMB or SMB? The nomenclature of Melts.
I did not say they all separated:) but many did, and they are mostly devoid of fusion crust and totally different than the more chondritic material. Amazing meteorite. Thins sections should beautiful. Sent from my iPhone On Apr 25, 2013, at 7:20 AM, Anne Black impact...@aol.com wrote: Sorry but those nodules did not always separate from the matrix. And they are entirely feature-less. As proof here is a slice with both lithologies (thank you Serge!) http://www.impactika.com/chely-slice.jpg Sorry, not for sale, will be made into thin-sections (large ones with both lithologies). Anne M. Black www.IMPACTIKA.com impact...@aol.com -Original Message- From: Michael Farmer m...@meteoriteguy.com To: Galactic Stone Ironworks meteoritem...@gmail.com Cc: Meteorite List meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com Sent: Wed, Apr 24, 2013 6:55 pm Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Chelyabinsk - IMB or SMB? The nomenclature of Melts. The meteorite is an IMB. These nodules being harder than the matrix were separated into individuals when the meteorite exploded. They are like thousands of Cat Mountains. Michael Farmer Sent from my iPhone On Apr 25, 2013, at 6:41 AM, Galactic Stone Ironworks meteoritem...@gmail.com wrote: 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@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 __ 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
Re: [meteorite-list] Chelyabinsk - IMB or SMB? The nomenclature of Melts.
Jeff and Anne I agree about the melt. I noticed a piece were it was black all the way through and when I spoke with who I got the sample from, I was told it was melt, and from my understanding that was cause through impaction in space with other asteroids, and also Mike had also made a point how Chelyabinsk melt can be simular to Cat Mountain. I also notice that the melt is hard to break up, but the magnetic properties is the sample with non melt and melt samples I have. It will be exciting to see how many impacts can be examined from the melt :) Shawn Alan IMCA 1633 ebay store http://www.ebay.com/sch/imca1633ny/m.html http://meteoritefalls.com/ - Original Message - From: Jeff Kuyken i...@meteorites.com.au To: 'Meteorite List' meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com Cc: Sent: Wednesday, April 24, 2013 10:53 PM Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Chelyabinsk - IMB or SMB? The nomenclature of Melts. 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-boun...@meteoritecentral.com [mailto:meteorite-list-boun...@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@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 __ 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
Re: [meteorite-list] Chelyabinsk - IMB or SMB? The nomenclature of Melts.
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. On Wed, Apr 24, 2013 at 8:24 PM, Jim Wooddell jimwoodd...@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 i...@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-boun...@meteoritecentral.com [mailto:meteorite-list-boun...@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@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 -- Jim Wooddell jimwoodd...@gmail.com 928-247-2675 -- Jim Wooddell jimwoodd...@gmail.com 928-247-2675 __ 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
