Re: [meteorite-list] Dumb Questions About Meteors Meteorites
Hi Erik, unfortunatly most of these balls are also anthropogenic pollution. Especially industries like coal-burning power plants, foundries and metal processing produces such spherical particles. That's why one has either to go in the stratosphere to collect micrometeorites or to use unpolluted sources like Antarctic wells or ice or sediments - from the times where there wasn't human pollution, to be able to isolate them. Especially in the late 70ies and early 80ies it was quite a fashion among the collectors to try to find micrometeorites by filtering rainwater. Best! Martin Stefan -Ursprüngliche Nachricht- Von: meteorite-list-boun...@meteoritecentral.com [mailto:meteorite-list-boun...@meteoritecentral.com] Im Auftrag von Erik Fisler Gesendet: Dienstag, 26. Januar 2010 08:34 An: meteorite-list Betreff: Re: [meteorite-list] Dumb Questions About Meteors Meteorites Eric, try this: One way to collect micrometeorites is to set a large shallow tray of water outside for a couple days. You should see some residue on the bottom in time. Cover a magnet with Saran wrap, wax paper or some other type of material. Pick up magnetic material in tray with your magnet and set on paper to dry. Observe material with a good- strong microscope. Some of what you see will be spherical balls- those are the micrometeorites. Steve from the nuggetshooter forum(http://www.nuggetshooter.ipbhost.com/index.php?showforum=4) posted that 2 years ago. There were great links and photos but the sites are long gone. I quote, If you're not having any luck hunting macrometeorites, try hunting micrometeorites. You'll never get skunked. Can someone with a microscope try this and post pictures if they can? [Erik] __ Visit the Archives at http://www.meteoritecentral.com/mailing-list-archives.html Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] Dumb Questions About Meteors Meteorites
Hi Robert, Sterling, Erik, Greg, Darren, ALL, Thanks for all the answers... I wanted to include a photo in my question. We're all familiar with Mike Hankey's now world famous PA fireball photo which just happened to catch the fragmentation of a large meteoroid as it was breaking up. This left many smoke trains in the air from each fragment.Now, even though no meteorites have yet to be recovered from this, there is a possibility there will be. But it brings up a question. This was an abnormal fireball and rather large but I've included another photo of a smaller Leonid meteor, with what appears to be a small smoke train emerging from the incandescence and entering dark flight. Take a look at this Leonid photo. As you can see after the incandescence there's a small smoke train shooting out from the tip of the meteor. Is that in fact the smoke train from the particle/meteoroid just before entering dark flight? Or was this just the last bit of the meteoroid burning up? Leonid: http://www.meteoritesusa.com/images/Leonid_Meteor-wikipedia-cc.jpg Leonid Closeup: http://www.meteoritesusa.com/images/Leonid_Meteor-wikipedia-cc-2.jpg Regards, Eric From: Meteorites USAe...@meteoritesusa.com Subject: [meteorite-list] Dumb Questions About Meteors Meteorites To: Meteorite-listmeteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com Date: Monday, January 25, 2010, 9:26 PM Hi Everyone, I'm not too sure how to broach the subject without stepping on toes, so I say this will all due respect to everyone who would be offended by the questions. I've been reading Meteorites by Caroline Smith, Sara Russell, and Gretchen Benedix, Firefly Books, 2009. Lovely book, with lots of information on meteorites, their origins, and composition, with loads of illustrations and great photography. As I was flipping through I found a mention about the total weight of meteoritic material which falls on our planet every year. On page 89 it states ...approximately 40,000-60,000 t of extraterrestrial material lands on Earth every year, the majority of which is in the form of tiny dust grains usually less than 1 mm (1/25 in) in size; importantly, most of this dust is believed to originate from comets... Doesn't this go against what science tells us about meteor showers? Don't the particles and sand-grain sized particles burn up in the atmosphere like science tells us they do? And if they don't burn up completely why does just about every text on meteors say they do? And if that the case, then how is it possible to weigh something that doesn't exist, anymore? I've read this in other places as well, some sources say that there is thousands of tons to millions of tons of meteoritic material landing on Earth every year. Yet... We all know that small dust to sand grain sized particles burn up high in the atmosphere, and there is debate on what it takes, or rather how large meteoroids must be to reach the ground and become meteorites. We know Asteroid 2008 TC3 was small but much larger than dust. So if a 3-6 meter asteroid can hit Earth, how small of a piece of debris can make it to Earth through the atmosphere? How big was Whetstone Mountain before entering our atmosphere? There was not much of that piece recovered, and the video showed 3 distinct fragments flying briefly through the field of view of the camera. West Texas was a daylight fireball seen from hundreds of miles away, and it produced a good bit of material. Buzzard Coulee too. These recent meteorite falls have been hunted by a large number of very professional meteorite hunters and scientists and yet the TKW of the falls are small except maybe the BC fall. Buzzard Coulee had a HUGE 13 kilo piece http://www.skyriver.ca/astro/bruce/marsden_meteorite%205.JPG that impacted the ground and hundreds of other smaller stones recovered. So how big does a meteoroid have to be to reach the ground? Do we really know? Regards, Eric Wichman Meteorites USA __ Visit the Archives at http://www.meteoritecentral.com/mailing-list-archives.html Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list __ Visit the Archives at http://www.meteoritecentral.com/mailing-list-archives.html Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] Dumb Questions About Meteors Meteorites
Take a look at this Leonid photo. As you can see after the incandescence there's a small smoke train shooting out from the tip of the meteor. Is that in fact the smoke train from the particle/meteoroid just before entering dark flight? Or was this just the last bit of the meteoroid burning up? I'd say it was just the last bit of the meteoroid burning up. It was dimming and the camera caught what little exposure it could at that point. GeoZay __ Visit the Archives at http://www.meteoritecentral.com/mailing-list-archives.html Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] Dumb Questions About Meteors Meteorites
You're just seeing incandescence from the last bit of meteoroid that hasn't survived the previous (four?) fragmentation events as well as the continuous ablation. I don't see any evidence in this photo of a smoke train at all. If one was produced, it would only be visible after the meteor faded away, and if the exposure continued on for at least a few seconds so the trail could start to disperse. Chris * Chris L Peterson Cloudbait Observatory http://www.cloudbait.com - Original Message - From: Meteorites USA e...@meteoritesusa.com Cc: meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com Sent: Tuesday, January 26, 2010 8:58 AM Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Dumb Questions About Meteors Meteorites Hi Robert, Sterling, Erik, Greg, Darren, ALL, Thanks for all the answers... I wanted to include a photo in my question. We're all familiar with Mike Hankey's now world famous PA fireball photo which just happened to catch the fragmentation of a large meteoroid as it was breaking up. This left many smoke trains in the air from each fragment.Now, even though no meteorites have yet to be recovered from this, there is a possibility there will be. But it brings up a question. This was an abnormal fireball and rather large but I've included another photo of a smaller Leonid meteor, with what appears to be a small smoke train emerging from the incandescence and entering dark flight. Take a look at this Leonid photo. As you can see after the incandescence there's a small smoke train shooting out from the tip of the meteor. Is that in fact the smoke train from the particle/meteoroid just before entering dark flight? Or was this just the last bit of the meteoroid burning up? Leonid: http://www.meteoritesusa.com/images/Leonid_Meteor-wikipedia-cc.jpg Leonid Closeup: http://www.meteoritesusa.com/images/Leonid_Meteor-wikipedia-cc-2.jpg Regards, Eric __ Visit the Archives at http://www.meteoritecentral.com/mailing-list-archives.html Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] Dumb Questions About Meteors Meteorites
I think it's the smoke left from the meteoroid as it cooled rapidly after incandescence, hence the reason for the tapering of the train. My theory is simple. As the meteoroid cooled (directly after incandescence) it produced less smoke, and therefore the train seems to taper to nothingness. The meteoroid is in fact still there, yet invisible to the camera. Also there is a certain squiggly nature to the trail suggesting an irregularly shaped object tumbling through the air. If it were still incandescent or in an oriented flight I would think the meteoroid would be flying a straighter path producing a cleaner trail. The irregular path, and tapering of the trail seems to me to suggest that the small thin trail is a smoke train and and not the meteoroid incandescence. Perhaps both? I've been a photographer for a LONG time, and depending on the shutter speed of the camera at the time of exposure, it's very possible that the trail is the smoke left by the meteoroid, left over time during exposure. Meteors are very fast, only a few hundredths of a second in duration, and if the shutter speed was say 1/30 second then you're looking at a mush longer span of time relative to the duration of the meteor. Therefore I would guess that what I'm looking at is smoke train, and not incandescence or plasma. It could be the blur of the object itself moving across the frame during the exposure however that since there are distortions in the symmetry of the trail this looks more like smoke dissipating than the streak left by the actual meteoroid, which would most likely be straighter with less distortion. Take a look at another enhanced version of the photo...Leonid Closeup: http://www.meteoritesusa.com/images/Leonid_Meteor-wikipedia-cc-3.jpg If this is the continued incandescence why is the trail not straight? Was the meteoroid still glowing hot thereby producing a visible light bright enough to be picked up by the camera? Eric On 1/26/2010 8:13 AM, geo...@aol.com wrote: Take a look at this Leonid photo. As you can see after the incandescence there's a small smoke train shooting out from the tip of the meteor. Is that in fact the smoke train from the particle/meteoroid just before entering dark flight? Or was this just the last bit of the meteoroid burning up? I'd say it was just the last bit of the meteoroid burning up. It was dimming and the camera caught what little exposure it could at that point. GeoZay __ Visit the Archives at http://www.meteoritecentral.com/mailing-list-archives.html Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list __ Visit the Archives at http://www.meteoritecentral.com/mailing-list-archives.html Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] Dumb Questions About Meteors Meteorites
Aloha Eric, I think it's the smoke left from the meteoroid as it cooled rapidly after incandescence, hence the reason for the tapering of the train. No smoke train in this photo - it is too early for any to develop (see Chris' post) Also there is a certain squiggly nature to the trail suggesting an irregularly shaped object tumbling through the air. If it were still incandescent or in an oriented flight I would think the meteoroid would be flying a straighter path producing a cleaner trail. The irregular path, and tapering of the trail seems to me to suggest that the small thin trail is a smoke train and and not the meteoroid incandescence. Perhaps both? Squiggly line is the last bit of material after ablation and just before dark flight, of a particle (from Comet Temple-Tuttle) tumbling through the air. Was the meteoroid still glowing hot thereby producing a visible light bright enough to be picked up by the camera? Yup. gary Eric On 1/26/2010 8:13 AM, geo...@aol.com wrote: Take a look at this Leonid photo. As you can see after the incandescence there's a small smoke train shooting out from the tip of the meteor. Is that in fact the smoke train from the particle/meteoroid just before entering dark flight? Or was this just the last bit of the meteoroid burning up? I'd say it was just the last bit of the meteoroid burning up. It was dimming and the camera caught what little exposure it could at that point. GeoZay __ Visit the Archives at http://www.meteoritecentral.com/mailing-list-archives.html Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list __ Visit the Archives at http://www.meteoritecentral.com/mailing-list-archives.html Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list Gary Fujihara Big Kahuna Meteorites (IMCA#1693) 105 Puhili Place, Hilo, Hawai'i 96720 http://bigkahuna-meteorites.com/ http://shop.ebay.com/fujmon/m.html (808) 640-9161 __ Visit the Archives at http://www.meteoritecentral.com/mailing-list-archives.html Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] Dumb Questions About Meteors Meteorites
If this is the continued incandescence why is the trail not straight? Was the meteoroid still glowing hot thereby producing a visible light bright enough to be picked up by the camera? In that area, the meteor probably wasn't bright enuf, for long enuf to be exposed in your camera. The lingering ionized train will have a longer time for exposure and show up without a meteor trails apparent presence. Your crooked trail appears to me to be the beginning of the ionized train distorting with the high altitude winds. As the train twists and turns, brighter spots presents itself for exposure...thus appearing crooked. This is something I had expected to see in Hankeys photograph, but don't. GeoZay __ Visit the Archives at http://www.meteoritecentral.com/mailing-list-archives.html Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] Dumb Questions About Meteors Meteorites
Thanks Chris, Gary, George, It appeared to be a smoke train at first glance... If the meteoroid was still glowing hot and producing light enough to be recorded by the camera, that would explain the trail and the squiggly nature produced by the irregular flight. I do have a question for Gary though. You mentioned it's too early for a smoke train to develop. How do you mean? If the particle is still there, it will rapidly cool to a point where it cannot produce smoke. When will such a meteoroid/particle produce a smoke train? Are we looking at both, the smoke and the after glow of the meteoroid? I would assume that if the meteoroid is still hot enough to glow, it would also be producing smoke, the camera could be capturing both the glow from the hot space rock and the smoke it emits. After looking at the photo closer I see the same waviness to the entire path as well. http://www.meteoritesusa.com/images/Leonid_Meteor-wikipedia-cc-4.jpg How many meteoroids actually reach the ground? I still don't see a solid answer on this. Eric On 1/26/2010 8:32 AM, Chris Peterson wrote: You're just seeing incandescence from the last bit of meteoroid that hasn't survived the previous (four?) fragmentation events as well as the continuous ablation. I don't see any evidence in this photo of a smoke train at all. If one was produced, it would only be visible after the meteor faded away, and if the exposure continued on for at least a few seconds so the trail could start to disperse. Chris * Chris L Peterson Cloudbait Observatory http://www.cloudbait.com - Original Message - From: Meteorites USA e...@meteoritesusa.com Cc: meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com Sent: Tuesday, January 26, 2010 8:58 AM Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Dumb Questions About Meteors Meteorites Hi Robert, Sterling, Erik, Greg, Darren, ALL, Thanks for all the answers... I wanted to include a photo in my question. We're all familiar with Mike Hankey's now world famous PA fireball photo which just happened to catch the fragmentation of a large meteoroid as it was breaking up. This left many smoke trains in the air from each fragment.Now, even though no meteorites have yet to be recovered from this, there is a possibility there will be. But it brings up a question. This was an abnormal fireball and rather large but I've included another photo of a smaller Leonid meteor, with what appears to be a small smoke train emerging from the incandescence and entering dark flight. Take a look at this Leonid photo. As you can see after the incandescence there's a small smoke train shooting out from the tip of the meteor. Is that in fact the smoke train from the particle/meteoroid just before entering dark flight? Or was this just the last bit of the meteoroid burning up? Leonid: http://www.meteoritesusa.com/images/Leonid_Meteor-wikipedia-cc.jpg Leonid Closeup: http://www.meteoritesusa.com/images/Leonid_Meteor-wikipedia-cc-2.jpg Regards, Eric __ Visit the Archives at http://www.meteoritecentral.com/mailing-list-archives.html Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list __ Visit the Archives at http://www.meteoritecentral.com/mailing-list-archives.html Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] Dumb Questions About Meteors Meteorites
In a message dated 1/26/2010 10:16:20 A.M. Pacific Standard Time, e...@meteoritesusa.com writes: After looking at the photo closer I see the same waviness to the entire path as well. That waviness is probably the ionized train just starting to distort in the high winds, after the meteors passage. geozay __ Visit the Archives at http://www.meteoritecentral.com/mailing-list-archives.html Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] Dumb Questions About Meteors Meteorites
On Mon, 25 Jan 2010 19:26:20 -0800, you wrote: atmosphere like science tells us they do? And if they don't burn up completely why does just about every text on meteors say they do? And if that the case, then how is it possible to weigh something that doesn't exist, anymore? I haven't noticed if someone addressed this point yet, but even if a micrometeorite does burn up, the atoms from which it was composed continue to exist, and their mass therefore has been added to the mass of the Earth+atmosphere, so it still exists. And burning is a chemical process (oh, heck, I'll just toss in a wikipedia link http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Combustion) and some components of a micrometeorite would possibly not chemically react and simply melt and form microscopic droplets that would solidify and eventually make their way to the ground. And even heavier elements that did chemically react (iron oxidizing, for instance) would form molicules that would eventually settle out of the atmosphere, being much heavier than normal atmospheric components. So, technically, the answer to how much of a meteorite (of whatever size) reaches the ground is almost all of it. Just not in a form that you would recognize. __ Visit the Archives at http://www.meteoritecentral.com/mailing-list-archives.html Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
[meteorite-list] Dumb Questions About Meteors Meteorites
Hi Everyone, I'm not too sure how to broach the subject without stepping on toes, so I say this will all due respect to everyone who would be offended by the questions. I've been reading Meteorites by Caroline Smith, Sara Russell, and Gretchen Benedix, Firefly Books, 2009. Lovely book, with lots of information on meteorites, their origins, and composition, with loads of illustrations and great photography. As I was flipping through I found a mention about the total weight of meteoritic material which falls on our planet every year. On page 89 it states ...approximately 40,000-60,000 t of extraterrestrial material lands on Earth every year, the majority of which is in the form of tiny dust grains usually less than 1 mm (1/25 in) in size; importantly, most of this dust is believed to originate from comets... Doesn't this go against what science tells us about meteor showers? Don't the particles and sand-grain sized particles burn up in the atmosphere like science tells us they do? And if they don't burn up completely why does just about every text on meteors say they do? And if that the case, then how is it possible to weigh something that doesn't exist, anymore? I've read this in other places as well, some sources say that there is thousands of tons to millions of tons of meteoritic material landing on Earth every year. Yet... We all know that small dust to sand grain sized particles burn up high in the atmosphere, and there is debate on what it takes, or rather how large meteoroids must be to reach the ground and become meteorites. We know Asteroid 2008 TC3 was small but much larger than dust. So if a 3-6 meter asteroid can hit Earth, how small of a piece of debris can make it to Earth through the atmosphere? How big was Whetstone Mountain before entering our atmosphere? There was not much of that piece recovered, and the video showed 3 distinct fragments flying briefly through the field of view of the camera. West Texas was a daylight fireball seen from hundreds of miles away, and it produced a good bit of material. Buzzard Coulee too. These recent meteorite falls have been hunted by a large number of very professional meteorite hunters and scientists and yet the TKW of the falls are small except maybe the BC fall. Buzzard Coulee had a HUGE 13 kilo piece http://www.skyriver.ca/astro/bruce/marsden_meteorite%205.JPG that impacted the ground and hundreds of other smaller stones recovered. So how big does a meteoroid have to be to reach the ground? Do we really know? Regards, Eric Wichman Meteorites USA __ Visit the Archives at http://www.meteoritecentral.com/mailing-list-archives.html Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] Dumb Questions About Meteors Meteorites
Hello Eric, I'm very sure others on the List will supply you with much better info in short order, but here are 3 quick quotes I found that states that very tiny micrometeorites make it through the atmosphere without burning up. I've read better explanations (it involves the ratio of surface area to weight) but I can't find it right now. Like I said, I know others will explain it better, but perhaps this will be of some interest to you: 1. A meteor, or shooting star is produced by the heating and vaporization of meteoroids which enter earth's atmosphere at high speeds. Most are about the size of a grain of sand. An average of about six per hour can be seen by a patient observer on a clear night. Several times as many may be seen during a meteor shower, when the earth encounters a swarm of meteoroids. 2. Meteorites are the remains of meteoroids which were large enough to survive the trip through the atmosphere, and thus reach the ground after a fiery descent. Micrometeorites are so small that they slow down before burning up, and land gently as dust particles. 3. Small meteors (about 1--10 grams in mass down to almost a nanogram (0.1 gram)) burn up in the Earth’s atmosphere before reaching the ground. Extremely small-sized particles (very fine dust) can make it through the atmosphere unmelted. Meteors larger than about 10 grams are partly melted, but the interior reaches Earth’s surface intact. Best wishes, Robert Woolard --- On Mon, 1/25/10, Meteorites USA e...@meteoritesusa.com wrote: From: Meteorites USA e...@meteoritesusa.com Subject: [meteorite-list] Dumb Questions About Meteors Meteorites To: Meteorite-list meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com Date: Monday, January 25, 2010, 9:26 PM Hi Everyone, I'm not too sure how to broach the subject without stepping on toes, so I say this will all due respect to everyone who would be offended by the questions. I've been reading Meteorites by Caroline Smith, Sara Russell, and Gretchen Benedix, Firefly Books, 2009. Lovely book, with lots of information on meteorites, their origins, and composition, with loads of illustrations and great photography. As I was flipping through I found a mention about the total weight of meteoritic material which falls on our planet every year. On page 89 it states ...approximately 40,000-60,000 t of extraterrestrial material lands on Earth every year, the majority of which is in the form of tiny dust grains usually less than 1 mm (1/25 in) in size; importantly, most of this dust is believed to originate from comets... Doesn't this go against what science tells us about meteor showers? Don't the particles and sand-grain sized particles burn up in the atmosphere like science tells us they do? And if they don't burn up completely why does just about every text on meteors say they do? And if that the case, then how is it possible to weigh something that doesn't exist, anymore? I've read this in other places as well, some sources say that there is thousands of tons to millions of tons of meteoritic material landing on Earth every year. Yet... We all know that small dust to sand grain sized particles burn up high in the atmosphere, and there is debate on what it takes, or rather how large meteoroids must be to reach the ground and become meteorites. We know Asteroid 2008 TC3 was small but much larger than dust. So if a 3-6 meter asteroid can hit Earth, how small of a piece of debris can make it to Earth through the atmosphere? How big was Whetstone Mountain before entering our atmosphere? There was not much of that piece recovered, and the video showed 3 distinct fragments flying briefly through the field of view of the camera. West Texas was a daylight fireball seen from hundreds of miles away, and it produced a good bit of material. Buzzard Coulee too. These recent meteorite falls have been hunted by a large number of very professional meteorite hunters and scientists and yet the TKW of the falls are small except maybe the BC fall. Buzzard Coulee had a HUGE 13 kilo piece http://www.skyriver.ca/astro/bruce/marsden_meteorite%205.JPG that impacted the ground and hundreds of other smaller stones recovered. So how big does a meteoroid have to be to reach the ground? Do we really know? Regards, Eric Wichman Meteorites USA __ Visit the Archives at http://www.meteoritecentral.com/mailing-list-archives.html Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list __ Visit the Archives at http://www.meteoritecentral.com/mailing-list-archives.html Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] Dumb Questions About Meteors Meteorites
Hi, Eric, The Earth collects dust. Not just from meteors and meteoroids burning up in the atmosphere but directly from space. The Earth gravitationally collects solar wind particles, zodaical dust, interplanetary dust, interstellar dust, cometary dust, dust from a variety of sources. Whoops! I left out intergalactic dust... Dust falls in slowly and takes months (or years) to settle to the surface. It can be measured in the layers of ocean sediments and icecap cores. How much dust accumulates is hard to measure, so the amount has been a long-running question. Here's a really good discussion of the dust question: http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/moon-dust.html although it's in the context of an age of the Earth argument with Creationists. Interplanetary dust is hard to analyse because it's so tiny: http://www.meteoriticalsociety.org/simple_template.cfm?code=resources_dustCFID=4156261CFTOKEN=70584526 Here's an interview with Don Brownlee (Mr. Dust): http://euro.astrobio.net/interview/742/extraterrestrial-capture A good summary of all the kinds of dust from out there: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cosmic_dust Or, just Google interplanetary dust and you will find many, many sources of information on dust infall: http://www.google.com/search?hl=enq=interplanetary+dust+aq=faql=aqi=oq= then Google interstellar dust and Google zodaical dust and... Space is dusty. The Earth is dusty. And best of all, the Internet is dusty. Lots of information out there. Best of all, you can collect rainwater, then extract the metallic dust from it with magnets. Most of the dust will be human produced smoke dust, but the tiny dull metallic spheres are probably cosmic dust. Every time you walk out the door, you're stepping on cosmic dust. It's everywhere. If you spend a fair amount of time out in the open air, you probably have some cosmic dust incorporated into your body. I'm going to stop now, before I start singing that Joni Mitchell song... Sterling K. Webb -- - Original Message - From: Meteorites USA e...@meteoritesusa.com To: Meteorite-list meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com Sent: Monday, January 25, 2010 9:26 PM Subject: [meteorite-list] Dumb Questions About Meteors Meteorites Hi Everyone, I'm not too sure how to broach the subject without stepping on toes, so I say this will all due respect to everyone who would be offended by the questions. I've been reading Meteorites by Caroline Smith, Sara Russell, and Gretchen Benedix, Firefly Books, 2009. Lovely book, with lots of information on meteorites, their origins, and composition, with loads of illustrations and great photography. As I was flipping through I found a mention about the total weight of meteoritic material which falls on our planet every year. On page 89 it states ...approximately 40,000-60,000 t of extraterrestrial material lands on Earth every year, the majority of which is in the form of tiny dust grains usually less than 1 mm (1/25 in) in size; importantly, most of this dust is believed to originate from comets... Doesn't this go against what science tells us about meteor showers? Don't the particles and sand-grain sized particles burn up in the atmosphere like science tells us they do? And if they don't burn up completely why does just about every text on meteors say they do? And if that the case, then how is it possible to weigh something that doesn't exist, anymore? I've read this in other places as well, some sources say that there is thousands of tons to millions of tons of meteoritic material landing on Earth every year. Yet... We all know that small dust to sand grain sized particles burn up high in the atmosphere, and there is debate on what it takes, or rather how large meteoroids must be to reach the ground and become meteorites. We know Asteroid 2008 TC3 was small but much larger than dust. So if a 3-6 meter asteroid can hit Earth, how small of a piece of debris can make it to Earth through the atmosphere? How big was Whetstone Mountain before entering our atmosphere? There was not much of that piece recovered, and the video showed 3 distinct fragments flying briefly through the field of view of the camera. West Texas was a daylight fireball seen from hundreds of miles away, and it produced a good bit of material. Buzzard Coulee too. These recent meteorite falls have been hunted by a large number of very professional meteorite hunters and scientists and yet the TKW of the falls are small except maybe the BC fall. Buzzard Coulee had a HUGE 13 kilo piece http://www.skyriver.ca/astro/bruce/marsden_meteorite%205.JPG that impacted the ground and hundreds of other smaller stones recovered. So how big does a meteoroid have to be to reach the ground? Do we really know? Regards, Eric Wichman Meteorites USA __ Visit the Archives at http://www.meteoritecentral.com/mailing
Re: [meteorite-list] Dumb Questions About Meteors Meteorites
Hi Sterling, I always enjoy your 'down-to-earth' reasoning! Thank you! :-) Greg Greg Hupe The Hupe Collection NaturesVault (eBay) gmh...@htn.net www.LunarRock.com IMCA 3163 Click here for my current eBay auctions: http://search.ebay.com/_W0QQsassZnaturesvault - Original Message - From: Sterling K. Webb sterling_k_w...@sbcglobal.net To: Meteorites USA e...@meteoritesusa.com; Meteorite-list meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com Sent: Tuesday, January 26, 2010 1:05 AM Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Dumb Questions About Meteors Meteorites Hi, Eric, The Earth collects dust. Not just from meteors and meteoroids burning up in the atmosphere but directly from space. The Earth gravitationally collects solar wind particles, zodaical dust, interplanetary dust, interstellar dust, cometary dust, dust from a variety of sources. Whoops! I left out intergalactic dust... Dust falls in slowly and takes months (or years) to settle to the surface. It can be measured in the layers of ocean sediments and icecap cores. How much dust accumulates is hard to measure, so the amount has been a long-running question. Here's a really good discussion of the dust question: http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/moon-dust.html although it's in the context of an age of the Earth argument with Creationists. Interplanetary dust is hard to analyse because it's so tiny: http://www.meteoriticalsociety.org/simple_template.cfm?code=resources_dustCFID=4156261CFTOKEN=70584526 Here's an interview with Don Brownlee (Mr. Dust): http://euro.astrobio.net/interview/742/extraterrestrial-capture A good summary of all the kinds of dust from out there: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cosmic_dust Or, just Google interplanetary dust and you will find many, many sources of information on dust infall: http://www.google.com/search?hl=enq=interplanetary+dust+aq=faql=aqi=oq= then Google interstellar dust and Google zodaical dust and... Space is dusty. The Earth is dusty. And best of all, the Internet is dusty. Lots of information out there. Best of all, you can collect rainwater, then extract the metallic dust from it with magnets. Most of the dust will be human produced smoke dust, but the tiny dull metallic spheres are probably cosmic dust. Every time you walk out the door, you're stepping on cosmic dust. It's everywhere. If you spend a fair amount of time out in the open air, you probably have some cosmic dust incorporated into your body. I'm going to stop now, before I start singing that Joni Mitchell song... Sterling K. Webb -- - Original Message - From: Meteorites USA e...@meteoritesusa.com To: Meteorite-list meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com Sent: Monday, January 25, 2010 9:26 PM Subject: [meteorite-list] Dumb Questions About Meteors Meteorites Hi Everyone, I'm not too sure how to broach the subject without stepping on toes, so I say this will all due respect to everyone who would be offended by the questions. I've been reading Meteorites by Caroline Smith, Sara Russell, and Gretchen Benedix, Firefly Books, 2009. Lovely book, with lots of information on meteorites, their origins, and composition, with loads of illustrations and great photography. As I was flipping through I found a mention about the total weight of meteoritic material which falls on our planet every year. On page 89 it states ...approximately 40,000-60,000 t of extraterrestrial material lands on Earth every year, the majority of which is in the form of tiny dust grains usually less than 1 mm (1/25 in) in size; importantly, most of this dust is believed to originate from comets... Doesn't this go against what science tells us about meteor showers? Don't the particles and sand-grain sized particles burn up in the atmosphere like science tells us they do? And if they don't burn up completely why does just about every text on meteors say they do? And if that the case, then how is it possible to weigh something that doesn't exist, anymore? I've read this in other places as well, some sources say that there is thousands of tons to millions of tons of meteoritic material landing on Earth every year. Yet... We all know that small dust to sand grain sized particles burn up high in the atmosphere, and there is debate on what it takes, or rather how large meteoroids must be to reach the ground and become meteorites. We know Asteroid 2008 TC3 was small but much larger than dust. So if a 3-6 meter asteroid can hit Earth, how small of a piece of debris can make it to Earth through the atmosphere? How big was Whetstone Mountain before entering our atmosphere? There was not much of that piece recovered, and the video showed 3 distinct fragments flying briefly through the field of view of the camera. West Texas was a daylight fireball seen from hundreds of miles away, and it produced a good bit of material. Buzzard Coulee
Re: [meteorite-list] Dumb Questions About Meteors Meteorites
Eric, try this: One way to collect micrometeorites is to set a large shallow tray of water outside for a couple days. You should see some residue on the bottom in time. Cover a magnet with Saran wrap, wax paper or some other type of material. Pick up magnetic material in tray with your magnet and set on paper to dry. Observe material with a good- strong microscope. Some of what you see will be spherical balls- those are the micrometeorites. Steve from the nuggetshooter forum(http://www.nuggetshooter.ipbhost.com/index.php?showforum=4) posted that 2 years ago. There were great links and photos but the sites are long gone. I quote, If you're not having any luck hunting macrometeorites, try hunting micrometeorites. You'll never get skunked. Can someone with a microscope try this and post pictures if they can? [Erik] From: gmh...@htn.net To: sterling_k_w...@sbcglobal.net Date: Tue, 26 Jan 2010 01:22:09 -0500 CC: meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Dumb Questions About Meteors Meteorites Hi Sterling, I always enjoy your 'down-to-earth' reasoning! Thank you! :-) Greg Greg Hupe The Hupe Collection NaturesVault (eBay) gmh...@htn.net www.LunarRock.com IMCA 3163 Click here for my current eBay auctions: http://search.ebay.com/_W0QQsassZnaturesvault - Original Message - From: Sterling K. Webb To: Meteorites USA ; Meteorite-list Sent: Tuesday, January 26, 2010 1:05 AM Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Dumb Questions About Meteors Meteorites Hi, Eric, The Earth collects dust. Not just from meteors and meteoroids burning up in the atmosphere but directly from space. The Earth gravitationally collects solar wind particles, zodaical dust, interplanetary dust, interstellar dust, cometary dust, dust from a variety of sources. Whoops! I left out intergalactic dust... Dust falls in slowly and takes months (or years) to settle to the surface. It can be measured in the layers of ocean sediments and icecap cores. How much dust accumulates is hard to measure, so the amount has been a long-running question. Here's a really good discussion of the dust question: http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/moon-dust.html although it's in the context of an age of the Earth argument with Creationists. Interplanetary dust is hard to analyse because it's so tiny: http://www.meteoriticalsociety.org/simple_template.cfm?code=resources_dustCFID=4156261CFTOKEN=70584526 Here's an interview with Don Brownlee (Mr. Dust): http://euro.astrobio.net/interview/742/extraterrestrial-capture A good summary of all the kinds of dust from out there: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cosmic_dust Or, just Google interplanetary dust and you will find many, many sources of information on dust infall: http://www.google.com/search?hl=enq=interplanetary+dust+aq=faql=aqi=oq= then Google interstellar dust and Google zodaical dust and... Space is dusty. The Earth is dusty. And best of all, the Internet is dusty. Lots of information out there. Best of all, you can collect rainwater, then extract the metallic dust from it with magnets. Most of the dust will be human produced smoke dust, but the tiny dull metallic spheres are probably cosmic dust. Every time you walk out the door, you're stepping on cosmic dust. It's everywhere. If you spend a fair amount of time out in the open air, you probably have some cosmic dust incorporated into your body. I'm going to stop now, before I start singing that Joni Mitchell song... Sterling K. Webb -- - Original Message - From: Meteorites USA To: Meteorite-list Sent: Monday, January 25, 2010 9:26 PM Subject: [meteorite-list] Dumb Questions About Meteors Meteorites Hi Everyone, I'm not too sure how to broach the subject without stepping on toes, so I say this will all due respect to everyone who would be offended by the questions. I've been reading Meteorites by Caroline Smith, Sara Russell, and Gretchen Benedix, Firefly Books, 2009. Lovely book, with lots of information on meteorites, their origins, and composition, with loads of illustrations and great photography. As I was flipping through I found a mention about the total weight of meteoritic material which falls on our planet every year. On page 89 it states ...approximately 40,000-60,000 t of extraterrestrial material lands on Earth every year, the majority of which is in the form of tiny dust grains usually less than 1 mm (1/25 in) in size; importantly, most of this dust is believed to originate from comets... Doesn't this go against what science tells us about meteor showers? Don't the particles and sand-grain sized particles burn up in the atmosphere like science tells us they do? And if they don't burn up completely why does just about every text on meteors say they do
