Re: [meteorite-list] [Fwd: RE: Specific Gravity Question]
Hi Dave, Father Guy's results are published in Meteoritics. I am at work now and can't look up the issue/s. Thanks, Peter __ 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] [Fwd: RE: Specific Gravity Question]
Hi, Dave, You should try actually reading the references that people give to help you with your question. If you had, you would have found the citation to the published data in about 30 seconds, just like I did: Consolmagno, G. J. and D. T. Britt, 1998, The Density and Porosity of Meteorites from the Vatican Collection, Meteoritics and Planetary Science, vol. 33, p. 1231-1241. Getting unpaid internet access to a scholarly journal is another matter, though. Sterling K. Webb -- - Original Message - From: "David Gunning" To: Cc: Sent: Thursday, September 30, 2010 7:08 AM Subject: [meteorite-list] [Fwd: RE: Specific Gravity Question] --- Original Message Subject: RE: [meteorite-list] Specific Gravity Question From:"David Gunning" Date:Thu, September 30, 2010 7:55 am To: "Peter Scherff" - Howdy, Thanks for the e-burp. There was no link, however, to the "published data for hundreds of meteorites", mentioned in your e-burp. Why allude to information that cannot be referenced and verified? While it's interesting to read of your specific gravity bead method, there are other less convoluted ways or dealing with the fear of potential contamination in meteorites and mineral samples, in general. What particularly interests me is exploring ways and utilizing lower tech methods that bring the ordinary collector into the the loop. Your suggested method would seem to exclude that possibility. Hi, Here is the way around contamination http://www.psrd.hawaii.edu/Aug99/densityMeasure.html. Guy Consolmagno has published data for hundreds of meteorites. Peter -Original Message- From: meteorite-list-boun...@meteoritecentral.com [mailto:meteorite-list-boun...@meteoritecentral.com] On Behalf Of David Gunning Sent: Thursday, September 30, 2010 6:46 AM To: meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com Cc: davidgunn...@fairpoint.net Subject: [meteorite-list] Specific Gravity Question Hi All, I'm a confessed specific gravity advocate for all things mineralogical, including meteorites. It seems to me that there is very little useful specific gravity information on the web concerning meteorites, with the singular exception of Randy L. Korotev', excellent website at Washington University in St. Louis; an informative website listing various specific gravity values for various meteorite types and classifications. It occurs to me that many people may not be taking specific gravity measurements of their meteorite specimens because of some sort of biased but unfounded fear of specimen contamination. Is this true? One of the benefits of measuring specific gravity is in being able to spot density anomalies in meteorites. For example, you procure a small meteorite specimen of a meteorite has been classified as an "L" ordinary stoney chondrite, with a range of specific gravity values, as found on Professor Korotev' s.g. list, of between 2.50 and 3.96 (with an average s.g. of 3.35). When you, yourself, measure the specific gravity of your L chondrite, and it's s.g. value comes in at 4.06, what does that mean? Would such a s.g. reading #1: be possible? And #2: be meaningful? Are meteorite specific gravity values exclusively constrained to the range of values that the scientists peg them at? And, if not, if actual specific gravity measurements cam occur outside the conventionally accepted range of values of the "experts", should anyone give a hoot one way or another? Best wishes, Dave Gunning __ 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 __ 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] [Fwd: RE: Specific Gravity Question]
One of the papers on density and porosity can be downloaded here: http://homepage.mac.com/brother_guy/.Public/Asteroid%20Densities.pdf directly from Brother Guy's webpages More references: CONSOLMAGNO G.J. et al. (1977) Composition and evolution of the eucrite parent body: evidence from rare earth elements (GCA 41, 1271-1282). BRITT D.T., CONSOLMAGNO G.J. (1996) Estimating porosities from bulk densities (abs. Meteoritics 31, 1996, A022). CONSOLMAGNO G.J. et al. (1996) Density and porosity measurements of the Vatican meteorite collection (abs. Meteoritics 31, 1996, A031). CONSOLMAGNO G.J. et al. (1997) Model porosities of chondrites and the nature of asteroidal material (MAPS32, Suppl., A031-A032). CONSOLMAGNO G.J. et al. (1998) Metamorphism, shock, and porosity: Why are there meteorites? (Meteoritics 33-4, 1998, A034). CONSOLMAGNO G.J. et al. (1998) The porosities of ordinary chondrites: Models and interpretation (MAPS 33-6, 1998, 1221). CONSOLMAGNO G.J. et al. (1998) The density and porosity of meteorites from the Vatican collection (MAPS 33-6, 1998, 1231-1241). Another paper on asteroid densities: http://adsabs.harvard.edu/full/1999M%26PS...34..479W Densities of Martian meteorites: http://gsa.confex.com/gsa/2002AM/finalprogram/abstract_40458.htm A short summary paper: http://www.lpi.usra.edu/meetings/metsoc2001/pdf/5171.pdf Sterling K. Webb - - Original Message - From: "David Gunning" To: Cc: Sent: Thursday, September 30, 2010 7:08 AM Subject: [meteorite-list] [Fwd: RE: Specific Gravity Question] --- Original Message Subject: RE: [meteorite-list] Specific Gravity Question From:"David Gunning" Date:Thu, September 30, 2010 7:55 am To: "Peter Scherff" - Howdy, Thanks for the e-burp. There was no link, however, to the "published data for hundreds of meteorites", mentioned in your e-burp. Why allude to information that cannot be referenced and verified? While it's interesting to read of your specific gravity bead method, there are other less convoluted ways or dealing with the fear of potential contamination in meteorites and mineral samples, in general. What particularly interests me is exploring ways and utilizing lower tech methods that bring the ordinary collector into the the loop. Your suggested method would seem to exclude that possibility. Hi, Here is the way around contamination http://www.psrd.hawaii.edu/Aug99/densityMeasure.html. Guy Consolmagno has published data for hundreds of meteorites. Peter -Original Message- From: meteorite-list-boun...@meteoritecentral.com [mailto:meteorite-list-boun...@meteoritecentral.com] On Behalf Of David Gunning Sent: Thursday, September 30, 2010 6:46 AM To: meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com Cc: davidgunn...@fairpoint.net Subject: [meteorite-list] Specific Gravity Question Hi All, I'm a confessed specific gravity advocate for all things mineralogical, including meteorites. It seems to me that there is very little useful specific gravity information on the web concerning meteorites, with the singular exception of Randy L. Korotev', excellent website at Washington University in St. Louis; an informative website listing various specific gravity values for various meteorite types and classifications. It occurs to me that many people may not be taking specific gravity measurements of their meteorite specimens because of some sort of biased but unfounded fear of specimen contamination. Is this true? One of the benefits of measuring specific gravity is in being able to spot density anomalies in meteorites. For example, you procure a small meteorite specimen of a meteorite has been classified as an "L" ordinary stoney chondrite, with a range of specific gravity values, as found on Professor Korotev' s.g. list, of between 2.50 and 3.96 (with an average s.g. of 3.35). When you, yourself, measure the specific gravity of your L chondrite, and it's s.g. value comes in at 4.06, what does that mean? Would such a s.g. reading #1: be possible? And #2: be meaningful? Are meteorite specific gravity values exclusively constrained to the range of values that the scientists peg them at? And, if not, if actual specific gravity measurements cam occur outside the conventionally accepted range of values of the "experts", should anyone give a hoot one way or another? Best wishes, Dave Gunning __ 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 M
Re: [meteorite-list] [Fwd: RE: Specific Gravity Question]
Hi Sterling, I've never declined to read any reference that's been offered for my additional understanding, on any subject matter. More to the point, you might ought to climb down from your high horse, for a minute, and actually read the actual intent of my question. My question centered around the idea of an individual taking their own specific gravity measurement of their own meteorites. I take it from your response that you would defer to Brother Consolmagno for any specific gravity measurements you might be curious about. Just because the good Brother is associated with the Vatican, I wonder, do you treat his findings as gospel? If so, good for you. Now, I am sure the good Brother is very exacting in his methods and measurements. I have no difficulty with that. Good for him! Most of his references, however, according to the links you provided, have to do with measuring the the grain bulk density of asteroids. That's quite a headful and a rarefied arena I would not presume to know much about. And has, for the most part, little, if any, practical application with actually measuring the specific gravity of meteorites. As may be, I think it's rather silly of you to compare measuring home grown specific gravity values of meteorites with measuring the bulk grain density of asteroids (or the bulk grain density of meteorites, for that matter). They are horses of different colors. One valuable insight I was able to glean from the good Brother's writing is when he suggests that his margin of error in his measurements is something on the order of plus or minus .07 percent, if I understand correctly. That agrees with my own estimation of a possible range of error for ordinary specific gravity measurements for meteorites. My stated interest has to do with common meteorites (if such a term may apply!) and how ordinary people might gain more insight into their own ordinary meteorites (to the extent that any meteorite can be thought of as being "ordinary"!) by utilizing traditionally proven time worn methods of measuring the specific gravity of their own space rocks. Is there something intrinsically wrong with wanting to do that? Glad tidings! Dave Gunning > Hi, Dave, > > You should try actually reading the references that > people give to help you with your question. If you > had, you would have found the citation to the published > data in about 30 seconds, just like I did: > > Consolmagno, G. J. and D. T. Britt, 1998, The Density > and Porosity of Meteorites from the Vatican Collection, > Meteoritics and Planetary Science, vol. 33, p. 1231-1241. > > Getting unpaid internet access to a scholarly journal is > another matter, though. > > > Sterling K. Webb > -- > - Original Message - > From: "David Gunning" > To: > Cc: > Sent: Thursday, September 30, 2010 7:08 AM > Subject: [meteorite-list] [Fwd: RE: Specific Gravity Question] > > >> --- Original >> Message >> Subject: RE: [meteorite-list] Specific Gravity Question >> From:"David Gunning" >> Date:Thu, September 30, 2010 7:55 am >> To: "Peter Scherff" >> - >> >> Howdy, >> >> Thanks for the e-burp. >> >> There was no link, however, to the "published data for hundreds of >> meteorites", mentioned in your e-burp. Why allude to information that >> cannot be referenced and verified? >> >> While it's interesting to read of your specific gravity bead method, >> there are other less convoluted ways or dealing with the fear of >> potential contamination in meteorites and mineral samples, in general. >> >> What particularly interests me is exploring ways and utilizing lower >> tech >> methods that bring the ordinary collector into the the loop. >> >> Your suggested method would seem to exclude that possibility. >> >> >> >>> Hi, >>> >>> Here is the way around contamination >>> http://www.psrd.hawaii.edu/Aug99/densityMeasure.html. Guy Consolmagno >>> has >>> published data for hundreds of meteorites. >>> >>> Peter >>> >>> -Original Message- >>> From: meteorite-list-boun...@meteoritecentral.com >>> [mailto:meteorite-list-boun...@meteoritecentral.com] On Behalf Of >>> David >>> Gunning >>> Sent: Thursday, September 30, 2010 6:46 AM >>> To: meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com >>> Cc: davidgunn...@fairpoint.net >>> Subject: [meteorite-list] Specific Gravity Question >>> >>> >>> Hi All, >>> >>> I'm a confessed specific gravity advocate for all things >>> mineralogical, >>> including meteorites. It seems to me that there is very little >>> useful >>> specific gravity information on the web concerning meteorites, with >>> the >>> singular exception of Randy L. Korotev', excellent website at >>> Washington >>> University in St. Louis; an informative website listing various >>> specific >>> gravity values for various meteorite types an
Re: [meteorite-list] [Fwd: RE: Specific Gravity Question]
Aloha, Thanks for the note. Yeah, that Brother Guy fellow is a rare bird. I am not so concerned with taking precise specific gravity value measurements (I've been doing that for years) so much as wanting to get the word out that there are ways of dealing with potential contamination issues, which seems to be the big bugaboo for most folks. The actual process of taking and achieving an exacting specific gravity measurement is so straight forward a child could do it. Appears to me that the willingness to measure specific gravity may be a reasonably accurate bellwether of whether a person is really, really interested in meteorites for what they are, and might be, as opposed to being used as mere lucrative commodities to be bought and sold. Such is life! Dave Gunning > Aloha - > > Just started looking through this: > > http://homepage.mac.com/brother_guy/.Public/Meteorite%20Densities.pdf > > and at the end, it has grain density And bulk density for a whole bunch > of meteorites, and meteorite classes... (yeah, it's got the porosity > data too...) > > In that listing, it doesn't give the sub-class of H / L / LL, but that > should be able to be looked up if you want to get finer information out > of this data. > > Now, this doesn't address how to do it at home, other than replicating > the process that they used (small glass beads - and all) > > Looked pretty interesting > > cheers = ted > > --- On Thu, 9/30/10, David Gunning wrote: > >> From: David Gunning >> Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] [Fwd: RE: Specific Gravity Question] >> To: "Sterling K. Webb" >> Cc: meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com >> Date: Thursday, September 30, 2010, 2:44 PM >> >> Hi Sterling, >> >> I've never declined to read any reference that's been >> offered for my >> additional understanding, on any subject matter. More >> to the point, you >> might ought to climb down from your high horse, for a >> minute, and >> actually read the actual intent of my question. >> >> My question centered around the idea of an individual >> taking their own >> specific gravity measurement of their own meteorites. >> >> I take it from your response that you would defer to >> Brother Consolmagno >> for any specific gravity measurements you might be curious >> about. Just >> because the good Brother is associated with the Vatican, I >> wonder, do you >> treat his findings as gospel? If so, good for you. >> >> Now, I am sure the good Brother is very exacting in his >> methods and >> measurements. I have no difficulty with that. Good >> for him! >> >> Most of his references, however, according to the links you >> provided, >> have to do with measuring the the grain bulk density of >> asteroids. >> That's quite a headful and a rarefied arena I would not >> presume to know >> much about. And has, for the most part, little, if >> any, practical >> application with actually measuring the specific gravity of >> meteorites. >> >> As may be, I think it's rather silly of you to compare >> measuring home >> grown specific gravity values of meteorites with measuring >> the bulk grain >> density of asteroids (or the bulk grain density of >> meteorites, for that >> matter). >> >> They are horses of different colors. >> >> One valuable insight I was able to glean from the good >> Brother's writing >> is when he suggests that his margin of error in his >> measurements is >> something on the order of plus or minus .07 percent, if I >> understand >> correctly. That agrees with my own estimation of a >> possible range of >> error for ordinary specific gravity measurements for >> meteorites. >> >> My stated interest has to do with common meteorites (if >> such a term may >> apply!) and how ordinary people might gain more insight >> into their own >> ordinary meteorites (to the extent that any meteorite can >> be thought of >> as being "ordinary"!) by utilizing traditionally proven >> time worn methods >> of measuring the specific gravity of their own space >> rocks. >> >> Is there something intrinsically wrong with wanting to do >> that? >> >> Glad tidings! >> >> Dave Gunning >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > Hi, Dave, >> > >> > You should try actually reading the references that >> > people give to help you with your question. If you >> >
