[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Smitshonian exhibit is open

Just saw the exhibit at Smithonian.  YTour discription is excellent.  I was
impressed with the pallasites and the Bencubbin.   It probably not as good
as NYC Museum of Natural history.  I have always resented the  Smith having
sooo much put away in storage.  Each exhibit is just as a shadow of the
material they have.  The public that pays for the place to be there never
see 10% or it.
Ken Carpenter 

----------
> From: Calvin Shipbaugh 
> To: meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com
> Subject: Smitshonian exhibit is open
> Date: Tuesday, December 09, 1997 9:22 PM
> 
> I just came back from a brief visit to the recently re-opened meteorite
> exhibit at the Smithsonian.  (Can one ever spend enough time among
> meteorites?) I would like to share my personal impressions with this
> list, and invite anyone else fortunate enough to have visited the hall
> to chime in with their observations and opinions. 
> 
> There was a number of good points to the exhibit (e.g., audiovisual
> displays about Chicxulub or the early history of the solar system) but
> also a few disappointments.  The taxonomy chart of meteorites didn't
> even list brachinites under the various achondite groupings.  The Tuscon
> ring and anvil were off in a separate side room with the Hope diamond!!
> This can be a bad thing if your main interest in visiting the Natural
> History museum is to observe the meteorites -- I nearly missed the
> Tucson wonders -- but it can be a good thing in the sense that more of
> the public is likely to see the ataxites in the corner once they pry
> their eyes off the Hope diamond spectacle in the center.  There could
> have been a more interesting display on the history of this meteorite. 
> Who should want to stare at a blue diamond when greater wonders are
> present?
> 
> As you first enter the exhibit, a vial containing microdiamonds in
> solution from a thumb sized Allende grabs your attention.  To the left
> begins a series of display cases starting with Allende ranging from a
> few dozen grams (I estimate) to one the size of a very large potato.  No
> huge Allende was on display.  Scattered around the cases was Murchison,
> Murray, Mighei, Orgueill, Ivuna, and other carbonaceous chondrites
> including CRs.
> 
> They had several large sized irons wieghing at least hundreds of pounds
> for the public to touch including the visually and tactilely impressive
> Goose Lake. If the precise weights were given at the display this was
> not immediately obvious to me. There was a huge slice of Mundrabilla
> behind glass, a wonder to behold with its plentiful inclusions.
> 
> About half of the SNCs were represented. Allan Hills 84001 was present
> of course, sealed in a clear box even within the glass wall. They have a
> polished Nakhla you can touch (but it was so slick that I couldn't
> figure out if I was touching it or a protective coating).  They had most
> of the Lafayette intact, and was it ever impressive- a beautiful
> oriented shield with shiny black crust and enormous radial flow lines. 
> Wow!  There was also an Antarctic shergottite that was very light toned
> in contrast to the gray of Zagami.  Explanations, anyone?
> 
> There were a number of well preserved polished slabs of pallasite-
> Thiels Mnt caught my eye, as did Otinapa.  Their Esquel was fairly big
> but looked ho-hum to me; it is much prettier when thinly prepared and
> well back-lit.  There were separate samples of Brenham to demonstrate
> both the olivine-sparse and olivine-rich aspects of this single
> meteorite.  Many slabs of mesosiderite could be seen, including Emery. 
> There was also a large piece of the intriguing Bencubbin stoney-iron.
> 
> There were of course many ordinary chondrites including Ensisheim,
> Peekskill, and a large Mbale displaying both reasonably fresh crust and
> gray interior.  An enjoyable part of the display mixed meteorites with
> meteorwrongs and let you guess at which was which.  I hope everyone
> reading passes this test.
> 
> Of course, it would not be the Smithsonian without a section on moon
> rocks.  Included was a case of the sort used by the Apollo astronauts to
> bring back samples.  One wonders just how pristine the samples were when
> delivered to the lab.
>  
> The tektite display naturally focused on the impact theory.  Their best
> rizalite on display was not as impressive as several in private
> collections. They had some big splash forms from Indochina, and a very
> large Muong Nong.  If you have never seen Billitonites, this is your
> chance.  They had a number of flanged Australites including the barbell
> shape as well as the better known button.  Although I did not see a
> bediasite, there were four large Georgia tektites.  Another rarity was a
> set of five shiny Ivory Coast tektites.  There was a magnifier
> displaying a collection of microtektites.  Fortunately for my eyes,
> there was also a good photograph beside this.
> 
> It was obvious from conspicuous absences that much of the collection was
> not present and the curator no doubt had to make many hard choices about
> which specimens would get floor space.  There was a good mix of science
> and aesthetics in this exhibit, and perhaps not enough attention to
> history. All in all, I would highly recommend that any meteoritophile
> visit the Smithsonian exhibit given a chance- despite some shortcomings,
> I give it a very commendable "A".