[meteorite-list] Kalahari lunar meteorite stones - photos

From: M come Meteorite Meteorites <info_at_meteoritecentral.com>
Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2007 06:17:29 +0200
Message-ID: <461c6159.20e.175b.704369695_at_webmailh3.aruba.it>

take a look to this photos

http://img407.imageshack.us/img407/3051/75951761pd4.jpg
http://img407.imageshack.us/img407/3605/24473791ff0.jpg

and look the Dhofar's lunar, its many similar, but is not
lunar...

Matteo

----- Original Message -----
Da : "Sterling K. Webb" <sterling_k_webb at sbcglobal.net>
A : "Meteorite List" <meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com>
Cc: Adam Hupe <raremeteorites at comcast.net>
Oggetto : Re: [meteorite-list] Kalahari lunar meteorite
stones - photos
Data : Tue, 10 Apr 2007 16:49:01 -0500

> Hi, Adam, Matteo, List
>
> It's a True Moon:
> "The regolith origin is also supported by the finding
> of solar wind implanted rare gases (L. Schultz, Mainz)."
>
> > No obvious crust
>
> It HAS a crust. A weird crust, but it's got one.
> Now, I'm a petrologico-idiot, so all I looked at was
> that weird crust. Look at the edges of the cut surfaces;
> the crust is so thin as to not show in places and where
> it does show on the edge, it is very thin, less than a
> millimeter.
> The crust is not dark, but appears virtually
> translucent. I would guess that it is entirely glassy.
> It's iron that makes crust dark, but the iron content of
> these babies is only 3.5%. Fully one-third of the stone is
> 2 parts silicon to 1 part calcium. That's a good formula
> for glass (sand and lime).
> My speculative nature also inclines me to think that
> the re-entry may have been unusually slow. The heating
> may have been "gentler" and the cooling more gradual.
> I search in vain for any indication of flow lines. Nope.
>
> > What makes this stone any different...?
>
> How many stones do you find that look like they
> were dipped in molten glass? I exclude natural glasses.
> Impactites are glasses themselves, although they're
> rife with clasts and junk. This is an "ordinary" chunk of
> apparently unremarkable basalt dipped in glass; you find
> many of those? (And, can I have them?) 8=)
>
> And before geologists jump all over me, I also exclude
> rocks found on the slopes of a volcano, in a limestone
> dripping cave, maybe even in some stream washouts...
> You're standing in a sand desert. There's a chuck of
> basalt with a thin glassy coat. Well, I'm suspicious.
>
> I posted before about the discarding of apparently
> valid meteorites that were sedimentary because they
> were "unacceptable." A large French stone was thrown
> away in the 1920's because it was "a basalt." There
> should be Venusites on Earth, say the dynamic studies,
> but would they too be passed by, ignored?
>
> Hunters! Get a big plastic garbage can, paint a "?"
> on it, toss the throw-away oddities in it. Give it time...
> Stack'em in the backyard in plastic milk crates. Use'em
> to edge your garden. Something.
>
>
> Sterling K. Webb
> ----------------------------------------------------------
> ------- ----- Original Message -----
> From: "M come Meteorite Meteorites"
> <info at mcomemeteorite.it> To: "Adam Hupe"
> <raremeteorites at yahoo.com>; "Adam"
> <meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com> Sent: Tuesday, April
> 10, 2007 2:44 PM Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Kalahari
> lunar meteorite stones - photos
>
>
> I agree with Adam, this material its many similar to a
> Quartz nodule pass for a lunar meteorite I have here in my
> meteorwrong collection...we are sure this 2 meteorites its
> real meteorites?
>
> Matteo
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> Da : Adam Hupe <raremeteorites at yahoo.com>
> A : Adam <meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com>
> Oggetto : Re: [meteorite-list] Kalahari lunar meteorite
> stones - photos
> Data : Tue, 10 Apr 2007 12:20:24 -0700 (PDT)
>
>
> #1
>
> > Wow,
> >
> > If I would have picked up these stones, I probably
> > would have thrown them back. I cannot see a single
> > indicator that these are planetary.
> >
> > No obvious crust
> > No indications of shock
> > No vesicles
> > and what looks like quartz
> >
> > Thanks for the images although I have learned not to
> > read too much from them. I normally do not comment on
> > images because I have been wrong in the past but felt
> > compelled in this case.
> >
> > All the Best,
> >
> > Adam
> >
> #2
>
> > Maybe I should go through my meteorite-wrong pile
> > again. I noticed they gave it a weathering grade of
> > 1. I thought metal had to be present in order to
> > qualify a weathering grade and that they are generally
> > not assigned to achondrites. The CRE age seems to be
> > no different than a rock that spent 300 years in the
> > desert.
>
> > What makes this stone any different than a terrestrial
> > impactite?
>
> Adam
>
>
>
> > ______________________________________________
> > Meteorite-list mailing list
> > Meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com
> > http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
> ______________________________________________
> Meteorite-list mailing list
> Meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com
> http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
>
> ______________________________________________
> Meteorite-list mailing list
> Meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com
> http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Received on Wed 11 Apr 2007 12:17:29 AM PDT