[meteorite-list] Carancas Bull

From: Darryl Pitt <darryl_at_meteoritecentral.com>
Date: Sun, 15 Mar 2009 20:27:28 -0400
Message-ID: <DD3B71B3-D1D3-4E53-BF81-3A09213B9194_at_dof3.com>

fair enough.

taking a page from sterling, we've got this covered.

and i just laughed out loud re your product placement.

thanks again for being so gracious, walter.

d,



On Mar 15, 2009, at 7:59 PM, Walter Branch wrote:

> The problem is where you draw the distinction.
> What about a person or animal who is not killed by the shock wave
> but may by thrown the ground, either by compressed air or ground
> movement? Would that meteorite be considered a "hammer?"
>
> What about sound waves that travel through the air as a meteorite
> flies overhead and reach a human eardrum, thus producing a "sound?"
> Technically, the compressed air impacted a human eardrum, so would
> that meteorite be considered a "hammer."
>
> What about a clod of dirt thrown up in the impact, hitting someone's
> shoe?
>
> Speaking only for myself, I draw a distinction between a person,
> animal or man-made object who is actually hit, or makes physical
> contact with the meteorite vs. not. Nothing, more.
>
> Besides, one could also argue that neither the blast wave nor the
> bomb actually killed our hypothetical person. It was the bomber who
> actually killed the person. Then we open up another can of worms,
> so-to-speak.
>
> Keep it simple. Did the meteorite itself actually hit something?
>
> My advert: Above fueled by fruit punch from ye old Piggly Wiggly
> (it's a grocery store chain here in the southeast US)
>
> No foolin' :-)
>
>
> -Walter
>
>
> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Darryl Pitt" <darryl at dof3.com>
> To: "Bob Loeffler" <bobl at peaktopeak.com>
> Cc: "Meteorite List" <meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com>
> Sent: Sunday, March 15, 2009 3:03 PM
> Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Carancas Bull
>
>
>
> Hi Bob...
>
> Bomb blasts were introduced as a way of ramping into a discussion of
> shock waves. Be it a bomb or an extraterrestrial impact, we're
> talking about the rapid compression of environmental air pressure.
>
> Let's look at Meteor Crater as an example. The impactor was a
> fraction of the size of the crater; the volume of the crater was
> primarily the result of shock waves; and we refer to the impact having
> been responsible for the entire crater.
>
> In fact Meteor Crater is of course referred to as an IMPACT crater. No
> one makes the distinction of what aspect of the crater touched the
> molecules of the impactor.
>
> Returning to Carancas, I don't understand the distinction that a
> bull---real or imagined---isn't considered "impacted" by the very same
> shock waves responsible for the overall size of the "impact crater."
> It's revealing that a casualty which results from shock waves created
> by a bomb are defined as Primary Blast Injury. It seems logical the
> same nomenclature will be applied to the first person who is a little
> too close to the impact of cosmic debris.
>
> Anyway....
>
> Two points:
>
> Does anyone know whether shock waves crated by an object the size of
> Carancas could have been sufficient to have killed a nearby bull?
>
> At least in the case of Valera, we know the "shoulder" (thoracic
> vertebrae and scapula) were crushed by the impactor.
>
>
> PRODUCT ENDORSEMENT: All of the aforementioned words were fueled by
> Red Bull.
>
>
>
> On Mar 15, 2009, at 1:59 PM, Bob Loeffler wrote:
>
>> Hi Darryl and Walter,
>>
>> I'm not trying to start this debate up again, so I'm not posting
>> this to the
>> list.
>>
>> I think you were getting off topic when talking about bomb blasts
>> and deaths
>> because that is not what a "hammer" or "hammer stone" is, according
>> to
>> Michael Blood who coined the term. If a meteorite hit a person (or
>> animal
>> or human artifact), it's a hammer stone. But if it hits the earth
>> and
>> creates a blast that hurts or kills a person, the meteorite is not
>> a hammer
>> stone because the blast affected the person, not the meteorite
>> itself. I
>> think that is the distinction that Walter was trying to convey.
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Bob
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: meteorite-list-bounces at meteoritecentral.com
>> [mailto:meteorite-list-bounces at meteoritecentral.com] On Behalf Of
>> Darryl
>> Pitt
>> Sent: Wednesday, March 11, 2009 5:53 AM
>> To: Walter Branch
>> Cc: Meteorite Mailing List
>> Subject: [meteorite-list] Carancas Bull
>>
>>
>> Hiya,
>>
>> My point was that an impact/blast that results in a mortality
>> producing shock wave is universally defined as an impact/blast
>> casualty. Your attempt to pull shock waves out of the equation in
>> an
>> assessment of an impact/blast is akin to taking water out the
>> equation
>> in a drowning.
>>
>> Moving on, I feel I should clarify my position. I never liked the
>> term "hammer"---it feels so comic strip-y---and agree it's overused.
>> I agree with Anne's orthodoxy on the application of the term---except
>> as it pertains to the point addressed above.
>>
>>
>> All best / d,
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Mar 11, 2009, at 6:48 AM, Walter Branch wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Darryl,
>>>
>>> Okay, but...
>>>
>>>> or scholarly assessment---
>>>
>>> That's what I assumed we are attempting. This list is for meteorite
>>> enthusiasts, not journalism enthusiasts.
>>>
>>> I propose we stick to discussing meteorites, not bomb blasts.
>>>
>>> -Walter
>>>
>>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Darryl Pitt" <darryl at dof3.com>
>>> To: "Walter Branch" <waltbranch at bellsouth.net>
>>> Cc: "Meteorite Mailing List" <meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com>
>>> Sent: Tuesday, March 10, 2009 10:49 PM
>>> Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] WG: AW: [IMCA] Hammers & Orientation
>>> from Dave
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Hi Walter!
>>>
>>> With all respect....
>>>
>>> In ANY report---except where there exist the specificity of a
>>> coroner
>>> or scholarly assessment---bomb victims are bomb victims.
>>>
>>> There is never differentiation between those killed by blast injury,
>>> penetrating wounds, blunt trauma or smoke/fire. In fact the
>>> foregoing
>>> types of injury are correctly referred to as primary, secondary,
>>> tertiary and miscellaneous BLAST INJURIES. Primary blast injury is
>>> specifically a rapid increase in air pressure--a shock wave.
>>>
>>> If the bull was killed by a shock wave created by an impact---it was
>>> killed by the impact.
>>>
>>> And that's no bull....
>>>
>>> ;-)
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Mar 10, 2009, at 10:11 PM, Walter Branch wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hello Darryl,
>>>>
>>>>> is a bombing victim killed by a bomb-produced shock
>>>>> wave not killed by the bomb?
>>>>
>>>> No. They would killed by the shock wave.
>>>>
>>>> If dirt kicked up by a meteorite hits a person, is said meteorite
>>>> then a "hammer?" No.
>>>>
>>>> Like all analogies, it eventually breaks down.
>>>>
>>>> It's not the fall that kills you, it's the sudden stop at the end -
>>>> Douglas Adams.
>>>>
>>>> -Walter Branch
>>>>
>>>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Darryl Pitt" <darryl at dof3.com>
>>>> To: "Impactika" <impactika at aol.com>
>>>> Cc: <IMCA at imcamail.de>; "Martin Altmann" <altmann at meteorite-
>>>> martin.de>
>>>> Sent: Tuesday, March 10, 2009 6:57 PM
>>>> Subject: Re: WG: AW: [IMCA] Hammers & Orientation from Dave
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> (deep breath)
>>>>
>>>> is a bombing victim killed by a bomb-produced shock wave not killed
>>>> by
>>>> the bomb?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> hi anne! ;-)
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Mar 10, 2009, at 6:43 PM, Impactika wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Hello Dave, and all,
>>>>>
>>>>> I submit another example to you: Carancas, since it has been
>>>>> discussed on the other List.
>>>>>
>>>>> In my personal opinion, only one fragment of the Carancas
>>>>> meteorite would qualify as a hammer: the fragment that hit the
>>>>> house on the picture, but it would have to be properly
>>>>> documented, with proof that this specific fragment, and not
>>>>> another one, or a piece of ejecta, is the actual fragment that
>>>>> damaged this roof. Any other fragment is just that: a fragment
>>>>> of the Carancas meteorite. As for the animals, they might have
>>>>> been hit by a shock wave, not by a fragment of the meteorite.
>>>>>
>>>>> With the same logic, a few of the Park Forest fragments can
>>>>> qualify as hammers, I am talking about the actual fragments that
>>>>> hit cars, roofs, .... and only those. And again, only with
>>>>> proper verifiable documentation. All other pieces of Park Forest
>>>>> are just that: pieces of the Park Forest meteorite.
>>>>>
>>>>> That still leaves Peekskill and Claxton as hammer meteorites,
>>>>> since they are single stones, and witnessed, documented falls.
>>>>>
>>>>> As for me, as a dealer, I will not use the term hammer on my
>>>>> website unless I have absolute proof and documentation that a
>>>>> certain specimen did hit a human, animal, or something man-made
>>>>> (roads, trees, fields.... don't count!).
>>>>>
>>>>> But that is my opinion.
>>>>> Any others?
>>>>>
>>>>> Anne Black
>>>>> IMCA - #2356
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> In a message dated 03/10/09 09:16:39 Mountain Daylight Time,
>> altmann at meteorite-martin.de
>>>>> writes:
>>>>> Von: dave at fallingrocks.com [mailto:dave at fallingrocks.com]
>>>>> Gesendet: Dienstag, 10. M?rz 2009 15:47
>>>>> An: Martin Altmann
>>>>> Betreff: RE: AW: [IMCA] Hammers & Orientation
>>>>>
>>>>> Hi, Martin,
>>>>>
>>>>> Please forward this quick note back to the IMCA list; I'm on a web
>>>>> interface and can't respond to the list from here...thanks:
>>>>>
>>>>> . . . . . . . . . . .
>>>>> The problem, at least in my view, with hammers is the fact that
>>>>> they are most appreciated by the least meteorite-savvy buyers.
>>>>> These newbie collectors are most exposed to paying a ridiculous
>>>>> price because a piece of, say, Thuathe was found in the roof of
>>>>> a hut -- yet the piece they're contemplating purchase around
>>>>> was picked up in a field two miles away. Thuathe might not be
>>>>> the best example, as it's a killer meteorite in its own right.
>>>>> Your example of Gao- Guenie, though by no means reflected in
>>>>> market pricing (yet, anyway), might be better.
>>>>>
>>>>> . . . . . . . . . . .
>>>>> Dave
>>>>>
>>>>> IMCA #5967
>>>>>
>>>>> www.fallingrocks.com
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Worried about job security? Check out the 5 safest jobs in a
>>>>> recession.
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> IMCA mailing list
>>>>> IMCA at imcamail.de
>>>>> http://lists.imcamail.de/mailman/listinfo/imca
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> IMCA mailing list
>>>> IMCA at imcamail.de
>>>> http://lists.imcamail.de/mailman/listinfo/imca
>>>>
>>>> ______________________________________________
>>>> http://www.meteoritecentral.com
>>>> Meteorite-list mailing list
>>>> Meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com
>>>> http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
>>>
>>>
>>> ______________________________________________
>>> http://www.meteoritecentral.com
>>> Meteorite-list mailing list
>>> Meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com
>>> http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
>>
>> ______________________________________________
>> http://www.meteoritecentral.com
>> Meteorite-list mailing list
>> Meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com
>> http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
>>
>
> ______________________________________________
> http://www.meteoritecentral.com
> Meteorite-list mailing list
> Meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com
> http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Received on Sun 15 Mar 2009 08:27:28 PM PDT