[meteorite-list] Meteorite numbers

kenoneill at kenoneill.com kenoneill at kenoneill.com
Sun Nov 21 13:09:23 EST 2004 

>Also I think the "Total Known Weight" should really be observerved for
witnessed falls. 

Yes I agree, I have made this point before, with a classified NWA the weight
is fixed to the piece/s classified so it's the "total weight" not the "total
known weight". 

Ken O'Neill

-----Original Message-----
From: meteorite-list-bounces at meteoritecentral.com
[mailto:meteorite-list-bounces at meteoritecentral.com] On Behalf Of Matt
Morgan
Sent: 21 November 2004 16:48
To: 'John Birdsell'
Cc: meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com
Subject: RE: [meteorite-list] Meteorite numbers


I understand this completely, but what I am getting at is cooperation and
sharing of data seems to happen very little or is non-existant.  The
researchers I have worked with in the past also made visual pairings (along
with thin section work) if there were a large number of pieces. They also
took really good digital photos of cut specimens and thin sections.  These
should be made available to others working on NWAs in some central
depository.  Pairings could be made visually in many cases by the proper
authorities.

Also I think the "Total Known Weight" should really be observerved for
witnessed falls.  
I have always thought it was a lame statistic for finds and is constantly
abused.  It is one of the cruxes that the current argument
re: name stealing/borrwing hinges about.
Matt

-----Original Message-----
From: John Birdsell [mailto:birdsell at email.arizona.edu] 
Sent: Sunday, November 21, 2004 9:33 AM
To: Matt Morgan
Cc: meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com
Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Meteorite numbers


Hi Matt and list. I'm not an expert on the topic, but I think that part 
of the problem may also be that meteorites such as those belonging to 
the HED group are quite heterogeneous. If one sample contains a slightly

higher diogenite component it may come back as a howardite while a 
sample with a lower diogenite component may come back as a eucrite. I 
would imagine that two samples from the same stone could conceivably 
come back with a different classification. If anyone can comment on this

and correct me if I'm wrong I would appreciate it!


Cheers


-John


Matt Morgan wrote:

>Just to add a note...
>There is a fundamental scientific problem of classifying meteorites.
>
>Try sending two pieces of the same meteorite to different labs.
>Chances are you will get different results. For instance, I have "L5's"

>that came back as "L4's" and "L6's". "Regolith" this and "Primitive"
>that. I heard the same situation happening for NWA 1929, either 
>howardite OR eucrite. I understand some of it is "interpretive".
>
>The system itself is flawed.
>
>Ideally, we need an NWA consortium of labs to correct this and have
>type specimens on hand.
>
>This SEEMS to be an easy fix, but university politics plays a huge
>role.
>
>So all you scientists who study NWA's, how about a network for
>meteorite "data sharing"?  It will make ALL our lives easier...
>
>Matt Morgan
>Mile High Meteorites
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: meteorite-list-bounces at meteoritecentral.com
>[mailto:meteorite-list-bounces at meteoritecentral.com] On Behalf Of Rob
>Wesel
>Sent: Sunday, November 21, 2004 2:38 AM
>To: Michael Farmer; meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com
>Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Meteorite numbers
>
>
>While I truly believe this practice is ultimately costly to the
>collector, truer words have never been spoken. Thanks Mike:
>
>"Virtually every dealer including myself has been or is guilty of this,

>we are in the process of correcting the situation and to start people
>MUST immediately comply or this will just spiral downward as we see 
>tonight."
>
>So, for now, we make it right. We follow the rules and pay out to prove 
>pairings. We wait longer to get to market and costs go up because
repeat
>lab
>fees and repeat type specimens factor into prices per gram. I don't
like
>it
>one bit but that's what we do. I will be finishing off my "likely
>paired" 
>howardite as such but new specimens are already off to the lab,
>specimens I 
>know are paired.
>While I seriously doubt the law has any holding here, the NomCom asks
>this 
>of us. Bottom line, if two folks buy bread from the same
baker...they're
>
>eating the same bread. The full weight of this ruling will soon be felt

>by all as we bog down institutions who want to study meteorites with 
>incessant pairings, not much grant money in pairings, not much 
>recognition. But this
>is what we do...for now.
>
>Rob Wesel
>------------------
>We are the music makers...
>and we are the dreamers of the dreams.
>Willy Wonka, 1971
>
>
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Michael Farmer" <meteoritehunter at comcast.net>
>To: <meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com>
>Sent: Saturday, November 20, 2004 7:56 PM
>Subject: [meteorite-list] Meteorite numbers
>
>
>  
>
>>To clarify something that is obviously causing some problems in the
>>meteorite world right now, I want everyone to know that NWA 788, 787, 
>>and NWA 482 are numbers that came from rather large or meteorites with

>>hundreds of pieces bought during one of my
>>    
>>
>expeditions.
>  
>
>>The Hupes and many other people have the right to those numbers. Now,
>>there are other numbers being widely used without proper title
>>    
>>
>(as Dr
>  
>
>>Grossman has stated publicly and with finality that people do not own 
>>numbers, but numbers are assigned to specific meteorite specimens and
>>    
>>
>must
>  
>
>>not be used with other meteorites just because you heard or someone
>>    
>>
>told
>  
>
>>you it is the same).
>>Let's all please stop this practice as it is really hurting our
>>    
>>
>business
>  
>
>>and hobby. Virtually every dealer including myself has been or is
>>    
>>
>guilty
>  
>
>>of this, we are in the process of correcting the situation and to
>>    
>>
>start
>  
>
>>people MUST immediately comply or this will just spiral downward as we
>>    
>>
>see
>  
>
>>tonight.
>>
>>I perused eBay today and it is still rampant with sellers using 
>>numbers they seem to have drawn from a hat. So please ask you seller 
>>next time
>>    
>>
>you
>  
>
>>buy something, how they got that number, who it was assigned to and if
>>    
>>
>not
>  
>
>>them, just how they came to call it that.
>>Mike Farmer
>>
>>______________________________________________
>>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
>
>  
>



______________________________________________
Meteorite-list mailing list
Meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com
http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list

More information about the Meteorite-list mailing list