[meteorite-list] Term Main Mass

[MexicoDoug at aol.com]

Hola John,

You bring up a good  point!  The problem I see is that I do not believe the 
term "Main Mass" in  the listings has been truly a peer reviewed subject of 
scientific  interest in most cases, but rather a rubber stamp that has gone 
unstudied for  the reason of having no true scientific value in the majority of 
cases.  So  while you are right in the sense supported by literature, I may be 
mistaken, but  I do not think the science has ever peer reviewed this subject.  
That would  be Adam's point perhaps.  The way the NWA system was piggybacked 
upon the  locality named system was not a peer reviewed scientific method, just 
a  convention adopted by a committee for the not especially peer reviewed 
appendix  of MAPS.  The scientific method and the ability of other labs to repeat 
is  severly restricted due to the distribution of material.  There are 
several  cases of meteorites which are analyzed by two separate labs and classified  
differently.  But the original classification is not so flexible as far as  I 
can tell as would be in a completely peer reviewed process.

Finally,  you say "every NWA numbered meteorite".  I disagree with that.  It 
is  a contradiction in terms to me, though normally acceptable to express  
ourselves.  However when we say this we should recognize that meteorite  does not 
refer to a particular fall, but rather to a bag of similar rocks picked  up 
on a Sunday by someone before the wind got too strong and buried  everything.

I think you're a little hard on Adam this  time!

Saludos, Doug

In a message dated 1/19/2006 11:33:18 P.M.  Eastern Standard Time, 
johnbirdsell at yahoo.com writes:
Just to help you
out  Adam, each and every NWA numbered meteorite has a
MAIN MASS.