[meteorite-list] Meteorite in New Hampshire

[Sterling K. Webb]

Hi, Gary, List,

    Like a clod, I meant to say what a good
page and description of the "chase" it was
and forgot to. By the time I finished reading
it, my feet were cold and I felt a sudden desire
for hot cocoa.
    Your weather is colder than my weather.
And my observations are probably more true
of a winter that bounces back and forth over
the freezing line. We haven't been "subzero"
(F) for years.
    Maybe the dual ice layer is the result of two
freezes, an earlier one that never melted fully
and a later one that couldn't close the gap.
    The Earth gets about 400,000 tons of Interplanetary
Dust Particles per year: "The earth's surface is
constantly being rained upon by interplanetary
dust particles (IDP's), from a few to several
hundred micrometers in diameter. The mass
distribution of this dust flux peaks at around
200µm (Love and Brownlee, 1993). This dust
is thought to be derived from collisions of
asteroidal material and from comets (e.g.
Kortenkamp and Dermott, 1998). The majority
of IDPs are compositionally similar to
chondritic meteorites (Jessberger et al, 2001),
and quite distinct from crustal rocks on earth."
    The exact amount of nickel in cosmic dust
bunnies is the basis of an argument. Earlier high
estimates of how much dust was incoming were
because the nickel content was thought to be
higher than it turned out to be.
    But, regardless of the amount, you'll find nickel
in cosmic dust. Just think of it as ground up meteorites,
all kinds together.


Sterling K. Webb
----------------------------------------------------------------
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Gary K. Foote" <gary at webbers.com>
To: "Sterling K. Webb" <sterling_k_webb at sbcglobal.net>; 
<Meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com>
Sent: Thursday, February 22, 2007 9:50 PM
Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Meteorite in New Hampshire


Hi sterling,

First, I realize the odds are against this being a meteoric created hole. 
That being
said let me shed some light on some of your questions;

On 22 Feb 2007 at 20:48, Sterling K. Webb wrote:

> The ice is obviously quite thick now.
> How thick was it when the hole appeared?

It was totally frozen over the and 2 feet+ of snow fell the night that the 
hole appeared.
 I assume the ice was at least 6 to eight inches thich though we did 
b=neglect to measure
the depth of ice in the non-modified ice.  :(  Live and learn.


> the hole is in the "center" (more or less) is always a
> suspicious piece of data. Lakes and ponds freeze from
> the shallow shore to the deep center, in that order. The
> center (or the deepest spot) is always the last place to
> freeze and the ice is always thinnest there.

The pond is only 7 feet deep at the point of the hole and with our regular 
below zero
weather the center would have been just as frozen as the edges.  In fact, 
around here it
is at the shores where the ice is thinnest as the warmth of the underlying 
land warms the
ice and keeps it from freezing as fast as at the deeper points.  Its always 
near the edge
where people go in thru the ice early in winter - either there or where 
there is a
current that keeps the water from sitting still enough long enough to freeze 
as rapidly
the more steady water does.

>     Particularly when the temperature drop is recent and
> not long-term, you will find lakes and ponds with thick
> stampable ice over the shallow margins (and farm ponds
> tend to have broad shallows) while in the center sits a
> universal invitation to a sudden thermal excursion.

If there is a tendency to thermal excursion to the center of a shallow pond 
I'm not aware
of it.  Doesn't mean its not true - just that I've not heard of this 
phenomenon.  I'd be
interested in anyone's pointers to greater knowledge in this area.  Further, 
this is not
only a stream fed pond, but a spring fed pond.  the landowner assurred us 
the spring was
a good 50 feet from the hole.

>     The owner's assertion of "no tracks" has to be weighed
> against the time that may have elapsed, the wind drift factor,
> the chance of snow since the incident, and the likelihood
> of quick wet prancing (and very annoyed) feet leaving prints.

The snow, as stated before, fell on the night of the phenomenon's 
appearance.   Maybe
this is a factor in its appearance.  I just don't know.  I do know it is a 
fairly remote
area and the landowner has a dog who is kept inside and she and her dog were 
the first
ones on the scene in the morning.    The landowner noted no tracks the very 
next morning.
It was also clearly noted that there were no footprints anywhere on the pond 
the day we
arrived seven days later.  Footprints persist in snow until the next 
snowfall and there
has been no significant snow since, so I feel there had been nobody near the 
area at all.

>     No hunt for a space rock is ever wasted, though. Alan
> Hildebrand, of the MIAC - Prairie Meteorite Search project
> in Canada, with very reasonable assumptions, estimates that
> ~1.4 meteorites >100 g mass occur in each km2 (or about
> 4.5 meteorites >10 g mass). That's about one 100+ gm
> meteorite for every 175 acres, or one 10 gm every 56 acres.
> Read:  http://miac.uqac.ca/MIAC/pmsearch.htm

This is one of the facts that gives me hope. I must admit to some 
disappointment, but
like you said, the hunt itself is a worthy learning exercise.

>     I'm sure that your "particles" contain meteoritic material;
> every open body of water in the world collects cosmic dust!
> In fact, Jerry Flaherty posted a story about kids collecting
> meteor "dust" on the night of major meteor showers using
> a big flat pan of water. You can also find cosmic "stuff"
> in the muck that lines the bottom of your gutters. Scrape
> out your gutters, put the gunk in a plastic bucket, dilute
> with water, drag a supermagnet through it, and Voila! Star
> Dust.

I remember this post by Jerry.  To avoid being foolde by cos=mic dust we 
will be looking
for not only visual analysis, but nickel content analysis.  Does cosmic dust 
contain
nickel in the 'right quantities?  Again I don't know.

>     There's a long list of natural occurances that can punch
> holes in new-iced ponds. But one of them is... Meteorite!
> My problem is that I can't find any rendition of a meteorite
> having been found that way.

I know.  wouldn't it be lovely if CJ and I were the first to claim this 
particular find
method?  The splash patterns of water around the hold are compelling 
though...

Thanks for your comments and information  Sterling.  We will continue the 
pursuit, though
the odds seem to be against us at this point.  :)

Gary