[meteorite-list] Surface Area or Weight

[Richard Montgomery]

I'd love to chime in here.

For example, as NWA 801 is already in my collection the 5gr range, I just 
purchased an ebay slice ~4cm across with multiple metal armored/rimmed 
chondrules and a huge surface area/weight ratio (it has become the fifth 
NWA801 in my collection, for the sole purpose of chosing later the one to 
keep)...when I weighed it, I was a bit shocked at it's 0.5 gram 
weight....but wait, there's more.

In my limited experience strictly as a collector, a larger 
surface-area-to-weight ratio gives me the best x-section to view.   Yet, it 
restricts my ability to ever re-sell it by weight, since it would be 
fabulously over-priced.  So I guess it becomes an aesthetic thing. (can you 
imagine $200/gr for 801??!)

I know that recently this has been discussed on the List ("not mentioning 
weight, so how I pay without disclosing the denomination")...(Hi Luci)...I 
digress, but still, it is an amazing preparation, and I am pleased to have 
it.

The Kainsaz slice I also bought from this same entitiy is so thin that it is 
transluscent....(I tried XPL, but no birefringence)....so for what it's 
worth, this will remain a debate?  I think when we buy by weight, somewhere 
in the back of our heads $-resale-value comes into play.  If that isn't a 
concern, by all means, buy what you like by dimension.  If analysis is in 
play, well, I know you real scientists will have something to say.

Richard Montgomery
-Goldierocks-


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Thunder Stone" <stanleygregr at hotmail.com>
To: <meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com>
Sent: Friday, February 11, 2011 2:51 PM
Subject: [meteorite-list] Surface Area or Weight




All:

I think this may have been discussed on the list in the past, but I'm not 
sure.

When it comes to meteorite’s value (especially rare types) is the value 
based solely on the weight of the specimen? Or can the total surface area be 
a factor?

Take this as an example:

Say you have 1 gram specimen of a rare type (perhaps planetary) which is 
cubed shaped and relatively small, and the second is 0.50 grams and is cut 
very thin, so it has a very large surface area and is very visually 
esthetic; how would they compare in value?

I know complete stones may be more, and specimens with nice fusion crusts 
are also more, so there are cases where the same weight may have different 
values.

I'm just curious,

Greg S.

______________________________________________
Visit the Archives at 
http://www.meteoritecentral.com/mailing-list-archives.html
Meteorite-list mailing list
Meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com
http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list