[meteorite-list] POP QUIZ ANSWER
MexicoDoug
mexicodoug at aim.com
Mon Sep 19 22:36:23 EDT 2011
Re: "In what year were chondrules first discovered in aerolites aka
meteorites? "
Hi Shawn,
Shyawn, you clearly didn't understand what I was sayingt, so I'll be a
bit clearer:
- Firstly, you left out the most important sentence in Williams'
description, because you are quoting third or fourth hand and Marvin
wasn't commenting on the first use of chondrules n or trying to list
every personal communication of the period. So I'll take the liberty
of helping you despite your stupid comment telling me to read more.
The description continues:
"The spherical bodies were much harder than the rest of the
stone".
That said:
- You did not provide any first hand referencfe that "chondrules were
*first* discovered" in 1799.
- You did not provide a quote that Ursula Marvin supported that the
Benares description was the "first incidence" of a description of
chondrules.
- You got the year wrong (1869) that the term "chondrule" was coined
(1863).
- You zero in on the word "spherical". Well, chondrules in meteorites
are more frequently not spherical. What remnants you find in
meteorites like Siena...are just granular, or remnants. "Discovery"
has nothing to do with obnserving a spherical one vs. a squashed,
crushed typical one. Most have been altered. That is my opinion, but
strongly so, Hence, describing granules without calling them spherical
only means that Benares had less deformed chondrules (and it was a
great description in general).
Sorry, but the assumptions were just way out. The first place it is in
print (1802) will be a reasonable occurence for the concept of
"spherical" granules, as opposed to regular granules. Since the 1799
date is not a publication date, and it is clear that plenty of
correspondence was being exchanged, credit for publication goes to
Howard so far, who though enough of this to publish.
Back in the 1700's no one had a clue that chondrules were condensates
or any other context to ascribe importance to them. When people looked
at spherical, granular, or any other rounded form, that was clearly
observed earlier, definitely in 1766 by Troili. The fact that the word
spherical vs. granule was used in your reference means absolutely
nothing except that more spherical chondrules occur in Benares than do
in, eg. Albareto, Wold Cottage, etc.
Chondrules were first understood in 1864. In that year it was first
theorized that this peculiar structure, was a condensation product -
specifically "droplets of fiery rain from the Sun" by Sorby, who showed
they were melt products and presented that theory. That is when
chondrules as a feature were "discovered" and lead to meteorites being
a key to unlocking the solar system's formation.
- As an aside: The independent account you mention from Williams has no
mention of any kind of granule or chondrule. You indicate Williams
"discovered" chondrules. A critical read of the information you
provided suggest to me that in what you posted, that it was Sir Joseph
who had already observed this in the older falls. And it was Sir
Joseph who likely noted that this was a common feature of meteorites,
based on his prior observations, not Williams who provided him with
additional data, which was the basis of comparson.
OK, enough ...
Kindest wishes
Doug
-----Original Message-----
From: Shawn Alan <photophlow at yahoo.com>
To: meteorite-list <meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com>
Sent: Mon, Sep 19, 2011 9:01 pm
Subject: [meteorite-list] POP QUIZ ANSWER
Hello Mexico Doug and Listers,
Dough you said this….
“No time to go through your document link, but I suspect you are making
a biased interpretation of this passing comment because you already
know something the original investigators were clueless about.”
And this……..
“While other scientists may have mentioned spherical or granulated
things and made various comments relating to them, specific or no so
much so, that is not a clear scientific leap by any means regarding
chrondrules in my opinion”
Doug first off, maybe you would want to read up on some of the links I
provided
before you make an opinion about what has been said in history. Why
don’t you
give that a try and get back to me and you will see the wonders it can
do for
oneself when trying to rewrite history based on opinions alone.
I love science and research and how one using these tools can present
an
educated argument on the topics of chondrules and use quotes and
references to
backup ones argument. Give it a try sometime :)
Shawn Alan
IMCA 1633
eBaystore
http://shop.ebay.com/photophlow/m.html
[meteorite-list] POP QUIZ ANSWER
MexicoDoug mexicodoug at aim.com
Mon Sep 19 20:04:23 EDT 2011
Previous message: [meteorite-list] POP QUIZ ANSWER
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------
Shawn wrote, refering to the application of the word "chondrule":
"But I would like to add it wasnt till 1869 that the word chondrules
was coined by Gustav Rose."
This is an error, Shawn.
It was alledgedly 1863. And in 1864, we had the first observation by a
"scientist" of a chondrule, who invented the microscope for thin
sections and made true scientific observation on meteorites. That is
why the answer should be 1864. This is the period that a better
understand was achieved that the granules we now call chondrules were
distinguished petrologically as we do today (just look at the
publications of science vs. layterms today when researching
chondrules).
While other scientists may have mentioned spherical or granulated
things and made various comments relating to them, specific or no so
much so, that is not a clear scientific leap by any means regarding
chrondrules in my opinion. When I am in strewn fields working with
peasants, they are quite sharp at recognizing chondrules in many cases,
and without anyone pointing them out to them. So I would hardly credit
your reference with anything of value except anectotal. Once you find
a not too cooked chondrite, it's as obvious as pointing out that a face
has a nose and eyes.
Shawn wrote:
"Marvin points out the first incident a scientist first observed these
chondrules in a meteorite....."
Does she "point this out" and suggest it was the first incidence of
observed chondrules? Or does she mention "an" incident?
It is foolish to ascribe too much significance to the indirect
reference you happened to find IMO.
No time to go through your document link, but I suspect you are making
a biased interpretation of this passing comment because you already
know something the original investigators were clueless about. While
it has the word "spherical", it is hard for me to believe that this was
the first reference though it is very clear. The common knowledge
before that was a sandstone appearance; and prior to your reference
year, granules were defnitely pointed out. I think the jury is still
out on this one, since it would require a complete collation in all
languages to determine who said what and when, rather than make such a
sweeping statement without giving Troili (1766) and others more credit
in a level context.
Kindest wishes, and of course, (kindest opinions may differ)
Doug
-----Original Message-----
From: Shawn Alan <photophlow at yahoo.com>
To: meteorite-list <meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com>
Sent: Mon, Sep 19, 2011 4:17 pm
Subject: [meteorite-list] POP QUIZ ANSWER
Hello Listers
I would like to thank everyone that submitted their answers for this
weeks POP
QUIZ FRIDAYS.
Question
In what year were chondrules first discovered in aerolites aka
meteorites?
Answer
1799
I am sorry but no one got the question right. But all hope is not lost
cause
there is still a winner. All the people that sent in their answer sent
in 1802(
even the best of the best sent in this answer and I spoke with some
people and
suggested I make a winner from the 10th incorrect answers cause it was
so
close). Good guess, I would have to say that was the year that was the
first
publication that first talked about spherical granulated substances
found in
aerolites(meteorites), but was not when they were first observed.
In
Ernst Florens Friedrich Chladni (1756–1827) and the origins
of modern meteorite research
by
Ursula B. MARVIN
in a meteorite.....
Benares, India, 1798
"A dazzling ball of fire exploded across a serene evening
sky near Benares, India, at 8 P.M. on December 19, 1798,
heralding a large shower of stones. Early in 1799, Sir Joseph
Banks in London received a letter from John Lloyd Williams
(about 1765–1838) in India describing the fireball and the
appearance of the stones. All of them, he said, had hard black
crusts like varnish or bitumen and whitish, gritty interiors
with many small spherical bodies interspersed with bright
shining grains of metal or pyrite. Williams (in Howard 1802:
179) concluded:
I shall only observe, that it is well known there are no
volcanoes on the continent of India; and, as far as I can
learn, no stones have been met with in the earth, in that
part of the world, which bear the smallest resemblance to
those above described.
On reading the letter, Sir Joseph was struck by the
apparent similarities between the Benares stones and the
samples he had obtained from the falls at Siena and Wold
Cottage. Judging that it was time for serious scientific
investigations, he handed his two samples to the
accomplished young chemist, Edward C. Howard (1774–
1816) and asked him to analyze them. In December 1800,
Banks presented the Copley Medal, the Royal Society’s
highest honor, to Howard for his discovery of the fulminate of
mercury. In his presentation speech, Banks made it clear that
he believed a new field of research was opening (Sears 1975:
218):
Mr. Howard . . . is now employed in the analysis of certain
stones, generations in the air by fiery meteors, the
component parts of which will probably open a new field
of speculation and discussion to mineralogists as well as to
meteorologists."
source
http://adsabs.harvard.edu/full/1996M%26PS...31..545M
PAGE 30
Here is another account of Williams work with the Benares fall and
observations........
"At length, in 1799, an account of stones fallen in the East Indies was
sent to
the president, by John Lloyd Williams, Esq. which, by its
unquestionable
authenticity, and by the striking resemblance it bears to other
accounts of
fallen stones, mult remove all prejudice. Mr. Williams has since drawn
up the
following more detailed narrative of facts.
Account of the Explosion of a Meteor, near Benares, in the East
Explosion of a
Indies; and of the falling of some Stones at the fame Time, me^°r ""t^"
about 14 Miles from lluii City. By John Lloyd Williams, falling of tome
Esq. F. R. S. stones «the
fame time.
A circumstance of so extraordinary a nature as the fall of stones from
the
heavens, could not fail to excite the wonder, and attract the attention
of every
inquisitive mind.
Among a superstitious people, any preternatural appearance is viewed
with silent
awe and reverence; attributing the causes to the will of the Supreme
Being, they
do not presume to judge the means by which they were produced, nor the
purposes
for which they were ordered; and we are naturally led to suspect the
influence
of prejudice and superstition, in their descriptions of such phenomena;
my
inquiries were therefore chiefly directed to the Europeans, who were
but thinly
dispersed about that part of the country.
The information I obtained was, that on the i 9th of De- Narrative,
cember,
179S, about eight o'clock in the evening, a very luminous meteor was
observed in
the heavens, by the inhabitants of Benares and the parts adjacent, in
the form
of a large ball LarEe ta" of
- ,. , . , , , , , , ,. fire with noise
Oi fire; that it was accompanied by a loud noile, reiembling thumbs.
thunder; and that a number of stones were said to have fallen
from it, near Krakhut, a village on the north side of the river
Goomty, about 14 miles from the city of Benares.
The meteor appeared in the western part of the hemisphere,
and was but a short time visible: it was observed by several
Europeans, as well as natives, in different parts of the country"
http://books.google.com/books?id=UPg3AQAAIAAJ&pg=PA255&lpg=PA255&dq=John+Lloyd+Williams+in+1799+meteorite&source=bl&ots=7IH2AqE9lt&sig=9kdVFN4BhBwOMmk_T0bQxpuqcbU&hl=en&ei=e8RzTteyEsnw0gGsgrnwDQ&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CB4Q6AEwAA#v=onepage&q&f=false
And one last link to confirm Willimas role....
http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1988KIzND......104E
But I would like to add it wasnt till 1869 that the word chondrules was
coined
by Gustav Rose.
Again I would like to thank everyone that sent in their answers and
would like
to announce the 10th Lister that sent in the incorrect answer which was
1802 and
that Lister is Gabriel G. They will win a free micro grain of the
Sylacauga
meteorite fall where this stone comes from the Smithsonian collection.
Thank you
Shawn Alan
IMCA 1633
eBaystore
http://shop.ebay.com/photophlow/m.html
______________________________________________
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
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------
Previous message: [meteorite-list] POP QUIZ ANSWER
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------
More information about the Meteorite-list mailing list
______________________________________________
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
More information about the Meteorite-list
mailing list