a_plutonium wrote:

Around June 2007
a_plutonium wrote:

a_plutonium wrote:

Green rock 6.3 Kg and 2.2 liters volume gives a density of 2.86 grams/
cm^3

The 3.9 Kg meteorite candidate has volume of 1.5 liters and gives a
density of 2.60 grams/cm^3

I redid the testing on the 3.9 Kg meteorite candidate. I am using
water
filled buckets or pyrex beakers.

The volume of the 3.9Kg rock is 1.33 liters, not 1.5 liters. So the
density is
2.9 grams/cm^3 and not 2.60 grams/cm^3

I tested smaller meteorite candidates to see if there is some sort of
average
density.

Rock of 397 grams, 0.125 liters, gives a density of 3.18 grams/cm^3
Rock of 209 grams, 0.070 liters, gives a density of 2.99 grams/cm^3
Rock of 61 grams, 0.020 liters, gives a density of 3.05 grams/cm^3

At the meeting to gain opinion on these rocks, one comment was that
the
3.9 Kg rock looked like some hematite from the Minnesota region. And
today I looked up what some density of hematite ranges are. Apparently
some
hematite can be 5 grams/cm^3.

So it maybe that my rocks are hematite but it would not explain why
they were
found in small pieces in a strewn-field such as what a meteorite
event. Would
it make sense for someone to break apart hematite can scatter the
pieces over
a large area? Same thing goes for the slag hypothesis. Does it make
sense
to scatter small pieces in a strewn field?

So the location of where I am finding the big pieces and the smaller
pieces makes the
most sense as a meteorite fall.

I had some X-ray diffraction analysis done on some small samples of my
rocks.

I am told the total number of counts per second were low and thus
inconclusive
as to whether my rocks are eucrite meteorites.

I am told meteorites often contain some of these:
kamacite
taenite
troilite
daubreelite
cohenite
haxonite
schreibersite
chromite
magnetite
corundum
graphite
rarely diamond and lonsdaleite

My magnetic sample had none of those except magnetite. And the
magnetic sample had
olivine.

My mindset is that I am sticking to the highest optimism that my rocks
are eucrite meteorites
from Vesta asteroid and perhaps containing zircon crystals. Unless
proven otherwise that is
what I am sticking with and that is a wise choice considering that if
true, then I have valuable
rocks for science research.

I am unfamilar with whether Minnesota magnetite has olivine? Unfamilar
as to whether olivine
in South Dakota is rare? Whether the Ice Ages dragged Minnesota
magnetite to this locale?

I do know eucrite meteorites contain olivine.

What I suspect is that my rocks are tied to the 1933 Sioux County
meteorite fall and my rocks
are Eucrites. I suspect that farmers in my locale often picked up
rocks in their farmfields and
carried them back home to use around buildings for fences or other
purposes rather than leave
them in the fields. Or that my rocks were the original debris field
and were not moved. They are
very much eroded for they are very much "rusty" in appearance.

What I am doing now is having them photographed to be placed on the
Internet for viewers to see
and judge. Until I find a science lab that wants to completely
analysis a sample of these rocks, I
will continue to assume the maximum optimism that they are Vesta
Asteroid eucrite meteorites that
contain zircon crystals. Especially my whitish looking one and my
large green looking one.

Archimedes Plutonium
www.iw.net/~a_plutonium
whole entire Universe is just one big atom
where dots of the electron-dot-cloud are galaxies

That's the stuff, ..innocence presumed until guilt is proven. This
has excellent scientific credentials and a precedent in Plate
Tectonics as a modus operandum. Since by their very nature faeries
are invisible, the fact that you can't see them at work (subduction)
is exactly proof for their existence.

a_plutonium wrote:

Around June 2007
a_plutonium wrote:

a_plutonium wrote:

Green rock 6.3 Kg and 2.2 liters volume gives a density of 2.86 grams/
cm^3

The 3.9 Kg meteorite candidate has volume of 1.5 liters and gives a
density of 2.60 grams/cm^3

I redid the testing on the 3.9 Kg meteorite candidate. I am using
water
filled buckets or pyrex beakers.

The volume of the 3.9Kg rock is 1.33 liters, not 1.5 liters. So the
density is
2.9 grams/cm^3 and not 2.60 grams/cm^3

I tested smaller meteorite candidates to see if there is some sort of
average
density.

Rock of 397 grams, 0.125 liters, gives a density of 3.18 grams/cm^3
Rock of 209 grams, 0.070 liters, gives a density of 2.99 grams/cm^3
Rock of 61 grams, 0.020 liters, gives a density of 3.05 grams/cm^3

At the meeting to gain opinion on these rocks, one comment was that
the
3.9 Kg rock looked like some hematite from the Minnesota region. And
today I looked up what some density of hematite ranges are. Apparently
some
hematite can be 5 grams/cm^3.

So it maybe that my rocks are hematite but it would not explain why
they were
found in small pieces in a strewn-field such as what a meteorite
event. Would
it make sense for someone to break apart hematite can scatter the
pieces over
a large area? Same thing goes for the slag hypothesis. Does it make
sense
to scatter small pieces in a strewn field?

So the location of where I am finding the big pieces and the smaller
pieces makes the
most sense as a meteorite fall.

I had some X-ray diffraction analysis done on some small samples of my
rocks.

I am told the total number of counts per second were low and thus
inconclusive
as to whether my rocks are eucrite meteorites.

I am told meteorites often contain some of these:
kamacite
taenite
troilite
daubreelite
cohenite
haxonite
schreibersite
chromite
magnetite
corundum
graphite
rarely diamond and lonsdaleite

My magnetic sample had none of those except magnetite. And the
magnetic sample had
olivine.

My mindset is that I am sticking to the highest optimism that my rocks
are eucrite meteorites
from Vesta asteroid and perhaps containing zircon crystals. Unless
proven otherwise that is
what I am sticking with and that is a wise choice considering that if
true, then I have valuable
rocks for science research.

I am unfamilar with whether Minnesota magnetite has olivine? Unfamilar
as to whether olivine
in South Dakota is rare? Whether the Ice Ages dragged Minnesota
magnetite to this locale?

I do know eucrite meteorites contain olivine.

What I suspect is that my rocks are tied to the 1933 Sioux County
meteorite fall and my rocks
are Eucrites. I suspect that farmers in my locale often picked up
rocks in their farmfields and
carried them back home to use around buildings for fences or other
purposes rather than leave
them in the fields. Or that my rocks were the original debris field
and were not moved. They are
very much eroded for they are very much "rusty" in appearance.

What I am doing now is having them photographed to be placed on the
Internet for viewers to see
and judge. Until I find a science lab that wants to completely
analysis a sample of these rocks, I
will continue to assume the maximum optimism that they are Vesta
Asteroid eucrite meteorites that
contain zircon crystals. Especially my whitish looking one and my
large green looking one.


Archimedes Plutonium
www.iw.net/~a_plutonium
whole entire Universe is just one big atom
where dots of the electron-dot-cloud are galaxies

That's the stuff, ..innocence presumed until guilt is proven. This
has excellent scientific credentials and a precedent in Plate
Tectonics as a modus operandum. Since by their very nature faeries
are invisible, the fact that you can't see them at work (subduction)
is exactly proof for their existence.