(meteorobs) Meteorite pix

[Matt Mundorf]

Hmmm.  Is the radioactivity generally because of the obsorbed radiation
that is emitted from a number of sources in space or that the material
in the meteor itself is radioactive?

 

 

 

-----Original Message-----


From: meteorobs-bounces at meteorobs.org
[mailto:meteorobs-bounces at meteorobs.org] On Behalf Of stange
Sent: Wednesday, December 03, 2008 4:26 PM
To: Global Meteor Observing Forum
Subject: Re: (meteorobs) Meteorite pix

 

Radiation measurements would be conducted using a scaler. But also
important 

is to determine any unusual or rare emission of surface Alpha emission.
Most 

likely radiation would be Beta or Gamma if it (is?) above background.

 

Question then would require an expensive Qualitive analysis of the
elements 

& Isotopes contained in the specimen (if) there is real evidence of a 

radiation anamoly. It will probably have to be a high reading to justify


going further. I shouldn't think...it will be radioacive because of 

half-life in its age.

 

 

----- Original Message ----- 

From: "Bruce McCurdy" <bmccurdy at telusplanet.net>

To: "Global Meteor Observing Forum" <meteorobs at meteorobs.org>

Sent: 2008/12/03 12:30

Subject: Re: (meteorobs) Meteorite pix

 

 

> Matt: I believe that is one of the things they are very accurately 

> measuring

> at the University of Alberta this week. They put the largest fragment
we

> recovered in some sort of enclosed lead chamber which leaks at an 

> extremely

> slow and well-calibrated rate. As I understood Dr. Herd's description

> yesterday, I think the specimen might be a little more radioactive
than 

> they

> expected but not dangerously so. I'm very keen to hear the results but

> apparently it takes them a week to get a sufficiently deep
measurement.

> Presumably we will hear eventually. I do know that Dr. Herd was
extremely

> pleased to get such a fresh specimen, only 10 days or so after it
fell.

> 

> For now, my hair isn't falling out and I don't glow in the dark.
Besides, 

> if

> I am a dead man this wouldn't be the worst way to go. It's been a
pretty

> amazing couple of weeks.

> 

> Bruce

> *****

> 

> 

> ----- Original Message ----- 

> From: "Matt Mundorf" <MattM at trafconinc.com>

> To: "Global Meteor Observing Forum" <meteorobs at meteorobs.org>

> Sent: Wednesday, December 03, 2008 12:54 PM

> Subject: Re: (meteorobs) Meteorite pix

> 

> 

>> 

>> Heya everyone,

>> 

>> 

>> 

>> One thing that I'm curios about.  Could any of these crash landed

>> meteorites be radioactive?  Or is that really rare that toxic

>> radioactivity is a concern when handling newly discovered fallen

>> objects?

>> 

>> 

>> 

>> 

>> 

>> Thanks,

>> Matt

>> 

>> 

>> 

>> -----Original Message-----

>> 

>> 

>> 

>> From: meteorobs-bounces at meteorobs.org

>> [mailto:meteorobs-bounces at meteorobs.org] On Behalf Of Bruce McCurdy

>> Sent: Wednesday, December 03, 2008 12:07 PM

>> To: Global Meteor Observing Forum

>> Subject: Re: (meteorobs) Meteorite pix

>> 

>> 

>> 

>> 

>> 

>>    The meteorites in the initial find, including the one pictured
with

>> 

>> Ellen, were frozen into the ice and had to be chipped out with a

>> geologist's

>> 

>> hammer.

>> 

>> 

>> 

>>    The four fragments that Frank and I discovered the next day were

>> also in

>> 

>> ice. The two medium-sized fragments (2-3 cm) were embedded but could
be

>> 

>> lifted out, leaving a small depression in the ice with some liquid
water

>> in

>> 

>> it. The larger fragment was frozen solid with just a portion
protruding,

>> and

>> 

>> needed to be chipped out. The smallest one was also frozen in, and in

>> fact

>> 

>> the entire object was slightly below the surface.

>> 

>> 

>> 

>>    We got the distinct impression that there was a freeze/thaw
process

>> at

>> 

>> play. The afternoon we discovered them the ice was a little soft in

>> places,

>> 

>> especially where direct sunlight fell (which was limited by the low
sun

>> 

>> angle and the fact the pond was in a valley). By then of course it
was

>> nine

>> 

>> days after the fall, so this thaw/freeze process may well have been

>> repeated

>> 

>> on several occasions.

>> 

>> 

>> 

>>    I really have no idea if the meteorites came to rest exactly where

>> they

>> 

>> landed, or if they hit and bounced and their encasement in ice all

>> occurred

>> 

>> subsequently.

>> 

>> 

>> 

>>    I will shortly have access to Frank's pictures from our recovery

>> zone;

>> 

>> we only took one camera on that scramble down a rather daunting

>> embankment.

>> 

>> If there's a good close-up I will post it to the website.

>> 

>> 

>> 

>>    Bruce

>> 

>>    *****

>> 

>> 

>> 

>> _______________________________________________

>> 

>> Mailing list meteorobs: meteorobs at meteorobs.org

>> 

>> To UNSUBSCRIBE, email: owner-meteorobs at meteorobs.org

>> 

>> http://lists.meteorobs.org/mailman/listinfo/meteorobs

>> 

>> _______________________________________________

>> Mailing list meteorobs: meteorobs at meteorobs.org

>> To UNSUBSCRIBE, email: owner-meteorobs at meteorobs.org

>> http://lists.meteorobs.org/mailman/listinfo/meteorobs

>> 

> 

> _______________________________________________

> Mailing list meteorobs: meteorobs at meteorobs.org

> To UNSUBSCRIBE, email: owner-meteorobs at meteorobs.org

> http://lists.meteorobs.org/mailman/listinfo/meteorobs 

 

_______________________________________________

Mailing list meteorobs: meteorobs at meteorobs.org

To UNSUBSCRIBE, email: owner-meteorobs at meteorobs.org

http://lists.meteorobs.org/mailman/listinfo/meteorobs