- FYI,
-
- The meteorites Leo and Marco V. are talking about, are Pribram (6
april 1959) and Neuschwanstein (6 april 2002). Pribram is a H5
chondrite, Neuschwanstein a E6 (E=Enstatite) chondrite. The Dutch
Glanerbrug meteorite (7 april 1990), an LL5, also has a quite similar
orbit (determined from visual observations). They might all three
originate from one 'rubble pile' parent asteroid. A 'rubble pile'
originates when after a collision between two or more objects, fragments
of these multiple objects reassemble again into one body due to
gravitational binding.
-
- Concerning the meteor aspect (as this is a meteor observer's list):
radiant positions are: alpha 192, delta +19 (Pribram); alpha 192, delta
+17 (Neuschwanstein); alpha 202, delta +49 (Glanerbrug). Velocities
21-23 km/s. For those interested in the details, see paper by Spurny et
al. in Nature 8 May 2003, and my paper in 'Radiant' (J. DMS) of
September 2001. Note that the radiant area has a diameter of some 30
degrees, stretching from Coma Berenices into Canes Venatici.
-
- What is much more 'problematic' than the difference in chemical
classifications, is the CRE (Cosmic Ray Exposure) ages for these
objects. They suggest they orbited the sun as small (i.e. meteorite
sized) objects for tens of millions of years, which seems at odds with
an intact stream. This paradox has not yet been satisfactorily solved.
Personally, I think it could mean that CRE ages are not what people
think they are.
-
- I think that Neuschwanstein and Pribram have been discussed on this
list a year ago following the Neuschwanstein fireball and subsequent
meteorite recovery a few months later. So Leo and Marco V. might want to
check up the list archives.
-
- - Marco Langbroek
_________________
Leo and Marco L.,
Hello,
- Great Leo to remenber
about the subject being object of
wide
discussion here;
- After having read the explanations I consider that the both
meteorites (59 - 02), even from diffferent years differents
parent bodies may be. Just read again their formation: (Pibram = *H5
Chondrite*) and (Newschwantein = *E6 Enstatite chondrite*). Equal, but
light diffs forms. Non avaliable Elements Table;
- About the sun more activeness in the past, of course that many
literatures confirm that. So, CRE has also chances to have light
options on reading data;
- Again, as the meteorites are on our virtual archives and
were discussed at length, there is no doubt that the cases are
conclusive. Or in other words, they were originated from the same
parent body, being colided and/or fragmented at all;
- Another aspect that I would like to light up this discussion
is about the meteorite found in Antartida. In there the researches were
very conclusive too, confirming that the same bolide had
possibilities to have fossils presence of germs, and also after intense
geological studies have concluded that it came from Mars. Now my
question is: If the meteorites are the same parent body, even from
different dates, how the analizes prooved that, even considering the
intense atmosphere reentry friction that eventually burns all
relevants evidences about this or that meteorite, and so, could confirm so
affirmativelly that these two meteorites are originated from an only
one? Iadmitthis Just on the rock bolide remained;
Obs. - Any more CRE explanations would be appreciated.
Marco V.