PDA

View Full Version : Interesting analysis of Martian meteorite



ExoZZ
2013-Jan-03, 07:29 PM
The Jan 4, 2013 issue of Science (http://news.sciencemag.org/sciencenow/2013/01/scienceshot-signs-of-water-in-ma.html) has an interesting analysis of a meteorite that fell in Africa and is though to be from Mars. It is different in age, composition, and water content from other know Martian meteorite. The suggestion is that it was formed in the transition from a wet Mars to a dry Mars. At 2.1 billion years old, it suggests that the loss of water took somewhat longer that is usually thought.

John Mendenhall
2013-Jan-03, 07:39 PM
The Jan 4, 2013 issue of Science (http://news.sciencemag.org/sciencenow/2013/01/scienceshot-signs-of-water-in-ma.html) has an interesting analysis of a meteorite that fell in Africa and is though to be from Mars. It is different in age, composition, and water content from other know Martian meteorite. The suggestion is that it was formed in the transition from a wet Mars to a dry Mars. At 2.1 billion years old, it suggests that the loss of water took somewhat longer that is usually thought.

Are you referring to the very recent fall in the farmer's field? If so, I think the analysis is suspect.

ExoZZ
2013-Jan-03, 07:46 PM
Are you referring to the very recent fall in the farmer's field? If so, I think the analysis is suspect.

Not very recent. Was bought in 2011. Didn't see when it was collected. From the paper:


NWA 7034, on deposit at the Institute of Meteoritics, purchased by Jay Piatek from Aziz Habibi, a Moroccan meteorite dealer, in 2011, is a 319.8 g single stone, porphyritic basaltic monomict breccia

Dave12308
2015-Feb-27, 07:00 PM
Are you referring to the very recent fall in the farmer's field? If so, I think the analysis is suspect.

I have a serious question. Why is it that so much of this space stuff SEEMS interesting at first, and then upon further analysis ends up having a ho-hum explaination?

Are we ever going to find anything in space that doesn't turn out to be a disappointment?

CJSF
2015-Feb-27, 07:06 PM
Just about everything coming from LRO, Cassini, MRO, Opportunity, Curiosity, Mars Express, MOM and now Dawn and New Horizons are not disappointing to me at all. I mean, have you SEEN the data? Just from an aesthetic perspective, they are often breathtaking, and often raise all sorts of awesome questions for any one they answer. And I haven't even mentioned everything out there taking readings and pictures and etc! What about some of these things do you find so disappointing? Or were you just referring to meteor"wrongs"?

CJSF

Ara Pacis
2015-Feb-28, 05:51 AM
I have a serious question. Why is it that so much of this space stuff SEEMS interesting at first, and then upon further analysis ends up having a ho-hum explaination?

Are we ever going to find anything in space that doesn't turn out to be a disappointment?

Where are you getting your news? That funny hair guy who thinks everything is aliens might not be a good source. :)

Swift
2015-Feb-28, 03:13 PM
I have a serious question. Why is it that so much of this space stuff SEEMS interesting at first, and then upon further analysis ends up having a ho-hum explaination?

Are we ever going to find anything in space that doesn't turn out to be a disappointment?
As others have said, maybe because the popular media, Twitter, and the general public have an attention span measured in seconds. For example, I find everything about Comet 67P/Churyumov-Gerasimenko fascinating. But because we didn't find a space worm living on it, the popular media quickly lost interest.

Dave12308
2015-Feb-28, 05:11 PM
As others have said, maybe because the popular media, Twitter, and the general public have an attention span measured in seconds. For example, I find everything about Comet 67P/Churyumov-Gerasimenko fascinating. But because we didn't find a space worm living on it, the popular media quickly lost interest.

I guess you're right. We do find neat stuff, Ceres is cool as heck too. And Pluto is coming up soon. And I get the feeling once we start going more places we'll find more surprises.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Eclogite
2015-Feb-28, 07:06 PM
For me the interesting thing about NWA7034 is that it is petrologically quite different from any of the previous Martian meteorites. With one exception these Martian meteorites fall into one of three categories, all of basic igneous composition. (Chassignites- shocked dunites; Nakhlites - clinopyroxenties; Shergottites - basalts). The last time I dipped into the subject around four years ago there were one hundred and fourteen fragments of fifty six Martian meteorites, 85% of which were shergottites, the petrologically most diverse group. The single exception then that did not fit one of these three was the famous ALH84001, that Mackay and others argued contained nanofossils.

Now we have this brecciated sample that opens another small window on our fascinating neighbour. Regardless of the accuracy of the conclusions presented in the subject study, the mere existence of the sample is intriguing.