Talk:1723: Meteorite Identification - Revision history

Ironeagl at 16:00, 27 April 2025

2025-04-27T16:00:56Z

Ата: comment

2018-09-25T07:42:58Z

comment

Dgbrt at 17:11, 24 September 2018

2018-09-24T17:11:46Z

Ата at 20:04, 22 September 2018

2018-09-22T20:04:33Z

Kynde at 07:58, 1 September 2016

2016-09-01T07:58:18Z

Kynde at 20:50, 23 August 2016

2016-08-23T20:50:06Z

Kynde at 20:32, 23 August 2016

2016-08-23T20:32:54Z

108.162.215.125 at 19:33, 23 August 2016

2016-08-23T19:33:41Z

Joshupetersen at 18:15, 23 August 2016

2016-08-23T18:15:44Z

Hkmaly at 12:55, 23 August 2016

2016-08-23T12:55:24Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 16:00, 27 April 2025
Line 41:		Line 41:
	I think it's important to note that from a certain perspective, this graph is wrong 100% of the time. Technically, speaking from a super-geological timeframe, our planet is nothing but a big mashed up mass of meteorites... or would our planet simply be a large meteoroid and thus not a meteorite yet as we have not finished plummeting into the sun? [[User:Joshupetersen\|Joshupetersen]] ([[User talk:Joshupetersen\|talk]])		I think it's important to note that from a certain perspective, this graph is wrong 100% of the time. Technically, speaking from a super-geological timeframe, our planet is nothing but a big mashed up mass of meteorites... or would our planet simply be a large meteoroid and thus not a meteorite yet as we have not finished plummeting into the sun? [[User:Joshupetersen\|Joshupetersen]] ([[User talk:Joshupetersen\|talk]])
	:As Earth has now cleared it's trajectory around the sun it is deemed a planet and thus not a meteoroid. Any stone that has been molten after landing on the Earth is now part of the Earth. This thus rules out all rocks that hit the Earth before it got a solid crust in the first place. Any rock that can be determined to have fallen to Earth after that, and has never been molten after landing is a meteorite and not a part of the original Earth. So technically you comment is, from any perspective, 100% wrong all the time ;-) --[[User:Kynde\|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde\|talk]]) 20:32, 23 August 2016 (UTC)		:As Earth has now cleared it's trajectory around the sun it is deemed a planet and thus not a meteoroid. Any stone that has been molten after landing on the Earth is now part of the Earth. This thus rules out all rocks that hit the Earth before it got a solid crust in the first place. Any rock that can be determined to have fallen to Earth after that, and has never been molten after landing is a meteorite and not a part of the original Earth. So technically you comment is, from any perspective, 100% wrong all the time ;-) --[[User:Kynde\|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde\|talk]]) 20:32, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
		+
		+	Not entirely sure where this would be on the chart, but might actually go through the "did someone see it fall" box? Given the statement that it was identified as a chondrite... https://www.bbc.com/news/videos/cly9vl9jjkvo [[User:Ironeagl\|Ironeagl]] ([[User talk:Ironeagl\|talk]]) 16:00, 27 April 2025 (UTC)

@@ Line 11: / Line 11: @@
 :::Looks like the chart was updated since then; now it has "No" arrow that also leads to "not a meteorite" -- [[User:Ата|<span style="color:SteelBlue">Ата</span>]]&nbsp;<sup>[[User talk:Ата|<span style="color:#80A0FF">(talk)</span>]]</sup> 20:04, 22 September 2018 (UTC)
 ::::What chart? What "No" arrow? Not this comic. --[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 17:11, 24 September 2018 (UTC)
 I'm wondering if this is related to the recent claims in British newspapers (Warning, Daily Mail content [http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3745346/Homeowner-makes-world-discovery-glowing-METEORITE-lands-garden-lights-cigarette-it.html Link] [[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.83|141.101.98.83]] 12:27, 22 August 2016 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 17:11, 24 September 2018
Line 10:		Line 10:

	:::Looks like the chart was updated since then; now it has "No" arrow that also leads to "not a meteorite" -- [[User:Ата\|<span style="color:SteelBlue">Ата</span>]] <sup>[[User talk:Ата\|<span style="color:#80A0FF">(talk)</span>]]</sup> 20:04, 22 September 2018 (UTC)		:::Looks like the chart was updated since then; now it has "No" arrow that also leads to "not a meteorite" -- [[User:Ата\|<span style="color:SteelBlue">Ата</span>]] <sup>[[User talk:Ата\|<span style="color:#80A0FF">(talk)</span>]]</sup> 20:04, 22 September 2018 (UTC)
		+	::::What chart? What "No" arrow? Not this comic. --[[User:Dgbrt\|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt\|talk]]) 17:11, 24 September 2018 (UTC)

	I'm wondering if this is related to the recent claims in British newspapers (Warning, Daily Mail content [http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3745346/Homeowner-makes-world-discovery-glowing-METEORITE-lands-garden-lights-cigarette-it.html Link] [[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.83\|141.101.98.83]] 12:27, 22 August 2016 (UTC)		I'm wondering if this is related to the recent claims in British newspapers (Warning, Daily Mail content [http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3745346/Homeowner-makes-world-discovery-glowing-METEORITE-lands-garden-lights-cigarette-it.html Link] [[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.83\|141.101.98.83]] 12:27, 22 August 2016 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 20:04, 22 September 2018
Line 8:		Line 8:

	::: I assume the reason for that is that the chart has run out of ideas why you'd even think it's a meteorite at that point [[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.59\|141.101.98.59]] 08:30, 23 August 2016 (UTC)		::: I assume the reason for that is that the chart has run out of ideas why you'd even think it's a meteorite at that point [[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.59\|141.101.98.59]] 08:30, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
		+
		+	:::Looks like the chart was updated since then; now it has "No" arrow that also leads to "not a meteorite" -- [[User:Ата\|<span style="color:SteelBlue">Ата</span>]] <sup>[[User talk:Ата\|<span style="color:#80A0FF">(talk)</span>]]</sup> 20:04, 22 September 2018 (UTC)

	I'm wondering if this is related to the recent claims in British newspapers (Warning, Daily Mail content [http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3745346/Homeowner-makes-world-discovery-glowing-METEORITE-lands-garden-lights-cigarette-it.html Link] [[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.83\|141.101.98.83]] 12:27, 22 August 2016 (UTC)		I'm wondering if this is related to the recent claims in British newspapers (Warning, Daily Mail content [http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3745346/Homeowner-makes-world-discovery-glowing-METEORITE-lands-garden-lights-cigarette-it.html Link] [[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.83\|141.101.98.83]] 12:27, 22 August 2016 (UTC)

@@ Line 22: / Line 22: @@
 Yeah, I can't even get on it. {{unsigned ip|162.158.75.27}}
 Well, thanks Randall for 'borrowing' my chart ....
@@ Line 30: / Line 29: @@
 UPDATE: I have heard from Randall and we're sorting things out! --[[Special:Contributions/108.162.215.125|108.162.215.125]] 04:25, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
 :Interesting, have included this in a trivia! What did you sort out then? Guess he just got the same idea from the chart he links to, as you had...? --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 20:32, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
 »Any meteor big enough to glow and be visible while falling will leave a large impact crater, rather than simply sit on the ground as a rock.« Doesn't many meteors break up and fragment while still in the air? Such an event could be highly visible on the sky yet yield meteorites sitting on the ground. --[[Special:Contributions/141.101.80.70|141.101.80.70]] 09:03, 23 August 2016 (UTC)

@@ Line 29: / Line 29: @@
 UPDATE: I have heard from Randall and we're sorting things out! --[[Special:Contributions/108.162.215.125|108.162.215.125]] 04:25, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
 »Any meteor big enough to glow and be visible while falling will leave a large impact crater, rather than simply sit on the ground as a rock.« Doesn't many meteors break up and fragment while still in the air? Such an event could be highly visible on the sky yet yield meteorites sitting on the ground. --[[Special:Contributions/141.101.80.70|141.101.80.70]] 09:03, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
 :The missing bit is IMHO that for finding meteorite based on seeing it fall it would need to be still visible in low attitudes. In case of breakup, you will see the breakup but will have no way to guess where the meteors landed, as the breakup will change the trajectory. -- [[User:Hkmaly|Hkmaly]] ([[User talk:Hkmaly|talk]]) 12:55, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
 I think it's important to note that from a certain perspective, this graph is wrong 100% of the time. Technically, speaking from a super-geological timeframe, our planet is nothing but a big mashed up mass of meteorites... or would our planet simply be a large meteoroid and thus not a meteorite yet as we have not finished plummeting into the sun? [[User:Joshupetersen|Joshupetersen]] ([[User talk:Joshupetersen|talk]])

@@ Line 24: / Line 24: @@
-Well, thanks Randall for stealing my chart ....
+Well, thanks Randall for 'borrowing' my chart ....
 http://www.mindat.org/forum.php?read,11,279733,279757
-(and yes, I emailed a linkt to this to Randall in 2013) --[[Special:Contributions/108.162.215.125|108.162.215.125]] 04:25, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
+UPDATE: I have heard from Randall and we're sorting things out! --[[Special:Contributions/108.162.215.125|108.162.215.125]] 04:25, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
 »Any meteor big enough to glow and be visible while falling will leave a large impact crater, rather than simply sit on the ground as a rock.« Doesn't many meteors break up and fragment while still in the air? Such an event could be highly visible on the sky yet yield meteorites sitting on the ground. --[[Special:Contributions/141.101.80.70|141.101.80.70]] 09:03, 23 August 2016 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 18:15, 23 August 2016
Line 33:		Line 33:

	:The missing bit is IMHO that for finding meteorite based on seeing it fall it would need to be still visible in low attitudes. In case of breakup, you will see the breakup but will have no way to guess where the meteors landed, as the breakup will change the trajectory. -- [[User:Hkmaly\|Hkmaly]] ([[User talk:Hkmaly\|talk]]) 12:55, 23 August 2016 (UTC)		:The missing bit is IMHO that for finding meteorite based on seeing it fall it would need to be still visible in low attitudes. In case of breakup, you will see the breakup but will have no way to guess where the meteors landed, as the breakup will change the trajectory. -- [[User:Hkmaly\|Hkmaly]] ([[User talk:Hkmaly\|talk]]) 12:55, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
		+
		+	I think it's important to note that from a certain perspective, this graph is wrong 100% of the time. Technically, speaking from a super-geological timeframe, our planet is nothing but a big mashed up mass of meteorites... or would our planet simply be a large meteoroid and thus not a meteorite yet as we have not finished plummeting into the sun? [[User:Joshupetersen\|Joshupetersen]] ([[User talk:Joshupetersen\|talk]])

← Older revision		Revision as of 12:55, 23 August 2016
Line 31:		Line 31:

	»Any meteor big enough to glow and be visible while falling will leave a large impact crater, rather than simply sit on the ground as a rock.« Doesn't many meteors break up and fragment while still in the air? Such an event could be highly visible on the sky yet yield meteorites sitting on the ground. --[[Special:Contributions/141.101.80.70\|141.101.80.70]] 09:03, 23 August 2016 (UTC)		»Any meteor big enough to glow and be visible while falling will leave a large impact crater, rather than simply sit on the ground as a rock.« Doesn't many meteors break up and fragment while still in the air? Such an event could be highly visible on the sky yet yield meteorites sitting on the ground. --[[Special:Contributions/141.101.80.70\|141.101.80.70]] 09:03, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
		+
		+	:The missing bit is IMHO that for finding meteorite based on seeing it fall it would need to be still visible in low attitudes. In case of breakup, you will see the breakup but will have no way to guess where the meteors landed, as the breakup will change the trajectory. -- [[User:Hkmaly\|Hkmaly]] ([[User talk:Hkmaly\|talk]]) 12:55, 23 August 2016 (UTC)