Jump to content
Nugget Shooter Forums

Impact Physics

Nugget Shooter Members
  • Posts

    2
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

Everything posted by Impact Physics

  1. Celuke, It appears my evidence has been ignored and not taken into any serious consideration, as I suspected. Hence, why the subject-thread goes into a comedy routine, vs. any substantial data/pictorial evidence showing common terrestrial-iron that exhibit these same crystal features. Check into the subject of "Neumann Bands/lines," found only within high-pressure shocked iron-type meteorites. It does not take an expert or prop-comic to see they are connected with the same high-pressure shock process, as do the photographic samples I have presented that also compare to your own. As far as magnetism is concerned, the magnetic field around the Earth has changed many times throughout the last 66 million years. Should you heat up your sample until it glows red, you will rearrange the electrons, and find that it sticks to a magnet like glue. These comedians will "never" be able to show "photographic evidence" of such a "common" piece of iron exhibiting these type of features. However, they will be able to throw some more bad jokes out there. That's the common/easy way to go. My sole intention was to give you a new avenue of research for your important specimen, and certainly not change the minds of this comedy circuit going on around these parts. "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence," I believe Carl Sagan said that. "Extraordinary evidence requires extraordinary observation," I said that. And, that ain't here. - James Tate
  2. I must respectively disagree with the common consensus here, regarding the specimen at hand. Yes, this is a form of Hematite Iron (Fe2O3) or possibly (Fe4O5), and agreed, this is not a meteorite. The sample in question is actually an "impactite," formed from vaporized/melted (Fe) during an asteroid impact event involving extreme heat/pressure circumstances. I can imagine the previous posters are crying "bloody murder it is," at this very moment of reading. I get that. However, true science involves the "consideration" of new evidence presented and the observation thereof. Here's my new evidence for all to ponder and ultimately decide upon yourselves. Figure 1: The photo (above) shows impact-related samples (exhibiting known reoccurring Tektite Shapes) that exactly match the characteristics from the originally posted iron-rich object in question. These samples have had XRF and ICP (ppm) Tests performed with very interesting results. The Iron (Fe) measures an average of 95% weight, and many exotic trace elements exceed normal (ppm) numbers. However, these are merely claims that accompany a photograph. The true evidence here is the notation of Size/Distribution evidence, as found within the study of Impact-Related objects such as Tektites/Spherules. Meaning, the materials formed within the confines of an impact-related event exhibit a Size Limitation. The same process as Hailstones falling in your yard. All of the pieces developed from the same process and each hailstone will always be a similar size as the one next to it. Iron-Rich Concretions have no size limit. It's purely dependent upon the chemical nucleation via particles and water/liquid transfer. The size limit should vary widely, with some the size of a coin, and some the size of a bowling ball or larger. Concretions also contain an abundant amount of the host constituent, usually (Si) Silicon Rock. How would an object achieve 95% pure Iron Particles under those terrestrial-concretionary circumstances? Please correct me if I'm wrong regarding any of this data. Figure 2: Showing a rare "in situ" example of the iron material in question, embedded within a gray stone matrix, and a broken/sliced sample, both exhibiting a radial crystalline structure. This photo illustrates and promotes the ultimate question. Did the Iron-Rich Sample form inside the gray rock matrix via water flow, or was it deposited there by other circumstances? That's the real question here. Is it not? Figure 3: A 60x view exhibiting black glassy micro-particles interpreted as micro-tektites from the gray rock matrix featured in Figure 2 (above). Such evidence is a common diagnostic feature well-studied within the field of asteroid impact-related science. Figure 4: Reveals a shocked melt vein exhibiting (PDFs) planar deformation features (from figure 2 sample), a diagnostic feature "only" found and observed within impact-related and generated events involving extreme heat/pressure on the materials involved. Does this conclusively prove the Iron sample was involved and created during an asteroid impact event? Well, it should certainly "suggest" it. However, one more important question should be promoted. If the Iron sample was deposited within a rock matrix showing clear and definitive signs of high-pressure impact-related shock, does the Iron-Rich Material also show signs/evidence of High Pressure Shock Deformation? It's a fair observational scientific question, and yes...it does. Figure 5: Showing a 60x view of the radial crystalline structure of the Iron Samples in questions. The structure shows evidence of "Iron Deformation Twinning" and "Shear Faulting," a feature only observed within High-Pressure experiments conducted in iron alloy research. Google it and tell me it ain't so. Well, I've presented my case and I'm curios as to what the interpretations and replies will be. Sincerely, James Tate
×
×
  • Create New...