Talk:Iron meteorite
 | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Inappropriate link removal
editI do not agree with users Mannheim_34 and Ohnoitsjamie with their removal of any link to webpages hosted on a commercial website (almost any .com domain). I expressed my opinion here and here. I ask to the community: are these in your opinion links to "web pages that primarily exist to sell products or services, or to web pages with objectionable amounts of advertising"?
- Meteorite charts on meteorite.fr
- Iron meteorites: relations between structural and chemical groups of iron meteorites
- Chemical Classification of Iron Meteorites
I don't want to start an edit war so if you agree with my point of view please restore any suitable reference removed [1] from this article. Thanks. -- Basilicofresco (msg) 22:21, 18 March 2009 (UTC)
positiv and negativ?
editIn the chemical classification system, there are several "correlation negativ"s and "correlation positv"s. Usually negative and positive end in e. Are negativ and positiv used in the chemical classification of meteorites, or is this just a mispelling?--Wikimedes (talk) 00:00, 29 December 2012 (UTC)
- Probably a spelling mistake. I was anyway thinking of removing those overly detailed listings of trace elements. The average reader of this article is not going to care about Germanium concentrations. I was thinking of redrawing a picture like this one (http://www.psrd.hawaii.edu/WebImg/ironMetGroups.gif) instead of the text. --Tobias1984 (talk) 09:54, 29 December 2012 (UTC)
Magmatic vs. non-Magmatic
editWithin the relevant paragraph section, we need an explanation or definition of the difference between "Magmatic" (igneous?) and "non-Magmatic" iron meteorites. Wikipedia in general seems to neglect this topic. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 204.85.11.149 (talk) 14:00, 29 July 2013 (UTC)
- We have Nonmagmatic meteorite. The subject of meteorite classification and interpretation is difficult and needs a lot more work. In general I would say that magmatic is "typical igneous" while non-magmatic really means formed by a process that does not quite look typical igneous. The literature at the bottom of Nonmagmatic meteorite should be helpful. --Tobias1984 (talk) 14:13, 29 July 2013 (UTC)
Effect of gravity on Widmanstätten pattern formation in meteorites
editWhat is the effect of gravity on Widmanstätten pattern formation in meteorites? Why is it that iron/nickel metallic meteorites (and M-type asteroids?) seem to have so much of this sort of metal crystallization? and we don't find similar patterns, or find them frequently, on Earth?
I came to this article to try to learn something about this, and was a bit surprised to not find it addressed.
What is unique about space and formation that makes these interesting patterns so prevalent? Cheers. N2e (talk) 23:54, 4 March 2019 (UTC)
- @N2e: I am not sure if gravity has an influence on the patterns. If you think of a cooling rock there are usually not big density differences between the mineral phases and gravity has little importance. The exception is Anorthosite, where the less-dense Anorthite crystals separated from the magma and floated to the top when the moon was formed. - Very metallic melts are difficult to get in the Earth's crust. So I would assume that that is the reason we don't find any of those patterns in terrestrial rocks. - Your question "unique about space and formation that makes these interesting patterns so prevalent" is I think answered well in the Widmanstätten pattern. The pattern is just the typical product of its chemistry. And that chemistry just happens to be common in the rocks that happen to be landing on our planet. --Tobias1984 (talk) 18:07, 17 June 2019 (UTC)