meteorite or common earth rock?

[Michigan Badger]

A friend found this in his yard and I told him I'd run it by you experts.

It's magnetic and he's wondering if there's a far out chance it could be a real meteorite.

Personally I doubt it.

What do you think?

 

[chipveres]

Thanks, Scott. Silly me.

Chip V.

 

[Michigan Badger]

The 'meteor wrong' camp should think about providing an explanation rather than posting drive-by, one word opinions.

Ok , I'll chime back in. IMO The possible Meteorite in question does not appear to be a meteorite to me. The outside of the rock is smooth and rounded as if it has been rolling around in river water or glacier till. Meteorites are generally irregular in shape due to coming through the atmosphere, it's also referred to as thumbprints which this rock is lacking. The outside discoloration on this rock looks as if it has picked up soil mineralization as it has been laying around on the ground. When a meterorite has a burnt fusion crust it is generally a lot harsher burnt appearance than this rock has.

Good post and this is what I've been finding reading online.

Meteorites are really very rare. One expert claims only about 1 hits the U.S. per year. Most burn up before hitting the ground. But there is disagreement even amongst the so-called experts.

While a rare earth magnet may help in identifying a meteorite, I've found that about 10% of common rocks also respond to the magnet test so it's only a beginning step in the authenticating process.

badger

 

[GopherDaGold]

I believe the 'expert' is wrong. Many, many thousands of meteorites hit the earth each year, including the U.S. Unfortunately, most of them are the size of a grain of sand once the atmosphere has had it's way with them.

* expert - X is a Latin mathematical term for the unknown
spurt - drip under pressure

So an 'expert' is an unknown drip under pressure.

(yeah it sounds better when spoken, )

 

[PChammer]

The 'meteor wrong' camp should think about providing an explanation rather than posting drive-by, one word opinions.

Ok , I'll chime back in. IMO The possible Meteorite in question does not appear to be a meteorite to me. The outside of the rock is smooth and rounded as if it has been rolling around in river water or glacier till. Meteorites are generally irregular in shape due to coming through the atmosphere, it's also referred to as thumbprints which this rock is lacking. The outside discoloration on this rock looks as if it has picked up soil mineralization as it has been laying around on the ground. When a meterorite has a burnt fusion crust it is generally a lot harsher burnt appearance than this rock has.

Yes and no. It depends how long this meteorite has been here and what type. While only X amount hit, there are still a vast majority here and still being uncovered. The thumbprint which you refer can also be microscopic silicates which chondrites can contain, not visible to the naked eye, "and I doubt anyone is going to be able to tell that from the picture" and can look like typical earth rocks, weathered by nature in the same way. I'm not saying it is a meteorite, or that your conclusion is wrong, but it's not just as black and white as your statement suggests.

 

[Michigan Badger]

I should also mention that many of the rocks in my rock pile were metal detector "hot rocks."

As I dug them on the property (large) I piled them up by the building.

I found one that looked more the classic shape but wasn't magnetic.

Badger

 

[Tuberale]

May I ask, what's the thing sticking out of the rock in the first picture? Casting a square shadow?

Chip V.

As the poster wrote above, it's a rare earth magnet. I saw online where this is one test used to determine if it's a real meteorite and the magnet responds exactly as it should. Real meteorites are not too magnetic, this is ONE REASON why rare earth magnets are used to find them.

Thanks

Many proven meteorites are quite magnetic. I had a discussion with Dick Pugh, a retired meteoritical specialist with the Portland State University Meteorite Lab several months ago. He brought a collection of smaller meteorites with him. ALL were STRONGLY attracted to magnets. Of course, these are probably the easiest meteorites to find as well. The less common chondrites can appear frothy, soft, porous, and at least in Oregon's acidic climate, and degrade within a year.

 

[Tuberale]

I should also mention that many of the rocks in my rock pile were metal detector "hot rocks."

As I dug them on the property (large) I piled them up by the building.

I found one that looked more the classic shape but wasn't magnetic.

Badger

Here's another low-tech test for meteorites. It worked with the Willamette Meteorite, found in 1903 by Ellis Hughes about 15 miles from where I live. Strike the suspected stone with a hammer sharply. If the rock breaks, it may not be a meteorite. It you hear a ringing sound, as of a bell, it may well be a meteorite. Striking an iron-nickel meteorite with a small hammer is unlikely to produce fragments, but you should probably use goggles to protect your eyes, just in case. Ellis Hughes used a rock pick at first. The resulting gong was quite loud, similar to striking a 13.5-ton bell with a sledge hammer.

BTW, meteorites are not generally porous, either. But in the pioneer sense, porous meant "with holes". You might want to look at the Willamette Meteorite to see if there are any "holes" visible.

Regarding rounded meteoritical surfaces: there are some. There is even a famous meteorite that looks like a ring, with a large hole in the center of it!

Meteorites strike the earth constantly, day and night. Only recently has it been learned that larger meteorites striking the atmosphere are much more common than previously suspected. Some 25-50 world-wide strikes resulting in atomic-bomb-like blasts are known each year. Most meteorites are tiny. One way to find some, perhaps even on your home, is to take a magnet to where the downspouts from your house drain. There should be at least some tiny meteoritical fragments on almost everyone's house or roof.

While damage to roofs is not common, at least several houses or buildings have apparently been hit by meteorites over the last 100 years and been documented.

And lastly, one of the features many (but not all) meteorites have is a nose-cone-like top. Literally, this is how re-entry capsules for rockets and satellites were designed: based on the known rocks which already made it through the atmosphere.

 

[Michigan Badger]

May I ask, what's the thing sticking out of the rock in the first picture? Casting a square shadow?

Chip V.

As the poster wrote above, it's a rare earth magnet. I saw online where this is one test used to determine if it's a real meteorite and the magnet responds exactly as it should. Real meteorites are not too magnetic, this is ONE REASON why rare earth magnets are used to find them.

Thanks

Many proven meteorites are quite magnetic. I had a discussion with Dick Pugh, a retired meteoritical specialist with the Portland State University Meteorite Lab several months ago. He brought a collection of smaller meteorites with him. ALL were STRONGLY attracted to magnets. Of course, these are probably the easiest meteorites to find as well. The less common chondrites can appear frothy, soft, porous, and at least in Oregon's acidic climate, and degrade within a year.

Yes, I've heard that too. The info on meteorites is all over the board today. It seems that maybe the facts are starting to come together but one still finds all sorts of opinions and sometimes contradictions on the various forums and websites.

I did read on one site that meteorites tend not to be too magnetic but already I can see that if they aren't then one will have a difficult time separating them from the millions of common earth rocks.

One guy on another forum goes out west and hunts them with rare earth magnets. I have to believe they attract better than what I'm seeing here. But then my rocks are most likely not meteorites.

I have a lot of rocks here that barely attract a neodymium magnet. The real thing must have a much stronger attraction.

 

[Michigan Badger]

I should also mention that many of the rocks in my rock pile were metal detector "hot rocks."

As I dug them on the property (large) I piled them up by the building.

I found one that looked more the classic shape but wasn't magnetic.

Badger

Here's another low-tech test for meteorites. It worked with the Willamette Meteorite, found in 1903 by Ellis Hughes about 15 miles from where I live. Strike the suspected stone with a hammer sharply. If the rock breaks, it may not be a meteorite. It you hear a ringing sound, as of a bell, it may well be a meteorite. Striking an iron-nickel meteorite with a small hammer is unlikely to produce fragments, but you should probably use goggles to protect your eyes, just in case. Ellis Hughes used a rock pick at first. The resulting gong was quite loud, similar to striking a 13.5-ton bell with a sledge hammer.

BTW, meteorites are not generally porous, either. But in the pioneer sense, porous meant "with holes". You might want to look at the Willamette Meteorite to see if there are any "holes" visible.

Regarding rounded meteoritical surfaces: there are some. There is even a famous meteorite that looks like a ring, with a large hole in the center of it!

Meteorites strike the earth constantly, day and night. Only recently has it been learned that larger meteorites striking the atmosphere are much more common than previously suspected. Some 25-50 world-wide strikes resulting in atomic-bomb-like blasts are known each year. Most meteorites are tiny. One way to find some, perhaps even on your home, is to take a magnet to where the downspouts from your house drain. There should be at least some tiny meteoritical fragments on almost everyone's house or roof.

While damage to roofs is not common, at least several houses or buildings have apparently been hit by meteorites over the last 100 years and been documented.

And lastly, one of the features many (but not all) meteorites have is a nose-cone-like top. Literally, this is how re-entry capsules for rockets and satellites were designed: based on the known rocks which already made it through the atmosphere.

Very interesting post!
Thanks much.

Badger

 

[Tuberale]

May I ask, what's the thing sticking out of the rock in the first picture? Casting a square shadow?

Chip V.

As the poster wrote above, it's a rare earth magnet. I saw online where this is one test used to determine if it's a real meteorite and the magnet responds exactly as it should. Real meteorites are not too magnetic, this is ONE REASON why rare earth magnets are used to find them.

Thanks

Many proven meteorites are quite magnetic. I had a discussion with Dick Pugh, a retired meteoritical specialist with the Portland State University Meteorite Lab several months ago. He brought a collection of smaller meteorites with him. ALL were STRONGLY attracted to magnets. Of course, these are probably the easiest meteorites to find as well. The less common chondrites can appear frothy, soft, porous, and at least in Oregon's acidic climate, and degrade within a year.

Yes, I've heard that too. The info on meteorites is all over the board today. It seems that maybe the facts are starting to come together but one still finds all sorts of opinions and sometimes contradictions on the various forums and websites.

I did read on one site that meteorites tend not to be too magnetic but already I can see that if they aren't then one will have a difficult time separating them from the millions of common earth rocks.

One guy on another forum goes out west and hunts them with rare earth magnets. I have to believe they attract better than what I'm seeing here. But then my rocks are most likely not meteorites.

I have a lot of rocks here that barely attract a neodymium magnet. The real thing must have a much stronger attraction.

The material provided by Dick Pugh were strongly magnetic. At least one of the specimens was supposed to be from the Canyon Diablo meteorite impact. I believe I have a small piece of that same fall myself. Dick was not able to verify it with the specimen in hand, but did suggest it was quite possible, as hundreds if not thousands of pieces have been recovered from the general vicinity of Canyon Diablo.

 

[seekeroforo]

Ok, imho the possibility of it being a meteorite is there.

Here is my arguement:
1st - they have been striking this planet for billions of years

2nd - correct me if I am wrong but this item was found in Michigan? If so, the land has been gouged by glaciers for eons as well as have been scarred by glacial run-off. There is a chance that this item had been in a glacier or churned up by one or its run-off and then weathered to produce the rounded contour.

3rd - It has been fractured at some point in its existence which can be seen from the outer surface differing in color than the inner.

4th - the difference in coloration for the inside to outside is due to solar radiation "bleaching" or creating a sun-soaked patina.

Hope this helps or spurs more thoughts from others here.

~Seeker~

 

[IronSpike]

Maybe bring your friends rock along with your rocks to a local 'expert' so the rocks can be examined in person?

Seekeroforo got a good point with location of find as well as fact that these 'rare earth magnet' rocks aren't common finds.

 

[Michigan Badger]

Ok, imho the possibility of it being a meteorite is there.

Here is my arguement:
1st - they have been striking this planet for billions of years

2nd - correct me if I am wrong but this item was found in Michigan? If so, the land has been gouged by glaciers for eons as well as have been scarred by glacial run-off. There is a chance that this item had been in a glacier or churned up by one or its run-off and then weathered to produce the rounded contour.

3rd - It has been fractured at some point in its existence which can be seen from the outer surface differing in color than the inner.

4th - the difference in coloration for the inside to outside is due to solar radiation "bleaching" or creating a sun-soaked patina.

Hope this helps or spurs more thoughts from others here.

~Seeker~

WOW! Thanks, Seeker! I never even thought about these things. Sometimes we forget this planet has been around for a long time. Very good points.

Yes, this was found in Michigan (all were).
badger

 

[seekeroforo]

You got it Badger,

By no means am I an expert on meteorites and I do think expert examination is in order. I am just a humble geological hobbyist looking to spur motivation and further avenues for thought.

I hope this one turns out well for you.

On a side note, it could be of magmatic origin as there is some volcanic history to your region (as it is mine in northern MN, western shores of Superior have old flows or batholiths exposed). It appears as though it could be some type of granitic or schist type origin based on the pic as well.

~Seeker~

 

[Michigan Badger]

Thanks, Seeker.

And too as one considers the great age of the planet--maybe meteorites aren't really all that uncommon? Maybe we're just beginning to learn to recognize them.

badger

 

[traderoftreasures]

Don't know what part of Michigan your from, but in this map, i think the pink is most magnetic.
here is a quote from usgs..http://pubs.usgs.gov/ds/ds411/mi_desc.htm
Michigan Magnetic Data Compilation
Magnetic anomalies are due to variations in the Earth's magnetic field caused by the uneven distribution of magnetic minerals (primarily magnetite) in rocks that make up the upper part of the Earth's crust. The features and patterns of the magnetic anomalies can be used to delineate details of subsurface geology, including the locations of buried faults and magnetite-bearing rocks and the depth to the base of sedimentary basins. This information is valuable for mineral exploration, geologic mapping, and environmental studies.

The Michigan magnetic map is constructed from grids that combine information (see data processing details) collected in 25 separate magnetic surveys conducted between 1947 and 1999. The data from these surveys are of varying quality. The design and specifications (terrain clearance, sampling rates, line spacing, and reduction procedures) varied from survey to survey depending on the purpose of the project and the technology of that time. Every attempt was made to acquire the data in digital form. Most of the available digital data, (USGS Open-File Report 02-361), were obtained from magnetic surveys flown by or on contract with the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) or were obtained from other Federal agencies. Many of the pre-1975 surveys were available only on hand-contoured maps from the (USGS) and through contractors and had to be digitized. These maps were digitized along flight-line/contour-line intersections, considered to be the most accurate method of recovering the original data. Digitized data are available in USGS Open-File Report 99-0557. Some of the magnetic surveys were flown at 305 m (~ 1000 feet). The other magnetic surveys were mathematically continued to 305 meters (~1,000 feet) above ground before all were merged together to form the State compilation. The merging parameters were designed to favor higher quality data. An index map shows the location of the original surveys, and a data table summarizes the detailed specifications of the surveys.

Grids for all Michigan magnetic and gravity maps are in Geosoft Oasis montaj binary format (downloadable free software for conversions to other grid formats is available at www.geosoft.com) and are available in the data directory. Oasis map files, help, and metadata files are also included in the data directory, as well as ASCII gravity data files.

Our priority in the construction of the State of Michigan magnetic compilation was always to acquire the highest resolution magnetic data sets for any given area (see the Michigan magnetic data index map). Where local high-resolution magnetic survey data were not available, in either digital or digitized format (mainly the southern peninsula of the State), aeromagnetic data collected by the National Uranium Resource Evaluation (NURE) program of the U.S. Department of Energy were used. These NURE data are available in digital format and cover the entire State. However, because magnetic surveying was not the primary objective in the design of the NURE surveys, these data are subject to certain limitations. Although the NURE surveys were flown at elevations close to the reduction datum level, the spacing between flight lines was 9,600 m (~6 mi). Therefore any magnetic anomalies that originate in surface rocks are poorly represented by widely spaced flight lines. However, the areas where the NURE data were used in the compilation are underlain by thick sequences of sedimentary rocks, which usually have very weak magnetic properties.

An all-analog compilation of Michigan aeromagnetic surveys was published by Zietz and others (1974). Since that time, 13 additional magnetic surveys have been flown and are part of this new digital compilation.

 

[Michigan Badger]

Thanks much traderoftreasure for taking your time to post all of this.

badger

 

[Breezie]

I know very little about meteorites, but have always found them interesting. Hopefully it's the real deal. Breezie

 

[Michigan Badger]

I know very little about meteorites, but have always found them interesting. Hopefully it's the real deal. Breezie

Thanks, Breezie.

Badger