| Why this rock is probably not a meteorite:
The rock has what appears to be a glassy crust, and it's
dark. The ridges and protrusions of the rock have been partially
by abrasion or ablation. But, the rock has vesicles and meteorites
don't have vesicles.
|What is it?
Don't know. The finder of this rock says that it is one of many that
he found in an elliptical pattern in a dry lake bed that didn't have
other stones. That's a good story - one consistent with a meteorite
Note added later: The finder had the rock analyzed. It has
the composition of a terrestrial basalt. The rock was found in a desert.
That means that the glassy "crust" is really desert
Note and photos added even later: The middle photo is
another sent by the same finder of a different rock found in the
111 is yet another one. (Sorry - this fellow took really good
photos and it would be a shame not to use them.)
The bottom photo is one I stole from a website that
poses the hypothesis and presents some arguments that the rock and
others found with it are meteorites from Venus. (I
increased the contrast a bit from the original.) I include it here
because of the interesting similarity (!).
Here's my suggestion. Have some good petrographic thin sections
made of several samples - sections that include the alleged fusion
crust. Have the sections examined by a good petrologist. Fusion
crusts on stony meteorites consist of glass. Glass is easy to identify
thin section. If this "crust" is not glass, then these attractive
rocks are not meteorites.