Sixty 
THE SOUTH AUSTRALIAN NATURALIST 
June, 1953 
smallest lens is one-sixth of a 
gram, but there may be smaller 
ones too difficult to find. In the 
larger lenses the rim was often 
fractured off, being brittle because 
of its rapid cooling in the lower 
atmosphere, and thus we get the 
lens “core,” second commonest in 
form. The largest are “bung- 
shaped,” and in rare cases are over 
200 grams. 
It is thought that the oval or 
elongate types may have grown 
longer as they spun, sometimes be- 
coming dumb-bell or pear-shaped 
types; in some cases perhaps these 
finally flew into two pieces form- 
ing “tear-drops.” Some elongate 
forms developed flanges, and even 
in rare cases this was so with tear 
drops. 
Since, as Suess has emphasized, 
and the present writer has shown 
by a detailed analysis of several 
large collections of form types, 
the Australites are confined to a 
“rather small number of well- 
defined types of shapes” (Suess), 
apparently developed by their 
flight in semi-liquid form through 
a gas, and since also their distri- 
bution, their internal and external 
structures, chemical composition, 
and refractive indices, are well 
known, it would appear that the 
next appropriate step in the en- 
quiry as to their origin should be 
a mathematical analysis of their 
shapes, as indicated by the writer 
in Australites, Part III, pp. 197- 
206, etc. (Trans. Roy. Soc. S.A., 
vol. 62 (2), 1938.) 
Many contain gas bubbles, often 
minute, and mostly burst. One 
specimen (Melbourne Museum) is 
a large hollow sphere, about 11- 
inc.hes in diameter. The interior 
was originally occupied by a gas. 
When this specimen was cut in 
two the gas was not collected, but 
workers on other specimens have 
asserted that the gas is mostly 
carbon dioxide and carbon mon- 
oxide. The specific gravity is fairly 
constant, but on its variations 
Baker considers they all fell in one 
swarm, moving from NW to SE. 
Large numbers must have fallen 
into the adjacent seas. 
In June, 1939, the writer pre- 
pared an article on Australites, 
entitled “Blackfellows Buttons.” 
This appeared in “The Sky,” New 
York, and concluded with the fol- 
lowing paragraph: “Tektites have 
now been reported from Europe, 
Asia, Africa, Australia and South 
America. It can scarcely be 
doubted that one or more showers 
await discovery in North America.” 
in June, 1940, Virgil Barnes pub- 
lished his first paper on North 
American tektites (Bediasites, 
Texas). Probably there are more 
swarms yet to be discovered. 
With all that we know of Aus- 
tralites, and of other tektites, no 
positive proof is available as to 
their origin, except that they are 
glassy, were molten, and that they 
came from outside the earth. 
Naturalists, keeping in mind the 
known facts, can therefore theorize 
about them to their heart’s con- 
tent. As was said long ago of the 
fly in the amber: 
“The wonder is not why nor 
where. 
But how the deuce the thing 
got there.” 
The facts and theories in this 
paper are based on forty years’ 
study of australites and other tek- 
tites, including the weighing, 
measuring, and classification of 
many thousands of these objects, 
