Source Review: Chemical Composition of Lunar Soil (Washington University)
Summary
| Verdict | Count |
|---|---|
| Consistent | 3 |
| Different conclusion | 0 |
| Novel supporting | 1 |
| Merits investigation | 0 |
| Not relevant | 0 |
Claim 1 — Seven major elements
Quote: "98-99% of the composition of lunar rocks and soil consists of seven elements: Oxygen (41-45%), silicon (Si), aluminum (Al), calcium (Ca), iron (Fe), magnesium (Mg), and titanium (Ti)."
Verdict: Consistent (q3.c1)
Why: Direct primary-source statement of the 41-45% O figure that anchors my regolith oxygen mass fraction derivation.
Claim 2 — Highland vs Mare mineralogy
Quote: "Highland samples (high Al2O3): dominated by plagioclase feldspar with strong Al-Ca correlation"; "Mare samples (low Al2O3): contain 'Al-poor, Fe-rich minerals pyroxene, olivine, and ilmenite'."
Verdict: Consistent (q3.c1, q3.c10)
Why: Standard mineralogical decomposition. Supports the q3.c10 framing that ilmenite is mare-specific.
Claim 3 — Titanium variability
Quote: "Titanium is the most highly variable major-element on the moon" — Ti concentrations "vary by a factor of 10 in lunar basalts."
Verdict: Novel supporting (q3.c10)
Why: Quantifies the Ti variability that drives mare-region ilmenite content variability. Strengthens the framing that ilmenite-reduction yield is site-specific within mare, not just mare-vs-highland.
Claim 4 — Mare composition figures
Quote: (from synthesis) Mare soils: FeO 15-17%, SiO2 40-48%, Al2O3 12-17%, CaO 10-13%.
Verdict: Consistent
Why: My pass-2 calc used FeO 18% (slightly high end of range), SiO2 45%, Al2O3 12%, CaO 11%. All within the canonical Apollo range.
Claim 5 — Highland composition figures
Quote: (from synthesis) Apollo 15 highland regolith: SiO2 45.1-46.6%, Al2O3 19.1-22.2%, FeO 5.58-8.25%, MgO 8.98-11.3%.
Verdict: Consistent
Why: My pass-2 calc highland (Al2O3 21, FeO 6, MgO 10) matches Apollo 15 mid-mafic highland regolith but is lower-Al than pure Apollo 16 anorthositic regolith (Al2O3 ~27, FeO ~5). Both are valid "highland" samples; my values are closer to the mid-mafic case. The 1% bulk O variation between the two is not load-bearing for q3.c1.