Jump to content
Nugget Shooter Forums

Help with Identification


Recommended Posts

Rock6UL.jpg

Rock4UL.jpg

Rock2UL.jpg

Rock1UL.jpg

Hi, I'm a newbie from the UK, great site, I wish we had some of the opportunites you do over there! There's plenty to find here, but we do lack a decent desert...:)

I wonder if anyone can help? I've had this lying about for nearly 20 years and originally thought it was some kind of furnace slag or similar, but was told by someone who specialises in such things that it isn't. I've done my best to look at all the meteor wrongs over the years and know this has a couple of things against it, but there's just something odd about its composition and I'd like to know what kind of rcck it really is.

1) It's vaguley mushroom-shaped, rounded on top and flatter underneath. It is - or was, I was trying to break off a sample and it fell more or less in two - approximately 4.5 inches by 3 inches, 1.5 inches thick. The side I call the top is rounded and flares out into a slight rim, the base has deeper dents in its surface, but is flatter, with a more melted look.

2) It weighs 24oz and feels quite heavy for its size.

3) There were no other stones of a similar type near it.

2) It doesn't produce a mark on a tile, except at one slightly glassy point on the underside which left a very thin black line before petering out. It scratches tiles rather than marking them.

3) It's magnetic, most heavily in a thin top layer and less moving down beyond about a quarter of an inch, lessening as you go down the interior towards the base. It also has various points on both the top, rim and base where actual metal is visible and is very magnetic.

4) Internally it has at least two types of crystals, some within holes. These range from soft yellow to deep amber (see 1b, hard to see at first)), most only just visible to the naked eye, though some are larger. It also has white, flat flecks of a different metal that's whiter, varying from tiny to about an eighth across. I can see a couple of places where this substance is in rectanguar shape.

5) I can see that it also has tiny pieces of what is obviously metal through most of it, in flecks and in larger pieces. There are various sizes of spheres in the upper parts, although they look like metal too, it's hard to tell at this size whether it really is metal or is some sort of glassy material that just looks like metal. I wet and dried a small portion of the stonier material in the exposed lower portion and it looks quite metallic too (see picture), and again it includes some shinier, larger flecks of metal within it and white-brown flat flecks of metal.

6) It looks like a metal rich stone of some kind that has been exposed to a lot of heat that has melted the surface and left a skin of metal in the top and parts of the rim and base as the stoney material burned away. The flecks and distribution o fhte spheres in it is odd though.

7) It has some vesicules, so not a meteor, but these are only within the parts of the rock that have been melted.

8) I had a home nickel test but didn't get any reactions, though I didn't have enough to do all of it.

So, doesn't seem like a meteor and yet has one or two similarities. What is it? Can anyone identify the minerals within it? Any information about what it could be will be gratefully received:)

I hope the attached pics work, I have more if necessary.

Geist

Link to post
Share on other sites
My "wag" would still be slag of some sort...regardless of the expert's opinion...perhaps you found an old refinery from the bronze age....

fred

Hi Fred, thanks for getting back to me. That was my first thought too (actually, I thought it was Saxon), so the guy I contacted is pretty much THE UK expert on early metallurgy from prehistoric times and he said no. Would it have crystals and spherical inclusions if it were slag? And why is it stony with metal inclusions I wonder? I'm thinking natural, but I really can't identify it. I don't know if this is useful, but the thing spent about 10 years outside in a Bonsai pot and didn't corroded at all. Also, I found it lying top up, half buried and obviously there for quite a long time, so I imagine it's very weathered, (it wasn't rusted when I found it either). Got me beat.

Geist

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello Geist,

Welcome to the forum. It is possible that your stone is a meteorite but, not likely. In your second photo, looking at the "inside", there are lots of vesicles. Also in the same photo, but in the "base" area, the surface has quite a few ruptured vesicles. They are not regmaglypts (thumbprints). There is a difference physically. Take a good look at the texture and formation of the glypts on any known meteorite, you'll see the differences. The first photo of the exterior, "top" look the best but, there's still the problem of the interior vesicles. Sorry. If you like, you may yet want to abrade a window in a "corner" of the stone to get a better look at the interior with a diamond file or a sharpening stone. Getting to know your meteor-wrongs is the second-best step to finding a meteor-right. You have already embarked on the first-best step: taking the time and trouble to look, and ask questions. Don't stop hunting.

Best Regards, Ben

Link to post
Share on other sites
Hello Geist,

Welcome to the forum. It is possible that your stone is a meteorite but, not likely. In your second photo, looking at the "inside", there are lots of vesicles. Also in the same photo, but in the "base" area, the surface has quite a few ruptured vesicles. They are not regmaglypts (thumbprints). There is a difference physically. Take a good look at the texture and formation of the glypts on any known meteorite, you'll see the differences. The first photo of the exterior, "top" look the best but, there's still the problem of the interior vesicles. Sorry. If you like, you may yet want to abrade a window in a "corner" of the stone to get a better look at the interior with a diamond file or a sharpening stone. Getting to know your meteor-wrongs is the second-best step to finding a meteor-right. You have already embarked on the first-best step: taking the time and trouble to look, and ask questions. Don't stop hunting.

Best Regards, Ben

Hi Both, thanks for the suggestions. I know the vesicules are a killer for it being a meteor, but I'm still intrigued as to what mineral it is. I've looked at all the meteor identifications sites over the last few years and looked at what must be hundreds of rights and wrongs, as I'm a keen rock-hunter. It does have some similarities to some I've seen, in particular an oriented pallasite (I have pictures of 3 with very similar exteriors, but again, the vesicules)...As you'll see on one of the pic's I made a smooth window in the interior using wet and dry sandpaper and it shows flecks of metal through the stone all the way to the base, that look like the flakes in the picture on the site that Homefire suggested. Magnetic, metal inclusions, no marks on a tile, spheres, melted crust - this thing really has me beat. Thanks for everyone's input, if anyone can point me towards any further ideas about what kind of rock it is I'd be grateful, I don't want another 20 years of guessing!:)

Geist

Link to post
Share on other sites
this thing really has me beat. Thanks for everyone's input, if anyone can point me towards any further ideas about what kind of rock it is I'd be grateful, I don't want another 20 years of guessing!:)

Geist

I would suggest you send a sample to some university that has a dept of meteorites in the UK. Surely they can put to rest any doubts as to what it might be. :twocents: :twocents: I agree with everyone else it's not a meteorite. Probably slag.

Steve

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well Geist;

what ever it is, it still appears to have been subjected to considerable heat. Perhaps as part of a fire-ring or oven??? One expert opinion given off the cuff would not convience me...but, I am no respecter of titles or postition.

Rather than sending a sample to a meteorite dept perhaps you should take the piece to a couple of geology depts...the meteorite department will only tell what is it not...you are already fairly sure of what it is not. Also, there is a rocks/mineral forum on this site...check it out...many of those people donot come visit here...

Good luck and keep hunting

fred

Link to post
Share on other sites
Well Geist;

what ever it is, it still appears to have been subjected to considerable heat. Perhaps as part of a fire-ring or oven??? One expert opinion given off the cuff would not convience me...but, I am no respecter of titles or postition.

Rather than sending a sample to a meteorite dept perhaps you should take the piece to a couple of geology depts...the meteorite department will only tell what is it not...you are already fairly sure of what it is not. Also, there is a rocks/mineral forum on this site...check it out...many of those people donot come visit here...

Good luck and keep hunting

fred

Hi Fred, yes, will do, that seems about my best bet. I'm now very intrigued:)

Geist

Link to post
Share on other sites

From it’s appearance, It may be of volcanic origin.

I know utterly nothing of Britain’s geology.

But have seen a few rare semi-metallic pyroclastic stones that had that appearance, in the vicinity of the Mono lake volcanic craters in eastern California.

306935144_o.jpg

Iron / manganese / oxide of volcanic origin.

I have also seen similar looking semi-metallic stone found near, or actually within ancient lime kilns and/or other types of very crude early smelters.

Things like that can be a tough nut to crack. Good luck.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...

hi i am jafar a new meteorites hunter from london, by the photos i am more sur that is not a meteorite ,looking inside it confirm by the vesicles and holes it's not a compact stone more volcanic that has pick up some metal with time and has no fushion crust, so far .

Link to post
Share on other sites

hi i am jafar a new meteorites hunter from london, by the photos i am more sur that is not a meteorite ,looking inside it confirm by the vesicles and holes it's not a compact stone more volcanic that has pick up some metal with time and has no fushion crust, so far .

Hi Jafar, yes, I think we can all agree that it isn't a meteorite. However, as a meteor wrong it's a goody:) File a window and it's shot through with various sizes of metal flakes, magnetic, a definite crust in the upper end and no vesicles in the lower part, just in the crust, magnetic, the weight, etc. I've sent pictures to three different experts on slag/early metal-working, a mineralogist and a meteor expert, but none will commit to it being either slag or a meteorite, as it does have a resemblance to both. Obviously, without a proper analysis or hands on viewing it will probably stay unidentified. I think it is terrestrial, but I really would like to find out what kind of a stone it is, particularly the crystal inclusions and the metal flakes themselves. Thus far I can't find a lab' inthe UK to test, but I'll let everyone know once I do.

Geist

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...