Jump to content
Nugget Shooter Forums

Please help determine and identify this find


Recommended Posts

That's a pretty cool water worn, terrestrial rock. The rectangular off-gray nose might help ID the rock. It has no characteristics of a meteorite.

Good luck IDing it.

billpeters

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting take however it is magnetic, turns black if you hold it and has a very thin crust to it

It also has high density, in fact it displays nearly all "do-it-yourself" characteristics --- 

Under a microscope it does not disappoint either - 

---  Of course I am playing devils advocate here but it was found in an area with clear sign of ancient habitation, eoliths litter the area 
      
Please be sure to check my next few posts and thanks for the reply good sir

Edited by markyzmark
Link to post
Share on other sites

No, it's water worn and the matrix is typical of terrestrial stones and atypical of meteorites.

Take a look at your rock. If it glistens like a crystal structure (ie: quartz) at any point in the rock it can’t be a meteorite. If it has layers, it can’t be a meteorite, it’s sedimentary. If it has small gas bubbles in it, it can’t be a meteorite. It’s basalt. If it is moderately magnetic it is not a meteorite. If there is a thick crust on it, it can’t be a meteorite. File off a corner or cut it. It won’t diminish it’s value. If there is all bright silvery metal it can’t be a meteorite. If it is all grey metal it can’t be a meteorite. If there is black crust as thin as a fingernail, and crazing on the outside of the rock, it might be a meteorite. If there are small silver specks visible in the filed off section, it might be meteorite.

There are billions of magnetic rocks in the US, none of which are meteorites. Anyone can find magnetic earth stones nearly everywhere. Just take a strong magnet and drop into sand and you will see what I mean. Check our O Richard Norton’s, “Rocks from Space” or visit the ASU Meteorite Center or similar center.

billpeters

Edited by billpeters
accuracy
Link to post
Share on other sites

Some meteorites, although rare, are not magnetic at all - 

There is no quartz, layers, or bubbles and it has iron nickel --  and  I was simply stating a characteristics that did apply as you said there none!

In actuality though it satisfies nearly all 

Most meteorites should have some magnetic reaction, this also depends on the strength of the magnet 

Edited by markyzmark
Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi there,

Sorry, doesn’t show any signs of being a meteorite. We have all been there and done that thinking we have found one, only to find out it isn’t. It’s not the end of the world, but rather a chance to learn from those of us that have found them. And learn to become better at finding them and  ID’ing them. Some meteorites are magnetic, but have the other indicators to back them up being magnetic as well. Clearly this is a water-worn, tumbled type of stone that doesn’t show the other classic signs. Here is a good resource to check out.

 

http://meteorites.wustl.edu/meteorwrongs/meteorwrongs.htm

 

Happy Hunting, and keep looking down,

Jason

Link to post
Share on other sites

Look dude, here` a meteorite I found when looking for stupid gold the other day. 

Notice the distinct fusion crust directly related to the obvious flow lines. Not to mention the regmaglypts next to the chondrules. The most prominent feature being nickel infused cone.

IMG_1529.JPG

 

  • Like 2
  • Haha 3
  • Sad 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Nice find Adam,  thats gonna make a great door stop :-P

Link to post
Share on other sites

It's a nice polished stone but unfortunately it doesn't display any ANY characteristics of a meteorite at all. You say it is dense but didn't provide a density, you said it turns black when you hold it, that's not even a characteristic of a meteorite, you say it has a thin crust, it doesn't have a crust not even little, you may be referring to the polished surface ( like a layer of polyglass on a bar top), there is no fusion crust at all, with all due respect because we are all human and have been bitten by the meteorite bug and have read a bit of meteorite and wrong literature and we have all done the same thing at some point in time. I get it you are convinced, you read the literature and understand somethings but beyond the reading you need to actually own or have held or seen many meteorites in the past to actually better determine what you are looking at.

    My suggestion is buy a meteorite from a reputable dealer on eBay like (azmeteorites, eegooblago, streaming meteorites, or outer space rocks) and familiarize yourself with a real meteorite right away from the start. It is the most valuable lesson hands down to actually see and hold the real authentic thing. It is the best way to learn without searching trying to find a real one or hundreds even thousands of meteorwrongs.! 

Edited by Rocky
Link to post
Share on other sites

It is a common, high silica metamorphic stone. You can even see a rectangular inclusion in it in photograph 3. Check out the polish on it. It is WAY too hard and silicified to be a meteorite.

You can see the crystalline silica structure clearly in the photos. Under a microscope the silica would be quite obvious. The pits and texture of the surface are Hertzian cones. This is a high silica terrestrial stone.

FYI - Eoliths are not a sign of habitation. Eoliths are naturally broken stones. Not artifacts. Eoliths are a sign of mechanical fracturing due to glaciation or other natural forces. Debitage is a sign of habitation. The difference is random breakage on the eolith. The debitage has platforms that have been strategically developed on which to focus percussion.  Eoliths are naturally broken pieces of flint with random patterns and no striking platform has been developed.

If you were in an area with eoliths scattered around you were probably in the bed of an old glacier rather than an area of habitation. Debitage is generally associated with ground platforms, multiple strikes, broken tools and other signs of lithic production.

Edited by Bedrock Bob
  • well done 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, fredmason said:

Gee whiz, Bob...are you a walking book of knowledge or just a run of the mill polymath?

fred

A polymath.

You like the part about Hertzian cones huh Fred? Almost like I knew what I was talking about! :laught16:

I learned about high silica stones and their characteristics from being a rock guy and from flint knapping. You work with those Hertzian cones a lot. And you learn the difference between an eolith and debitage pretty quickly. So this one is kinda up my alley.

Sometimes it is a lot easier to identify an earthly rock by its characteristics than to identify a meteorite by its extra terrestrial characteristics. I don't know squat about meteorites and have found only a few. Most being irons. But I have found several pocketfulls of earth rocks so I know those pretty good. At least from a prospector point of view. I don't do much geology.

We all know what this rock isn't and that is a meteorite. We cant convince most of these posters of what it isn't. My approach is to tell them what it is. And I will bet my Hertzian cones that this stone is a high silica metamorphic comprised of granular, crystallized minerals.

  • Like 1
  • well done 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Bedrock Bob said:

A polymath.

You like the part about Hertzian cones huh Fred? Almost like I knew what I was talking about! :laught16:

I learned about high silica stones and their characteristics from being a rock guy and from flint knapping. You work with those Hertzian cones a lot. And you learn the difference between an eolith and debitage pretty quickly. So this one is kinda up my alley.

Sometimes it is a lot easier to identify an earthly rock by its characteristics than to identify a meteorite by its extra terrestrial characteristics. I don't know squat about meteorites and have found only a few. Most being irons. But I have found several pocketfulls of earth rocks so I know those pretty good. At least from a prospector point of view. I don't do much geology.

We all know what this rock isn't and that is a meteorite. We cant convince most of these posters of what it isn't. My approach is to tell them what it is. And I will bet my Hertzian cones that this stone is a high silica metamorphic comprised of granular, crystallized minerals.

A slight tangent from the thread, but since some of these artifacts are knapped from Libyan Desert Glass (and exhibit conchoidal fractures), I'm gonna go with it. http://ancientpoint.com/category/29-antiques_antiquities_neolithic__paleolithic_/page_13.html

LDG tool.jpg

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I think you guys were thinking that I would be stuck on this being a meteorite or something - I am merely playing devils advocate 

And with this stone it was more so if anyone could look past the obvious and tell me why not based on the look (in other words, assuming the crust disintegrated in situ) - or even better what kind of igneous rock it looks like to someone in-the-know  

Anyway, my apologies - I should have said right off the bat that I am not being a silly stubborn newb  :P

Please check out my new thread, Thanks againfellas

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...