Jump to content
Nugget Shooter Forums

Recommended Posts

large.20201008_113549.jpglarge.20201008_113559.jpgCut a small slit in it and its shiny metal looking? Is it meteorite...lol? Is it a piece of old rusty metal? Rock? Thanks in advance for the help.....a

Edited by Celuke13
Added Images
Link to post
Share on other sites

Someone posted a similar picture of this a few years ago. Don't know and can't remember any of the responses. My guess is it's an crystalized iron mineral of some type.

Did you do a streak test on it? All a streak test does is tell you the color of the powdered mineral. You can use a fine file to create the powder. Smear onto a piece of white paper with your finger.

https://geology.com/minerals/streak-test.shtml

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Morlock said:

Someone posted a similar picture of this a few years ago. Don't know and can't remember any of the responses. My guess is it's an crystalized iron mineral of some type.

Did you do a streak test on it? All a streak test does is tell you the color of the powdered mineral. You can use a fine file to create the powder. Smear onto a piece of white paper with your finger.


https://geology.com/minerals/streak-test.shtml

 

You can see the red powder on the stone below the cut. Residue from the grinding. Some disks leave a red residue so im not sure you could call that the "streak". But the cuttings say hematite to me.

You can't see enough of the window to tell if it is sub-metallic or metallic. And if it is a hematite concretion it will probably be non magnetic.

It might be hematite. It looks like a nodule or concretion for sure. If I had to guess on a photo I would say it is a hematite nodule.

It is an artifact if it is metallic. Definitely not a meteorite either way.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It is a Garnet Ball; that is a lot of garnets all grown together.  Many of the outside minerals show the classic dodecahedral shape.  Might be the iron rich, almandine variety of garnet. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, d_day said:

I’m thinking it may be a hematite or  limonite after pyrite pseudomorph. 

Bingo.

19 hours ago, Morlock said:

Someone posted a similar picture of this a few years ago. Don't know and can't remember any of the responses. My guess is it's an crystalized iron mineral of some type.

Did you do a streak test on it? All a streak test does is tell you the color of the powdered mineral. You can use a fine file to create the powder. Smear onto a piece of white paper with your finger.


https://geology.com/minerals/streak-test.shtml

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I must respectively disagree with the common consensus here, regarding the specimen at hand. Yes, this is a form of Hematite Iron (Fe2O3) or possibly (Fe4O5), and agreed, this is not a meteorite. 

The sample in question is actually an "impactite," formed from vaporized/melted (Fe) during an asteroid impact event involving extreme heat/pressure circumstances. 

I can imagine the previous posters are crying "bloody murder it is," at this very moment of reading. I get that. However, true science involves the "consideration" of new evidence presented and the observation thereof. Here's my new evidence for all to ponder and ultimately decide upon yourselves. 

 

IMG_0567 (2).JPG

 

Figure 1:  The photo (above) shows impact-related samples (exhibiting known reoccurring Tektite Shapes) that exactly match the characteristics from the originally posted iron-rich object in question. These samples have had XRF and ICP (ppm) Tests performed with very interesting results. The Iron (Fe) measures an average of 95% weight, and many exotic trace elements exceed normal (ppm) numbers. However, these are merely claims that accompany a photograph. The true evidence here is the notation of Size/Distribution evidence, as found within the study of Impact-Related objects such as Tektites/Spherules. Meaning, the materials formed within the confines of an impact-related event exhibit a Size Limitation. The same process as Hailstones falling in your yard. All of the pieces developed from the same process and each hailstone will always be a similar size as the one next to it. 

Iron-Rich Concretions have no size limit. It's purely dependent upon the chemical nucleation via particles and water/liquid transfer. The size limit should vary widely, with some the size of a coin, and some the size of a bowling ball or larger. Concretions also contain an abundant amount of the host constituent, usually (Si) Silicon Rock. How would an object achieve 95% pure Iron Particles under those terrestrial-concretionary circumstances?  

Please correct me if I'm wrong regarding any of this data.

 

  

IMG_0569.JPG

Figure 2: Showing a rare "in situ" example of the iron material in question, embedded within a gray stone matrix, and a broken/sliced sample, both exhibiting a radial crystalline structure. This photo illustrates and promotes the ultimate question.   

Did the Iron-Rich Sample form inside the gray rock matrix via water flow, or was it deposited there by other circumstances? 

That's the real question here. Is it not? 

 

IMG_0553.JPG

Figure 3:  A 60x view exhibiting black glassy micro-particles interpreted as micro-tektites from the gray rock matrix featured in Figure 2 (above). Such evidence is a common diagnostic feature well-studied within the field of asteroid impact-related science. 

 

 

 

 IMG_0556 (2).PNG

Figure 4: Reveals a shocked melt vein exhibiting (PDFs) planar deformation features (from figure 2 sample), a diagnostic feature "only" found and observed within impact-related and generated events involving extreme heat/pressure on the materials involved.  

Does this conclusively prove the Iron sample was involved and created during an asteroid impact event? Well, it should certainly "suggest" it. However, one more important question should be promoted. If the Iron sample was deposited within a rock matrix showing clear and definitive signs of high-pressure impact-related shock, does the Iron-Rich Material also show signs/evidence of High Pressure Shock Deformation? 

It's a fair observational scientific question, and yes...it does. 

 

IMG_0571.JPG

 

Figure 5: Showing a 60x view of the radial crystalline structure of the Iron Samples in questions. The structure shows evidence of "Iron Deformation Twinning" and "Shear Faulting," a feature only observed within High-Pressure experiments conducted in iron alloy research. Google it and tell me it ain't so.  

Well, I've presented my case and I'm curios as to what the interpretations and replies will be. 

Sincerely,

James Tate

Edited by Impact Physics
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Its Goethite after pyrite. I remember there being a post about this a long time ago.  

The specimens posted are just heavily weathered, they had sharp crystal faces at one time.

Edited by adam
  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, adam said:

Its Goethite after pyrite. I remember there being a post about this a long time ago.  

The specimens posted are just heavily weathered, they had sharp crystal faces at one time.

Thanks Adam. I knew it couldn't be my eyes deceiving me. Most rock pics don't tell the whole story but this material is so common and familiar to me it seemed obvious. I suspected a little leg pulling was occurring?

Sometimes the obvious answer is overlooked. Occam's Razor and all that.

(Occam's Razor:

"We are to admit no more causes of natural things than such as are both true and sufficient to explain their appearances." Issac Newton

or more simply:

"when you have two competing theories that make exactly the same predictions, the simpler one is the better."

or if you like popular scientists:

Stephen Hawking writes in A Brief History of Time:
"We could still imagine that there is a set of laws that determines events completely for some supernatural being, who could observe the present state of the universe without disturbing it.  However, such models of the universe are not of much interest to us mortals.  It seems better to employ the principle known as Occam's razor and cut out all the features of the theory that cannot be observed.")

I'm not seeing tektites where there is obviously Goethite. It seems obvious (to me) when you eliminate the unsubstantiated theories.

Edited by clay
Cause bob needs to know you don't need a beard to shave with Occam's razor
Link to post
Share on other sites

It's an exploding sandstone from Uranus.

Occam has a beard and hasn't used a razor in a decade.

It is some sort of terrestrial iron ore. Goethite after Pyrite is as good as hematite after a big plate of enchiladas.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Clay,

Once again you miss the entire point.

You don't need a beard to shave with a razor. But if you have a beard we can safely assume you haven't been shaving.

If Occam has a beard we can't make any assumptions about his razor. Only if Occam is clean shaven can we assess the razor.

It is an iron replacement of some darn thing. I call everything hematite that isn't magnetite. That's because I can't pronounce goethite or limonite and I probably couldnt tell the difference anyway. But Adam knows his $hit and I bet he is right.

Those rocks that James Tate posted might be what he says they are. But I don't think this rock is one of those. It could be but we only have a photo and a streak to go by. Not a bunch of tests and data. The only thing that would group this rock with those is they kinda look the same.

And since we are just making assumptions based on looks I'm willing to use Occam's razor to decide. Even if it might be dull and rusted into some form of iron oxide that I can't identify.

I'm willing to bet a dollar that it is goethite after Pyrite. And I'll bet another dollar Adam uses an electric razor and has excellent personal hygiene.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Celuke,

     It appears my evidence has been ignored and not taken into any serious consideration, as I suspected. Hence, why the subject-thread goes into a comedy routine, vs. any substantial data/pictorial evidence showing common terrestrial-iron that exhibit these same crystal features. 

     Check into the subject of "Neumann Bands/lines," found only within high-pressure shocked iron-type meteorites. It does not take an expert or prop-comic to see they are connected with the same high-pressure shock process, as do the photographic samples I have presented that also compare to your own. As far as magnetism is concerned, the magnetic field around the Earth has changed many times throughout the last 66 million years. Should you heat up your sample until it glows red, you will rearrange the electrons, and find that it sticks to a magnet like glue. 

     These comedians will "never" be able to show "photographic evidence" of such a "common" piece of iron exhibiting these type of features. However, they will be able to throw some more bad jokes out there. That's the common/easy way to go.  

     My sole intention was to give you a new avenue of research for your important specimen, and certainly not change the minds of this comedy circuit going on around these parts. 

"Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence," I believe Carl Sagan said that.

"Extraordinary evidence requires extraordinary observation," I said that. 

And, that ain't here. 

- James Tate

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Your pictures are "evidence" of Goethite.

https://www.mindat.org/gm/2048?page=49

It's not up to readers here to prove you wrong. Your evidence, when subjected to experience and logic, amounts to some cherry picked assumptions about your specimen that you would like us to accept as a valid theory. How about you clearly state your postulation as such and encourage others to consider all possibilities?

Or you can stick to your "theory" (almost fact in your mind?) and skip the whole postulation and scientific method thing. The choice, as always, is yours.

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...