Home PageAbout MindatThe Mindat ManualHistory of MindatCopyright StatusWho We AreContact UsAdvertise on Mindat
Donate to MindatCorporate SponsorshipSponsor a PageSponsored PagesMindat AdvertisersAdvertise on Mindat
Learning CenterWhat is a mineral?The most common minerals on earthInformation for EducatorsMindat ArticlesThe ElementsThe Rock H. Currier Digital LibraryGeologic Time
Minerals by PropertiesMinerals by ChemistryAdvanced Locality SearchRandom MineralRandom LocalitySearch by minIDLocalities Near MeSearch ArticlesSearch GlossaryMore Search Options
The Mindat ManualAdd a New PhotoRate PhotosLocality Edit ReportCoordinate Completion ReportAdd Glossary Item
Mining CompaniesStatisticsUsersMineral MuseumsClubs & OrganizationsMineral Shows & EventsThe Mindat DirectoryDevice SettingsThe Mineral Quiz
Photo SearchPhoto GalleriesSearch by ColorNew Photos TodayNew Photos YesterdayMembers' Photo GalleriesPast Photo of the Day GalleryPhotography
╳Discussions
💬 Home🔎 Search📅 LatestGroups
EducationOpen discussion area.Fakes & FraudsOpen discussion area.Field CollectingOpen discussion area.FossilsOpen discussion area.Gems and GemologyOpen discussion area.GeneralOpen discussion area.How to ContributeOpen discussion area.Identity HelpOpen discussion area.Improving Mindat.orgOpen discussion area.LocalitiesOpen discussion area.Lost and Stolen SpecimensOpen discussion area.MarketplaceOpen discussion area.MeteoritesOpen discussion area.Mindat ProductsOpen discussion area.Mineral ExchangesOpen discussion area.Mineral PhotographyOpen discussion area.Mineral ShowsOpen discussion area.Mineralogical ClassificationOpen discussion area.Mineralogy CourseOpen discussion area.MineralsOpen discussion area.Minerals and MuseumsOpen discussion area.PhotosOpen discussion area.Techniques for CollectorsOpen discussion area.The Rock H. Currier Digital LibraryOpen discussion area.UV MineralsOpen discussion area.Recent Images in Discussions
Identity HelpIDENTIFY MINERAL
3rd Dec 2013 15:44 UTCMr Farooq
This mineral is from badkhshan Afghanistan come from the mine of tourmaline color is blue & hexagonal.few are complete crystal & few are like flower combine on tourmaline.few afghans peoples said they are apitite.
3rd Dec 2013 16:02 UTCRui Nunes 🌟 Expert
3rd Dec 2013 19:06 UTCDan Costian
3rd Dec 2013 20:32 UTCRob Woodside 🌟 Manager
3rd Dec 2013 21:01 UTCUwe Ludwig
Rgds.
Uwe Ludwig
3rd Dec 2013 23:23 UTCPaul Brandes 🌟 Manager
3rd Dec 2013 23:46 UTCMichael Wood
Mike
4th Dec 2013 14:57 UTCRock Currier Expert
9th Dec 2013 17:19 UTCMr Farooq
9th Dec 2013 17:42 UTCReiner Mielke Expert
9th Dec 2013 19:16 UTCMr Farooq
10th Dec 2013 17:25 UTCDonald Peck
10th Dec 2013 19:51 UTCMr Farooq
10th Dec 2013 23:20 UTCWayne Corwin
Blue Beryl IS Aquamarine !
21st Apr 2015 18:50 UTCMr Farooq
this mineral is identify & name of this minerals is Beryl var. Vorobyevite
thank you
21st Apr 2015 20:50 UTCReiner Mielke Expert
How much caesium is in it?
22nd Apr 2015 00:49 UTCMark Heintzelman 🌟 Expert
Were it to be used for study, then of course a confirming analysis would need to be done first.
MRH
22nd Apr 2015 00:55 UTCReiner Mielke Expert
How much caesium did Federico Pezzotta find in it?
22nd Apr 2015 01:22 UTCMark Heintzelman 🌟 Expert
Unfortunately there does not seem to be published report of it (as yet anyway). The analysis was conducted by request of a dealer who did not release the full account of the study. I tried to find the information elsewhere as well, but to no avail. And yes, I would like to see it myself, and feel it's a shame that it was not considered "important" enough to make note of (left to take the dealers word for it I fear). http://www.irocks.com/galleries/arkenstone-fine-minerals-vorobyevite-rosterite-gilgit-pakistan
MRH
22nd Apr 2015 01:49 UTCReiner Mielke Expert
22nd Apr 2015 02:10 UTCMark Heintzelman 🌟 Expert
Since we're on the subject, I have taken note of an earlier dissussion on this subject and see that there is some conflicting information about these supposed "Vorobyevite" from Badakhshan.
"We have several specimens thought to be Vorobyevite from recent finds in Deo Darrah Afghanistan that we are testing. I know that everybody has been talking about the potential Cesium content in these, but we got ahold of an email from Dr. Pezzotta and Rob Lavinsky from the 2012 finds in Deo Darrah... and Pezzotta mentioned detecting the alkali metal elements Na and K, but not notable Cs in the periphery of the crystals. I'm unsure if there were additional tests that later confirmed Cs content."
http://www.mindat.org/forum.php?read,9,351661,351661,quote=1
Perhaps considering these "vorobyevite" would be somewhat premature, prior to seeing an actual report of analysis.
MRH
22nd Apr 2015 04:11 UTCAlfredo Petrov Manager
22nd Apr 2015 05:02 UTCDoug Daniels
22nd Apr 2015 05:31 UTCAlfredo Petrov Manager
I don't mind people using varietal names, when the varietal name has been well-defined - Then the varietal name carries extra information not present in the species name. But when the name has as fuzzy a definition as "vorobyevite", then it just introduces more confusion.
22nd Apr 2015 14:17 UTCReiner Mielke Expert
22nd Apr 2015 14:23 UTCReiner Mielke Expert
22nd Apr 2015 14:33 UTCOwen Melfyn Lewis
-------------------------------------------------------
> I don't mind people using varietal names, when the
> varietal name has been well-defined - Then the
> varietal name carries extra information not
> present in the species name.
Exactly so.
> But when the name has
> as fuzzy a definition as "vorobyevite", then it
> just introduces more confusion.
Well, fuzzy or not, it's been around for quite some time. Sinkansas (after an 1922 USSR publication) suggest that it was first recorded in trade in the late 18th C in the Transbaikal region just north of the border with Mongolia. There is a suggestion (but no evidence?) that various varieties of beryl from that area may have been traded since ancient times. Sinkansas was, of course writing before (and much before many of his primary sources) IMA declared that Cs-heavy beryl was a different species, that of pezzottaite. It seems to me that is where the dubiety begins,
The bonding of Cs into Beryl appears complex and only indirectly substitutional.The Cs ions are too large to substitute for the structural Be and also there is not a match of ionic charges. So, the Cs is trapped interstitially and needs to be accompanied by a structural substitution of Be by Li, Li being of the right size and with two Li required for every Cs ion. Does this work still hold as true? If it does, what is the structural differentiation that:
- Warrants a species' differentiation (i.e. pezzottaite).
- Sets the boundary between the Cs-rich beryl variety vorobyevite and the relatively newly minted species of pezzottaite?
There are other concerns I have too. It seems that pink beryl from Transbaikal is all vorobyevite and is elongate in form as is typical of most beryl. The pink pezzottaite form Madagascar has tabular form, implying the incorporation of an alkali metal (vis Cs &Li) into the lattice? The newly discovered Afghani vorobyevite is also tabular in form, contrary to elongate form of other beryl found in the same area.
Does anyone either have or know a reported quantitative analysis of the vorobyevite from Badakhshan?
Edit. Just cross-linked to http://www.mindat.org/forum.php?read,9,351661,351728#msg-351728 Looking forward to the results.
.
22nd Apr 2015 16:57 UTCMark Heintzelman 🌟 Expert
The System of Mineralogy of James Dwight Dana, 1837-1868: Descriptive Mineralogy - completing the work to 1909. (the first Dana volume that Beryl var. Volbeyervite appears. Absent from the 6th edition, 1898 & it's 1899 appendix).
“Vorobeyevite” - W. J. Vernadsky [Trav. Mus. Geol. Ac. Sc. St. Pet., 2, 81, 1908], Zs. Kr., 50, 73, 1911. Name given to caesium beryl because of the description of such beryl from Lipowka, Ural Mts., by Vorobyev. Description of crystals and anal. of this beryl given. Discussion of chem. comp. of Beryl.
A variety of Beryl described well over a century ago, where Cs content was it's defining characteristic. Boundries may not be clearly defined, however if there's no Cs at all, then you can't justify calling it var. Vorobeyevite. It's a simple matter of integrity I should think.
MRH
22nd Apr 2015 17:58 UTCReiner Mielke Expert
22nd Apr 2015 18:39 UTCMark Heintzelman 🌟 Expert
The System of Mineralogy of James Dwight Dana, 1837-1868: Descriptive Mineralogy - completing the work to 1898
Rosterite Grattarola. 1 c. A slightly altered variety of beryl from Elba, named after Dr. G. Roster. It occurs in short prismatic to tabular doubly-terminated crystals. In polarized light a basal section is divided into six sectors, corresponding to the prismatic edges, for the three alternate of which the extinction is the same. Optically biaxial. Color pale rose-red. Anal. 1-4, Grattarola; 1, 2, from the ends of a crystal, which had a nucleus of normal beryl (anal. 3); 4, “typical rosterite.”
MRH
Personally, I'm all in favor of retaining these historical, albeit somewhat archaic, varietal names for specimens from the localities at which they were first described. I do however hesitate to promote their use beyond that purpose. At the very least, if they are used elsewhere, the characteristics of these specimens obviously need to correspond well with the original descriptions.
22nd Apr 2015 18:58 UTCOwen Melfyn Lewis
-------------------------------------------------------
> I'm sorry, but I can't help but bristle at the
> idea that because the IMA doesn't support varietal
> nomenclature, and isn't standing over your
> shoulder, ready to hit those knuckles of yours
> with a ruler, that you needn't exhibit any
> integrity at all when using these long standing
> and reasonably described varietal names. If you
> don't respect them, don't use them at all.
I think we feel the same way. Where they are meaningful, varietal names are useful or, for some purposes, are essential.
> “Vorobeyevite” - W. J. Vernadsky , Zs. Kr.,
> 50, 73, 1911. Name given to caesium beryl because
> of the description of such beryl from Lipowka,
> Ural Mts., by Vorobyev. Description of crystals
> and anal. of this beryl given. Discussion of chem.
> comp. of Beryl.
> A variety of Beryl described well over a century
> ago, where Cs content was it's defining
> characteristic.
Yes, and there was/is also a third Russian locality in the Ukraine.
> Boundries may not be clearly
> defined, however if there's no Cs at all, then you
> can't justify calling it var. Vorobeyevite. It's
> a simple matter of integrity I should think.
Quite so. But there are three points here, I think:
(1) Since vorobyevite is a variety of beryl that is Cs-rich (alkali), should not the crystals be tabular? Is Russian material from all three sites tabular?
(2) It has been stated that in the Russian vorobevite it is a prerequisite not only for Cs to be incorporated interstitially (too large for structural replacement of Be) but that to balance the ionic charges 2x Li have to be incorporated in structural replacement for Be for every one Cs held interstitially. Since this AIUI the differentiation of pezzottaite from beryl, should the Russian vorobyevite not also not be classified as pezzottaite or, if not, what *is* the differentiation of pezzottaite from vorobyevite?
(3) Has anyone got a good quantitative analysis for the 'vorobyevite' from Deo Darrah that they would care to share here?
22nd Apr 2015 19:27 UTCMark Heintzelman 🌟 Expert
As to whether there are Russian "Vorobyevite" which actually qualify as pezzottaite, I don't know that there are. If so, it is simply a sign that, similar to "troostite", (now Willemite) Vorobyevite was either not defined accurately or completely enough that it qualified as a separate species. Either that, or the IMA that has simply disregarded grandfathering and has decided to make up their own nomeclature. I hope the latter isn't true, but I'm much more inclined to believe that the lab work on pezzottaite was far superior, and which earned the separate species designation.
The use of approved nomenclature would of course be the priority, and old varietals simply "icing on the cake".
MRH
23rd Apr 2015 00:59 UTCAlfredo Petrov Manager
23rd Apr 2015 01:41 UTCMark Heintzelman 🌟 Expert
I didn't find that claim particularly credible myself, but there again, it's a bit outside my area of competency.
MRH
23rd Apr 2015 02:10 UTCOwen Melfyn Lewis
@ Mark. Yes of course, modern analysis methods outstrip by far in accuracy the capabilities of those 90-100 years ago and it is these modern methods that have differentiated beryl and pezzottaite as discrete species. However, the differentiation of vorobyevite vis a vis pezzottaite is not clear from any of the sources on my shelf or from the discussions in this forum. I'm left with an uneasy feeling that what is now classified as pezzotaite may be what, 100 years ago, was first named as vorobyevite.
As for the blue tabular crystals from Deo Darah, if someone has the interest and the means of obtaining as complete a quantitative chemical analysis as possible, I have a small specimen to offer up for testing (slight polycrystalline matrix attached - maybe albite).
23rd Apr 2015 02:43 UTCMark Heintzelman 🌟 Expert
Dana was handed a detailed report (for the day) on vorobyevite, so it must exist somewhere, but I do not have any additional reference for it in my own library either, nor can I locate any additional detail of it on the web. Regardless, an accepted detailed lab work was done more recently and named pezzotaite. Even if vorobyervite turned out to be the same said mineral, the credit still goes to the first certified lab work on a species.
Detailed analysis for pezzotaite is available, so if a minerals analysis corresponds with that I.D., even a russian specimen formally known as "vorobyevite", it's still pezzotaite, so I don't see the problem. Again, personally I would rather that such old variety nomenclature remain in use only for historical reasons on material from the original find/analysis, but as long as it isn't missing the characteristics generally noted of vorobyevite, i.e. detectable Cs, at least no one will formally contend it's usage.
MRH
23rd Apr 2015 03:10 UTCAlfredo Petrov Manager
23rd Apr 2015 06:28 UTCJoel Dyer
Apropos, especially pin(kish) beryl but also white beryl from the Viitaniemi, Eräjärvi location contained up to 7% Cs according to my sources; the highest rates were apparently in pinkish beryl. I'm including, just for the interest, a picture of a slightly damaged pinkish beryl that is 5cm wide and 2,5cm high: the color should be a little bit more pink than is shown in the picture & the yellowish spots are Fe-oxide tainting. However, I have found chunks of large pinkish beryl that would see to indicate pretty average prismatic form.
As is known, a single huge block of pollucite was found at Viitaniemi, and occasionally with luck and sharp eyes one can find some leftover pieces of this block.
There is a researcher writing an extensive paper on Finnish beryls from perhaps all known domestic locations, so let's see if some day it will be possible to read about some previously unknown particulars.
Cheers,
23rd Apr 2015 16:24 UTCMr Farooq
http://www.irocks.com/minerals/specimen/41611
can you see the growth of crystal ???
23rd Apr 2015 16:41 UTCMr Farooq
these picture are few good view then first one which i posted,blue color is much then http://www.irocks.com/galleries/arkenstone-fine-minerals-vorobyevite-rosterite-gilgit-pakistan
6th May 2015 20:14 UTCMr Farooq
i own first conform it from test XRF
soon give you here result of test
6th May 2015 20:57 UTCRob Woodside 🌟 Manager
14th Dec 2016 11:06 UTCUwe Kolitsch Manager
Weerth, A. & Weiß, S. (2016): Neues aus der Grenzregion Pakistan/Afghanistan. Lapis, 41 (10), 30-39 (in German).
Edit 2: Improved posting.
14th Dec 2016 20:57 UTCIan Nicastro
What was the % for Na they saw?
15th Dec 2016 11:32 UTCUwe Kolitsch Manager
> What was the % for Na they saw? Article didn't say.
Mindat.org is an outreach project of the Hudson Institute of Mineralogy, a 501(c)(3) not-for-profit organization.
Copyright © mindat.org and the Hudson Institute of Mineralogy 1993-2024, except where stated. Most political location boundaries are © OpenStreetMap contributors. Mindat.org relies on the contributions of thousands of members and supporters. Founded in 2000 by Jolyon Ralph.
Privacy Policy - Terms & Conditions - Contact Us / DMCA issues - Report a bug/vulnerability Current server date and time: April 26, 2024 16:12:15
Copyright © mindat.org and the Hudson Institute of Mineralogy 1993-2024, except where stated. Most political location boundaries are © OpenStreetMap contributors. Mindat.org relies on the contributions of thousands of members and supporters. Founded in 2000 by Jolyon Ralph.
Privacy Policy - Terms & Conditions - Contact Us / DMCA issues - Report a bug/vulnerability Current server date and time: April 26, 2024 16:12:15