Help|Log In|Register|
Home PageMindat NewsThe Mindat ManualHistory of MindatCopyright StatusManagement TeamContact UsAdvertise on Mindat
Donate to MindatSponsor a PageSponsored PagesTop Available PagesMindat AdvertisersAdvertise on Mindat
Minerals by PropertiesMinerals by ChemistryAdvanced Locality SearchRandom MineralSearch by minIDLocalities Near MeSearch ArticlesSearch GlossaryMore Search Options
Search For:
Mineral Name:
Locality Name:
The Mindat ManualAdd a New PhotoRate PhotosLocality Edit ReportCoordinate Completion ReportAdd Glossary Item
StatisticsThe ElementsMember ListBooks & MagazinesMineral Shows & EventsThe Mindat DirectoryHow to Link to MindatDevice Settings
Photo SearchPhoto GalleriesNew Photos TodayNew Photos YesterdayMembers' Photo GalleriesPast Photo of the Day Gallery
Raymond Lasmanis October 07, 2011 06:10PM
Now that plumbobetafite was discredited in 2010, what do I have that contains 45%U, 45%Ti, 5%Pb, and very little Ca, Nb, and Ta?
Pavel Kartashov October 13, 2011 11:53PM
Hi Raymond,
I should to say you, that mineral with such composition hadn't any chance to be plumbobetafite even according to Hogarth' nomenclature. It was betafite according to it. Of course if it is cubic, i.e. is member of pyrochlore supergroup at all. It may be some orthorhombic uranium titanate.
Do you have complete analysis of your mineral? What is it locality? How it looks?
Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.

Click here to login

Mineral and/or Locality is an outreach project of the Hudson Institute of Mineralogy, a 501(c)(3) not-for-profit organization.
Copyright © and the Hudson Institute of Mineralogy 1993-2017, except where stated. relies on the contributions of thousands of members and supporters.
Privacy Policy - Terms & Conditions - Contact Us Current server date and time: October 19, 2017 09:54:16
Go to top of page