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

F2 in Nature - Antozonite (Fluorite)

Jean-Francois Carpentier July 10, 2012 06:11AM
"The most reactive chemical element, F2, has been claimed not to occur in nature. First direct evidence from in situ NMR spectroscopy now proves that elemental F2 indeed occurs in nature as an occlusion in “antozonite” (right in the picture), a variant of fluorite (CaF2, left)."

Occurrence of Difluorine F2 in Nature—In Situ Proof and Quantification by NMR SpectroscopyDr. Jörn Schmedt auf der Günne, Martin Mangstl and Priv.-Doz. Dr. Florian KrausAngewandte Chemie International Edition
Article first published online: 4 JUL 2012 | DOI: 10.1002/anie.201203515

Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 07/10/2012 06:12AM by Jean-Francois Carpentier.
Rob Woodside July 10, 2012 08:28PM
Great!!! A new native element, F2 molecules!!! With the reluctance of the IMA to say a mineral must have a certain size, individual molecules are the smallest minerals possible!!! Since a single molecule isn't a crystal; let alone a solid, a liquid or a gas, we have a new class of minerals!!! At least a submission to the IMA will be mercifully short, no colour, hardness, lustre, space group, etc. I was thinking of submitting it myself but couldn't find the instructions or form at the IMA site.

Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 07/10/2012 08:29PM by Rob Woodside.
Alfredo Petrov July 10, 2012 08:58PM
Rob, you'd better make a lot of photocopies of the form. If you want to submit isolated F molecules as native element mineral species, you should be fair and do it for H, He, N, Ar, Ne, Xe, Rn and Hg too ;-) And you'd better pick Canadian type localities for all of them too, lest anyone accuse you of being unpatriotic :)-D
Rob Woodside July 10, 2012 09:12PM
These are individual molecules trapped in radiation damaged fluorite There are not mixtures like atmospheric gasses or volcanic exhalations which suffer the same fate as alloys- banished from mineralogy as mixtures. However your point is well taken. He, Ar, and Rn are atoms trapped in rock like F2 and should be more Native elements on the atomic scale!!! I note that Hg is still in good standing as are some x-ray amorphous phases, despite the efforts of x-ray diffractors. The problem would be the disposition of type material as I have no idea what the authors did with their Antozonite.
Alfredo Petrov July 10, 2012 09:23PM
The concept of mixture is irrelevant when you're describing single molecules. Your type specimen of F2 is a molecule surrounded by CaF2 molecules. If my type specimen of single molecule H2 in a fumarole happens to be surrounded by CO2 and H2O molecules, so what? That's the "matrix", not a "mixture" :-D
Rob Woodside July 10, 2012 10:13PM
Alfredo I like your attitude:)-D
Bart Cannon July 11, 2012 01:35AM
I haven't been able to open the link provided by Jean Francios.

I wonder what F2 standard was used to provide quantification of F2. via NMR.

I wonder how F2 could be distinquished from HF via NMR.

This brings up another of my complaints about NASA.

Some years ago, NASA claimed to have detected HF in the parts per trillion in the upper atmosphere, and that such a discovery proved that HFCs in the upper atmosphere was complete proof that human activity had sent HFCs into the atmosphere and was depleting the ozone layer.

Their position was that HF did not occur in nature. Any 12th grade science student would know that HF has been a standard assay subject at fumaroles for many decades.

John Attard July 11, 2012 07:17AM
I am not sure we should involve Mineralogy with trivia. It may be a waste of effort at best.

It may be like counting little rocks (barely large enough to step on) close to the beach to increase the number of islands; or theologians discussing how many angels can dance on the head of a pin!

I do not think the new Fleisher should be filled with trivia. The IMA probably agrees.
Berthold Weber July 11, 2012 07:36AM

I wonder how F2 could be distinquished from HF via NMR.

"The 19F NMR spectrum (Figure 2, gray spectrum) shows that inclusions of other oxidative fluorine compounds previously discussed (Table S1) are not detectable down to the noise level of the NMR experiment."
Alfredo Petrov July 12, 2012 03:26AM
Rob, You would likely stand a better chance of proposing Native Calcium inclusions in fluorite as a mineral than the isolated F2 molecules. See the recent discussion on Mineralienatlas, where someone states that nanoparticles of Ca range from 10 to 100 nanometers size:,12791.0/topicseen.html
The following reference is cited, which you probably have access to:
CRAMER, L., SCHUBERT, B., PETITE, P., LANGFORD, S., DICKINSON, J. (2005) Laser interactions with embedded Ca metal nanoparticles in single crystal CaF2, J. Appl. Phys. 97, 074307

Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 07/12/2012 03:27AM by Alfredo Petrov.
Bart Cannon July 12, 2012 04:51AM
Who needs Google when we have Alfredo ! ?

Rob Woodside July 12, 2012 07:34PM
I love it Alfredo. Soon we will be able to fill a museum with invisible nanominerals!!!
Alfredo Petrov July 12, 2012 08:27PM
Dr. George Rossman, who partially described the micron size dumortierite-like particles giving some rose quartz its pink colour, said several years ago that, when mineralogists acquire equipment sufficient to fully describe micron-size particles, the list of IMA-approved species would rapidly expand from 4,000 to 10,000... "nanominerals". That was his prediction anyway.

I think the implications for the serious "systematik" collectors is that they need to set a lower size boundary to the species they will collect, preferably I would think around the lower limits of observation with petrographic or ore microscopy. Attempting to assemble a large collection of invisible nanospecies would be completely ludicrous, although I'm sure a few dealers will be happy to write the names on labels.

Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 07/12/2012 08:33PM by Alfredo Petrov.
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: September 26, 2017 20:58:56
Go to top of page