Log InRegister
Quick Links : The Mindat ManualThe Rock H. Currier Digital LibraryMindat Newsletter [Free Download]
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
Search For:
Mineral Name:
Locality Name:
Keyword(s):
 
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

Identity Helpunknown stone ?

4th Jul 2017 22:37 UTCsunstone sunstone

05919500016027468745745.jpg
any idea about that stone could be ? . will be appreciated .

nearly all of the egyptians do not care with the beach stones whatever they are to the extent that collecting stones is a strange Hobby .

but I do want to know their identity .

04527780015652252206359.jpg

5th Jul 2017 00:32 UTCDoug Daniels

Again, where was it found? It's definitely eroded, and thus weathered. Kinda LOOKS LIKE a porphyritic igneous rock (maybe basalt), but hard to tell from the two photos shown. And, I've known to be wrong.

5th Jul 2017 08:07 UTCsunstone sunstone

05458420016027468762949.jpg
found on the beach of the mediterranean in Egypt .

here's another one :

06755540015652252214329.jpg

5th Jul 2017 08:12 UTCsunstone sunstone

07649510016027468777640.jpg
actually I have many stones like that ( several kilograms )

08616680015652252224683.jpg

09798390015652252224043.jpg

5th Jul 2017 12:13 UTCReiner Mielke Expert

The translucency of these is unusual. The only explanation I have is that it is ancient slag. What does one look like broken open? What is the specific gravity and hardness?

5th Jul 2017 12:23 UTCPaul Brandes 🌟 Manager

To me, it's odd that no matter what the outside colour is, they all show up as red when back lit. They all look like some sort of microcrystalline quartz (chalcedony) that have been stained over time. Reiner is correct in that you'll have to break one open so we can see what the fracture looks like. In addition, a hardness and streak test would be most helpful...

5th Jul 2017 13:25 UTCEd Clopton 🌟 Expert

I agree that chalcedony is a good candidate, but seeing a freshly broken surface and making a few tests would help.

5th Jul 2017 13:33 UTCsunstone sunstone

08520600016027468797201.jpg
that is a naturally open one

02188450015652252243903.jpg


there are all colors reddish brown , reddish orange and yellow they are all translucent .only the reddish brown stones appear red on the lamp light .
03156790015652252241630.jpg

5th Jul 2017 13:35 UTCsunstone sunstone

02761060016027468808180.jpg
also there is orange ones :


there is one or two broken ones here :
04943860015652252252665.jpg

07132170015652252264759.jpg

5th Jul 2017 14:16 UTCsunstone sunstone

08083330016027468805737.jpg
Paul Brandes Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> To me, it's odd that no matter what the outside

> colour is, they all show up as red when back lit.

> They all look like some sort of microcrystalline

> quartz (chalcedony) that have been stained over

> time. Reiner is correct in that you'll have to

> break one open so we can see what the fracture

> looks like. In addition, a hardness and streak

> test would be most helpful...

the brownish ones have unusual translucency and appear red when back light .

I did not notice any conchoidal fractures and they are all cannot be scratched by knife tip .

I noticed patterns of banding that looks like banded agate especially on some of the translucent brown stones .

there are many gray translucent stones as well ( several kilograms )

5th Jul 2017 14:30 UTCAlfred L. Ostrander

Based on taking a good look at all the photos, it appears you are finding chalcedony. The red is called carnelian and the brownish red are known as sard.

I don't see any color banding in the pieces that would indicate agate.


As you indicated you found these on a beach and they have been worn smooth by being tumbled in the sand by wave action. Still, some of the characteristics of the stones can still be seen. A few pieces have not been smoothed out enough to remove the evidence for conchoidal fracture and not all the original surfaces indicating a botryoidal habit have been worn away. The manner the stones have been smoothed out by tumbling in the sand, the botryoidal habit, the conchoidal fracture all fit an identification of chalcedony. The colors fit for the varities known as carnelian and sard. Look up carnelian and sard and see what you think.

5th Jul 2017 14:57 UTCsunstone sunstone

Alfred L. Ostrander Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Based on taking a good look at all the photos, it

> appears you are finding chalcedony. The red is

> called carnelian and the brownish red are known as

> sard.

> I don't see any color banding in the pieces that

> would indicate agate.

>

> As you indicated you found these on a beach and

> they have been worn smooth by being tumbled in the

> sand by wave action. Still, some of the

> characteristics of the stones can still be seen. A

> few pieces have not been smoothed out enough to

> remove the evidence for conchoidal fracture and

> not all the original surfaces indicating a

> botryoidal habit have been worn away. The manner

> the stones have been smoothed out by tumbling in

> the sand, the botryoidal habit, the conchoidal

> fracture all fit an identification of chalcedony.

> The colors fit for the varities known as carnelian

> and sard. Look up carnelian and sard and see what

> you think.

I agree with you about reddish carnelian and yellowish sard there is many of them . but I think that there are many banded brownish Sardonyx and some of the banded agate ( not pictured ) . it is a huge collection but I did not notice any conchoidal fracture sure I will search about it . sorry all that was old pictures and I do not have new ones .

many thanks

5th Jul 2017 15:32 UTCOwen Lewis

07187710016018869237837.jpg
Beaches are interesting places. I have a few self-collected items, from the Caribbean barrier reef of Belize and central Texas, through Europe, the Mediterranean littoral, Sri Lanka and on to east Malaysia. The southern and eastern Mediterranean shores are partcularly interesting because one still finds so many small but ancient artefacts in this; relics in this the cradle of European civilisation. Sadly, most found this way are severely damaged and water-worn, past the point where recognition of their original purpose is possible but huge quantities of colourful and banded chalcedony were used for architectural ornamentation in ancient times in Egypt, continuing right through the rise and fall of the Roman Empire.


So my guess is, as Alfred says, mainly varieties of chalcedony. The pieces you show above are interesting because they seem to be translucent, some to absorb strongly blue light and be well suited to ornamental use. However, IMO, there is not a hope of a certain ID without the results from a series of accurately carried out hardness tests and SG determinations. From the little I know of the area, I'd say that what you collect are all that is left of ornamental stonework from the sea-side villas of the rich around Alexandria. If this is so, then the true origin of the mineral(s) will never be known.


On one holiday, lying on the sandy beach in front of my hotel I had the strong impression that, at a certain time of day and with the sun in a certain position, the beach almost seemed to glow. I was curious enough to drop a couple of pinches of this beach sand into a bag and bring it home to put it under a camera and illuminated with a diffused white back-light. Here is what I saw:


Image 1. A small sample of the sand I brought home; dry and sprinkled of a 30mm transparent and colourless polystyrene dish. At this magnification, there's nothing to get excited about,




Image 2. However, selecting, cropping and enlarging a section of the whole image file gives us this!
09668640015652252275150.jpg



One day, I shall have some real fun with this sand, testing it out carefully with microscope, polariscope. refractive index testing fluids and a damn good electronic scale and density determination kit. For now, and just from the pic and knowing exactly where the sand came from, I know there is at least one gem mineral present in abundance. To say how many more gem species are present and to calculate the % by mass of each present in my collected sample requires a little more work.


I may not be a rich man - but I know where some riches are! :-) And that's before we get to the octahedral diamond crystal that is still pretty much where it was found, a few hundred metres from the western South Atlantic, that's the size of a hen's egg - and then there's the ametrine site in Canada. And no, I'm not saying where that is either. In each case, the locals prefer to keep their peace, quiet and quality of life as it is. These are truly precious things that money can't buy. Nor even buy my memories of them


Keep looking and finding - but do more testing as well.

5th Jul 2017 17:12 UTCsunstone sunstone

01758310016027468815524.jpg
Owen Lewis : many thanks for your kind words and your open mind . you noticed the close relation between the stones and the history of my location . I also noticed that because of the diversity of different kinds of stones in a relativelly small area that makes me know that it was an ancient collection of people lived here ( Egypt ) in the past and was admiring the diversity of stones .

and I repeat your words about the stones :

( used for architectural ornamentation in ancient times in Egypt right through the rise and fall of the Roman Empire.)

also you said : ( what you collect are all that is left of ornamental stonework from the sea-side villas of the rich around Alexandria )

many thanks for you all

00718600015652252288819.jpg

10th Jul 2017 21:47 UTCsunstone sunstone

I think that my beach is the paradise of coral stones I convinced for a while that my orange red and pink stones are carnelian stones but I am sure now that carnelian was a wrong choice because I think that all of my pink and reddish orange stones are coral stones . even the translucent brown stones I think now that they are translucent agatized fossil coral .

10th Jul 2017 22:43 UTCOwen Lewis

On what facts do you base that opinion? Knowing is always better than guessing.


There is *nothing* in your pictures that suggests a coral, be it mediterranean, fossilised or otherwise. Read up and study images of the typical calcereous and conchiolin structures for the various species. Get to see some real samples in the Cairo Museum.

11th Jul 2017 01:59 UTCReiner Mielke Expert

I agree with Owen.

11th Jul 2017 06:53 UTCsunstone sunstone

04868610016027468824166.jpg
there is a different patterns of striations looks like some sort of growth lines . absence of conchoidal fractures . the translucency of the stones appear very will when the stones washed with water . I pictured them after washing with water to show the internal structure . there is a type of coral called red sponge coral I think that my stones belong to that type of coral .

sponge coral here : http://coral.org.in/what-is-red-sponge-coral-stone/

01358520015652252284696.jpg

02115510015652252284044.jpg

11th Jul 2017 07:20 UTCsunstone sunstone

02585620016019358379457.jpg

02659280015652252281895.jpg

03291690015652252297747.jpg

11th Jul 2017 12:31 UTCReiner Mielke Expert

They look like hematite included quartz pebbles to me. The "striations" are healed fractures filled with hematite. What is the hardness of these?

11th Jul 2017 17:04 UTCDoug Schonewald

It is good that you are persistent and ask questions. However, twisting around your questions and asking the same thing over and over will not change the answers. You have shown some (or all) of these rocks before. It is unlikely your answers about them are going to be different this time.


They are not associated with sponge coral, or any other coral for that matter. These are simply water tumbled quartz pebbles (most likely chalcedony). Chalcedony occurs regularly in volcanic environments and you've said in past posts that the area where these come from is a volcanic area. There are no conchoidal fractures because you haven't broken them. When small pebbles are water washed for a very long time the grinding and polishing of the sands removes any evidence of fracture types. This occurs in both rivers and beaches and in fresh and salt water. It is not unlike putting broken quartz rocks in a tumbler. In a few weeks or months you will have very smooth rounded pebbles. The lines and features you see are not uncommon in chalcedony, in fact, I would expect them to be there and would be slightly surprised if they were not there.

11th Jul 2017 21:27 UTCGregg Little 🌟

I would have to agree with Douglas. Particularly when it comes to fossils, silicified or not, they have to show a repeating growth structure, such as central canals, pores, septa, growth rings, growth layers, coatings on fragments, oolites, pisolites, birds-eye texture, etc. To merely have a texture within the rock doesn't necessarily qualify for fossils. It is most likely sedimentary rock, agate, etc.; in other words inorganic formations.


Your pictures appears to be slag (man-made glass), agate, chalcedony and silicified sedimentary material in general. This is typical stuff that, due to its resistance to abrasion, is found in beaches and rivers.


As Owen indicates it still is interesting and can be economically important sources (eg. gold, monazite, diamond, ruby, etc.)

12th Jul 2017 08:04 UTCsunstone sunstone

00833090016027468839592.jpg
I am very grateful for your attention and I know that it is very difficult to identify sponge coral depending on few pictures . sponge coral can be semi translucent to opaque and I think that there is a relation between the degree of translucency and the age of sponge coral stones . I have in my collection all colors and all degrees of translucency starting with the semi translucent to the mature opaque sponge coral ( I think ) .

here is a sample of two mature opaque stones one red and the other black knowing that I have many others .


back side of the stone
06519450015652252298870.jpg

12th Jul 2017 08:12 UTCsunstone sunstone

04252890016027468835888.jpg

12th Jul 2017 10:23 UTCOwen Lewis

Reiner Mielke Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> The translucency of these is unusual. The only

> explanation I have is that it is ancient slag.

> What does one look like broken open? What is the

> specific gravity and hardness?


Reiner, In N.America, your explanation would be very likely. But, as said previously, picked off an Alexandrian (Egypt) beach, they are most likely water-worn architectural rubble that is 500 - 5,000 years old. Remains from any of several earlier civilizations, such can be picked off the beaches and shallow waters around much/most of the central and eastern Mediterranean. As artefacts, these pieces can have no mineralogical significance though they may sometimes be of archeological interest. Nil commercial value.


As you also suggest, no mineral ID of such rubble is possible without patient and accurate testing since the locality of find is almost always without (mineralogical) significance.

12th Jul 2017 10:23 UTCWayne Corwin

SS


The red one (5460/1) is slag.

12th Jul 2017 21:39 UTCsunstone sunstone

06761390016027468847816.jpg
Owen Lewis Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Reiner Mielke Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > The translucency of these is unusual. The only

> > explanation I have is that it is ancient slag.

> > What does one look like broken open? What is

> the

> > specific gravity and hardness?

>

> Reiner, In N.America, your explanation would be

> very likely. But, as said previously, picked off

> an Alexandrian (Egypt) beach, they are most

> likely water-worn architectural rubble that is 500

> - 5,000 years old. Remains from any of several

> earlier civilizations, such can be picked off the

> beaches and shallow waters around much/most of the

> central and eastern Mediterranean. As artefacts,

> these pieces can have no mineralogical

> significance though they may sometimes be of

> archeological interest. Nil commercial value.

>

> As you also suggest, no mineral ID of such rubble

> is possible without patient and accurate testing

> since the locality of find is almost always

> without (mineralogical) significance.


many thanks but I think that rubble or slag cannot be unique and beautiful like that stones ( black sponge coral I think )

01460850015652252305065.jpg

02175510015652252313232.jpg

12th Jul 2017 22:30 UTCReiner Mielke Expert

I see nothing to indicate that is black coral. Looks more like a sedimentary rock to me.

12th Jul 2017 23:39 UTCOwen Lewis

sunstone sunstone Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

...... unique and beautiful like that stones ( black

> sponge coral I think )

>


This conversation becomes meaningless. 'Sponge coral' is a contradiction in terms. 'Sponge' and 'coral' are , generically, the names of two different families of simple animal species that live under water. There are some black sponges and some black corals, neither of which are found in the Medterranean as far as I know. Black sponges are soft-centred with a leathery surface. Black coral does not have a rigid and brittle inorganic calcereous skeleton, as do the reef-building corals. Rather, its supporting skeleton is built up from layered growth of excreted conchiolin, a tough and flexible organic compound.


Anyone who has handled corals will know with certainty that none of the photographs you switch about shows a coral, black or otherwise, nor do they show any fossilised coral. The problem with your posts is that often repeated nonsenses can confuse some others who read here and might accept your quite unreasoned opinions as truths.


It is a good rule that, if one cannot clearly support an opinion with either (1) clear photography of identifying features or (2) data from several types of testing (preferably giving both), it's better not to offer any opinion at all.


Anyway, I'm now finished in these threads which will reduce the general noise a little :-/

13th Jul 2017 00:02 UTCReiner Mielke Expert

Hello Owen,


It does get rather tiring doesn't it. Just so you know, I admire your patience and persistence. Thanks for "carrying the load".
 
and/or  
Mindat Discussions Facebook Logo Instagram Logo Discord Logo
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: May 3, 2024 22:22:03
Go to top of page