|
|
Post by vegasjames on Apr 24, 2023 7:35:01 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by MsAli on Apr 24, 2023 9:15:37 GMT -5
We have that all over the shores up here. Some guy started calling it galaxy stone.
Cuts good but hard to do anything with as it likes to crumble apart. I've tried tumbling some and cabbing.
It's better left on the shores of the lady
|
|
|
|
Post by Lazy Perfectionist on Apr 24, 2023 11:11:02 GMT -5
Where from?
|
|
|
|
Post by vegasjames on Apr 24, 2023 16:46:23 GMT -5
Next to Lake Las Vegas by Henderson, Nevada. |
|
|
|
Post by Pat on Apr 24, 2023 16:49:44 GMT -5
Interesting. What is the material in the amygdaloidal holes?
|
|
|
|
Post by Jugglerguy on Apr 24, 2023 20:39:25 GMT -5
That was Taylor from the Agate Dad YouTube channel who started calling it Galaxy Stone. That name has really caught on.
That stuff looks so much like what you find in copper mine tailings in Michigan's copper mine tailings piles. If I remember correctly, you hunt copper country too, right James?
|
|
RWA3006
Cave Dweller 
Member since March 2009
Posts: 4,630 
|
Post by RWA3006 on Apr 24, 2023 21:43:51 GMT -5
Looks like gas vesicles that filled with copper compounds. Is it hard, soft?
|
|
|
|
Post by vegasjames on Apr 24, 2023 21:56:20 GMT -5
Interesting. What is the material in the amygdaloidal holes? I have not been been able to ID the minerals yet. |
|
|
|
Post by vegasjames on Apr 25, 2023 0:07:44 GMT -5
That was Taylor from the Agate Dad YouTube channel who started calling it Galaxy Stone. That name has really caught on. That stuff looks so much like what you find in copper mine tailings in Michigan's copper mine tailings piles. If I remember correctly, you hunt copper country too, right James? Yes, spend a lot of time at copper mines around here. Not sure if there are any copper mines where these were found. There is an old manganese mine close by. although I think there was also a turquoise deposit in the area. Have to double check on that. |
|
|
|
Post by vegasjames on Apr 25, 2023 0:09:39 GMT -5
Looks like gas vesicles that filled with copper compounds. Is it hard, soft? Have not run any tests on them yet. I did find various green minerals in the area that run from green clay to green chalcedony that occur together. |
|
|
|
Post by MsAli on Apr 25, 2023 0:33:25 GMT -5
I know around here a lot of them are filled with Zeolite, quartz and calcites
|
|
|
|
Post by vegasjames on Apr 25, 2023 20:03:45 GMT -5
Interesting. What is the material in the amygdaloidal holes? Think I have the green identified as celadonite K(MgFe3+◻)(Si4O10)(OH)2 |
|
|
|
Post by jasoninsd on Apr 26, 2023 5:35:14 GMT -5
James, thanks for posting this! I find a LOT of material around this area that is the spitting image of that...well...close to it anyway!
|
|
|
|
Post by fernwood on May 4, 2023 5:36:30 GMT -5
I find some on my land, too. It is fairly common on the South Shore of Lake Superior.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Member since January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 4, 2023 7:50:40 GMT -5
We have that all over the shores up here. Some guy started calling it galaxy stone. Cuts good but hard to do anything with as it likes to crumble apart. I've tried tumbling some and cabbing. It's better left on the shores of the lady Personally I find making up names for stones that already have names to be both stupid and annoying. I think it does a disservice to people getting into rocks and minerals as it adds confusion to an already complex subject. |
|
pizzano
Cave Dweller
Member since February 2018
Posts: 1,390
|
Post by pizzano on May 4, 2023 11:36:06 GMT -5
We have that all over the shores up here. Some guy started calling it galaxy stone. Cuts good but hard to do anything with as it likes to crumble apart. I've tried tumbling some and cabbing. It's better left on the shores of the lady Personally I find making up names for stones that already have names to be both stupid and annoying. I think it does a disservice to people getting into rocks and minerals as it adds confusion to an already complex subject. I wouldn't go so far as to say adding names to an already known entity is "stupid", but it is quite annoying.........just like referring to various stones like Chert because it has 'four diagnostic features: the waxy luster, a conchoidal (shell-shaped) fracture of the silica mineral chalcedony that composes it, a hardness of seven on the Mohs scale, and a smooth (non-clastic) sedimentary texture.".........and then giving it another name.
The most typical or common "naming" game is innocently practiced to identify a location it was harvested.........but there are those who prefer to "personalize" their finds as if it is special or unique to other material "common" to most collectors........those are the identities I find most annoying and misleading to the hobbyist.....as with everything today, if it ain't special or unique, it won't draw the type of attention so many seem to crave and require in order to function socially today.......lol
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Member since January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 4, 2023 12:54:51 GMT -5
Personally I find making up names for stones that already have names to be both stupid and annoying. I think it does a disservice to people getting into rocks and minerals as it adds confusion to an already complex subject. I wouldn't go so far as to say adding names to an already known entity is "stupid", but it is quite annoying.........just like referring to various stones like Chert because it has 'four diagnostic features: the waxy luster, a conchoidal (shell-shaped) fracture of the silica mineral chalcedony that composes it, a hardness of seven on the Mohs scale, and a smooth (non-clastic) sedimentary texture.".........and then giving it another name. The most typical or common "naming" game is innocently practiced to identify a location it was harvested.........but there are those who prefer to "personalize" their finds as if it is special or unique to other material "common" to most collectors........those are the identities I find most annoying and misleading to the hobbyist.....as with everything today, if it ain't special or unique, it won't draw the type of attention so many seem to crave and require in order to function socially today.......lol
That's fine, we don't have to agree.
I personally believe that taking something that clearly has a standard descriptive name which is good and well documented and replacing it with whatever silly or cute name you like and then getting your social media follower to repeat it is in fact stupid.
What if I was to just try and rename thundereggs because I felt like it? It is after all just a common name for lithophysae but it is widely accepted at this point.
From now on this is a Dirty Pond Stone, I mean it looks like a body of water seen from above so why not just call things whatever someone feels like calling it?
 I think all of us as lapidary's, rock collectors and amateur mineralogist should be striving for accuracy in what we do and I think that is even more important to do if you have a large social media following because people will follow in your footsteps and repeat the things you say like it or not so setting a good example is important or at least I think it should be important. |
|
|
|
Post by MsAli on May 4, 2023 14:19:11 GMT -5
I will agree that it is very confusing and a disservice, especially to people that are just getting into the hobby
I will say that he has made a name for himself because of it which good for him but there is a lack which I'll keep the personal opinions to myself
|
|
|
|
Post by parfive on May 4, 2023 15:17:23 GMT -5
Just wonderin’ what they called that stuff all over the shores up there before some guy started calling it galaxy stone. 
|
|
|
|
Post by vegasjames on May 4, 2023 15:41:35 GMT -5
Personally I find making up names for stones that already have names to be both stupid and annoying. I think it does a disservice to people getting into rocks and minerals as it adds confusion to an already complex subject. I wouldn't go so far as to say adding names to an already known entity is "stupid", but it is quite annoying.........just like referring to various stones like Chert because it has 'four diagnostic features: the waxy luster, a conchoidal (shell-shaped) fracture of the silica mineral chalcedony that composes it, a hardness of seven on the Mohs scale, and a smooth (non-clastic) sedimentary texture.".........and then giving it another name.
The most typical or common "naming" game is innocently practiced to identify a location it was harvested.........but there are those who prefer to "personalize" their finds as if it is special or unique to other material "common" to most collectors........those are the identities I find most annoying and misleading to the hobbyist.....as with everything today, if it ain't special or unique, it won't draw the type of attention so many seem to crave and require in order to function socially today.......lol
Yes, I see a lot of things that obviously are not chert being called chert, which sets a bad example to newbies that then start misidentifying stones. Not just with chert though. The most common one I see is people calling every copper ore "chrysocolla". I have even seen people refer to malachite as "chrysocolla". Another example is people calling common chalcedonies an "agate", or satin spar being called "selenite". A couple others are "bumblebee japser", which is actually a calcite and "rainforest jasper" that is actually a rhyolite. Been in to a number of debates on other boards with people over the candy rhyolite, also known as sandstorm rhyolite, from Gemfield that people argue is chalcedony because this is what the new claim owners have misidentified it as. Chalcedonies do not have flow banding like this rhyolite does, and other than the jaspers, including chert/flint, the chalcedonies have clarity. The candy rhyolite is opaque. I even pull up multiple geological reports discussing the rhyolite composition of the area and they still wan to argue that it is chalcedony because this is what the owners listed on the claim. Chalcedony is very uncommon in the area other than the green jasper at Gemfield. |
|
Nov 14, 2024 18:17:57 GMT -5
*
Nov 14, 2024 18:17:57 GMT -5
*
Nov 15, 2024 17:44:51 GMT -5
Nov 15, 2024 17:44:51 GMT -5
