Please, any information about magadiite. Which type of phyllosillicates does it belong to, links, pics, contacts, esp. structure, use, intercalation.\nThank you.
207191
You could start here:\n\nhttp://webmineral.com/data/Magadiite.shtml
299995
Here are some questions that will help you:\n\nFirstly, are they natural or synthetic?  \nSome synthetics can look amazingly similar to heat-treated naturals.  \n\nIf they are synthetic, what kind of synthetics are they? Flame-fusion? Flux-grown? Flame-fusion synthetics can be had for a few cents a piece.  Some flux-grown synthetics cost over a $100/ct.\n\nIf they are natural, you'll need to judge their quality:\n\nColor - Is the color saturated? Is the tone balanced? Do they show undesirable brown modifiers? \n\nClarity - Are there inclusions? How distracting are they? Where are they located? Do they improve or adversely effect the aesthetics of the stones?  Do they affect durability? \n \nCut - Are the stones faceted or cabachon-cut? Are they transparent, translucent or opaque?  What shapes are they?\nAre they cut well? ie balanced & symmetrical, good length-width ratio, good polish and finish.  There is a premium for matched pairs and lots.\n\nCarat - 13 rubies totalling 50 carats makes each piece about 3.85cts.  Hmmm...that's considered large for rubies.  \nFine stones above 3 carats are considered rare.  Commercial & utility quality stones can be hundreds of carats in size and still not be very valuable.\n\nOrigin - Where were they mined? There is a premium for Burmese stones, especially from Mogok.\n\n------------------------------------------ \n\nBased on the information you have provided, it is not possible to accurately say what they are worth.  You could have a jeweller look at them, but it's probably better to send them to a professional colored stone appraiser.  \n\nAs a very rough estimate, here are some price ranges for faceted rubies in the 3ct range (in Bangkok): [Commercial/Good/Fine]\nRuby [25-300/300-1000/1000-6000]\nPink Sapphire (low saturation rubies) [50+/100-250/250-1500]\n\nBTW, 99% of all rubies available in the market are heat-treated.  A premium is put on stones that are not heated but only if they are of fine quality material.  All other things equal, washed out stones that have not been heat treated are never worth more than heated material with good color.
630483
Sorry, but I don't think magenta is new.  The link says it's just a strontium salt.  Maybe you could find your original source.
30921
It sounds like a mineral called chrysotile. This is a fibrous mineral, sometimes green, that is a type of asbestos. Link to a picture is here:http://geology.about.com/library/bl/images/blchrysotile.htm\n\nIf you have more properties to describe it with you may find more information using this mineral search engine:\nhttp://www.mindat.org/fullsearch.php
216538
A student from New Delhi showed me some Kashmirs he had purchased last year.  They were indeed Kashmirs (we checked the inclusions) but they were one of the worse cut stones I'd ever seen.  Plus they were badly zoned with (at best) a fair color grade.  \n\nMy point is, the finest Kashmirs (and I've seen some at the Christies auctions) are the most beautiful, vivid yet velvety blue sapphires on the face of this earth.  But your average Kashmir could be as average as a sapphire from any other locality.  \n\nI understand the buzz about origin (Golconda Diamonds/Kashmir Sapphires/Mogok Rubies etc), but we shouldn't judge gemstones by their "genetics".  I've seen fine Burmese sapphires that would have knocked the socks of Kashmir enthusiasts.  \n\nPrices for fine Kashmirs? It's a seller's market! That's the best (and worse) thing about fine quality colored gemstones.  They are so genuinely rare (as opposed to diamonds) they are worth whatever someone will pay for them!
116860
Interesting stuff.  I wouldn't mind if we were not alone in the universe. I found some discussion of this stuff on the internet, but if you have better sources, please post them \nThis is an article about Inca stones and the whole archeological find \nhttp://www.labyrinthina.com/ica.htm\nsome pictures here. about 1/4 down the page\nhttp://www.raphaelk.co.uk/web%20pics/Peru/Peru.htm
221244
..Hi ..I put a few links below! ...\nKind regards! ...
364668
Most rocks thought to be meteorites are not. There are what they call "meteorwrongs". I found a rock myself that's all metal and rather heavy. That's how I found this site. You could also take it to a museum. Someone there will know. Take a look at these pictures.\n.
25160
How about one of these on this page?\nhttp://jewelry.about.com/cs/thefourcs/tp/diamonds.htm
15059
Worth of course depends on how many people are wanting to buy it.  On of the best sources to get it out there and seen is to take a picture of it and sell it on ebay.  There is a huge huge demand for minerals/crystals of that nature on there.  I know because I buy alot of my crystals on there.  See if htat works for you.
79712
Probably not on the web.  Do a web search on the final product, read the hits, and see if the journals mentioned are on line or contact the authors (be very polite!!! if you want feedback).  If not you will need the library.  The book series Inorganic Syntheses should have it.
556687
Can I please see these photographs as well?\n\nI viewed your source, and the pre-Colombian gold artifacts do look like airplanes, and the heiroglyphics do look like helicopters and a blimp. I didn't see a source for a jet fighter on rock (you probably meant gold) or pictures of ancient astronauts, or a picture of the space station on a rock in Persopolis. If you have a chance and remember where you saw them, please add the links. I don't know why the gold sculptures look so much like airplanes; we know that airplanes didn't exist back then so do you think the sculptor had some sort of vision? The picture of the heiroglyphics did not elaborate on them at all... at this point, with the information you gave me, it seems to be a very long stretch. Very long.
200824
It's not right in your area, but in your state. Try contacting the Genesee Valley Flint Knappers Association. They make stone tools like arrow heads and spear points, so they might be able to share some places to find flint and related silicaceous rocks. Also, the town of Herkimer NY is the source of the famous Herkimer diamonds, which are not really diamonds but nicely shaped quartz crystals. It's not far from you on the Thruway. If you want to take a day trip into Connecticut, the whole Connecticut River valley has lots of garnet, (the CT state stone). Contact some gem or rock shops, they can probably put you in touch with local collectors. Enjoy!
145371
I'm not sure maybe the link will help.\n\nhttp://www.chemicalforums.com/
536029
http://www.stolaf.edu/depts/chemistry/courses/toolkits/123/js/lewis/\n\nI agree it is too hard for us to draw lewis structures in a forum like this. What helped me learn lewis structures is by practicing them on sites like these. If you follow each step you can do lewis structures for anything.
25621
I am not going to pick any of those choices because I don't believe any of those are correct, including streak. What you are describing is crystal structure, which might be related to color and streak, but since trace impurities in a mineral often determine color, and streak is nothing more than the color of a powdered form of the mineral I don't think It will be determined by atomic structure with certainty.  Most streaks are white!\n\nCleavage would be a correct answer but it was not included above. Cleavage and crystal structure are closely related properties. \n\nWhat you have described is the crystal structure. All minerals can be classified within 14 basic crystal lattice arrangements of the atoms in three dimensions. These 14 lattice arrangements fit within 7 larger crystal systems, allowing the classification of atomic structure of all known minerals.  To see diagrams of these go here:\nhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crystal_structure
452118
You should recognize that, when they combine with nonmetals, metals tend to LOSE electrons and form POSITIVE ions. Nonmetals, on the other hand, tend to GAIN electrons and form NEGATIVE ions.\n\nGet an "A".