Difference between revisions of "Talk:Mineral"

From The Gemology Project
Jump to: navigation, search
(questions on content)
 
 
(3 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
 
would ammolite be considered organic?  I would guess so, but can someone confirm that for me? --[[User:Africanuck|Africanuck]] 07:33, 9 March 2006 (PST)
 
would ammolite be considered organic?  I would guess so, but can someone confirm that for me? --[[User:Africanuck|Africanuck]] 07:33, 9 March 2006 (PST)
 +
:confirmed --[[User:Doos|Doos]] 08:01, 9 March 2006 (PST)
 +
 +
Ok, glass is excluded but how about obsidian or moldovite? And how does opal fit into all of this, as it is not a crystalline structure? --[[User:Africanuck|Africanuck]] 14:41, 9 March 2006 (PST)
 +
 +
:Obsidian and moldavite are natural glasses, so non-crystalline. Opal is non-crystalline aswell. The opposite of crystalline is "amorphous", glass and opal are therefor amorph (meaning no regular internal structure). --[[User:Doos|Doos]] 08:47, 10 March 2006 (PST)

Latest revision as of 09:47, 10 March 2006

would ammolite be considered organic? I would guess so, but can someone confirm that for me? --Africanuck 07:33, 9 March 2006 (PST)

confirmed --Doos 08:01, 9 March 2006 (PST)

Ok, glass is excluded but how about obsidian or moldovite? And how does opal fit into all of this, as it is not a crystalline structure? --Africanuck 14:41, 9 March 2006 (PST)

Obsidian and moldavite are natural glasses, so non-crystalline. Opal is non-crystalline aswell. The opposite of crystalline is "amorphous", glass and opal are therefor amorph (meaning no regular internal structure). --Doos 08:47, 10 March 2006 (PST)