Jump to content
mickiver

Could Be An Egg.......

Recommended Posts

JohnJ

Hi Ed,

I had a close look at that and I still don't see any clear layering. I see parallel lines in places but those look like scratches in the rock to me, not layers. Considering that whole area is full of glacial till that would make a lot of sense.

Agreed. The brighter photo in post 5 shows striations on the surface which are consistent with glacial "polishing".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mr_ed

Thanks. That gravel was located in eastern central Texas - very little if any volcanic rock shown. No obsidian. Cherts, jaspers, other sedimentary rocks and quartz of varying forms...plus the partial mammoth tooth. It's interesting how we like to relate isolated rocks to those found in our local areas.

Regarding the subject rock of this topic, mickiver says it was found in eastern South Dakota. So, it is most likely from a Pleistocene glacial deposit and would have been subjected to a lot of erosive forces no matter it's true composition.

Studying the last 3 photos, I'm not seeing any of the "layering" referenced in earlier posts...not that it isn't - I just don't see it. What I think I can see in those images are subtle hints of circular conchodial fractures across the surface. In a few areas, it appears that a different lighter mineral is exposed on the surface as irregular shapes. Maybe mickiver can provide additional info. This is one of those interesting finds that allows teaching and learning for many who surf this forum.

Sorry.. i thought the black rock in the upper left was obsidian at a glance.. anyway that shows what I know .. I have always referred to agate and jasper as volcanic rocks for some reason... should be more careful here .. Sorry

Only more silly question.. how do you explain the circular conchodial fractures on one side and no such thing around the larger divot? Thanks

Ed

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
JohnJ

No worries, Ed. I'm no expert either...just learning along with everyone else. Here is an enlarged view of mickiver's stone.

post-420-0-55487800-1374802141_thumb.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
pinkpantherbeekeeper

To catch up with answers:

When I found it, it had a small amount of calcium "slag" on it that I removed. It made me think it had to be very old, and in a wet environment at some point.

Does this have any bearing on it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Herb

Soapstone in most of it's forms can be scratched with your fingernail, hardness ranges from MOHS 1.0 (talc) to about 5.0 (counter tops) if it cant be scratched with a knife (5.5) it is not soapstone.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Roadrunner

I wonder why he hasn't done a scratch test?

Maybe he went on vacation....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mr_ed

I wonder why he hasn't done a scratch test?

Maybe he went on vacation....

Looks like a "your guess is as good as mine" situation without a scratch test and estimate of hardness.

When I was about seven years old my father found a mistery stone in our backyard which at one time not long before that was an Indian village of sorts. The evidence of a crude steam bath was still there by the creek.. anyway the mystery rock turned out to be star saphire about the size of a golf ball or a little smaller. Dad took it to a local rock shop to get some jewellery made of it for Mom and he never saw it again. It got lost.

But that was either glacial drift or an Indian trade item.. anyway it was a long way from home wherever that was. I have never seen anything that beautiful in the 63 years that I have been playing around with rocks since then. On occasion I would sneak into his bedroom where he kept it and pick it up and look at it and no matter how many times I looked at it I was always amazed with the beauty it portrayed. He never knew what it was until he took it to the rock shop and asked them to make some jewellery out of it.. They tried to buy it but it was kind of a sentimental thing to him for some reason.

This rock of Mckivers could have been carried around for centuries by natives and used as a trade item or good luck... who knows. Or maybe it was just polished by nature as some have suggested.

Nice to dream of what it could be.

Cheers

Ed

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Herb

Anyhew, it's still just a rock. :blink:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
jwcounts

The chance that this is a 3.5 centimeter, extremely well-preserved fossil pearl that was just picked up out of a backyard are slim to none, IMO. Such a thing would be very rare.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
steelhead9

Colonial era marble. I have some somewhere and will look to find and photograph them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
painshill

Colonial era marble. I have some somewhere and will look to find and photograph them.

No. Not nearly spherical enough.

Goodness... it's amazing how much random speculation can be generated by a small, roughly round black rock with a ding out of it, despite the fact that we still don't have full description of it geological properties.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Batty

It has certainly peaked a lot of interest lol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
painshill

Maybe it's an Aztec 8-ball used by a hitherto unknown tribe of midgets and the '8' has been worn off. It looks very like the one in this picture (only a bit smaller):

post-6208-0-48050500-1374838557_thumb.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Auspex
...how do you explain the circular conchodial fractures on one side and no such thing around the larger divot? ...

The former could be of much more recent origin, where the latter is older and has been subjected to much more tumbling.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Indy

Maybe it's an Aztec 8-ball used by a hitherto unknown tribe of midgets and the '8' has been worn off.

It looks very like the one in this picture (only a bit smaller):

Native Game Balls.jpg

OR

Possibly a ball from an Aztec pin-ball game Link

:P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Indy

Speculation can be fun

However, sooner or later, we will conclude even the best pictures

will probably not result in a positive identification of this artifact.

:P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mr_ed

The former could be of much more recent origin, where the latter is older and has been subjected to much more tumbling.

I like the first part of your reply better ..."could be" is ok but you then say 'the latter is older and has been subject to much more tumbling".. You are obviously grasping at straws and I am not saying that is a bad thing... but it assures me that you don't know that the divot is a chip or an impression and therefore it could be an impression.

Here is an embossed image of the picture with the divot. Note that there are little to no sharp marks in the bottom of the divot. The bottom of the divot has no cracks or splits from the impact that would have to have happened to make that kind of a dent in that rock.

My guess is that the divot is an impression and that the specimen is a river polished concretion .. and you know I am usually wrong.

Your replies are usually air tight to novices like me... You aren't swaying my opinion on this one so far.. I am just guessing like you are.. but I feel confident in my guess so far.

Cheers

Ed

post-10180-0-05268400-1374862183.jpg

Edited by Mr_ed

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mr_ed

This is an embossed picture of the other side.

This is the sort of debate that makes people learn.. sometimes you have to be wrong to learn...me anyway.

Ed

post-10180-0-05994100-1374862713_thumb.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Auspex

I like the first part of your reply better ..."could be" is ok but you then say 'the latter is older and has been subject to much more tumbling".. You are obviously grasping at straws and I am not saying that is a bad thing...

This is a clearer way to say what I meant:

"The former could be of much more recent origin, where the latter is could be older and has been subjected to much more tumbling."

I am proposing what is to me the simplest explanation for the difference between the dent and the conchoidal features, regardless of the dent's origin as an impression, chip, or differential erosion of a 'soft spot'.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Fossildude19

:zzzzscratchchin: .... :blink: .... :o

post-2806-0-92896100-1374863881_thumb.jp post-2806-0-95971400-1374863907_thumb.jp

Just sayin' ,....

:P

Regards,

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
piranha

:zzzzscratchchin: .... :blink: .... :o

death-star2.JPG death_star_2.jpg

smiley-sw023.gif "As you can see, my young apprentice, your fossil-friends have failed. Now witness the firepower of this fully ARMED and OPERATIONAL battle station!" :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Indy

Speculation can be fun

However, sooner or later, we will conclude even the best pictures

will probably not result in a positive identification of this artifact.

:P

:zzzzscratchchin: .... :blink: .... :o

death-star2.JPG death_star_2.jpg

smiley-sw023.gif "As you can see, my young apprentice, your fossil-friends have failed. Now witness the firepower of this fully ARMED and OPERATIONAL battle station!" :P

I stand corrected !!

:D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mr_ed

This is a clearer way to say what I meant:

"The former could be of much more recent origin, where the latter is could be older and has been subjected to much more tumbling."

I am proposing what is to me the simplest explanation for the difference between the dent and the conchoidal features, regardless of the dent's origin as an impression, chip, or differential erosion of a 'soft spot'.

fair enough

It is all good..

I must have something better to do than argue about a dent in a rock.

Cheers

Ed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Herb

OMG! the Death Star!!, I think it's a micrometeorite impact crater.

(Still a rock)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
AgrilusHunter

Hi Ed,

Here is your Fraser rock from earlier, the one with the confirmed chip, next to the unknown. I think they look pretty close.

post-7497-0-62444100-1374867629_thumb.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×