Weird water worn rock or something else?

[thelivingdead531]

Is this just a water worn rock in a weird pattern, or is it something else? Found at West Runton, UK by my son along with a bucket full of flint rocks and a small handful of belenmites. It’s an intriguing pattern, so even if it’s just a rock I still think it’s neat.

[thelivingdead531]

[thelivingdead531]

[Auspex]

I'll put my money on half a peach pit.

[thelivingdead531]

 I knew the pattern looked familiar, but I wasn’t coming up with anything. 

[caldigger]

Lucky!  If I were you, I'd get back there and see if you can find the other half. 

 

[thelivingdead531]

1 hour ago, caldigger said:

Lucky!  If I were you, I'd get back there and see if you can find the other half. 

 

I’ll call myself lucky and settle for this half. It seems to be a rare find on this beach, so I’ll count this one as a win. 

[abyssunder]

Yup, pretty nice one!

 

[Innocentx]

What a cool thing to find! Good spotting!

[Bobby Rico]

Fantastic find . 

[Bronzviking]

Is this a petrified pit and considered a fossil?

[abyssunder]

11 minutes ago, Bronzviking said:

Is this a petrified pit and considered a fossil?

I think so.

[ynot]

2 hours ago, Bronzviking said:

Is this a petrified pit and considered a fossil?

 

2 hours ago, abyssunder said:

I think so.

Found with belemnites?

I do not see it being fossil, but rather remnants of someone's snack.

[The Mushroom Whisperer]

[thelivingdead531]

8 hours ago, ynot said:

 

Found with belemnites?

I do not see it being fossil, but rather remnants of someone's snack.

 

 

12 hours ago, Bronzviking said:

Is this a petrified pit and considered a fossil?

 

 

11 hours ago, abyssunder said:

I think so.

 

While West Runton is highly fossiliferous, ranging from plants, seeds, cones, mollusks, fish, reptiles, and large mammals (mammoths and rhinos), I’m not sure the peach pit is petrified either. 

 

Is is there a way to tell? Will the burn test work on this, even if it’s not bone?

[Rockwood]

6 minutes ago, thelivingdead531 said:

Is is there a way to tell? Will the burn test work on this, even if it’s not bone?

If it is modern it should burn after it dries enough. I would just tap it with a spoon though. If it's mineralized it will ring like fine china.

Wait for more locally experienced advise before you burn it in case there are true fossils there that still burn.

[Rockwood]

9 hours ago, ynot said:

 

Found with belemnites?

 

Wouldn't we need to see the entire column for the area for this to be indicative ?

[ynot]

2 hours ago, Rockwood said:

Wouldn't we need to see the entire column for the area for this to be indicative ?

Possibly. But I doubt that peach pits of this size are that old.

 

Peach pits that are identical to modern have been found in China and date to 2.5 million years.

 

Further (from wikipedia)

Although its botanical name Prunus persica refers to Persia (present Iran) from where it came to Europe, genetic studies suggest peaches originated in China,[11] where they have been cultivated since the neolithic period. Until recently, it was believed that the cultivation started circa 2000 BC.[12][13] More recent evidence indicates that domestication occurred as early as 6000 BC in Zhejiang Province of China. The oldest archaeological peach stones are from the Kuahuqiao site. Archaeologists point to the Yangtze River Valley as the place where the early selection for favorable peach varieties probably took place.[14] Peaches were mentioned in Chinese writings and literature beginning from the early 1st millennium BC.[15]

An apparently domesticated peach appeared very early in Japan, in 6700–6400 BP (4700–4400 BC), during the Jōmon period. It was already similar to modern cultivated forms, where the peach stones are significantly larger and more compressed than earlier stones. This domesticated type of peach was apparently brought into Japan from China. Nevertheless, in China itself, this variety is currently attested only at a later date of ca. 5300 to 4300 BP.[14]

In India, the peach first appeared by circa 3700 BP (1700 BC), during the Harappan period.[16]

It is also found elsewhere in Western Asia in ancient times.[17] Peach cultivation also went from China, through Persia, and reached Greece by 300 BC.[13] It is often claimed that Alexander the Great introduced the fruit into Europe after he conquered the Persians,[17] although there is no historical evidence for this belief.[18] Peaches were, however, well known to the Romans in first century AD,[13] and were cultivated widely in Emilia-Romagna. Peach trees are portrayed in the wall paintings of the towns destroyed by the Vesuvius eruption of 79 AD, while the oldest known artistic representations of the fruit are in two fragments of wall paintings, dated to the first century AD, in Herculaneum, now preserved in the National Archaeological Museum in Naples.[19]

[Rockwood]

If it turns out to be stone either the peach pit idea, or this one may need to be scrapped then ? 

[ynot]

11 minutes ago, Rockwood said:

If it turns out to be stone either the peach pit idea, or this one may need to be scrapped then ? 

But it is a peach stone, at least half of one anyways.

[Rockwood]

34 minutes ago, ynot said:

But it is a peach stone, at least half of one anyways.

Kind of circular (logic) at this point isn't it ? 

[Innocentx]

No one's going to accept this as fossil until burn test is done, is that right?

[Rockwood]

44 minutes ago, Innocentx said:

No one's going to accept this as fossil until burn test is done, is that right?

No. A small but not insignificant percentage of fossils will burn. I think burning nut would smell like burning nut no mater how old it is.

[Innocentx]

1 hour ago, Rockwood said:

I think burning nut would smell like burning nut no mater how old it is.

If it's fossilized then it's been replaced by minerals, correct? How could it then smell of nut when burned?

[Bronzviking]

It sure looks like stone to me but I'm not holding it in my hand. I was thinking the same thing @Innocentx