Meteorite identification

stuart7

Jr. Member
Sep 13, 2023
20
21
I found this a few months ago and I have had one geologist look at it and they couldn't tell me what it was, I have since had a search around online and found that it has alot of features that a meteorite would have, it is magnetic and pretty heavy for its size.
If anyone can help with this it would be much appreciated
1694633922841426404665794778796.jpg
16946339496483714700748541826854.jpg
16946339753046287627816590878039.jpg
16946341882154007275390543627080.jpg
16946339496483714700748541826854.jpg
 

Attachments

  • 16946340148441209299914098410575.jpg
    16946340148441209299914098410575.jpg
    939.1 KB · Views: 24
Upvote 11
Can't get it tested and approved by anyone without cutting it.

Meteorites are often authenticated without cutting. Many are worth far more because of interesting features and cutting would greatly reduce the value. Only one in my collection is cut, the rest are whole. Most meteorites are identified by their fusion crust, flow patterns, regmaglypts, chondrules, and when necessary, by Ion Beam analysis--not by cutting.

But this is irrelevant in this case because the OP's stone is NOT a meteorite.
 

Meteorites are often authenticated without cutting. Many are worth far more because of interesting features and cutting would greatly reduce the value. Only one in my collection is cut, the rest are whole. Most meteorites are identified by their fusion crust, flow patterns, regmaglypts, chondrules, and when necessary, by Ion Beam analysis--not by cutting.

But this is irrelevant in this case because the OP's stone is NOT a meteorite.
I disagree you need to cut it to get a IMCA number and that will make it more valuable.
 

I found this a few months ago and I have had one geologist look at it and they couldn't tell me what it was, I have since had a search around online and found that it has alot of features that a meteorite would have, it is magnetic and pretty heavy for its size.
If anyone can help with this it would be much appreciated
View attachment 2104969View attachment 2104970View attachment 2104971View attachment 2104973View attachment 2104970
Nice pictures. Unsure. Lava Rock?
 

Perhaps I can clarify here. While I have no doubt at at all that this is terrestrial (likely a breadcrust lava bomb) and not meteoritic, I would say this:

It is not necessary to cut into a specimen to determine if it is a meteorite. Confirmatory testing can easily be done non-destructively. At worst, such testing may leave a small mark on the surface which will not detract from its value. Confirmatory testing is not however the same thing as ‘approval’.

If it passed those confirmatory tests then, as a second step, maximising its (scientific and commercial) value would come from having it typed and formally submitted to the Meteoritical Society to obtain an approved name for it. They would also require a small portion of it as a type specimen so, inevitably, that would require it to be cut or chipped (but not sawn in half). That’s pretty academic since I would be sure it will not pass non-destructive confirmatory testing.

If it’s a lava bomb it doesn’t have particular scientific value, but cutting into it will detract from its aesthetic/display value to a collector.

Note also that meteorites are rare in the UK and command high prices. Collector demand for a new addition to the list would be sufficiently high that there would likely be more money to had from selling slices of it than selling it as an intact individual. Again, that’s academic, since it isn’t a meteorite (my opinion). There have only been 23 confirmed meteorites/falls plus a further 14 claimed to have been found in historic times when testing protocols were unavailable, and which are regarded as “doubtful”.

Further discussion here:

 

The OP did streak test the rock. It is a hematite after pyrite concretion just as the geologist said. :thumbsup:

Not a meteorite and not a lava bomb or igneous rock of any kind.

 

Top Member Reactions

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top