Talk:Tourmaline
|
|
The style in this article is atrocious! Anyone making an edit or with enough time, remove all the soft commas.
The page is much improved.
Additions I would suggest
Tourmaline polarizes light when cut perpendicular to the long axis. It is both pyroelectric and piezoelectric.
Tourmaline also comes in the colors: orange (sometimes called Pumpkin Tourmaline) and purple (Siberite when found in Russia, but also found in California).
Radiation can be used to change the color (if I remember right, this was in a paper >30 years ago by an AT&T or Bell Labs researcher).
Incorrect entry of Tourmaline Refractive Index
The Refractive Index entry is incorrect, transparency is ANOTHER optical property. The correct Refractive Index for Tourmaline is 1.624-1.644. The variation is +-.005 and the birifringence is .020.
- OK. Fixed per 20th ed. Dana Manual. The article text appears to be largely from 1911 Britannica article and in need of serious rewriting ... someday :-) -Vsmith 00:11, 29 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Wrong!
The whole page is wrong. 'Tourmaline' is not a mineral, and shouldn't be described as one. It's a group of minerals with similar (but not identical) properties - minerals such as Elbaite, Dravite, Schorl, Uvite, etc. So it's plain wrong to list physical properties, etc. when they vary from species to species. I don't really have time to update this now, but someone needs to kick this page around. --Jolyonralph 13:09, 6 May 2005 (UTC)
I submit that the whole page isn't wrong. Tourmaline is a mineral because it has a characteristic crystalline form. Because of its chemical complexity and variability we witness a broad range of color, perhaps more than any other commonly recognized gemstone. I have never heard anyone in Gemology refer to the "Tourmaline Group."
- I agree w/ Jolyonralph, tourmaline is a group of minerals with varying compositions. Many of the physical properties are shared by members of the group but not all. The page should be revised as a group page with each of the various minerals in the group described with a section or a separate page (for the major ones). Properties in common should be discussed in the intro and specific properties amplified in each section/subarticle. See Mineral galleries (http://mineral.galleries.com/minerals/silicate/tourmali.htm)] for an example discussion. I'll put it on my to do list, but ... when? :-) Vsmith 04:05, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Why not take the members of this group and treat them the way garnets and feldspars are delt with on Wikipedia? I know that this requires a lot of work from Wikipedians familiar with gemstones but a worthy task nonetheless. User:T.E. Goodwin
- That's basically what I had in mind. Someday. -Vsmith 23:20, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC)