Home
×

Topaz
Topaz

Chambersite
Chambersite



ADD
Compare
X
Topaz
X
Chambersite

Topaz Vs Chambersite

Add ⊕
1 Astrology
1.1 Origin
Brazil, Madagascar, Russia, USA, Mexico, Pakistan, brown, Yellow, Orange, Brazil, Sri Lanka, Pakistan, Russia, brown, Yellow, Orange, Brazil, Sri Lanka, Pakistan, Russia
China
1.2 Color
Yellow, Blue, Green, Red, White, Colorless, Blue, Red, Green, Yellow, pink, Brown
Red, Colorless, Red
1.3 Streak
White
White
1.4 For which Rashi?
Sagittarius
Not Available
1.5 Planet
Sun
Not Available
1.6 Element of Planets
Not Available
Not Available
1.7 How to Wear?
1.7.1 Finger
Not Available
Not Available
1.7.2 Ring Metal
Not Available
Not Available
1.8 Energy
Projective
Not Available
1.9 Deities
Ra
Not Available
1.10 Not to wear with
Not Available
Not Available
1.11 Powers
Healing, Love, Money
Not Available
1.12 Birthstone
1.12.1 Planetary
Not Available
Not Available
1.12.2 Talisman
Not Available
Not Available
2 Physical Properties
2.1 Tenacity
Not Available
Not Available
2.2 Solubility
Not Available
Not Available
2.3 Durability
Not Available
Not Available
2.4 Specific Gravity
3.49-3.57
3.50
2.5 Fracture
Subconchoidal, Uneven, ConchoidalArthur Thomas, Gemstones (2009), Brittle
Uneven, Uneven, ConchoidalAnthony et al, Handbook of mineralogy (2001), Conchoidal, Uneven
2.6 Cleavage
[001] Perfect
None
2.7 Mohs Hardness
8
7
2.8 Chemical Composition
Al2SiO4(F,OH)2
Mn 3B 7O 13ClMichael O’Donoghue , Gems, Sixth Edition (2006)
3 Optical Properties
3.1 Luster
Vitreous
Vitreous
3.2 Pleochroism
Weak
Not Available
3.3 Dispersion
Albite
0.01
Rank: 26 (Overall)
Not Available
Rank: N/A (Overall)
Fluorite
ADD ⊕
3.4 Transparency
Transparent
Gemmological Tables (2004) More from other references
3.5 Refractive Index
1.606-1.644
1.735-1.745
3.6 Optic Character
Not Available
Not Available
3.7 Crystal System
Orthorhombic
Orthorhombic
3.8 Birefringence
0.008-0.011
0.012
3.9 Clarity
TransparentUlrich Henn and Claudio C. Milisenda
TransparentUlrich Henn and Claudio C. Milisenda
4 Benefits
4.1 Physical
4.1.1 Neurological
Not Available
Not Available
4.1.2 Cardiovascular
Not Available
Not Available
4.1.3 Respiratory
Not Available
Not Available
4.1.4 Reproductive
Not Available
Not Available
4.1.5 Digestive
Not Available
Not Available
4.2 Psychology
Not Available
Not Available
4.3 Healing
Not Available
Not Available
4.4 Qualities Associated
Not Available
Not Available

Topaz Vs Chambersite Fracture

Fracture is an important parameter when you compare Topaz and Chambersite Physical Properties. It is necessary to understand the significance of these properties, before you compare Topaz Vs Chambersite fracture. Whenever a gemstone chip breaks, it leaves a characteristic line along its breakage. Such lines are known as fracture and are used to identify the gemstones in their initial stages of production when they are in the form of rough minerals. Fracture is usually described with the terms “fibrous” and “splintery” to denote a fracture that usually leaves elongated and sharp edges. Fracture observed in Topaz is Brittle, ConchoidalArthur Thomas, Gemstones (2009), Subconchoidal and Uneven. Chambersite fracture is Conchoidal, ConchoidalAnthony et al, Handbook of mineralogy (2001), Uneven, Uneven and Uneven.

Topaz Vs Chambersite Luster

A primary knowledge about Topaz vs Chambersite luster is useful in apparent identifications of these gemstones. Luster is the measure of light that gets reflected when incident on a finished cut gemstone. There are two major types of lusters: Silky and Adamantine. Since luster varies between two crystals of even the same gemstone, luster is limited to basic identification criteria. Topaz exhibits Vitreous luster. Chambersite, on other hand, exhibits Vitreous luster.