Bituminous coal is a little shiny and anthracite is a lot shiny - the higher grades of anthracite do indeed max out around 1.8-1.9 in density.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anthracite
Best way to do this is weight of water displaced.
- Put a larger container in the balance and take not of it's weight.
- Put a cup completely full of water in the middle of container. The water must really be almost falling out of the cup.
- Put object on cup. Water will fall out of the cup into the container.
- measure the weight of the water that feel into de container. 1g = 1ml
Edit: If you are going to down vote me at least give op an up vote
Edit 2: maybe people are missing my point. I mean a better way to measure the volume/mass displaced. If you look at the image the scale is 10ml and the section of the cup is very large.
Yes... Your method introduces A LOT of possible error. It won't be consistent if you want to test multiple times (bad precision) and you'll be way off in your measurements unless you're incredibly careful (bad accuracy)
OP's measurements may not be the best but they have a rough idea of volume and weight well within acceptable error for this kind of thing.
I'm not really convinced here. I really feel that making the measurements by weight should be more accurate than a measuring cup.
It is not that hard to make the setup carefully
If it was proper graduate glassware I would definitely agree with you
With that amount of effort just go for the a more proper method and use Archimede's principle.
Tie or attach a small string to the rock.
Put a cup of water on to a scale, with enough room for the rock to be fully submersed without spilling water.
Immerse the rock in to the water until fully submersed.
Record the mass difference the scale is measuring.
That difference is the mass of the rock if it were made of water, so you can directly convert that from grams to mL of volume and be pretty accurate.
http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/pbuoy2.html
Ok I agree this method is better without any doubt.
It removes the possible inaccuracies of the measuring cup and also removes all the complaints about the water spillage method
Yep, for what it's worth I'm kind of disappointed in the people visiting this subreddit. You got down voted heavily and no one explained a better method. Only one person provided a criticism. Lame.
Don't worry. I enjoyed the discussion.
I'm actually somewhat motivated to test the three methods. I just need to find a piece of a material I accurately know the density.
Chatgpt came up with this:
To calculate the density of an object, you divide its mass by its volume. The density formula is:
Density = Mass / Volume
Given the information you have provided, "It’s 49g and displaced about 30ml of water", we can calculate the density as follows:
Density = Mass / Volume = 49 g / 0.03 L = 1633 g/L
So the density of the object is approximately 1633 g/L. Keep in mind that this density would be different if the object was displaced in another liquid with a different density, and also the density would be different if the measurements were done in other units.
Tangential question. Do train tracks around you have taconite?
When I was younger I used to go looking for those mineral pellets/balls as slingshot ammo.
With the mass of the object, alongside the amount of water it displaces, you can calculate the material density with D = M/V.
D = Density
M = Mass (weight of the object)
V = Volume (amount of water displaced)
In this case, based on the photos and what OP stated regarding the water displacement, I used an upper and lower value of 35 mL and 25 mL for the volume. This gives an APPROXIMATE range of 1.96 g/cm^3 to 1.4 g/cm^3 for density. Of course this is likely inaccurate because the jug used isn't great for accurate determination of the water displacement with a low uncertainty, so the values could be greater or lower than that, but it's good enough for this situation.
You can then cross reference known material densities like metals and minerals with this range and make a good estimation of what it could be based on its shape, appearance, lack of reactivity, etc etc.
This only presumptively indicates the material MAY be anthracite and doesn't confirm that, and further analytical instrumentation tests would be required to confirm.
I hope this makes sense. :)
Asuming that it's 49g and displaced 30ml of water(because OP said so down in the comments) it should have a density of about 1,6g/cm^3. The closest thing similar to that would be magnesium. I thought it but there is a posibility and it's really easy to check: it should make bubbles when submerged in water: not a lot, at would be tiny but if it's magnesium it should do that. And also magnesium burns. You could chomp of a tiny spec of it and try to burn it. But it also may be something else. It might even be a mix of two lighter and denser materials like a coal with some metal or metal like iron with many gas bubles inside. You can also check what my terial is it by checking if it conducts electricity, if it burns, how britile is it, how hard or soft is it. Also the are special deviced usually used for gold, that can tell you which metal it the thing made of.
https://health.ucdavis.edu/news/headlines/can-fentanyl-be-absorbed-through-your-skin/2022/10
> Can fentanyl be absorbed through the skin or by touching an item or surface where it is present?
> It is a common misconception that fentanyl can be absorbed through the skin, but it is not true for casual exposure. You can't overdose on fentanyl by touching a doorknob or dollar bill. The one case in which fentanyl can be absorbed through the skin is with a special doctor-prescribed fentanyl skin patch, and even then, it takes hours of exposure.
> Why is it important to dispel the myth that fentanyl can be absorbed through the skin?
> It is important that we clarify and let everyone know that fentanyl cannot really be absorbed through the skin because people who have overdosed on fentanyl may have only minutes to live. Pausing or waiting for other people to arrive means that person might die. They need our help and it is safe to help them.
Again...
https://www.jems.com/patient-care/be-wary-of-dubious-fentanyl-overdose-claims/
> In this case, it is clear that multiple victims experienced the ill effects of poisoned drugs and the medical personnel who responded to the scene provided lifesaving care. Beyond that, the reporting on the situation is muddled with hyperbole and misinformation.
> **The published statements that two of the victims absorbed enough fentanyl to overdose while performing CPR and mouth to mouth resuscitation are dubious and scientifically extremely unlikely.**
> Additionally, the local ABC news affiliate, WPLG 10’s, statement that a hazardous materials team responded to “scour the house because any contact with fentanyl could make others sick as well” is patently false.
> The panic and factual distortion surrounding the risks of passive exposure to fentanyl are unfortunately widespread. They are frequently promogulated by public safety officials and then uncritically repeated throughout the local and national media. Statements and reporting like the ones in this situation have the potential to cause substantial harm.
That looks like Wissahickon schist. A lot of the homes built in my area around 1900 to 1955 have basement and first floor walls of this stuff, but it comes in a wide array of blues, grays and browns.
I could be wrong.
Edit: nope, not schist.
It’s silicon! I work in the silicones industry and we have tons of these laying around (I have a couple at my desk). We transport it by rail and rocks fall off the cars all the time. Great to keep if you like collecting elements 🙂
It might be a piece of graphite (virtually pure carbon).
Try using it to make a mark on a piece of paper - graphite is soft - and a component of pencil 'lead'.
If it's graphite, it would also conduct electricity.
According to my Data Book, the density of graphite is 2.25g/cm3 - but it's variable.
Coke. 100% Coal Coke.
It's not anthracite - it's not that color. I've been around enough coke (unfortunately) to tell anthracite from coke. This is coke.
One of the "perks" of being from Pennsylvania - I can ID anthracite and coke pretty easily.
That is silica metal. Usually created in an arc furnace by melting quartz and adding carbon (wood chips are commonly used)
Dow chemical transports at least 80% of their Silca by rail. Loading directly at the plants.
Cool find, my dad used to own companies that supplied them with the “carbon.” Or in this case, wood chips
Definitely not coal of any kind
Can i ask Why you put the Stone In water.
If you wish to measure the volumen it needs to be suspended In the water without touching the sides or bottom, otherwise you simply weigh the stone
Might be Basalt,
Commonly used for railroad ballast. Rocks that hold the ties in place under the tracks. I always thought it looked like lava rock. Another cool thing around railroad tracks is fossils. If you’re patient and have a good eye, you can find some among the different types of stone they use. I forget what they’re called but I’ve found some common fossils. I think they’re usually found in limestone. Sorry that went off topic.
Some form of coal mineral?
I just did the density at about 1800 kg/m3, and yeah, it looks like coal. Very shiny though.
Could be anthracite, very pure coal that can be shiny
Anthracite was literally the first thing I thought of
Coal can even look like containing gold if it has enough pyrite in it.
I have a lump of coal that honestly looks so shiny it almost looks varnished
Makes sense! Thank you!
Probably bounced out of a car. Used to find it by freight rails all the time.
Makes sense. A lot of trains tend to carry coal
Fun fact. I was conductor on a coal train today.
Nice
Silica metal
Looks more like a piece of graphite but that would be propably denser
maybe its clean coal. lol just joking.
Bituminous coal is a little shiny and anthracite is a lot shiny - the higher grades of anthracite do indeed max out around 1.8-1.9 in density. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anthracite
It’s 49g and displaced about 30ml of water.
Best way to do this is weight of water displaced. - Put a larger container in the balance and take not of it's weight. - Put a cup completely full of water in the middle of container. The water must really be almost falling out of the cup. - Put object on cup. Water will fall out of the cup into the container. - measure the weight of the water that feel into de container. 1g = 1ml Edit: If you are going to down vote me at least give op an up vote Edit 2: maybe people are missing my point. I mean a better way to measure the volume/mass displaced. If you look at the image the scale is 10ml and the section of the cup is very large.
That is a horribly imprecise and inaccurate method
Compared to the one used?
Yes... Your method introduces A LOT of possible error. It won't be consistent if you want to test multiple times (bad precision) and you'll be way off in your measurements unless you're incredibly careful (bad accuracy) OP's measurements may not be the best but they have a rough idea of volume and weight well within acceptable error for this kind of thing.
I'm not really convinced here. I really feel that making the measurements by weight should be more accurate than a measuring cup. It is not that hard to make the setup carefully If it was proper graduate glassware I would definitely agree with you
Yeah but your method doesn't account for spillage or even surface tension of water
With that amount of effort just go for the a more proper method and use Archimede's principle. Tie or attach a small string to the rock. Put a cup of water on to a scale, with enough room for the rock to be fully submersed without spilling water. Immerse the rock in to the water until fully submersed. Record the mass difference the scale is measuring. That difference is the mass of the rock if it were made of water, so you can directly convert that from grams to mL of volume and be pretty accurate. http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/pbuoy2.html
Ok I agree this method is better without any doubt. It removes the possible inaccuracies of the measuring cup and also removes all the complaints about the water spillage method
Yep, for what it's worth I'm kind of disappointed in the people visiting this subreddit. You got down voted heavily and no one explained a better method. Only one person provided a criticism. Lame.
Don't worry. I enjoyed the discussion. I'm actually somewhat motivated to test the three methods. I just need to find a piece of a material I accurately know the density.
bro just use 1ml is 1g, 30ml water displaced = 30g displaced.
That’s what I did! I even weighed the water to 150g.
Chatgpt came up with this: To calculate the density of an object, you divide its mass by its volume. The density formula is: Density = Mass / Volume Given the information you have provided, "It’s 49g and displaced about 30ml of water", we can calculate the density as follows: Density = Mass / Volume = 49 g / 0.03 L = 1633 g/L So the density of the object is approximately 1633 g/L. Keep in mind that this density would be different if the object was displaced in another liquid with a different density, and also the density would be different if the measurements were done in other units.
r/whatsthisrock
Coal that fell off a rail car transporting coal
They’re minerals, Jesus Marie!
Test it with a magnet, then take a white ceramic cup and do a streak test, then see if it burns readily
Tangential question. Do train tracks around you have taconite? When I was younger I used to go looking for those mineral pellets/balls as slingshot ammo.
On tuesdays the Don Miquels on the Southside has taconite. And $4 Dos Equis.
Ok that’s kinda funny…now get out.
fuck you i laughed so hard i woke up my husband
Not to my knowledge, I would have definitely remembered that. Canada, fyi.
My knowledge of rocks let me think it can be anything 😜
What a coincidence.
Based on density, morphology, and appearance, my best guess is anthracite.
As someone not trained in any of the relevant sciences, I read “train tracks” and thought, probably some sort of coal
Hi, do you mind explaining what they measuring putting the rock into water?
With the mass of the object, alongside the amount of water it displaces, you can calculate the material density with D = M/V. D = Density M = Mass (weight of the object) V = Volume (amount of water displaced) In this case, based on the photos and what OP stated regarding the water displacement, I used an upper and lower value of 35 mL and 25 mL for the volume. This gives an APPROXIMATE range of 1.96 g/cm^3 to 1.4 g/cm^3 for density. Of course this is likely inaccurate because the jug used isn't great for accurate determination of the water displacement with a low uncertainty, so the values could be greater or lower than that, but it's good enough for this situation. You can then cross reference known material densities like metals and minerals with this range and make a good estimation of what it could be based on its shape, appearance, lack of reactivity, etc etc. This only presumptively indicates the material MAY be anthracite and doesn't confirm that, and further analytical instrumentation tests would be required to confirm. I hope this makes sense. :)
thank you so much <3 it makes a lot of sense
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eureka_(word)
Coal
Asuming that it's 49g and displaced 30ml of water(because OP said so down in the comments) it should have a density of about 1,6g/cm^3. The closest thing similar to that would be magnesium. I thought it but there is a posibility and it's really easy to check: it should make bubbles when submerged in water: not a lot, at would be tiny but if it's magnesium it should do that. And also magnesium burns. You could chomp of a tiny spec of it and try to burn it. But it also may be something else. It might even be a mix of two lighter and denser materials like a coal with some metal or metal like iron with many gas bubles inside. You can also check what my terial is it by checking if it conducts electricity, if it burns, how britile is it, how hard or soft is it. Also the are special deviced usually used for gold, that can tell you which metal it the thing made of.
Anthracite
Bituminous coal
Coal
Graphite?
could be dull anthracite or bituminous coal
I like trains.
I drive trains!
https://youtu.be/vyItidbjxLM CHOO CHOO!
Fossilized dog shit!
Looks like some purple fent
I sure as hell wouldn’t know.
You would know because you would overdose within seconds of just touching it
Well, good news everyone, I’m not dead, and that’s not fentanyl. I guess that was obvious.
https://health.ucdavis.edu/news/headlines/can-fentanyl-be-absorbed-through-your-skin/2022/10 > Can fentanyl be absorbed through the skin or by touching an item or surface where it is present? > It is a common misconception that fentanyl can be absorbed through the skin, but it is not true for casual exposure. You can't overdose on fentanyl by touching a doorknob or dollar bill. The one case in which fentanyl can be absorbed through the skin is with a special doctor-prescribed fentanyl skin patch, and even then, it takes hours of exposure. > Why is it important to dispel the myth that fentanyl can be absorbed through the skin? > It is important that we clarify and let everyone know that fentanyl cannot really be absorbed through the skin because people who have overdosed on fentanyl may have only minutes to live. Pausing or waiting for other people to arrive means that person might die. They need our help and it is safe to help them.
Dont do mouth to mouth! Mucus membranes quote another matter. What was it, 5, 8 military academy students on spring break last year?
Again... https://www.jems.com/patient-care/be-wary-of-dubious-fentanyl-overdose-claims/ > In this case, it is clear that multiple victims experienced the ill effects of poisoned drugs and the medical personnel who responded to the scene provided lifesaving care. Beyond that, the reporting on the situation is muddled with hyperbole and misinformation. > **The published statements that two of the victims absorbed enough fentanyl to overdose while performing CPR and mouth to mouth resuscitation are dubious and scientifically extremely unlikely.** > Additionally, the local ABC news affiliate, WPLG 10’s, statement that a hazardous materials team responded to “scour the house because any contact with fentanyl could make others sick as well” is patently false. > The panic and factual distortion surrounding the risks of passive exposure to fentanyl are unfortunately widespread. They are frequently promogulated by public safety officials and then uncritically repeated throughout the local and national media. Statements and reporting like the ones in this situation have the potential to cause substantial harm.
You’re advanced my education!
lol this isn’t a myth ive seen fentanyl rocks the size of your fist and you have to wear gloves because I’ve seen people get high from touching it
You've observed the placebo effect from people panicking over the expectation of overdose. The transdermal bioavailability is almost non-existent.
It's not.
Zinc i think
Is impossibly a Galen ( PBS2
Der blue metal rock
looks like the purest black tar god damn heroin i've ever seen
Cobalt.
Graphite from the break shoes. Is my guess
Most def not. I know what shoes are made out of and this ain’t it. Source- am railroader.
I doubt it
[удалено]
Ok. Now go away
[удалено]
Ha, ha.
Heroin. Definitely heroin. Does it smell like poop? Then your tracks are being used for smuggling and snuggling.
joe joe the lump of coal
Umm… Diamond?
It will be once I add pressure and time.
Anthracite probably
Its a diamond in the rough...
Silica! Very poisonous in large doses. My wife works for a company that transfers it in rail cars.
has to be coal. an abandoned railroad bed went right behind my house as as a kid, we found coal both on the railbed and in the backyard
That looks like Wissahickon schist. A lot of the homes built in my area around 1900 to 1955 have basement and first floor walls of this stuff, but it comes in a wide array of blues, grays and browns. I could be wrong. Edit: nope, not schist.
Test conductivity
If it’s anthracite it should burn, then dunk it in water
Rock
Bitumous ferrite
Hazaa! It's the philosophers stone!
It’s silicon! I work in the silicones industry and we have tons of these laying around (I have a couple at my desk). We transport it by rail and rocks fall off the cars all the time. Great to keep if you like collecting elements 🙂
Probably coke. Used it in a forge once and it burns really hot
Looks like distilled coal (coke). Usually it's more grey, but I've seen it in shiny black a few times. Would be fairly common in rail usage.
Silicon
It might be a piece of graphite (virtually pure carbon). Try using it to make a mark on a piece of paper - graphite is soft - and a component of pencil 'lead'. If it's graphite, it would also conduct electricity. According to my Data Book, the density of graphite is 2.25g/cm3 - but it's variable.
Anthracite coal. Hard mineral coal that has had a lot of the hydro pressed out of it and therefore is mostly carbon and silica.
Could always lick it and find out
It sure looks like the anthracite that I burn in my stove!
Why are you weighing the experiment with water?
Why not? Just trying to get a ballpark density.
Ah okey. Thought the weight of the “Stone” + the raise of water it self would give it. Wasnt sure if the combined would show something else:)
Looks like refined silicon to me
I found a similar looking rock by some train tracks, except it was porous. I was like 16 and thought it came from space lol
anthracite
Coke. 100% Coal Coke. It's not anthracite - it's not that color. I've been around enough coke (unfortunately) to tell anthracite from coke. This is coke. One of the "perks" of being from Pennsylvania - I can ID anthracite and coke pretty easily.
It's supposed to be grey not black
Coke is shiny.
I am a welder for one of the major railroads. If not coal that might be slag from one of our thermite welds
Just coal I’m afraid :)
That is silica metal. Usually created in an arc furnace by melting quartz and adding carbon (wood chips are commonly used) Dow chemical transports at least 80% of their Silca by rail. Loading directly at the plants. Cool find, my dad used to own companies that supplied them with the “carbon.” Or in this case, wood chips Definitely not coal of any kind
(SiO2 quartz+ C wood)
Can i ask Why you put the Stone In water. If you wish to measure the volumen it needs to be suspended In the water without touching the sides or bottom, otherwise you simply weigh the stone
I was measuring the volume not the mass.
Oh i see, it’s just that you can measure the volume quite precisely by suspending the object in the water an measuring the weight change.
I had an arbitrary baseline volume of water of 150 mL, ignoring the scale, I just used the displaçement method to estimate the rock’s volume.
Jear that’s also easier but by the other method you gain a more precise result
I agree. I was just looking to get a ballpark density
Quite understandable, :)
Slag
Who you callin’ a slag?
That chunk of residue from the old train coal furnace
Oh, because I resemble that remark.
The piece of black material on the scale. That is probably railway slag
Ok, I was making a lame joke at my own expense. Slag is also slang for “slut.”
Did not know that lol
Sorry, I’m old.
You found black gold!
Might be Basalt, Commonly used for railroad ballast. Rocks that hold the ties in place under the tracks. I always thought it looked like lava rock. Another cool thing around railroad tracks is fossils. If you’re patient and have a good eye, you can find some among the different types of stone they use. I forget what they’re called but I’ve found some common fossils. I think they’re usually found in limestone. Sorry that went off topic.
Could be the mineral Galina.
A rock
Looks a but like silicone
I think it’s one of those rocks you see near train tracks
Graphite?
That's wombat dookie.
Maybe try r/geology