Hostname: page-component-74656f9884-2dmjx Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-10T16:34:43.226Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Differences among low Ceylon zircons

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 July 2018

E. R. Vance  and
B. W. Anderson
E. R. Vance
Affiliation:
Chemistry Department, University College, London
B. W. Anderson
Affiliation:
The Laboratory of the London Chamber of Commerce, Hatton Garden, London
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

Low Ceylon zircons showing an optical absorption band at 5200 Å appear to have suffered more radiation damage than other low Ceylon zircons. Very heavy fission-fragment irradiation failed to lower the density of each of two low Ceylon zircons significantly, although the specimens were rendered completely amorphous. Further fission-fragment irradiation experiments indicated that low Ceylon zircons showing a previously reported anomalous absorption spectrum have been heated late in their geological histories.

Information

Type
Research Article
Information
Mineralogical Magazine , Volume 38 , Issue 298 , June 1972 , pp. 721 - 724
Copyright
Copyright © The Mineralogical Society of Great Britain and Ireland 1972

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Anderson, (B.W.), 1941. Gemmologist, 10, 56.7.Google Scholar
Anderson, (B.W.), 1962. Ibid., 31, 19.36.Google Scholar
Anderson, (B.W.), 1963. Journ. Gemm. 9, 1–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blumenthal, (W.B.), 1958. The Chemistry of Zirconium. New York (Van Nostrand), 201-29.Google Scholar
Deer, (W.A.), Howie, (R.A.), and Zussman, (J.), 1962. Rock-Forming Minerals, 1, 59.68. London (Longmans Green).Google Scholar
Gottfried, (D.), Sentele, (F.E.), and Waring, (C.L.), 1956. Amer. Min. 41, 157-61.Google Scholar
Holland, (H.D.) and Gottfried, (D.), 1955. Acta Cryst. 8, 291-302.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tilton, (G.R.) and Aldrich, (L.T.), 1955. Trans. Amer. Geophys. Union, 36, 531.2.Google Scholar
Vance, (E.R.), 1971. Journ. Phys. C: Solid State Phys. 4, 257-62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vance, (E.R.), and Anderson, (B.W.), 1972. Min. Mag. 38, 605.10.1180/minmag.1972.038.297.09CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vaz, (J.E.) and Senetle, (F.E.), 1971. Journ. Geophys. Res. 76, 2038-50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wittels, (M.C.), 1959. In Advances in X-ray Analysis, ed. Mueller (W. M.), 3, 259-68. London, (Pitman).Google Scholar
Wittels, (M.C.), Steigler, (J.O.), and Sherrill, (F.A.), 1962. Reactor Science and Technology (Journal of Nuclear Energy Parts A/B) 16, 237-44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar