[Jewelry making - Article 00394] - Re: [Orchid] CZ-Synthetic

[The Doctor]

========[ Invite a Friend - http://www.ganoksin.com/invite.htm  ]========


>        PS   Guys, I mean no disrespect or hostility in these
>     arguments. I am merely expressing my views with supporting evidence
>     and hopefully shedding light on some subjects while having fun.
>     Hope you are too. : ) 

    Hiya there Steve. Are you kidding? I'm having a blast with this. Any
    time I can stretch my mind with a discussion of new ideas, I'm
    happy. Now, on to it :-) 

>          Liddicoat's Handbook of Gem Identification 10th edition on
>     page 118 includes "materials unknown in nature such as lithium
>     niobate (Linobate) and KTN (niobium doped potassium tantalate)."
>     under the heading synthetic.  It is apparent that Richard Liddicoat
>     does not insist that a synthetic gem have a natural counterpart. 

    I don't have the 10th edition of this book, but in the 12th edition,
    that paragraph is under the heading of Manmade Gem Materials on page
    85, not the heading of Synthetic. It actually mentions those
    substances as brought forth by "Other scientific efforts". Yes,
    there are synthetic minerals which are mentioned in the same
    paragraph, but he doesn't represent Linobate and KTN  as synthetics.
    He does, however, go on to discuss other, more well-known
    synthetics, including the Gilson opals, which are disputed by many
    gemologists as synthetics as they contain no water; natural opal
    does. Your inference that Liddicoat does not insist that a synthetic
    gem have a natural counterpart is proven wrong by the paragraph
    immediately following your quoted paragraph "(Since Strontium
    Titanate is not found in nature, it is not a true synthetic gem
    material)" Sure, it was synthesized in a laboratory, but not a TRUE
    synthetic GEM MATERIAL (please excuse caps, I'm not yelling, just
    emphasizing). 


>          As for Doc's quote from Merriam-Webster's  Dictionary
>     "devised, arranged, or fabricated for special situations to imitate
>     or replace usual realities c : FACTITIOUS, BOGUS " This definition
>     does not apply to the scientific definition of "synthetic". The use
>     of the word synthetic can be for people, situations, philosophy,
>     personalities, diets, etcetera.  When it comes to crystallography,
>     chemistry, physics etcetera it is the scientific definition that
>     takes precedence 

    Yes, it certainly can be used for people, situations, etc. but we're
    talking about gemstones here. And yes, crystallography, chemistry,
    physics, etc. are all part of gemology and gemstones, but we're not
    talking about those individual areas of study, either. We are
    talking about using a term that must be common to all gemologists,
    jewelers, etc. I must agree with the "smoke and mirrors" post. The
    waters of gemology are muddy enough without stretching the
    definitions of what is considered a synthetic gem material.
    Consumers have long been confused about this issue and they deserve
    layman's terms that won't undermine their already shaky opinion that
    we in the trade won't perform any of those horror stories we've all
    heard about. (you know: "Oh, don't go to them, they replaced my
    diamond with a CZ"). You're right that the Merriam-Webster
    definition doesn't apply completely to "the scientific definition of
    'synthetic'" but it certainly applies to the gemological definition.
    And that's what we're talking about here. 


>          Most synthetics are not "initially designed to fool the
>     public" as you stated, but came about without the slightest
>     interest in the gem business. They were synthesized for scientific
>     purposes like lasers, timekeeping, RF technologies, semi-conductor
>     industries, abrasives and so on. The synthetic crystals that came
>     as a result of these needs are certainly inventions and copyrighted
>     by their inventors. However if they have intrinsic beauty,
>     durability and meet other "gem" criteria they are classified as
>     synthetic gems with no need for a natural counterpart. 

    I love the English language. "Designed to fool the public"...I meant
    the word "designed" as "intended".  While you're right about the
    synthetic gems we have today, most were developed for scientific
    purposes, SOME manufacturers and retailers certainly do intend to
    deceive the public. That "Tsavorite-Colored, Laboratory-Created
    Obsidian" sure was! And you're wrong about the ones with no natural
    counterpart being called synthetic gem materials. Unless they have a
    natural counterpart, they are called Manmade. Here's one of the
    strongest arguments: Section 23.23 of the FTC guides advises against
    use of terms like "ruby," "sapphire," "emerald," "stone,"
    "birthstone," or other gem name alone for anything but a natural
    stone. Any synthetic stone must possess essentially the same
    optical, physical, and chemical properties as its natural
    counterpart if the word "synthetic" is used in its description. See,
    when gemstones are involved (we're still talking about gemstones,
    right?), you can't create a new category of synthetic gemstone
    unless it has a natural counterpart. Scientifically, maybe. Legally?
    Well, FTC guidelines are just that; guidelines. But when they're
    used in a court of law to support a claim, they're as good as law. 


    A synthetic gem does not need to have a natural counterpart, it just
    needs to be man-made. Just ask any YAG lover at Bell Labs. 

    On page 104 of Liddicoat's 12th edition, he discusses YAG, YIG and
    GGG. They are referred to as garnet-structured substitutes, not
    synthetics. I guess I'm going to need a copy of Webster's book,
    too...I can never get enough knowledge. I'm sure the YAG lovers at
    Bell labs would like to call their garnet-structured substitute
    whatever they like, but my bet is on their legal counsel advising
    against calling it a synthetic garnet gemstone, in compliance with
    FTC guidelines. Go to bell-labs.com and use their search engine for
    YAG, or even synthetic. You'll find some references to YAG lasers
    under a search for "YAG", and under "synthetic" you'll find that
    they indeed invented a method of creating Synthetic Quartz crystals
    (sic). I'll even post the URL:
    http://www.bell-labs.com/org/physicalsciences/timeline/span8.html#  
    Note the term "Synthetic" there...they follow FTC guidelines after
    all, it seems. Don't get me wrong, I love all gem materials as well
    as mineral specimens, including synthetics and manmade materials.
    And yes, I even have a couple of round brilliant YAGs and am looking
    for Strontium Titanate, GGG, Synthetic Spinel Triplets, and many
    others to complete my (at this point) modest gemological collection.
    But in this type of collection, a material must be catalogued
    correctly, not by what I would arbitrarily decide to call its'
    components. 

    And that's the real root of what I'm trying to say here. There is a
    specific definition of a gem material, natural or synthetic.
    Arbitrarily inserting terms and definitions that are outside of the
    gemological community for materials that are used inside the
    gemological community just doesn't work for me, or the consumer. 

    P.S. Steve, you mentioned my nickname (The Doctor). I would like
    everyone to know that it is just that, a nickname that was given to
    me by a previous mentor, now deceased. I'm not a PhD, MD, DDS, or
    any such thing, just a G.G. who wants to keep fresh by seeking
    knowledge. 

Respectfully and cheerfully yours in gemology,
James in SoFL, where it actually didn't rain here yesterday (we'll see 
about today).


____________________________________________________________________
T h e   O r c h i d   L i s t
Open Electronic Forum for Jewelry Manufacturing Methods and Procedures
____________________________________________________________________
Orchid FAQ:
~ http://www.ganoksin.com/orchid/faq.htm
Orchid Archives:
~ http://www.ganoksin.com/orchid/archive
Orchid Galleries:
~ http://www.ganoksin.com/orchid/gallery.htm
Invite a Friend:
~ http://www.ganoksin.com/invite.htm
____________________________________________________________________
Tips From The Jeweler's Bench - Article Archive
~ http://www.ganoksin.com/borisat/tip_sear.htm
The Jeweler's Selected Bibliography List
~ http://www.ganoksin.com/jewelry-books
Buy Orchid Jewelry:
~ http://www.ganoksin.com/shop
____________________________________________________________________
-Unsubscribe:
-Email: orchid-request AT ganoksin.com Body=unsubscribe subject=blank
____________________________________________________________________