Nautilus pearl

[smetzler]

Spirit of Nautilus does not sleep, nor take vacations…

Going through the collection today the pearl from this prior post begged fresh imaging. 3.1 carats, a unique circled/double, each section having a polar vortex feature. The vortical dominant half is perfectly symmetrical, and chatoyant in the extreme.

Molluscus Abominabilis, my tongue-in-cheek term for Caitlin's Negative Hypothesis (i.e. "If not Nautilus, then WHAT!?") has long since become the defacto subject of this thread, reigning prominently as pearldom's most stubborn mystery.

[Lagoon Island Pearls]

the pearl from this prior post begged fresh imaging.

You captured the aspect nicely this time around.

So very alien.

[GemGeek]

I agree with Dave.

[smetzler]

Molluscus Abominabilis™ Pearl Imagery at your service…

Learning to use a new toy, an inexpensive USB digital microscope that I had almost given up on until it dawned on me that it would be a fun tool for inspecting the structure of these uniquely translucent pearls using backlighting (candling). Magnification here should be around 100x.

Images are of the 3.1ct pearl in the post just above, north and south polar views. The top swirl is flamboyant and perfect in its symmetry, the regularly-spaced slopes and angles (facets!) on its periphery serving to explain the wildly reflective optics. The bottom swirl is typical of others in the collection, a tighter structure, analogous to the narrower bottom of a spinning top-like object.

Observations only, conclusions must wait.

[Caitlin]

Some mysterious photos there, Steve. Enough for a calender one of these days?

[smetzler]

Some mysterious photos there, Steve. Enough for a calender one of these days?

Quantity is not the issue!

[Kevin Canning]

You know at first I had no interest in these pearls but I'm really starting to "get it" the more I look at your pics Steve.

Enough for a calender one of these days?

PG calender is a Good idea Caitlin, the tough part would be choosing from all the pics posted over the years.

[smetzler]

You know at first I had no interest in these pearls but I'm really starting to "get it" the more I look at your pics Steve.

Will keep them coming. This has been all about either substantiating or refuting a centuries-old myth (not to mention those sadly debatable lab certificates!). Any positive aesthetics have been a complete bonus, as well as the study of primordial molluscan shell microstructure and uniform pearl formation theory. Commercial application not intended…

PG calender is a Good idea Caitlin, the tough part would be choosing from all the pics posted over the years.

Which month for M. Abominabilis (Nautilus)?

[smetzler]

Spirit of Nautilus has provided some extraordinarily cosmic moments here in the past couple of years, but today is right up there with the most enthralling. Please bear with me—this requires some setting up:

I have held in my hand a pearl from a nautilus last week end.

I did some research, and the only reference to a nautilus pearl I could find is an article in a French magazine La Nature in 1912. This article says that a photography of a nautilus pearl was given by a Mr. Lyster Jameson to Nature Magazine (14x11mm, 18 carat). I don't know if the photo has been published in that magazine.

Has anyone else heard of nautilus pearls?

Otherwise occupied, I had not previously persevered to obtain a scanned copy of that Nature insertion until today. The published natural-sized photos were poorly retained and incredibly grainy, but together with the description did not disappoint:

The pearl, which is a perfect pear-shape, slightly flattened at the broader end, weighs 18 carats and is composed of the porcellanous (not the nacreous) constituent of the shell. It is somewhat translucent, white, with a slightly creamy tinge, rather suggesting a fine Beleek china.

I recently referred to Mr. Jameson's description of this pearl, acquired in 1884 from the brother-in-law of the Sultan of Sulu by T. H. Haynes of Australia—the very same 'Nautilus' pearl mentioned by George Frederick Kunz in his much-cited works:

…every recorded sighting of a Nautilus pearl from pioneering naturalist Georgius Everhardus Rumphius in the mid-17th century, to Kunz, to H. Lyster Jameson in the October 1912 Nature (one hundred years later, still among the most prestigious scientific journals on the planet)…is of a non-nacreous, or porcelaneous…

Imagine my shock and surprise, upon finally seeing the published photos of this mythical pearl, that one of my earlier acquisitions should be its close, slightly larger match!!!!!

Haynes' (Sultan of Sulu's) pearl was 18 carats, my best guess from the photo 12mm x 18mm in size. Our pearl, fished off the north coast of Sumbawa in August of 2009, is 21.75 carats, 12mmx21mm. Side and top views below right are compared with those of the Haynes pearl from Nature 10/17/1912:

[pattye]

Truly remarkable!

[lisa c]

Hey! Calendars are good fund raisers, anyone think it might be good for raising money for disaster areas? Anyone know how much time it takes to set one up and get it produced? Is this a bad idea?

[Caitlin]

The Spirit of Nautilus yields her secrets, one by one. And Steve is there to observe. Maybe it's like quarks, Steve's observation causes vibrations or particles to create a path for the knowledge to leak out. Or something. Any way, Nautilus is creating a place for Steve in her history and future. I'm glad I get to read about it.

Amazing work.

[lisa c]

[QUOTE=Caitlin;75188]The Spirit of Nautilus yields her secrets, one by one. And Steve is there to observe. Maybe it's like quarks, Steve's observation causes vibrations or particles to create a path for the knowledge to leak out. Or something. Any way, Nautilus is creating a place for Steve in her history and future. I'm glad I get to read about it.

And that we were privileged to travel along (comment, question and applaud) with him as it all unfolded.

[smetzler]

Haynes' (Sultan of Sulu's) pearl was 18 carats, my best guess from the photo 12mm x 18mm in size. Our pearl, fished off the north coast of Sumbawa in August of 2009, is 21.75 carats, 12mmx21mm. Side and top views below right are compared with those of the Haynes pearl from Nature 10/17/1912:

With more time and less shaking from excitement I have better optimized the images from the 1912 Nature entry, and have put a little more effort into matching the lighting in new images of our 21.75 carat pearl. Also, I noticed that in my prior post I shot the wrong end of our pearl, the 'bottom' being the correct one (it appears both pearls have a noticeable swirling there). A completely new montage below—rather than replacing my prior image I leave it for comparison.

The second photo is of the 21.75ct pearl in its most optically phenomenal position, as it is curiously unidirectional, best seen/illuminated bottom-up (no place to hide the wax, however!).

[smetzler]

7.31 carat off-round (10.04x9.69mm) M. Abominabilis pearl with superb surface and vortical symmetry, resulting in noteworthy iridescent chatoyance. Certainly at the top of its class, whatever class that might turn out to be…