Talk:Limestone/Archive 1

Archive 1

In reply..

In reply to both previous discussion topics: 1) "Easy to cut when you have a big sword"??? (It's the year 2006, not 1206!)

2) Kwertii, the rock is fairly common therefore readily available, and it can be chopped into blocks of all sizes, but the extraction process is expensive - involving blasting the rock with explosives, seperating it from the impurties, and getting rid of the impurities produced. Therefore, the rock costs about £5/tonne, or $9/tonne. --LeFrog 11:06, 26 May 2006 (UTC) 3)how does it transport the limestone

Fixing "Uses of Limestone" Image

On Thursday September 28th, 2006 I fixed the "Uses of Limestome" image at the bottom of the page to center it. The image used to be docked on the left side of the page but it was causing problems with the text below it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.192.147.86 (talk) 01:06, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

Ratio of limestone to marine life

For there to be so much calcium carbonate or lime on the planet, there must of been a hell of a lot of marine life over 290 million years ago, to have all this lime all over the planet. are you sure there is not some natural chemical reaction that has formed all this excess limestone?

Some people say Limestone can be formed two ways, by living things and by a chemical reaction. It gets a little complicated from here. I'll start off the chemical reaction, Travertine, according to wikipedia travertine is not limestone but it is Calcium Carbonate? Isn't limestone calcium carbonate too? But anyways, the point is that travertine is not as common as Limestone made by living things. When the 'living things' were actually living, almost all of the earth was covered with water so there was a lot more of them then there is today. Also, as you stated they had 290 Million years to be born and die to eventually turn into limestone. It's the same thing as Algae and Zooplankton turning into millions if not billions of gallons of Petroleum that we use today. Bear21 06:09, 5 October 2006 (UTC)Bear21

Toothpaste etc... (added this header to make TOC show up in the right place)

in toothpaste? can we find a source for that?

Kaens 21:17, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

Gillson, J.L., and others, 1960, The Carbonate Rocks: in Industrial Rocks and Minerals, 3rd ed., Amer. Inst. Mining, Metallurgical, and Petroleum Engineers, p. 189. Geologyguy 21:51, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

Also, online in narrative form, here (Utah Geological Survey) Geologyguy 22:00, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

Arm and Hammer is a famous brand that claims to rely heavily on bicarbonate. It has a particularly 'unique' taste. :D

---

Limestone is a sedimentary rock. It is used in lots of ways; it used for buildings, for agriculture etc. It is strong, but easy to cut when you have a big sword. Easily corrodes in acid rain

Whitney

---

How is limestone "readily available relatively easy to cut into blocks" and yet "quite expensive"? Kwertii 04:42, 21 Oct 2004 (UTC)

What different types of limestone are there

continued malicious edits in the last 24 hours

So, lots of very malicious edits to this article. It looks like the same person even though they are coming from different IPs, and they appear to be deliberately misleading. Perhaps we should start considering a semi-protect on this article. Debivort 21:54, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

OK with me! I've never asked for that (don't know procedure), so if you want to, go for it, I guess. Cheers and thanks - Geologyguy 22:38, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

Health effects of lime dust

I am starting a job hauling burnt lime to a steel mill. It is very dirty and dusty. Are there any health issues known involving burnt lime, and the dust?

Try the links at this Google Search. Geologyguy 16:44, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

How hard is Limestone on the Mohs scale

How hard is Limestone on the Mohs scale? I can't tell. Can anyone tell me?

--DέǍtЋŜǎŝЏЌə

Well, as a rock rather than a mineral, it probably doesn't exhibit a single standard hardness. That said, it's hardness will largely reflect that of it's main constituent mineral, calcite: 3. Debivort 07:51, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

march 07

The page is taking quite a beating now. I've put in a request for a semi-protection. Hopefully this spate of vandalism will die down. Cheers, Debivort 19:17, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

Exploding Limestone

Is it true that Limestone will explode in your stomach if you swallow it? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Crazyboy899 (talk • contribs) 11:00, 8 May 2007 (UTC).

When you take antacids like Tums and Rolaids and generics, you are essentially eating limestone. So, no, it does not "explode" in the sense you probably mean. Geologyguy 13:00, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

This may be a reference to mentos in coke idea. Although mentos cause cola to fizz up for different reasons, carbonates will do something similar when dropped into acid. Mythbusters did some heavy duty testing of the mentos idea by dropping packs and packs of them into a pigs stomach and then pushing bottles of coke into it with a big syringe. They eventually got it to start leaking but I think part of that was simply the force with which Adam was pushing on the syringe, and that it was now stretched to bursting with the litres of cola in it. An emergency cure for acid reflux / heart burn is to eat a teaspoon or two of bicarbonate from the kitchen, which functions in the same way as indigestion tablets but tastes foul. There is not really enough in a teaspoon, nor is the reaction quick enough, to pop a stomach prior to your burping the gas out.

"His father was the first man to stuff spaghetti with bicarbonate of soda, thus causing and curing indigestion at the same time." Groucho Marx as Otis B. Driftwood

Limestone and Iron Ore

Question: Is limestone used in the production of iron from iron ore? Oranges91 13:00, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

Yes. See Flux (metallurgy) and Smelting. Cheers Geologyguy 13:16, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

Spam

The link to superior cut stone maybe spam. Please respond with your comments.Bear21 02:24, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

Promotional link posing as reference removed. Vsmith 02:43, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

Water in limestone caves

Question: When rainwater falls in limestone caves, what will the pH be - acid or alkaline? What reaction takes place? How long will it take that water to become the same pH as mineral water? Hannahdalton9 09:39, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

Rain water is usually slightly acidic, pH something like 6.5 or 6.0 (see Rain) - water reacts with carbon dioxide in the atmosphere to form weak carbonic acid, which, over time (millions of years), is sufficient to dissolve limestone. Limestone does not crop out much in the US East, whereas it makes high resistant ridges in the US west, simply because it rains more in the east. It is not because of greater acidity, nor, until recently, because of pollution-induced acidity, but just because of greater volume of a very weak acid. When limestone dissolves, the reaction between a weak aqueous acid and calcium carbonate has the effect of increasing pH (Tums and Rolaids are basically calcium carbonate), but with new water (slightly acid) coming in all the time from rain, it would be unlikely for it to ever really completely equilibrate. I have no idea how long the process would take. Cheers Geologyguy 13:59, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

The pH will be neutral to alkaline. When CO2 dissolves in water, it produces carbonic acid. Limestone is calcium carbonate (the product of reacting calcium with carbonic acid, so little happens when dilute carbonic acid hits limestone). Calcium carbonate is not particularly soluble in water, so it can't affect the pH of it all that much. Over time, however, or when the water is saturated with CO2, the water will react with the calcium carbonate to form BIcarbonate. This is water soluble and basic, so the pH gradually becomes alkaline. The rate at which this happens depends on numerous environmental conditions, but if this is a homework question they will probably be content with 'a long time', given that it's about geochemistry.

Types of Limestone

Expanding the article to include types of limestone would be useful. Specifically, are there characteristics of cafe pinta limestone from Colombia that make it more or less desirable as a building material? Jkw12345 (talk) 22:54, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

Limestone in haunted locations???

Im researching my theory of a connection between limestone and residual hauntings.Im just wondering if there is any evidence that could help support my theory.I know there are theories of acient pottery holding sound waves.Is there any culture that made pottery from limestone?And has anyone ever herd of limestone absorbing energy or sound?sorry im just a paranormal researcher not a geogolist but i have noticed a lot of the residule activity i have seen is in limestone buildings and im just looking for answers. —Preceding unsigned comment added by JolietParanormal (talk • contribs) 01:41, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

The idea of sounds being captured in pottery comes from the idea that potters will sometimes use a brush to polish up the sides of their wet pot before taking it off the wheel. If you think of a vinyl LP, those used to be made by digging a sharp stylus into the disc and then vibrating the stylus with a sound wave. The vibration (sounds; music / voices) would be captured in the disc by the groove cut into the surface. The same was true of early wax drum recorders, which used a stylus and a drum coated in wax to scribe the vibration into something solid. In the same way, the idea was put forward that the brush hairs of the potters brush would each act as a tiny stylus, and vibrate a tiny amount when they picked up sound from something nearby. Because the clay was wet and the hairs were leaving marks in the surface, that vibration could theoretically appear as grooves in surface; microscopically vibrating brush strokes. The pot would then be fired, capturing those marks, and so the recording, in the pot. It was suggested that, in theory, we could have dug up pots with a recording of Jesus on them from when he was walking by a potter; or other audio recordings of daily life thousands of years ago. As, whatever you believe about religion, an actual man, causing political unrest and named Jesus did exist and can be found in Roman records from the period, and we have pottery from that period and region.

Whilst the idea is really nice (how awesome would it be if it worked and we could listen to a market from 2000 years ago!?), it is not very realistic at all, as the brush has thousands of bendy hairs on it, not one precise, rigid, sharp point. The hairs themselves would not pick up much of the surrounding noise at all. The brush would likely be in the wobbly hand of the potter, and so the vast majority of the wobbles in the lines would be from his hand. Lastly, the pot would likely warp and distort a little during handling and firing. Not to mention all the wear the surface would get once done and then buried for millennia. In short, any type of 'audio' signal on there would be, at best, horrifically distorted beyond recognition to scratches and pops.

It is theoretically possible, I'm sure someone could produce a terrible recording using the idea in a lab with one brush hair fixed to some special mount, but it is not realistic. Mythbusters actually had a go at testing the idea in one of their episodes.

With regards to limestone, that is deposited by nature over huge amounts of time, so no, there won't be a recording there.

To get high tech and push the limits of the word, it would be theoretically possible to playback every single conversation and sound ever had or made on the planet, for it's entire history, provided we could calculate the interaction of every single atom over that period. For example, if we look at light from a star, we can determine lots of information about that star and it's history because the light came from that star and has not touched much in the meantime; if you hit a tennis ball towards a wall and it bounces back at you, that is a predictable event (and if you hadn't hit the ball yourself, you could take a fair guess how hard someone else had hit it based on how fast it came back from the wall). Similarly, when we speak, we cause minute but ordered changes in the air around us, and everything the air touches. For example, if you do not sneeze into your friends face one morning, that wave of air would never have hit them in the face. If you do, the wave continues to move, but becomes scrambled into the background almost instantly as the molecules bump into trillions upon trillions of other molecules and become 'random patterns'; like hitting trillions of balls at a wall all in one go and them bouncing all over the place, then trying to work out which was hit first and at what angle. The patterns are not random, but they are immensely complicated for even simple events like a sneeze and a few seconds.

This is the same as the idea that we have all breathed at least several molecules of each other, because we breath so much and there is a limited amount of air. But in practice, trying to replay such an 'air history' recording would be a feat that would make the genome project look like nursery school play time. The amount of data and computational energy would be immense. As an example, it is orders and orders and orders of magnitude in excess of what would be needed to scan a human into digital format and teleport them from one place to another; a task which we are struggling to do with one atom, let alone an entire planets worth of them.

You might be interested to know that when glass is broken, that smooth wave you sometimes see in the shattered edge is a 'photograph' of the wave of energy that flowed through it as it snapped.

Mars

Removed the following:

Limestone has been found on Mars, suggesting the possible long-ago presence of liquid water containing marine life forms.

Calcium carbonate in the soil isn't limestone, even though the news blurb uses the word. And... "marine life forms"? Kinda stretching it there from WP:SYN to WP:OR, no? Vsmith (talk) 11:11, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

Confusing

I think this article needs to be re-written in order to
present the subject in a simpler or more clear way.

--Encyclopedia77 16:31, 5 November 2008 (UTC)

Here -->[1] 24.188.131.67 (talk) 01:52, 12 January 2009 (UTC)

Precambrian limestone?

IF Limestone comes from hard-bodied marine organisms... AND IF hard-bodied marine organisms only evolved 550 Mya, during the Cambrian Explosion... THEN wouldn't that mean, that there is no Limestone older than 550 Myr?? No "Marine Snow" older than 550 Myr?? "Marine Snow" can accumulate to depths of 5-7 km in the deep ocean... how do all that Calcium Carbonates, and Silicates, affect Subduction Zones, and the upwelling magma along Volcanic Arcs there derived from ?? 66.235.26.150 (talk) 08:46, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

See my answer at Talk:Marble. Mikenorton (talk) 10:00, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

How much limestone sand is needed to correct a better ph level in a trout stream

I know of a trout stream that has a low ph level,the fishing is rather dead. I want to improve the aquatic environment for the long term. I find it difficult to get information in regards to this issue' Am I taking on a task beyond my abilities? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.181.139.167 (talk) 02:58, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

This would depend on numerous factors, such as what is in the stream that is causing it to become acidic and where it is coming from. E.g. if the acidic substance in coming from the entire catch area of the stream, you would have to balance whatever is in the entire catch area with the addition you make to the stream, which could be gigantic. Or perhaps the stream is originating from a well and table that contains acidic volcanic deposits. I would suggest you buy a data logging pH meter that is designed, or can be enclosed in a case, so it can sit out next to the stream, with the probe sat down stream. The data loggers are the best way to check things like this as the changes take a lot of time and you need to ensure you've not measured a fluke patch or event. Let it record the pH for a week or so, taking maybe ten or a hundred readings per day, then begin adding pH up - doing so at the source, or as close as possible. Prior to doing this, I would walk down the stream checking the pH along as much of it as possible. It could be that the acidic material is entering the stream from somewhere that is not the main source; as an extreme example, perhaps a farm's drain could be leaking pH down out through it's tile drain at a specific point. This would appear as a sudden rise in the pH at some point down stream of the main source. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.149.154.248 (talk) 23:20, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

Name

I'm constantly wondering where names and words come from, so why limestone? Being basic in nature it neither tastes like a lime nor is it lime coloured.

Lime_(material) -- 87.79.101.237 (talk) 20:55, 29 July 2012 (UTC)

Limestone Value

So just how much is a quarry worth if it has 100 million tonnes of limestone reserves and a viable market to go with it? Is there a typical value used per ton once a quarry is permitted and operational? I have read $3.5 million per acre if an acre had 430,000 tonnes making the value about $8 a ton. Sales to be generated of about $18 million or $40 of sales per ton. Hammerstone2012 (talk) 22:19, 25 August 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 6 February 2014

hello! Good eve sir Sir i want to do some editing in the limestone usage section as i do not find it explicit. i beg you pardon if this causes disturbance to the site. Ritz.ptk (talk) 12:55, 6 February 2014 (UTC)

Not done: please be more specific about what needs to be changed. --Anon126 (talk - contribs) 16:32, 6 February 2014 (UTC)

Lacustrine limestone

There are quite a few articles that use the term lacustrine limestone. Some just point here, others to lacustrine (a disambiguation page) and some to lake, none of which seem like ideal solutions. Is there enough to say about this form of limestone that it could have its own section here, or article in its own right, so that clearer links could be made? --Derek Andrews (talk) 13:05, 14 February 2014 (UTC)

Relative importance of uses

It seems a little odd that the section on 'uses' spends a lot of time on the largely historical use of limestone as a building material, but mentions its major modern uses, for cement manufacture and crushed aggregates, almost as a throwaway. Maybe some knowledgeable person could add a little table showing the main uses in percentages? 86.135.5.31 (talk) 14:54, 3 April 2015 (UTC)

Natural limestone erosion in the wild, in lengths of time

If any geologists or chemists know the properties that allow water to erode limestone in nature, it would be helpful to add that information. Stone Forest is an area in Yunnan Province that has formed over time as a result of water eroding the rocks. Creationists believe that the Earth is 6,000 years old, so limestone erosion should be be explained, and then amended to the Stone Forest article.

^K_Bⁿ_a^o_t^w_t^le_l^d_e^e

06:33, 11 March 2016 (UTC)

Spelling Concern

just wondering, is 'limestones' even a proper word? Daisy134 (talk) 06:04, 14 January 2017 (UTC)

It's the plural of limestone. It's only really useful in a geological context, maybe "to compare the limestones of the Cotswolds with those of the Pennines", but it's a reasonable word for that context. Andy Dingley (talk) 11:52, 14 January 2017 (UTC)

Edit request for the Great Pyramid footnote.

The photograph of the great pyramid of Giza mentions that it has an outside cover made entirely from limestone. While this was true during its construction, most of the limestone casing of the pyramid has disappeared through the ages, what remains visible is the underlying structure. The verb "has" should simply be changed into the past tense "had" as follows:

"The Great Pyramid of Giza, one of the Seven Wonders of the Ancient World had an outside cover made entirely from limestone."

See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Pyramid_of_Giza#Casing_stones for more information. Xavierk (talk) 07:41, 26 June 2017 (UTC)

 Fixed Dave.Dunford (talk) 08:10, 26 June 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Limestone. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090325233234/http://www.wooster.edu/geology/Taylor%26Wilson2003.pdf to http://www3.wooster.edu/geology/Taylor%26Wilson2003.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:17, 23 December 2017 (UTC)

External links modified (January 2018)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Limestone. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20061102184845/http://www.iwight.com/council/documents/policies_and_plans/udp/2002_pdfs/minerals.pdf to http://www.iwight.com/council/documents/policies_and_plans/udp/2002_pdfs/minerals.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 18:25, 21 January 2018 (UTC)

Featured article

Let's make this article a featured article.

I'm for it, but it would be nice if you signed this so I know who is wanting to work on it. --Kent G. Budge (talk) 15:41, 21 January 2021 (UTC)

Ok, thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Joshua's Number9 (talk • contribs) 20:06, 21 January 2021 (UTC)

Thanks, User:Joshua's Number9. There are a lot of what you might call technical requirements -- having hatnotes squared away, being sure citations are consistently and properly formatted, etc., but all that can come later. First step is a nice tight lead that stands alone as an introduction to the topic. ("Tight" does not necessarily mean short, but it's expected the lead will not exceed three or four paragraphs for an article of this length -- some reviewers will insist on not more than three.) Then the main body has to have a solid outline that touches every relevant aspect. Then make sure the writing is good and that everything is properly sourced. Forgive me if this is all obvious.

First step, really, is to look at the article and list everything that seems deficient. I'm at the office chasing a computer bug but will start on such a list this evening.--Kent G. Budge (talk) 20:34, 21 January 2021 (UTC)

Some thoughts:

• Lead. First sentence is good. First paragraph seems to overemphasize distinction from dolomite. This probably belongs in the lead but not in the first paragraph. We may also want to beef up the lead by saying just a little about how limestones form, and perhaps their significance for fossil preservation. Anything else really notable about limestone that should be mentioned in the lead? Perhaps their role in sequestering CO2, or is that too much in the weeds?
• "Limestone landscape" should probably be retitled "karst"; there just isn't any other notable limestone landscape. We can note that limestone tends to form resistant beds and so is a cliff-forming rock, but that doesn't necessarily go in this section, and it's hardly unique to limestone.
• "Degradation by organisms" is an odd little section with one odd factoid; it seems to me this should be much expanded as a section to talk about reef-forming organisms, and degradation is a natural thing to mention there. Not sure what to call the section.
• Outline is otherwise fine. Gallery may be okay, but we ought to think about whether the images here should be placed next to sections whose concepts they illustrate.
• Breaking classification out into separate articles means the classification section will probably be a bare outline. That's okay as long as the outline is sufficient. I don't think we're far off.

What else is needed to fill out this article? --Kent G. Budge (talk) 18:50, 22 January 2021 (UTC)