Synthetic Gemstones

Loose Gemstones:

Specials Product:
CODE: D001

Diamond Rough
0.3 - 1.5 carat
USD $ 190/Crt
Detail report
CODE: Z001

Emerald Rough
1.5 - 10 carat
USD $ 40/Crt
Detail report
CODE: R001

Ruby Rough
1.5 - 10 carat
USD $ 40/Crt
Detail report
CODE: S001

Sapphire Rough
1.5 - 10 carat
USD $ 40/Crt
Detail report
CODE: Y001

Yellow Sapphire Rough
1.5 - 10 carat
USD $ 40/Crt
Detail report
CODE:  C001

Cat Eyes Rough
1.5 - 10 carat
USD $ 30/Crt
Detail report

Support By:

Synthetic Gemstones

Synthetic sapphire and ruby were first produced in volume by 1907, using the flame fusion method developed by the French chemist Verneuil. But this method could not be used to produce synthetic emerald. It took another 30 years before a commercially successful synthesis of emerald was invented by an American chemist, Carroll Chatham.

Chatham was a brilliant chemist who developed an interest in synthetic gemstones at an early age. As a teenager he tried to create diamonds in his garage laboratory, apparently by dissolving graphite in molten iron. When he tried to produce rapid cooling by immersing this solution in a vat of liquid nitrogen, the resulting explosion blew out windows around his San Francisco neighborhood.
At urging of his father and the San Francisco police, he turned his attention to growing emerald crystals. By 1930 he had grown crystals of colorless beryl and then in 1935, he grew his first true emerald, a one carat crystal that is now in the Smithsonian Institution.

The reason that the Verneuil method would not work for emerald is because emerald is an aluminum beryllium silicate colored by chromium, and it is very difficult to melt all the component elements together — some of them evaporate before others have even melted. The key to the Chatham process was a special solvent called a flux: a combination of chemicals such as lithium oxide, molybendum oxide and vandadium oxide that stay liquid at high temperatures. Chatham’s secret flux recipe solved the problem of how to melt all the components together. He suspended tiny seed crystals in the hot flux as the basis for growing new crystals. It can take up to a year to grow marketable stones in this environment.

Chatham’s created emeralds are in some respects superior to the natural product. Since natural emerald tends to have many inclusions and fractures, it is not a particularly durable stone despite its very good hardness (8 on the Mohs scale). The Chatham emeralds suffer from none of the defects of natural emeralds.
Chatham was not only a brilliant scientist but an astute businessman. He built a company to sell his created emeralds, and he developed technology to create rubies, alexandrites, and blue and orange sapphires. Chatham died in 1983 but his son has carried on the business. Just a few years after Chatham’s death the company finally realized his longtime dream of creating diamonds in the laboratory.

When we talk about fake gemstones in the gem business we always distinguish between gemstones which are synthetic and those which are simulants. A simulant has an appearance similar to that of a natural gemstone but has different optical, physical, and chemical properties. Cubic zirconia and moissanite are examples of well-known diamond simulants. A trained gemologist with the right instruments can easily separate simulants from the natural gems they simulate. For example, moissante shares many optical properties with genuine diamond. It even fools thermal testers. But moissanite is doubly refractive while genuine diamond is singly refractive, and a gemologist can tell the difference by visual inspection alone.
Cubic zirconia and moissanite are lab-created materials, but a simulant may be a natural gemstone. Natural white zircon was once used as a diamond simulant, for example; and some of the most important rubies in the world turned out to be natural spinels. A real gem can be a fake if it is represented as something else, usually a more expensive gem material.

A synthetic gemstone, on the other hand, is a laboratory-created gemstone which has essentially the same appearance and optical, physical, and chemical properties as the natural material (if there is in fact a corresponding natural material). So a synthetic diamond is a real diamond. Synthetic moissanite, by contrast, is only a diamond simulant; it is, however, real moissanite (though natural moissante exists in only minute quantities). Since synthetic moissanite is actually quite expensive, moissanite simulants have even started to appear on the market.
It is possible for a gemstone to be both synthetic and a simulant. A lab-grown spinel passed off as natural sapphire, is a synthetic spinel and a sapphire simulant.
A simulant, by definition, is intended to give the appearance of a natural gemstone. The intent is not always fraudulent of course; cubic zirconia and moissanite are almost always sold under their own names. The goal is provide a lower-cost gemstone that provides brilliance and fire somewhat similar to diamond. Selling these simulants is a perfectly respectable business provided the gems are correctly identified.

Most of the business in synthetic gem material is also entirely respectable. Synthetic sapphire, for example, is used for mechanical parts (tubes, rods, bearings, and other machined parts), scratch-resistant watch crystals and windows for optical equipment and spacecraft as well as for lasers. Naturally there is a market for lower cost jewelry with synthetic gems as well. Some people would prefer to have a ring with a synthetic sapphire exhibiting the same hardness, brilliance and luster as a natural sapphire, rather than buy a ring with a lesser natural gemstone for the same price. It is also possible to produce synthetic sapphires in colors not seen in nature, which is apparently of interest to some buyers.

It is fair to say that the presence of synthetics and simulants in the market has not undermined the market for genuine natural gemstones. Synthetics remind us that natural gemstones are incredibly rare and unusual products of nature. To the expert gemologist synthetics betray their artificial origin — they have none of the natural inclusions that are the fingerprints of natural stones. In one sense the synthetic stones are too perfect; they lack natural imperfections. But in another sense they have their own imperfections — they have curved growth lines that show how the crystals formed in layers in the labratory.

Pa