Search Documents

By Paul Weaver

DURING 1932 the amount of geophysical surveying carried out as a part of oil-field development in¬creased, particularly in the Gulf Coast of Texas and Louisiana. Here the most intensive geophysical activity was displayed in the discovery of domes and prospects several years ago, after which there was a period of relative inactivity. This year many of the leases required development and geophysical methods were used to obtain pictures of the detailed structures. These were almost exclusively gravity and reflection-seismograph surveys and for the first time this latter method was generally used by oil operators to construct subsurface contours. The total number of geophysical troops in this territory increased from 16 to 40 during the year.

Jan 1, 1933

By AIME AIME

ARGUMENTS and discussions were not lacking either Wednesday or Thursday mornings, when the geophysicists got together. The first session, under the chairmanship of Paul Weaver, was devoted largely to theoretical papers, except for the first one by F. W. Lee, which was a progress report. This speaker mentioned some of the high lights of geophysical exploration during the last year, such as the recently announced extension of the Rand gold fields through magnetic exploration, and the continued activity in the oil fields of this country. Even this brought forth some disagreements, Paul Weaver feeling that credit was being given geophysics where it was not due for the discovery of certain oil fields. In this criticism Everette DeGolyer concurred, and both agreed that geophysicists must lean over backward when it comes to taking credit for discoveries. The troublesome question of interpreting resistivity curves is always being aired, and Lynn G. Howell's paper, presented briefly by the chairman, served to clear up a moot point raised last year by M. King Hubbert's work. By use of Maxwell's theory of images the author calculated that the effect of a thin, conductive sheet placed perpendicularly across the middle of a four electrode system should bring the resistivity curve up to a figure equivalent to the resistivity of the surrounding medium, but no higher. Variations from this he explained as being due to dirt on the surface of the sheet. The difficult question of interpreting three-layer curves was tackled bravely in Thomas Manhart's paper, presented in abstract by S. F. Kelly. The author seems to be attaining some success through dividing three-layer curves into two approximation curves of the two-layer type.

Jan 1, 1933

By F. C. Canney

Geochemical prospecting seeks hidden mineral deposits by sampling for variations in the chemical composition of naturally occurring materials. Usually the samples are of soils and other products of weathering and erosion—surface materials extremely susceptible to contamination by human activities. Except when a survey is conducted well away from populated areas, contamination is an ever-present hazard. The program's success is particularly endangered when the contaminants are the elements sought; if these occur erratically throughout an area, spurious anomalies completely unrelated to mineralized areas can be formed. Evenly distributed contamination can be dangerous too, if it raises the background to such a level that true anomalies can no longer be easily detected. Suppose, for example, that in an area where the lead background is 20 parts per million the soil over a lead vein contains 1000 ppm of lead. Here the contrast would be 50 to 1, which is very satisfactory for geochemical surveying. Now if 1000 ppm of lead from some source were added evenly to the soil in this area, the contrast would be reduced to about 2 to 1, and the anomaly would no longer be readily detectable because a threshold of significance twice the value of the background is the minimum generally used for interpreting geochemical data. Of the many possible sources of contamination, probably most important are smelter fumes, which may distribute large quantities of metal contaminants over many square miles of ground. For several reasons, the investigation reported here was begun in the Coeur d'Alene district in northern Idaho: 1) a lead smelter has been operated in this district since 1917 and an electrolytic zinc plant since 1928, and presumably the contamination patterns are strongly developed; 2) to evaluate the usefulness of certain geochemical techniques, V. C. Kennedy and S. W. Hobbs of the USGS had already studied the distribution of copper, lead, and zinc in the soils (both in background areas and other veins) and in the water and plants, providing a criterion for measuring the magnitude and effect of soil contamination; 3) one of the economically important parts of the district lies south of the South Fork of Coeur d'Alene River and within a radius of five miles of the reduction plants near Smelterville (Fig. 1). In this area, and in the entire district, conventional methods of prospecting are hindered by heavy vegetation and thick soil cover, and the possibility of contamination by smelter fumes has discouraged geochemical prospecting. Should data reveal that geochemical prospecting could be done successfully in such an area, a particularly useful tool would be available to mining companies and prospectors searching for concealed orebodies in this economically important part of the district. The field work on which this report is based was done from July 28 to 31, 1955. It should be emphasized that this was reconnaissance study only, and therefore far from exhaustive. Previous Investigations in U. S. : The first geochemical survey known to have been affected by contamination was conducted in 1940—a geobotan-ical reconnaissance made in the Michigan copper district by a private company. Geologists found striking variations in the copper content of oak and maple leaves, but unfortunately the high copper isograds of the study seemed to be related more to the Calumet and Hecla copper smelter fall-out than to mineralized ground.' The leaves of one oak tree near the smelter contained 0.4 pct Cu. Similar contamination was reported by Clarke (Ref. 2, p. 41), who conducted experimental geochemical soil and botanical surveys at Ray, Ariz. He found that the leaves of oak trees growing in unmineralized ground near Superior, Ariz., contained more copper than the leaves of oak trees growing on the capping of the Ray orebody and attributed this fact to contamination from the fumes of the Magma smelter at Superior. According to H. E. Hawkes,3 soils and stream sediments in the Superior area are also severely contaminated. Hawkes' work there has shown a copper content averaging 0.5 pct in the surface horizons of soils within one mile of the smelter stack. Samples taken only a few inches below the anomalous surface samples showed only background copper values. In 1950 L. C. Huff' of the USGS made a geochemical survey in an area near Jerome, Ariz., and found considerable zinc and copper in the soils over unmineralized basalt close to Clarkedale, Ariz., and over limestone close to Jerome. As the amounts were notably greater than could reasonably be expected to be derived from the underlying rocks, Huff suspected airborne contamination from the smelter at Clarkedale. Description of Area: The area sampled in detail (Fig. 1) for the study presented here is one of strong relief. The dominant watercourse is the westward-flowing South Fork of the Coeur d'Alene River. East of Kellogg the South Fork flows in a rather narrow canyon, but its valley floor widens considerably to the west where much of the flood plain is covered by an extensive veneer of mining, milling, and smelting debris. South of the South Fork and between Big Creek and Pine Creek is a mountainous area where

Jan 1, 1960

By C. A. Heiland

THIS year's review of geophysical activities has a somewhat different complexion than usual. With the ending of the war, the time seems opportune to supplement the customary report on operations and discoveries in oil and mine exploration by a review out-lining the contributions of geophysicists to the. war effort. To give as much space as possible to the latter, presented as Part 2, some of the usual review features have been omitted from the statistical section, given as Part 1 immediately following.

Jan 1, 1946

By Rollyn P. Jacobson

THE town of Pacific, in Jefferson County, Mo., is 127 miles west of St. Louis. Since the area lies entirely on the flood plain of a cutoff meander of the Meramac River, it was considered a likely environment for accumulation of commercial quantities of sand and gravel. Excellent transportation facilities are afforded by two major railways to St. Louis, and ample water supply for washing and separation is assured by the proximity of the river. As a large washing and separation plant was planned, the property was evaluated in detail to justify the high initial expenditure. An intensive testing program using both geophysical and drilling methods was designed and carried out. The prospect was surveyed topographically and a 200-ft grid staked on which electrical resistivity depth profiles were observed at 130 points. The Wenner 4-electrode configuration and earth resistivity apparatus" were used. In all but a few cases, the electrode spacing, A, was increased in increments of 11/2 ft to a spread of 30 ft and in increments of 3 ft thereafter. Initial drilling was done with a rig designated as the California Earth Boring Machine, which uses a bucket-shaped bit and produces a hole 3 ft in diam. Because of excessive water conditions and lack of consolidation in the gravel there was considerable loss of hole with this type of equipment. A standard churn drill was employed, therefore, to penetrate to bedrock. Eighteen bucket-drill holes and eight churn-drill holes were drilled at widely scattered locations on the grill. The depth to bedrock and the configuration will not be discussed, as this parameter is not the primary concern. Thickness of overburden overlying the gravel beds or lenses became the important economic criterion of the prospect.** The wide variety and gradational character of the geologic conditions prevailing in this area are illustrated by sample sections on Fig. 2. Depth profiles at stations E-3 and J-7 are very similar in shape and numerical range, but as shown by drilling, they are measures of very different geologic sequences. At 5-7 the gravel is overlain by 15 ft of overburden, but at E-3 bedrock is overlain by about 5 ft of soil and mantle. Stations L-8 and H-18 are representative of areas where gravel lies within 10 ft of surface. In most profiles of this type it was very difficult to locate the resistivity breaks denoting the overburden-gravel interface. In a number of cases, as shown by stations M-4 and H-18, the anomaly produced by the water table or the moisture line often obscured the anomaly due to gravel or was mistaken for it. In any case, the precise determination of depth to gravel was prevented by the gradual transition from sand to sandy gravel to gravel. In spite of these difficulties, errors involved in the interpretation were not greatly out of order. However, results indicated that the prospect was very nearly marginal from an economic point of view, and to justify expenditures for plant facilities a more precise evaluation was undertaken. The most favorable sections of the property were tested with hand augers. The original grid was followed. In all, 46 hand auger holes were drilled to gravel or refusal and the results made available to the writer for further analysis and interpretation. When data for this survey was studied, it immediately became apparent that a very definite correlation existed between the numerical value of the apparent resistivity at some constant depth and the thickness of the overburden. Such a correlation is seldom regarded in interpretation in more than a very qualitative way, except in the various theoretical methods developed by Hummel, Tagg (Ref. 1, pp. 136-139), Roman (Ref. 2, pp. 6-12), Rosenzweig (Ref. 3, pp. 408-417), and Wilcox (Ref. 4, pp. 36-46). Various statistical procedures were used to place this relationship on a quantitative basis. The large amount of drilling information available made such an approach feasible. The thickness of overburden was plotted against the apparent resistivity at a constant depth less than the depth of bedrock for the 65 stations where drilling information was available. A curve of best fit was drawn through these points and the equation of the curve determined. For this relationship the curve was found to be of the form p = b D where p is the apparent resistivity, D the thickness of overburden, and b a constant. The equation is of the power type and plots as a straight line on log-log paper. The statistical validity of this equation was analyzed by computation of a parameter called Pearson's correlation coefficient for several different depths of measurements, see Ref. 5, pp. 196-241. In all but those measurements taken at relatively shallow depths, the correlation as given by this general equation was found to have a high order of validity on the basis of statistical theory.

Jan 1, 1956

By C. T. Bischoff

This paper describes the results of testing with colorimetric methods, using "dithizone", soil samples taken over various known copper and zinc deposits covered by glacial till. Variation in results is shown for different depths and types of overburden as well as grade and type of deposit. Limiting factors for the practical application of this work are discussed. The method has proved successful for copper and zinc deposits under clay and fine sand with depths up to at least 30 ft but fails in coarse sand and gravel unless depths are very shallow. Swamps require penetration to the underlying subsoil for sample material. DURING the past few years geochemical testing for traces of heavy metals in water, soil, rock, and vegetation has aroused increasing interest. Various techniques for field and laboratory determinations have been described in the literature, as have some of the results of application. However, little information has been published regarding application to glacial terrain. Over 90 pct of the Canadian Shield is overburdened, resulting in high costs for mineral exploration once the outcropping ore deposits have been found. This has been largely responsible for the widespread application of mining geophysics in Canada, permitting concentration of effort on area or zones considered most favorable. However, geophysical interpretation has its limitations, since at least 90 pct of the structures indicated thereby contain no valuable minerals. A more direct approach is therefore highly desirable. If underlying base metal mineralization can be detected by sampling soil or vegetation at moderate cost this should prove of great help in locating new discoveries or extending known ones. A large proportion of Canadian ore deposits contain appreciable copper or zinc, even where these are not the principal economic metals. Consequently the field of application is a broad one. This paper deals with investigations along these lines with particular emphasis on soil sampling. The problems involved from the start were: 1—Which types of glacial soil, if any, would best lend themselves to testing, and conversely which types might be considered relatively hopeless? 2—Through what depths of overburden could significant mineralization be detected? 3—What sampling techniques would prove economically applicable? This included minimum depth of sample and maximum spacing that could be allowed.

Jan 1, 1955

By W. Allen

FOR the past six years gravity surveys have been used for underground prospecting in the copper mines at Bisbee, Ariz. The primary purpose of the surveys has been to reduce the diamond drilling and crosscutting necessary for exploration. Since many of the orebodies are small, and geologic control is not always apparent, any information that will direct the drilling and crosscutting is highly desirable. Because of extensive development and exploration work in the copper mines at Bisbee, it has been possible to cover more than 630,000 ft of crosscuts on 30 levels with the gravity surveys. In the process the gravity procedures have been refined to a high degree. Density Contrast: For a gravity survey to be successful, a sufficient density contrast must exist between the geologic feature sought and surrounding host rocks. Most mineralized areas will provide this contrast if fairly massive bodies are present. In the Bisbee area the entire sequence of formations, except for alluvium, appears to have specific gravities ranging from 2.65 to 2.70. These values have been determined by means of a large number of cut samples and diamond drill cores. As a further check, vertical gravity differences have been used where nonmineralized sections are known to occur.' The only known major gravity disturbances result from mineralization that has increased the density and the voids that have decreased density. The voids are caused by mining operations and by underground water movement that has developed several areas of caverns. Equipment: While not absolutely essential, a small rugged gravity meter, such as the Worden meter, is highly desirable. A tall tripod, about the height of a transit tripod, permits instrument set-ups in deep water and in locations where fallen timber and muck piles make it impossible to use a short tripod. An additional advantage of a tall tripod is that it places the meter in the center of the crosscut, reducing the error caused by the crosscut void. Size and weight are important, since the only satisfactory means of operating the meter underground is to carry it by hand. A backpack can be used in rare instances but is usually a hindrance because of the close station spacing. The operator's ability to move through tight clearances will improve survey coverage, as it is then possible to move through raises and caved areas and to pass mine cars and machinery with a minimum of trouble. Station Control: Gravity stations are normally located every 100 ft along the crosscuts, at each intersection, and in the face of all stub crosscuts. In areas of high gravity relief, or where small anomalies might be expected, stations may be located at 25 or 50-ft intervals. When possible, the stations should be offset to avoid effects of raises or other voids. The gravity stations on a level are tied to one or more base stations, which are usually located at the shaft or near the portal of an adit. The base stations may be part of a gravity control net that extends to each level in the mine as well as to the surface. Such a net extending throughout the potential area of the surveys is highly desirable, as it is then possible to compare all gravity stations on a uniform basis. The stations that are part of the base net should be carefully established by multiple readings and, if necessary, by a least squares adjustment of the loops. In some instances where levels do not have a shaft station, or where access may be blocked by caving, it may be necessary to establish secondary bases at the top and bottom of the raises that are between levels. Under fair conditions 70 to 90 gravity stations can be located and run in 6 hr by a two-man crew. The best field procedures depend on conditions. Reduction of Field Data: Most of the time required to produce a final gravity map is consumed in processing the data. Each meter reading must be corrected for a minimum of five factors that affect the gravity value in addition to the density contrast being sought. These factors are 1) instrumental drift, 2) station elevation, 3) topography, 4) latitude, and 5) regional gravity gradient. Mine openings, such as stopes and raises, will affect the value. However, it is seldom practical to make corrections for these voids. Usually a rotation is made on the field note on the station, and any

Jan 1, 1957

By C. A. Heiland

IN the third year of war, geophysical oil exploration broke all records to keep pace with the demand for increased reserves. Geophysical prospecting for strategic and other minerals also grew in scope. The trend of geophysical oil exploration throughout the war is indicated in Fig. 1. This figure resembles the one presented in the last annual review issue of M&M (February 1944, p. 62), corrected for data on-operations in the last months of 1943 and extended into 1944. The average number of geophysical oil prospecting crews in the field in 1944 was 451, whereas the total in 1943 was 340. An upward trend in the use of all geophysical methods is clearly evident throughout the year. Seismic operations were 67 per cent, gravimeter surveys 28 per cent, and other methods 5 per cent of the total. Seismic reflection and refraction crews increased 181/2 per cent over the 1943 average, gravimeter operations increased 73 per cent, and other methods gained 92 per cent. The increase in seismic and gravimeter operations, particularly the latter, is probably due to an increased production of equipment and the organization of new service companies. Miscellaneous methods gained largely through a revival of magnetometer work, and an increase in the use of torsion balances and electrical equipment. In comparison with the prewar average of 1941, it is noteworthy that seismic operations increased 58 per cent, gravimeter operations 88 per cent, and miscellaneous other methods gained as much as 283 per cent. Unfortunately the expansion in the number of geophysical crews does not indicate a proportionate increase in efficiency or in areal coverage, as will be brought out later.

Jan 1, 1945

By J. C. Cook

In solution-mining of underground salt and similar minerals, using drilled wells for access, it is desirable to monitor the lateral growth pattern of the resulting fluid-filled cavern. Therefore, a process of seismic surveying from the surface of the ground has been conceived in which the amplitudes of waves reflected from and transmitted through the soluble formation are measured. The large acoustic impedance contrast between solid and fluid should produce striking amplitude anomalies, especially if shear waves are employed, since thick fluid bodies are opaque to shear waves. Horizontally-polarized (SH) shear waves are best for preventing conversion to P waves at the numerous horizontal interfaces in the ground. Field tests to date have shown that a truck-mounted, half-ton hammer striking horizontally against the end of a trench produces usable SH-wave energy at lateral distances up to about 850 ft. Horizontally-directed explosive wave sources were effective to about 2000 ft. Conventional magnetic-tape recording and processing were used, but with the detecting geophones oriented to favor SH waves. An irregular solution cavity in bedded salt at 500-ft depth has apparently been located by SH-wave and SV-wave reflections. Further field work is planned to corroborate and extend this result. The Brine Cavity Research Group, an association of 11 chemical and salt producing companies, is supporting this work. Major deposits of salt in tabular beds lie beneath some 300,000 sq miles of land in the central and northeastern U.S. This salt is a basic source of soda ash and chlorine, and has been extracted as brine from drilled wells for about a century. During the past two decades, the U.S. solution-mining industry, following the lead of European operators, has greatly improved the extraction process through the application of engineering and science.' In 1957, the Brine Cavity Research Group, an association of 11 chemical and salt producing companies, was formed. This group proceeded to attack certain common problems through the support of research. An outstanding problem has been that of determining the shape and location of the growing solution cavities in the underground salt, so that measures can be taken to maintain operating efficiency. The problem has been partially solved by the Dowel1 sonar mapping service, which employs a pulse-echo device lowered into the cavity through the well.2 However, the working range of this equipment is at present insufficient for large cavities, and echoes are not returned from highly sloping walls nor from behind such obstructions as rock debris. Therefore, an independent means of mapping the cavity, for example, from the surface without interfering with operation of the well, would be desirable. THEORY OF THE METHOD Seismic waves are the only physical agent known to be capable of sufficient resolution and penetration to define typical solution cavities from the surface of the ground. The geometry is unfavorable: cavity widths are generally less than half their depths below the surface; resolution and lateral location of boundaries and channels to within 50 ft at depths of 500 to 3000 ft is desirable. Conventional seismic surveying, as used for petroleum prospecting, is probably not the answer: isopach mapping, for example, is not thought accurate enough to define the cavity by the slight additional delay time it would introduce (of the order of 0.005 sec for a 50 ft-thick cavity in hard Paleozoic rocks). Refraction surveying has also been considered, but seismic specialists see little promise in it for this problem. In 1957, in correspondence with industry personnel, the writer suggested a seismic method based upon careful measurement of reflection amplitudes. As Table I illustrates, seismic reflection coefficients r for typical brine-rock interfaces are considerably higher than those for typical interfaces between different kinds of solid rock. This fact can be utilized in two ways, illustrated in Fig. 1: 1) If the cavity roof is reasonably flat (which it may sometimes be since the unsaturated top brine will be in contact with an insoluble rock stratum), extra-strong seismic reflections will be received from the salt stratum where the solid has been replaced by liquid.

Jan 1, 1964

By John B. Gustavson

The mineral deposits found in carbonate facies rocks of sedimentary basins include deposits comprised of the country rock itself such as limestone for chemical uses, dolomite for road aggregate, and a variety of other industrial uses of the sedimentary rock. Exploration for new reserves is generally conducted on basis of outcrop investigation, subsurface drilling, and facies change studies while geophysics and geochemistry are not applied. In contrast, rapid development has taken place in the application of both geophysical and geochemical techniques in exploration for stratiform deposits of zinc, lead, barite, and fluorite deposits. This paper will present case histories and show illustrations from such work in the Mid-Continent region. The Metals Division of International Oil & Gas, Inc. has gathered this experience through work over the last three years along the southern margin of the Eastern Interior platform focusing on the states of Arkansas and Tennessee. The exploration work was conducted partially for the Company's own account, partially in joint exploration ventures with mining companies including International Mogul Mines, Ltd., a Canadian company; Bear Creek Mining Company, a subsidiary of Kennecott Copper Corporation; the Mining Division of W. R. Grace and Company, and Boliden-Preussag Exploration, a Swedish-German partnership. We wish to take this opportunity to thank our venture partners for allowing presentation of the various sections of this paper.

Jan 1, 1976

By Jr. Matthews

The Candelaria copper-gold deposit is located in Region m of Chile, 805 kilometers north of the capital, Santiago. Candelaria was discovered in 1987, following a six month exploration program. In late 1986, induced polarization (IP) surveys outlined an anomalously high response within the area of interest. The first test hole bad three intersections totaling 49 meters, with an average grade of 1.97% copper. Drilling eventually outlined approximately 390 million tonnes, grading 1.09010 copper and 0.26 grams/tonne gold. Production began in early 1995 and is estimated at 120,000 tonnes copper and 80,000 ounces gold annually.

Jan 1, 1996

By David K. Fountain

"The growth of the mining industry in British Columbia in the last ten years has been largely the result of the development of large low-grade copper and molybdenum deposits. There are two problems which must be solved in the search for mineral deposits of this type. It is necessary to detect large volumes of rock containing a low percentage of total sulphide mineralization1 and, secondly, to get some idea of the economic significance of this mineralization. The standard geophysical exploration techniques available have a varying degree of application in the search for disseminated sulphide de-posits. The electrical methods, and the induced polarization method in particular, are the most successful direct methods, and magnetic methods have indirect application in most situations. This is illustrated by geo-physical survey results from several properties in British Columbia."

Jan 1, 1968

By W M. Cameron

Geophysical studies have extended seaward in recent years, and the important discoveries which have been made have led to a better understanding of geological processes. A present source of certain minerals, the sea will eventually serve as an important source of desalinated water. The continental helves, in particular, represent a potential mineral resource. The expansion of Canadian oceanographic effort that is now underway will eventually lead to the exploitation of the wealth beneath the sea. THE subject of this symposium, which emphasizes the word "geophysics," the specialties of the speakers who are contributing and the nature of the audience at first made me believe that I, a a physical oceanographer, would be out of place. However, I shall undertake to classify myself as a geophysicist, and shall arrange my remarks on my specialty o that they might be of interest to those of you who are predominantly geologists, metallurgists or mining engineers.

Jan 1, 1963

By C. A. HEILANDG

THERE is a need for men well trained in geo- physical prospecting. Although the number of geophysicists required by the industry in the future cannot be expected to be very great, there will always be a demand for courses on the subject. A number of educational institutions are, therefore, interested in providing instruction in geophysical prospecting. Some institutions will be satisfied with courses in general geophysical prospecting designed to give the geologist fundamental concepts on the comparative merits of the methods and the interpretation of the results. Other institutions will want to give special instructions in theory, field procedure, and interpretation of any or all geophysical methods. In giving such special courses a number of problems will be faced, and it seems to me that such difficulties are easier to overcome in an engineering institution than in a university. A knowledge of basic engineering subjects, such as required of all students in an engineering school, seems to be the best foundation upon

Jan 1, 1930

By J. B. Macelwane

Geophysics differs from geology and physics in in many respects. In the first place, geophysics is a complex science embracing the fields of seismology, geomagnetism, geoelectricity, geodesy, meteorology, vol-canology, physical oceanography, physical hydrology, tectonophysics and exploration geophysics. Geology is also a complex science and so extensive in its various fields that no one can master them all, and no part of geology deals in any sense with several of these fields of geophysics. In the second place, geophysics makes use of methods and instruments that are derived primarily from the science of physics. Geology, on the other hand, has methods of its own and it draws its borrowed techniques and its instrumental equipment not only from physics but also and perhaps primarily from chemistry and biology. The difference, therefore, between the geophysicist and the geologist lies partly in the phenomena that are observed, partly in the methods and instruments with which each carries on his exploration; but partly also, and perhaps principally, in the habitual attitude of mind and in the background of specialized training with which each approaches the problems presented by this planet of ours. The geologist as such, therefore, is no geophysicist. On the other hand, the physicist is not a geophysicist either. Isolation of each problem in a closed laboratow system under complete control is fundamental to the methods of the physicist. The geophysicist must apply physical instruments and physicomathematical reasoning to the study of physical quantities in their undisturbed natural environment. What, then, is a geophysicist? In the sense that he is a trained expert in all of the geophysical sciences, I do not believe that such a person ever existed. It would be beyond the possibilities of a single lifetime. I think there is confusion in our ideas and in our use of terms. We are not all thinking of the same thing when we say geophysics or geophysicist; yet we seem to talk as though we were. It is as absurd to say that the whole of geophysics belongs to geology because the field of a particular type of geophysicist—the exploration geophysicist —calls for some knowledge of geology as it would be to say that the whole of biology belongs to geology because a particular type of biologist—the paleontologist— needs some knowledge of geology. Development of a Geophysicist Since it is impossible to become an expert in all the fields of geophysics, and since students entering college seldom know the field they will choose as a career, what would we suggest as the best general preparation for work in geophysics, whether as a meteorologist, an oceanographer, a seismologist, a geodesist, a geomagneticist, a volcanologist, a tectonophysicist, a hydro1 ogist, or an exploration geophysicistp we may distinguish five phases in the development of a geophysicist: (I) his mathematical and scientific studies in high school; (2) the general mathematical and scientific

Jan 1, 1946

By J. B. Macelwane

Geophysics differs from geology and physics in in many respects. In the first place, geophysics is a complex science embracing the fields of seismology, geomagnetism, geoelectricity, geodesy, meteorology, vol-canology, physical oceanography, physical hydrology, tectonophysics and exploration geophysics. Geology is also a complex science and so extensive in its various fields that no one can master them all, and no part of geology deals in any sense with several of these fields of geophysics. In the second place, geophysics makes use of methods and instruments that are derived primarily from the science of physics. Geology, on the other hand, has methods of its own and it draws its borrowed techniques and its instrumental equipment not only from physics but also and perhaps primarily from chemistry and biology. The difference, therefore, between the geophysicist and the geologist lies partly in the phenomena that are observed, partly in the methods and instruments with which each carries on his exploration; but partly also, and perhaps principally, in the habitual attitude of mind and in the background of specialized training with which each approaches the problems presented by this planet of ours. The geologist as such, therefore, is no geophysicist. On the other hand, the physicist is not a geophysicist either. Isolation of each problem in a closed laboratow system under complete control is fundamental to the methods of the physicist. The geophysicist must apply physical instruments and physicomathematical reasoning to the study of physical quantities in their undisturbed natural environment. What, then, is a geophysicist? In the sense that he is a trained expert in all of the geophysical sciences, I do not believe that such a person ever existed. It would be beyond the possibilities of a single lifetime. I think there is confusion in our ideas and in our use of terms. We are not all thinking of the same thing when we say geophysics or geophysicist; yet we seem to talk as though we were. It is as absurd to say that the whole of geophysics belongs to geology because the field of a particular type of geophysicist—the exploration geophysicist —calls for some knowledge of geology as it would be to say that the whole of biology belongs to geology because a particular type of biologist—the paleontologist— needs some knowledge of geology. Development of a Geophysicist Since it is impossible to become an expert in all the fields of geophysics, and since students entering college seldom know the field they will choose as a career, what would we suggest as the best general preparation for work in geophysics, whether as a meteorologist, an oceanographer, a seismologist, a geodesist, a geomagneticist, a volcanologist, a tectonophysicist, a hydro1 ogist, or an exploration geophysicistp we may distinguish five phases in the development of a geophysicist: (I) his mathematical and scientific studies in high school; (2) the general mathematical and scientific

Jan 1, 1946

By Donald C. Branford

The place of geophysics in the curriculum of a college or an engineering school has been much discussed. There is uncertainty as to whether the graduate may be called a "geological geophysicist" or a "geophysical geologist." Some have used the term "geophysical engineer." The question of the specialized undergraduate curriculum versus a general undergraduate training in the parent sciences with the addition of cultural electives has been and is still being argued. The literature during the past Io years shows that there are two rather definite schools of thought on this subject. The prospective employer, engaged in active geophysical exploration, visualizes the graduate in terms of the routine work he will do in the field. The school administrator, grounded in many years of tradition in the cultural type of education, visualizes the graduate in terms of his position in a political and cultural society as well as in his work as a professional geophysicist. Both are right and both wrong. A third school of thought, that of the student himself, has been almost totally ignored. It would seem best, for the purpose of this paper, to treat these various points and allied material separately, and then to integrate the conclusions as a set of conditions that should be fulfilled as far as possible in the ideal curriculum. At the end the relationship of our findings to the curriculum that has been tentatively adopted at the University of Pittsburgh will be considered. Divisions in Definition or Field of Geophysics Geophysics is that field of science in which geological and earth problems are solved with the use of physical and chemical techniques. Altogether too much attention has been paid to the artificial separation in this science of the commercial applications from the so-called "pure" or academic geophysics. The only real difference in the two types of work is one of scale of operations. In the commercial field the scale is large in terms of fmancial backing, immediate economic importance, and speed of operations. In the academic field the scale is large in terms of breadth of interests, in eventual economic importance, and length of time allowable for theoretical investigations. In exploration work the scale is small in terms of dimensions, since the methods are applicable only to the outer 20,000 ft. or SO of the earth's crust. In academic work, the student is not pressed for results of immediate economic importance, and therefore can afford to spend more time on problems that seem unimportant at the time. In the sense of background knowledge of the parent sciences necessary to the geophysicist, no essential difference can be found. Physics, chemistry, geology, and mathematics together, and in their proper proportionate amounts, form the matrix from which geophysical ideas and methods may spring.

Jan 1, 1946

By Donald C. Branford

The place of geophysics in the curriculum of a college or an engineering school has been much discussed. There is uncertainty as to whether the graduate may be called a "geological geophysicist" or a "geophysical geologist." Some have used the term "geophysical engineer." The question of the specialized undergraduate curriculum versus a general undergraduate training in the parent sciences with the addition of cultural electives has been and is still being argued. The literature during the past Io years shows that there are two rather definite schools of thought on this subject. The prospective employer, engaged in active geophysical exploration, visualizes the graduate in terms of the routine work he will do in the field. The school administrator, grounded in many years of tradition in the cultural type of education, visualizes the graduate in terms of his position in a political and cultural society as well as in his work as a professional geophysicist. Both are right and both wrong. A third school of thought, that of the student himself, has been almost totally ignored. It would seem best, for the purpose of this paper, to treat these various points and allied material separately, and then to integrate the conclusions as a set of conditions that should be fulfilled as far as possible in the ideal curriculum. At the end the relationship of our findings to the curriculum that has been tentatively adopted at the University of Pittsburgh will be considered. Divisions in Definition or Field of Geophysics Geophysics is that field of science in which geological and earth problems are solved with the use of physical and chemical techniques. Altogether too much attention has been paid to the artificial separation in this science of the commercial applications from the so-called "pure" or academic geophysics. The only real difference in the two types of work is one of scale of operations. In the commercial field the scale is large in terms of fmancial backing, immediate economic importance, and speed of operations. In the academic field the scale is large in terms of breadth of interests, in eventual economic importance, and length of time allowable for theoretical investigations. In exploration work the scale is small in terms of dimensions, since the methods are applicable only to the outer 20,000 ft. or SO of the earth's crust. In academic work, the student is not pressed for results of immediate economic importance, and therefore can afford to spend more time on problems that seem unimportant at the time. In the sense of background knowledge of the parent sciences necessary to the geophysicist, no essential difference can be found. Physics, chemistry, geology, and mathematics together, and in their proper proportionate amounts, form the matrix from which geophysical ideas and methods may spring.

Jan 1, 1946

By F. McIntosh Galbraith

EMPLOYING geophysics to find ore was for a long time considered by the Canadian mining fraternity to be a performance of dubious value: in a category somewhere between the practice of sorcery, and using a divining rod to locate underground water. With increasing knowledge, however, and with constantly improving instruments, a solid speaking acquaintance with this adolescent science is becoming an integral part of the mining geologist's stock in trade. And quite properly so: for, in the established mining districts, the ore deposits which could be easily found, by ordinary prospecting methods, have already been located. There remain; however, in almost all of the principal mining camps, areas which are covered to varying depths by glacial debris; and it is here that the obvious opportunities exist for the successful application of geophysical methods. Geophysical results must always be considered in the closest possible relation to the local geology; and, in reality, the 'doodle-bugs' are simply additional tools for the geologist (in the same category with a plane table or a microscope). The Sudbury Basin is a shining example of precisely this state of affairs. Detailed geological mapping has not significantly altered the position of the outer norite contact as placed on Dr. Coleman's original map of the district. What detailed examination has done, of course, has been to reveal the accuracy with which the contact can be placed in different parts of the district, and to show up, in consequence, areas in which further work might reasonably be expected to disclose hitherto unknown or unsuspected ore. Viewed in this light, the proportion of the norite contact which is covered by substantial quantities of overburden is astonishingly large.

Jan 1, 1939

By Walter E. Heinrichs

To many, petroleum exploration and successful geophysics , are partly synonomous, This is not because natural petroleum is usually concentrated as a liquid, nor certainly not because oil can be detected directly. The reason is Chat geophysics helps to at least better understand and sometimes, to even explain the essential geology involved. That groundwater is similarly a liquid with all but a few of its basic geologic relationships practically identical to petroleum, seems to have escaped many of those most interested and responsible for complete geo-hydrologic knowledge. The paramount need to use every means at our disposal for maintaining and expanding our crustal resources reserves are generally obvious, However, in view of the rapidly mounting requirements, continual re-emphasis is worthwhile.

Jan 1, 1963