I don't think looking for diamonds is an easy way to find diamonds. If some things are 20 times more plentiful than diamonds and they stand out, and are somewhat unique, then you look for them first. It is the science of indicator minerals. They are rare in most rocks in their type which congregate with diamonds, so they are the leads. The mistake many naive companies make with drill core is that they analyze the core for diamonds instead of analyzing the more plentiful garnets and diallage for chemistry.
If the chemistry, i.e. pressure temperature curve, and oxidation co-efficient is good, and the garnets are formed right, and the right colour, then it follows that the diamonds may be there. This is mature science outlined by Sobolev and Griffin and Ryan. Some kimberlites may be ecologitic and some may have few microdiamonds, so the microdiamond tap dance while positive if the diamonds are there, may lead you astray if they are not. You must be on the lookout for eclogitic garnets, as well as peridotitic. Microdiamonds it seems may have formed in a completely different way than macros. Thus their existence may be partially co-incidental, and their absence may not always be significant. Chemistry however is always significant.
Taking an MRI of the earth is a good idea. Of course an MRI or nuclear magnetic resonance imaging machine is just a reading magnetometer which measures the response due to paramagnetism of elements which have are exposed to induced magnetic field. In a small way, electromagnetic surveys to a similar thing for conductors. The electric and magnetic field are created by and electrical or magnetic field induced in the conductor. The difference is it is read rather crudely.
EC<:-} |
