SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Gold/Mining/Energy : Nuinsco Resources (NWI)
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: Brumell who wrote (2067)3/22/1999 11:48:00 AM
From: E. Charters  Read Replies (2) of 5821
 
In Lynn Lake and Thompson it was noted that the size of the mafic intrusive had no relation to the size of the associated orebody. I asked Puskas, of NVE if he felt that was true about this situation and he averred that he felt that this was so here, too. For one thing we are seeing erosional roots, and the original mass may have been much larger. For another, the amount of nickel a mafic body may source is purely haphazard. Some may contain more than others. The nickel is a differentiate of one kind or another and may separate before the emplacement of the Gabbro. It depends on what theory you embrace as to where you want to put the nickel emplacement in time, but both theories allow the overlying body to be independent of the size of the ore. At any rate, the actual cases support a positive outlook for just about any surface expression of an intrusion.

mineletter.com

EC<:-}
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  

HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2026 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News