Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

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 : SOUTHERNERA (t.SUF) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: VAUGHN who wrote (6207)	9/1/2000 9:25:55 AM
From: teevee	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 7235

Vaughn, Nice find on the seismic evaluation of kimberlite. Sonic (sound) waves are faster in kimberlite than the host sediments at FALC, according to the article. In the NWT, I believe there should also be a density contrast between kimberlite and host rock. The point I was trying to make in our earlier discussion, is that by using a down hole geophone, (or hydrophone as they are called in the article), with a 3-D array on surface, it may be possible to map where the thicker sections of the dyke are, infer the size of the body BEFORE drilling additional deep and expensive holes, and provide the direction to drill the best or at least thicker areas first. regards, teevee