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.

Strategies & Market Trends : Ride the Tiger with CD -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Goose94 who wrote (173731)	9/1/2009 11:29:54 AM
From: E. Charters	Respond to of 313046

Doesn't ring any Belles so far. "Arizona is one of the world's premier copper-producing regions, but broad regions of the state lie buried beneath shallow alluvial cover, making exploration difficult. The recent discovery of the giant Resolution orebody served as a reminder that undiscovered porphyry copper deposits still exist in Arizona, and that they are worth finding." That is what Phil Hallof was doing with psuedo sections in IP. (his Phd thesis) Finding the porphyry sulphides beneath the Arizona sand. No one has come up with a better way of defining and illustrating the meaning of "pot" spacings with respect to their signals. (conductor aerial spacings of the induced polarization receiver). Seismic does a version of this with sound, arguing for first arrival/reflection/refraction timing to define the path of the sound wave and its depth. Electricity is too fast, so they space the pots, receive the signal and argue the wider spacings come from a deeper horizon and display it on paper as such. This is not strictly true so it is called pseudo section. Different people did IP geometries such as dipole-dipole, pole-dipole, pole-pole, etc and differential pot spacings, sounding, etc.. but the pseudo depth section got the most attention as a graphical way of showing what happened as you got deeper. CSAMT tries to do the same thing with differing frequencies and the Cagniard equation. A fellow Duckworth, I believe now retired from U of Calgary has a system for porphyries and other conductors, called co-incident coil, which needs another type of interpretation. Co-incident coil has the advantage of simple interpretation once the single is properly massaged, and is not as hard to build as Duckorth avers. Duckworth holds that the slightest, even thermal differentiation of the coil, will throw results way off. I think there is way around that with psuedo geometries and filter compensation for perceived irregularities happening to geometry of the coil. Their website is rather well organized and written. Hmmmmm... I have seen that sort of thing before. EC<:-}