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 : WillP Speaks on Winspear -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Tomato who wrote (87)	3/3/1999 10:52:00 PM
From: Tomato	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 177

Author: WillP -- Date:1999-03-03 19:05:47 Subject: The Atomic Number of Strontium is 30. Of course it's not...but that was (I think) the line from a movie. It kind of stuck with me...and just having ordered from the drive through at Burger King...you can probably understand why. So... Funny thing is...if you do the calculations on the larger core samples taken...that were rather homogeneous...you end up with an even lower value. I tend to use 2.2 as the density of kimberlite. It's supposedly higher than that, but I'd feel more comfortable about it if all of the LDC core samples taken had returned a value higher than 2.2. If something approaching 3 is the correct value...then great. My 2.2 calculations have yet another conservative fudge factor built in. Again...I wouldn't get excited about the kimberlite vs. orangite vs. hypabyssal vs. diatreme vs. pyroclastic vs. whatever angle. A dyke 2.6 metres deep is fairly well enough Ok...but at 1.7 metres, you will be forced to mine a chunk of country rock as well. That puts the SG of kimberlite in perspective. Oh...talked to Aber today. They suggested it was likely to hear the bulk sample results by the May to June time frame. [emphasis added by editor] (I'm not so sure.) Further...they huffily suggested that "Winspear as the operator would be releasing news fairly frequently" leading up to those results. I'm not so sure such a release is not...umm...imminent. :-) P.S. The 'standard' quoted SG for kimberlite is around 2.75 I believe. But then again...there is no standard 'standard'. I still like the 2.2 figure. Ultimately....the tonnage of Snap Lake will be determined by drill success or failure...not SG numbers. I think, at least. I've got a few good chunks of said kimberlite in my basement...I'll give it the old high school test when I get the chance. Let you know. One of these chunks is...umm...orangeite. Maybe. :-) Hey...damn fine subject! Keep at it Mr. Garnet! :-) Regards, WillP