Search Documents

For four years your Committee has been engaged in the study of problems connected with the educational preparation of professional geophysicists. The Present report represents the conclusions drawn from the investigations and deliberations undertaken since it was first organized. These studies have shown that the evolution of geophysics has proceeded along lines that differed from those marking the advance of classical geology. The latter science developed as a descriptive one, dealing with directly observable terrestrial phenomena, and the elementary, rational explanations that could be offered therefor. The fact that these phenomena were also chemical and physical in nature was seldom given more than passing acknowledgment. During the last half century, however, a new approach to problems of terrestrial phenomena has become of greater significance. This new attack has come through the sciences of physics and chemistry, as the people trained therein have investigated the facts of the earth as problems in their respective sciences. This development has been chiefly at the hands of European investigators, and European universities have long recognized it by establishing departments or institutions of geophysics. In the universities of North America, their arbitrary departmentalization into fields of physics, chemistry, astronomy, geology, etc., has prevented the academic recognition of such domains of science as geophysics and geochemistry. In consequence, the development of these subjects in the United States has been largely at the hands of nonacademic institutions, while the universities themselves are evidently in a state of confusion as to how the subject should be handled. In some places an attempt to teach geophysics is made in the physics department, in others in the geology department, in some in the engineering school, and occasionally as a cooperative effort; a Department of Geophysics is seldom found in North America. In some instances, proper academic plan. ning has been precluded by interdepart. mental jealousies, or by lack of appreciation of the significance of the subject. For the background upon which these conclusions are based, the reader is referred to reports previously issued or SPonsored by Your Committee. The "First Report of the A.I.M.E. Mineral Industry Education Division's Committee of Geophysics Education, 1939," summarizes the replies received to question-

Jan 1, 1946

For four years your Committee has been engaged in the study of problems connected with the educational preparation of professional geophysicists. The Present report represents the conclusions drawn from the investigations and deliberations undertaken since it was first organized. These studies have shown that the evolution of geophysics has proceeded along lines that differed from those marking the advance of classical geology. The latter science developed as a descriptive one, dealing with directly observable terrestrial phenomena, and the elementary, rational explanations that could be offered therefor. The fact that these phenomena were also chemical and physical in nature was seldom given more than passing acknowledgment. During the last half century, however, a new approach to problems of terrestrial phenomena has become of greater significance. This new attack has come through the sciences of physics and chemistry, as the people trained therein have investigated the facts of the earth as problems in their respective sciences. This development has been chiefly at the hands of European investigators, and European universities have long recognized it by establishing departments or institutions of geophysics. In the universities of North America, their arbitrary departmentalization into fields of physics, chemistry, astronomy, geology, etc., has prevented the academic recognition of such domains of science as geophysics and geochemistry. In consequence, the development of these subjects in the United States has been largely at the hands of nonacademic institutions, while the universities themselves are evidently in a state of confusion as to how the subject should be handled. In some places an attempt to teach geophysics is made in the physics department, in others in the geology department, in some in the engineering school, and occasionally as a cooperative effort; a Department of Geophysics is seldom found in North America. In some instances, proper academic plan. ning has been precluded by interdepart. mental jealousies, or by lack of appreciation of the significance of the subject. For the background upon which these conclusions are based, the reader is referred to reports previously issued or SPonsored by Your Committee. The "First Report of the A.I.M.E. Mineral Industry Education Division's Committee of Geophysics Education, 1939," summarizes the replies received to question-

Jan 1, 1946

and would also contribute to the post-war employment. -As far as the future is concerned, I doubt whether any of the present geophysical methods will ever be developed to directly indicate ore. However, the geochemical methods and certain combinations between chemical and geological methods now used might be the answer to our prayers for direct and more definite methods of determining the quality of the ore or its relative metal content. Geochemical and spectrochemical analysis of minute content in ground waters, in soil or in plants and trees, living or dead, will be extremely important and I would venture to predict that in the very near future each mining or exploration company and each assay oflice will have its own spectroscope equipped for accurate chemical analysis, not only to guide the daily work in the mine, but also for identifying ores as well as for guiding exploration, geological mapping and the evaluation of geophysical indications. These methods, although they are still in their infancy, promise very much for the future. Radioactivity methods could also be helpful when sufficient facilities for radioactivity determination can be made available. They have already been used to a great extent in oil exploration and experiments have shomn great promise for ore exploration also. As for future surveys of large areas, the exploration for physical contrasts will be made from the air, using aeroplanes, helicopters, etc. Already electrical and magnetic methods have been designed whereby the instruments are carried in the aircraft and by automatic recording the location of anomalies is made in a simple enough manner. It should be possible in this way to cover, say, a square mile in an hour. Later Discussion Replies to Dr Lundberg. J. B. Macelwane.*—Someone has said that if a person knows his subject well enough he can explain it in words of one syllable. The point is well taken and I think the converse is also true. If a person cannot explain a subject clearly in simple words, it is either because he has not sufficient command of the language, or he is not master of his subject. Now it is obvious, it seems to me, that the remedy for both of these unfortunate conditions lies not in less education, but in more. If Dr. Lundberg has met geophysicists who confused and discouraged prospective clients by their inability to talk the language of the mine owner or of the mining engineer or geologist, the fault most probably lay in the geophysicist's lack of sufficient training; but it may also have been the want of ordinary common sense, which no amount of education can supply. It is hard to understand the position taken by Dr. Lundberg. Does he regret his own extensive training? noes he wish to say that he would have had greater success in geophysics if he had been only a mine hand with an instrument and a rule of thumb? As a matter of fact, I find it rather difficult to account for his presentation before this Committee on Geophysics of an emotionally distorted picture of the Report of the Committee on Geophysical Education, after the lapse of an entire year since the Report was read and discussed in its proper place, unless he honestly thinks he is handicapped by his knowledge and training and wishes to warn the whole profession against a similar fate. I regret that I am obliged to disagree so emphatically with Dr. Lundberg's thesis— but I believe it would be dangerous if left unchallenged, both because of the inaccurate statements it contains concerning the recommendations made in the Report and because of the ultimate discredit that would be bound to fall upon genuine geophysics if Dr. Lundberg's recommendations were extensively followed out. S. F. Kelly.*-—The argument that a science and its practitioners can be improved by debasing the standard of educational preparation is indeed a strange argument to come from the pen of a man with the education of Dr. Hans Lundberg. In criticising the Committee report, moreover, he has to a certain extent set up a straw man to belabor. The statement that the Committee report recommends that

Jan 1, 1946

and would also contribute to the post-war employment. -As far as the future is concerned, I doubt whether any of the present geophysical methods will ever be developed to directly indicate ore. However, the geochemical methods and certain combinations between chemical and geological methods now used might be the answer to our prayers for direct and more definite methods of determining the quality of the ore or its relative metal content. Geochemical and spectrochemical analysis of minute content in ground waters, in soil or in plants and trees, living or dead, will be extremely important and I would venture to predict that in the very near future each mining or exploration company and each assay oflice will have its own spectroscope equipped for accurate chemical analysis, not only to guide the daily work in the mine, but also for identifying ores as well as for guiding exploration, geological mapping and the evaluation of geophysical indications. These methods, although they are still in their infancy, promise very much for the future. Radioactivity methods could also be helpful when sufficient facilities for radioactivity determination can be made available. They have already been used to a great extent in oil exploration and experiments have shomn great promise for ore exploration also. As for future surveys of large areas, the exploration for physical contrasts will be made from the air, using aeroplanes, helicopters, etc. Already electrical and magnetic methods have been designed whereby the instruments are carried in the aircraft and by automatic recording the location of anomalies is made in a simple enough manner. It should be possible in this way to cover, say, a square mile in an hour. Later Discussion Replies to Dr Lundberg. J. B. Macelwane.*—Someone has said that if a person knows his subject well enough he can explain it in words of one syllable. The point is well taken and I think the converse is also true. If a person cannot explain a subject clearly in simple words, it is either because he has not sufficient command of the language, or he is not master of his subject. Now it is obvious, it seems to me, that the remedy for both of these unfortunate conditions lies not in less education, but in more. If Dr. Lundberg has met geophysicists who confused and discouraged prospective clients by their inability to talk the language of the mine owner or of the mining engineer or geologist, the fault most probably lay in the geophysicist's lack of sufficient training; but it may also have been the want of ordinary common sense, which no amount of education can supply. It is hard to understand the position taken by Dr. Lundberg. Does he regret his own extensive training? noes he wish to say that he would have had greater success in geophysics if he had been only a mine hand with an instrument and a rule of thumb? As a matter of fact, I find it rather difficult to account for his presentation before this Committee on Geophysics of an emotionally distorted picture of the Report of the Committee on Geophysical Education, after the lapse of an entire year since the Report was read and discussed in its proper place, unless he honestly thinks he is handicapped by his knowledge and training and wishes to warn the whole profession against a similar fate. I regret that I am obliged to disagree so emphatically with Dr. Lundberg's thesis— but I believe it would be dangerous if left unchallenged, both because of the inaccurate statements it contains concerning the recommendations made in the Report and because of the ultimate discredit that would be bound to fall upon genuine geophysics if Dr. Lundberg's recommendations were extensively followed out. S. F. Kelly.*-—The argument that a science and its practitioners can be improved by debasing the standard of educational preparation is indeed a strange argument to come from the pen of a man with the education of Dr. Hans Lundberg. In criticising the Committee report, moreover, he has to a certain extent set up a straw man to belabor. The statement that the Committee report recommends that

Jan 1, 1946

By M. M. Slotnick

It was once aptly said that a sign of approaching senility is ceasing work on a subject and beginning to talk about it. Perhaps that explains why, after many Years in which Part of my duties has been the training of college men in various branches of petroleum exploration geophysics, I have now begun to talk about it. In making an outline of what I believe ought to be discussed under the general heading of the title, I found it almost impossible to subdivide the ideas into an ordered set of discrete subjects. Rather, the pertinent remarks seemed to interlock almost everywhere. The consequence is that it will be necessary to start with the conclusions and then try to justify them by jumping back and forth. However, based on the types of men with whom I have had to deal, the subject naturally divides itself into two parts. In the first part, I should like to deal with the case of those undergraduates whose natural bent is toward the physical sciences and who may decide to enter the geophysical fold as a career. The other part will deal with those many men, geologists and engineers for the most part, who have drifted into exploration geophysics by one means or another, and whom it is necessary to train for geophysical work while they are occupied in their routine jobs. Here it may be in point to remark that most men in exploration geophysics at Present have been developed from precisely the latter group, and that the problem of training here is of great importance even though, in this paper, it will perforce occupy the secondary place. Training oF a Geophysicist The outstanding reason for the perplexing problem on the training of a geophysi-cist is that ideas differ on the answer to the question: "what is a geophysicistp" ln any of the scientific "specialties," like physics, for example, it is relatively simple to pigeonhole a man as being qualified to call himself a physicist. That appellation applied to an individual does not mean that he has mastered only the branches of intellectual endeavor usually associated under the broad name of "physics." we expect him also to have a more than mere acquaintance with mathematics and chemist~ and some understanding of most of the other sciences. But note this important point—we expect our physicist, whom we have chosen as an example, to be intelligently trained so that, if necessary, he can and will know how and where he can get the proper information on a subject in which he is not a specialist; he will know how to absorb that information and turn it to his uses. It seems to me that this is the outstanding characteristic of a man who can truly call himself a scientist: that he is a specialist in one of the broad branches of science in that he has enough training and discipline in the scientific approach so that, when called upon to do so, he can inteugently absorb knowledge from another bordering science (and all sciences not only border upon one another to some extent, but more often, overlap One another), and

Jan 1, 1946

By M. M. Slotnick

It was once aptly said that a sign of approaching senility is ceasing work on a subject and beginning to talk about it. Perhaps that explains why, after many Years in which Part of my duties has been the training of college men in various branches of petroleum exploration geophysics, I have now begun to talk about it. In making an outline of what I believe ought to be discussed under the general heading of the title, I found it almost impossible to subdivide the ideas into an ordered set of discrete subjects. Rather, the pertinent remarks seemed to interlock almost everywhere. The consequence is that it will be necessary to start with the conclusions and then try to justify them by jumping back and forth. However, based on the types of men with whom I have had to deal, the subject naturally divides itself into two parts. In the first part, I should like to deal with the case of those undergraduates whose natural bent is toward the physical sciences and who may decide to enter the geophysical fold as a career. The other part will deal with those many men, geologists and engineers for the most part, who have drifted into exploration geophysics by one means or another, and whom it is necessary to train for geophysical work while they are occupied in their routine jobs. Here it may be in point to remark that most men in exploration geophysics at Present have been developed from precisely the latter group, and that the problem of training here is of great importance even though, in this paper, it will perforce occupy the secondary place. Training oF a Geophysicist The outstanding reason for the perplexing problem on the training of a geophysi-cist is that ideas differ on the answer to the question: "what is a geophysicistp" ln any of the scientific "specialties," like physics, for example, it is relatively simple to pigeonhole a man as being qualified to call himself a physicist. That appellation applied to an individual does not mean that he has mastered only the branches of intellectual endeavor usually associated under the broad name of "physics." we expect him also to have a more than mere acquaintance with mathematics and chemist~ and some understanding of most of the other sciences. But note this important point—we expect our physicist, whom we have chosen as an example, to be intelligently trained so that, if necessary, he can and will know how and where he can get the proper information on a subject in which he is not a specialist; he will know how to absorb that information and turn it to his uses. It seems to me that this is the outstanding characteristic of a man who can truly call himself a scientist: that he is a specialist in one of the broad branches of science in that he has enough training and discipline in the scientific approach so that, when called upon to do so, he can inteugently absorb knowledge from another bordering science (and all sciences not only border upon one another to some extent, but more often, overlap One another), and

Jan 1, 1946

By Walter H. Bucher

This symposium is designed to lay the basis for a general discussion of the place of geophysics in the training of geologists. As there is danger that in the ensuing debate individual interests may be given emphasis out of proportion to their place, we shall do well to view the whole field of geological inquiry in order to see the problem in true perspective. The Nature of Geological Inquiry "Basic" and "Complex" Sciences It is convenient to divide all science into two major divisions, the basic and the complex sciences. The basic sciences separate out from reality such entities as "substances" and "movements," describe their behavior in terms of arbitrary units of measurement and derive from them by progressive abstractions concepts and patterns of behavior that exist between them, so-called general "laws" and "properties" of nature. The complex sciences, on the other hand, deal, with little or no abstraction, with those objects of reality that are accessible to man in the atmosphere, the hydrosphere, the lithosphere and the biosphere. Their work comprises two types of inquiry. One is concerned with abstractions to the extent of dealing with types rather than individuals—that is, with such things as plants, animals, protoplasm; clouds, streams, gla- ciers; volcanoes and mountain ranges. It comprises the search for general properties and patterns of behavior or "laws" that characterize the objects and their reactions to each other. These properties and laws apply always, everywhere. They are independent of the stream of time. We may call the results of this sort of inquiry timeless knowledge. The other type of inquiry is concerned with the objects themselves—that is, with this animal and that plant; this river system and that mountain chain; this glacier and that valley. Like all concrete objects in nature, they are subject to change with the passage of time, especially when it is measured in years, centuries, eons. The characteristics by which we recognize them —indeed, their very existence—are dependent on their position at this point in the stream of time. This we may call time-bound kntowledge. The so-called descriptive sciences are all bound to the past of which the objects of their study are the product and through which alone their present properties call be understood. They are historical sciences. This obvious fact is easily overlooked, which leads to serious misunderstanding, as we shall see later. Dynamic Geology With this broad picture in mind, let us now examine the nature of geological inquiry, defining, for the purposes of this discussion, geology as the science of rocks. Air is not a rock; water is. Meteorology and climatology are, correspondingly, gen-

Jan 1, 1946

By Walter H. Bucher

This symposium is designed to lay the basis for a general discussion of the place of geophysics in the training of geologists. As there is danger that in the ensuing debate individual interests may be given emphasis out of proportion to their place, we shall do well to view the whole field of geological inquiry in order to see the problem in true perspective. The Nature of Geological Inquiry "Basic" and "Complex" Sciences It is convenient to divide all science into two major divisions, the basic and the complex sciences. The basic sciences separate out from reality such entities as "substances" and "movements," describe their behavior in terms of arbitrary units of measurement and derive from them by progressive abstractions concepts and patterns of behavior that exist between them, so-called general "laws" and "properties" of nature. The complex sciences, on the other hand, deal, with little or no abstraction, with those objects of reality that are accessible to man in the atmosphere, the hydrosphere, the lithosphere and the biosphere. Their work comprises two types of inquiry. One is concerned with abstractions to the extent of dealing with types rather than individuals—that is, with such things as plants, animals, protoplasm; clouds, streams, gla- ciers; volcanoes and mountain ranges. It comprises the search for general properties and patterns of behavior or "laws" that characterize the objects and their reactions to each other. These properties and laws apply always, everywhere. They are independent of the stream of time. We may call the results of this sort of inquiry timeless knowledge. The other type of inquiry is concerned with the objects themselves—that is, with this animal and that plant; this river system and that mountain chain; this glacier and that valley. Like all concrete objects in nature, they are subject to change with the passage of time, especially when it is measured in years, centuries, eons. The characteristics by which we recognize them —indeed, their very existence—are dependent on their position at this point in the stream of time. This we may call time-bound kntowledge. The so-called descriptive sciences are all bound to the past of which the objects of their study are the product and through which alone their present properties call be understood. They are historical sciences. This obvious fact is easily overlooked, which leads to serious misunderstanding, as we shall see later. Dynamic Geology With this broad picture in mind, let us now examine the nature of geological inquiry, defining, for the purposes of this discussion, geology as the science of rocks. Air is not a rock; water is. Meteorology and climatology are, correspondingly, gen-

Jan 1, 1946

By Benjamin L. Miller

The essential differences expressed by the different speakers participating in this symposium concern merely the relative emphasis placed on the subjects that are commonly included under the term "geophysics" and the branches of science that form the basis for investigations in this field. In order to appreciate the present situation it may be profitable to briefly refer to a few historical matters. One can find almost countless descriptions of geological phenomena long antedating the introduction of the title of "geology," which has been credited to Richard de Bury in the fourteenth century. Interpretations, when they were offered, were generally pure speculation. Only toward the close of the eighteenth century do we find theories developed as the result of observations and tested by additional observations. It is difficult to select and give proper credit to the individual who was particularly responsible for turning geology into a distinctly observational science. william Smith, who has been called the "Father of English Geology," certainly represents the period when observation was the only method used. As he traveled through the British Isles, "sometimes 10,000 miles in a year," he was continually making notes of his observations. Geikie says: "His plain, solid, matter of fact intellect never branched into theory or speculation, but occupied itself wholly in the observation of facts." William Smith, with others of his time, definitely laid firmly the foundations on which modern geology has been built. Field and laboratory observations can no longer be said to constitute the sole basis for geologic contributions but we have not laid aside the methods of Smith and his followers. It is folly to underestimate the fundamental value of the observational part of geology in the present. The objection to purely observational geology is that it is mainly qualitative and not quantitative, general and not specific. No one can deny this charge and probably there are few who do not welcome every method or process whereby we can put aside generalities for definite established values. Physics is the science that has particularly come to the aid of the geologist in this respect. Contributions of PhYsics It is not the intent of the writer to enumerate or to evaluate all of the contributions to geologic advance in the field of. physics. A few only are used for the purpose of illustration, When Clarence King, Director of the United States Geological Exploration of the Fortieth Parallel, invited Ferdinand Zirkel to study 2500 thin sections of rocks collected from the western United States, the use of the microscope came into general use. Zirkel's report was published in 1876. He was not the first to use transmitted light for microscopic rock determination, some work having been done by Henry Clifton Sorby and others some years earlier, but he was the first to put into general use this method. We may well daim that this

Jan 1, 1946

By Benjamin L. Miller

The essential differences expressed by the different speakers participating in this symposium concern merely the relative emphasis placed on the subjects that are commonly included under the term "geophysics" and the branches of science that form the basis for investigations in this field. In order to appreciate the present situation it may be profitable to briefly refer to a few historical matters. One can find almost countless descriptions of geological phenomena long antedating the introduction of the title of "geology," which has been credited to Richard de Bury in the fourteenth century. Interpretations, when they were offered, were generally pure speculation. Only toward the close of the eighteenth century do we find theories developed as the result of observations and tested by additional observations. It is difficult to select and give proper credit to the individual who was particularly responsible for turning geology into a distinctly observational science. william Smith, who has been called the "Father of English Geology," certainly represents the period when observation was the only method used. As he traveled through the British Isles, "sometimes 10,000 miles in a year," he was continually making notes of his observations. Geikie says: "His plain, solid, matter of fact intellect never branched into theory or speculation, but occupied itself wholly in the observation of facts." William Smith, with others of his time, definitely laid firmly the foundations on which modern geology has been built. Field and laboratory observations can no longer be said to constitute the sole basis for geologic contributions but we have not laid aside the methods of Smith and his followers. It is folly to underestimate the fundamental value of the observational part of geology in the present. The objection to purely observational geology is that it is mainly qualitative and not quantitative, general and not specific. No one can deny this charge and probably there are few who do not welcome every method or process whereby we can put aside generalities for definite established values. Physics is the science that has particularly come to the aid of the geologist in this respect. Contributions of PhYsics It is not the intent of the writer to enumerate or to evaluate all of the contributions to geologic advance in the field of. physics. A few only are used for the purpose of illustration, When Clarence King, Director of the United States Geological Exploration of the Fortieth Parallel, invited Ferdinand Zirkel to study 2500 thin sections of rocks collected from the western United States, the use of the microscope came into general use. Zirkel's report was published in 1876. He was not the first to use transmitted light for microscopic rock determination, some work having been done by Henry Clifton Sorby and others some years earlier, but he was the first to put into general use this method. We may well daim that this

Jan 1, 1946

The Geophysics Education Committee has devoted several years to a consideration of the problem of training geophysi-cists. Past reports have dealt largely with fact finding and with the discussion of particular aspects of geophysical education. In the present report it is proposed to review the subject more comprehensively. This involves the question of what educational qualifications the geophysicist of the highest professional standards should possess, and the related question of what changes must be effected in existing educational institutions in order that prospective professional geophysicists may obtain instruction of the desired quality. The type of geophysicist here contemplated is one familiar with what is known already in the several branches of earth physics, and capable not only of following contemporary progress in any of these branches, but of contributing to that progress in a research capacity. Geophysics in its broadest sense, as has been emphasized repeatedly by this Committee, is the study of the physics of the earth and of terrestrial processes. This includes both the static and the dynamic characteristics of the gaseous, the liquid, and the solid portions of the earth, as well as its gravitational, thermal, and magnetic and electrical manifestations. Some branches of earth physics have been cultivated but slightly; others have reached an advanced state of development. Those branches whose development is sufficient to warrant explicit recognition in the form of organized Sections of the American Geophysical Union are: geodesy, seismology, tectonophysics, and volcanology, dealing with the rock constituents of the earth; oceanography and hydrology with the aqueous constituents; meteorology with the atmospheric constituents; and terrestrial electricity and magnetism with the electromagnetic manifestations. At present, instruction on the professional level in any of these branches of earth physics can be obtained in but few universities in North America. In most institutions where such instruction is undertaken different subjects are given in different and independent departments. Geodesy and hydrology are taught, if at all, as a part of civil engineering. The nearest approach to volcanology and tectonophysics ordinarily is represented by petrology and structural geology given

Jan 1, 1946

The Geophysics Education Committee has devoted several years to a consideration of the problem of training geophysi-cists. Past reports have dealt largely with fact finding and with the discussion of particular aspects of geophysical education. In the present report it is proposed to review the subject more comprehensively. This involves the question of what educational qualifications the geophysicist of the highest professional standards should possess, and the related question of what changes must be effected in existing educational institutions in order that prospective professional geophysicists may obtain instruction of the desired quality. The type of geophysicist here contemplated is one familiar with what is known already in the several branches of earth physics, and capable not only of following contemporary progress in any of these branches, but of contributing to that progress in a research capacity. Geophysics in its broadest sense, as has been emphasized repeatedly by this Committee, is the study of the physics of the earth and of terrestrial processes. This includes both the static and the dynamic characteristics of the gaseous, the liquid, and the solid portions of the earth, as well as its gravitational, thermal, and magnetic and electrical manifestations. Some branches of earth physics have been cultivated but slightly; others have reached an advanced state of development. Those branches whose development is sufficient to warrant explicit recognition in the form of organized Sections of the American Geophysical Union are: geodesy, seismology, tectonophysics, and volcanology, dealing with the rock constituents of the earth; oceanography and hydrology with the aqueous constituents; meteorology with the atmospheric constituents; and terrestrial electricity and magnetism with the electromagnetic manifestations. At present, instruction on the professional level in any of these branches of earth physics can be obtained in but few universities in North America. In most institutions where such instruction is undertaken different subjects are given in different and independent departments. Geodesy and hydrology are taught, if at all, as a part of civil engineering. The nearest approach to volcanology and tectonophysics ordinarily is represented by petrology and structural geology given

Jan 1, 1946

By Sherwin F. Kelly

PLAIN mining engineers usually avoid any gathering of geo¬physicists because of the incomprehensibility of their discussion to the uninitiated. This being so, gradients, gravity and gammas will be deferred to the end of this review, the first part of which will be devoted to what has been done in applying geophysics to the solution of real field problems. From the West, J. J. Jakosky reports that International Geophysics has had its activities fairly well 'divided between mining (both placer and lode), oil structural work, and clans-site and reservoir investigations. In oil exploration, electrical methods are used for depths down to 2500 ft., beyond which they utilize seismic methods. They find in their placer work that the many 'magnetic anomalies encountered in the bedrock of the Southwest render the electrical techniques more satisfactory, and with them they are obtaining thickness and tonnage of gravels, depth to and contour of the underlying bedrock as well as important structural features therein, and water-table elevations.

Jan 1, 1934

By EVERETTE DE GOLYER

USE of geophysical methods in the search for new pools and as an aid in the development of known pools and prospects reached a new all-time peak for the oil industry in 1933. The outlook for 1934 is for work to continue at an even greater rate. The area of greatest activity, as in previous years, was in the Gulf coastal plain of Texas and Louisiana, particularly through a belt of territory some 20 to 30 miles wide parallel to the coast line and some 80 miles inland from it-the so-called "Jackson play" or "Conroe trend." This area was surveyed in an attempt to find additional pools of a type similar to Conroe, a pool not discovered directly as a result of geophysical surveys but one which was indicated by refraction surveys before it was drilled and one which was accurately outlined as to structure by reflection surveys shortly after the completion of the first few wells. Surveys were made over this belt, extending from Texas, across Louisiana and into Mississippi and Alabama, chiefly by the reflection method and torsion balance, and to some extent by pendulum and magnetic methods.

Jan 1, 1934

By H. LeRoy Scharon

The electrical resistivity method was utilized at 245 road cuts and structure sites over the 166 miles of the Philadelphia and Western Extensions of the Pennsylvania Turnpike System. Varying geologic structures and rock types afforded an excellent academic study of the method as well as a practical application to modern highway engineering.

Jan 4, 1951

By AIME AIME

ELECTRICAL methods of geophysical exploration attracted major attention at the three sessions devoted to geophysics on Monday and Tuesday. At the opening' meeting Monday morning Hans Lundberg gave the paper by himself and Folke Kihlstedt; he described the use of the Racom, discussed last year, and the method whereby it is possible to eliminate all but subsurface, effects in electrical exploration. In the discussion Theodor Zuschlag pointed out some of the theoretical considerations behind the field procedure. Karl Sundberg's paper on the effect of impregnating waters was presented by title only, and S. F. Kelly then gave an abstract of a paper on the electrical properties of ores, by J. J. Jakosky, R. N. Anderson and Clyde H. Wilson. , This dealt with an exhaustive series of laboratory tests on the variation of -conductivity of ore specimens with the frequency of the energizing current, and of the effect of moisture content in typical clays and gouges on their conductivities at various frequencies. Considerable discussion was provoked during which the authors came in for some-criticism on their measuring circuits and for their assumption that a solid conductor could be compared with linear ones. They were praised, however, for making a start toward a compilation of resistivities for ores and rocks. Dr. Slichter disagreed with them that the conductivity of an orebody was primarily capacitive. He also called attention to the fact that it was high time geophysicists adopted the standard physical expression of ohm-,centimeters or ohm-meters to express resistivities. This same point was the burden of the next paper,. "Uniform Expression for Resistivity," by Sherwin F. Kelly, presented by title only.

Jan 1, 1932

By L. W. Blau

THE entrance of geophysics and geochemistry into petroleum engineering may be viewed with apprehension by some engineers. They may not remember the time when "practical oil men" opposed the invasion of engineers into the field of petroleum production. By their excellent contributions they established themselves. In the popular mind, engis veers are practical men whereas physicists and chemists are suspected of being theoretical. It will be best to annihilate this misconception right now at the beginning of a closer relationship between petroleum engineers. geophysicists, and geochemists.

Jan 1, 1943

By A. A. Brant

Mining men, quite as exploration minded as petroleum interests, are in the position where most of the exposed crustal portions of the earth have been examined, where the demand for metals is high and likely to continue so, and yet where, perhaps, the tools fail for the economic exploration of many of the possible mineral areas more deeply covered with drift, alluvium, and later formations. At the same time the incentive exists to create acceptable substitutes for many of the duties of metal. The problem of the economic exploration of possible mineral-bearing areas is hence a vital one. In oil exploration, the absence of surface or shallow occurrences and the high cost of test drilling has led to the intensive study of geophysical techniques. Hence the development of the seismic method with its high certainty factor and its adaptability to standardized procedure.

Jan 1, 1949

By Sherwin F. Kelly

THIS is intended as a simple review of the principles and practice of geophysics, so will not be of interest to the geophysicist, who is hereby warned of its elementary character. The engineers for whom it is written are those who, having glimpsed the formidable formulas and discussions of the geophysicists, give all publications on the subject a wide berth. For a few years now the geo-physicists have had a tendency to be ingrowing at their meetings, going deeper and deeper into theory and instrument construction, and forgetting to present the topics that would interest the practicing engineer who desires merely to know how geophysics can help him, not why.

Jan 1, 1934

By AIME AIME

PAST President R. C. Allen, then State Geologist of Michigan, gave George Corless his first job-tracing ?magnetic? with the dip compass in northern Wisconsin. His second job was also with a man now Past President of the Institute-"Chief" Buehler, for whom he worked at Joplin three years. Then came seven years as geologist and later as assistant manager of the Chanute Spelter Co., a subsidiary of The American Metal Co., Ltd. His entrance into the oil business was not planned. During a lull in the zinc industry in July, 1926, he stopped at Houston, after a trip to the Rio Grande Valley, and was so impressed with the city that he decided to migrate. His first job there was with the Texas Company, whose impressive building across from the Post Office caught his eye after he had mailed a letter saying that he was settling in Houston and would not be home until Christmas. Some months later, A.I.M.E. Past President Philip N. Moore learned that he was in. Houston and wrote an unsolicited recommendation that resulted in his present employment with the Humble Oil & Refining Co. Today he is superintendent of the Gulf Coast Division of its production department. The Division extends from Jackson County, Texas, to New Orleans, and includes such pools as Sugarland, Conroe, Toni Ball, Thompsons, Anahuac, and Friendswood. -

Jan 1, 1938