Geophysics - Science topic

Hi, my name is Agata Goździk, but till 2008 I was publishing under my maiden name Agata Mazuczyk (with the same afilliation of the Institute of Geophysics PAS. How can I merge this two names?

I published a.o. three papers with my supervisor Paweł M. Rowińki:

Turbulent characteristics of flows through emergent vegetation

Shear velocity estimation in hydraulic research

Scales of Turbulence in Compound Channels with Trees on Floodplains

Dear all,

I am doing this marine magnetic survey at a jetty/ barge, where the seabed is scattered with various dumped materials (proven from side scan sonar mosaic). After producing the QAS grid, I found the anomaly patches show a "survey line-following" trend, which means you could easily tell the survey line orientation etc by only looking at the QAS result. The result is so unreal and I couldn't figure out the main reason causing it. I have made a small assumption to trying to explain it (see picture 7 attached), and tried larger iteration number when producing residual grid.

I have attached the detail processing steps, together with illustrations to make this thing easy and clear for your understanding. If you need more information, please leave your comment and I will update you very soon. I would really appreciate if you could help me to understand this. Thank you in advance.

I found most of the papers used magnetic survey (airborne or ground) to explore new gold mine. However, almost all papers uses additional geophysics method (IP, SP, Conductivity, resistivity, EM etc.) to support the magnetic data.

I wonder why do we need support since the magnetic data can gives precise reading on the magnetic anomalies of those associate minerals (Sulfides especially) in the field.

Thank you so much in advance.

How are earthquakes in the world of quantum mechanics?

What causes an Earthquake?

When I put the above question into social media, the response on all the sites was the same: an earthquake occurs when the rock underground suddenly breaks along a fault line. The sudden release of energy causes the seismic wave that makes the ground shake. When two blocks of rock or two plates rub against each other until one of the rocks or plates break, is when the earthquake occurs. This is the general answer for the cause of an earthquake.

My question is: what is it that caused these two rocks/plates to rub against each other in the first place? And what caused the rock underground to break at the fault line?

We really don’t know what caused it or for what reason an earthquake suddenly takes place. There is no straight forward answer for this question.

My theory of a Quantum Mechanics Universe has the answer for this phenomenon and can be described by Quantum Mechanics Unification Gravity.

My suggestion at this point is to read my Quantum Mechanic Gravity (QMG) to understand the concept.

Let me explain:

The Earth has four major layers: the inner core, the outer core, the mantle and the crust. The inner core of Earth consists of harder and heavier elements. As we travel to the surface, the heavy elements become lighter. The character of a heavier element is that it can take more heat than lighter elements.

The Earth is about 10 minutes in light years away from the Sun and the Sun is shining on the Earth 24/7. The character of the Sun’s energy wave or sun’s mass-less particles are traveling through the earth and nothing can stop it. Light is thermo-dynamic energy (thermodynamic is the relationship between heat and exertion).

Where does all this energy go and what is it used for?

Most of the energy is used or wasted over the surface of the Earth; but the energy wave that is shining perpendicular to the Earth has a better chance to travel into the Earth where eventually it meets at the center (inner core). The energy of the Sun is interchanged to quantum mechanics energy in heavier elements in the center of the solid hard core of the Earth.

NOTE: This is additional hard evidence that sunlight does not carry any mass. If the sunlight had mass, the inner core of the Earth would not be hot, because mass cannot travel through a harder mass.

The center of the Earth consists of heavy elements of the periodic table that first absorb this energy wave of heat from the Sun. Secondly, the surrounding core (outer core) is another heavy metal family that also absorbs this heat, until both, inner core and a part of the outer core become a melting pot of bubbling heavy elements, which then cause a new heavy metal of the inner ring of the outer core (close to the center of the Earth) to join this hot melting pot.

The quantum mechanics gravity causes the heavier elements to sink more into the center; meanwhile more sunlight energy is still being absorbed. It gets to a point that this boiling pot has limited space to expand and the heat generates a sudden expansion which creates a high pressure in the center of the Earth in both the inner and outer cores. The stress of this built up energy and pressure under the tectonic plates create the underground shaking and earthquakes as a result of the release of this heat and pressure. At first the heat and pressure is released through volcanoes but it also causes the plates to shift/break and create earthquakes.

We all know too well of the horrific results of an earthquake or a sudden volcanic eruption. Hundreds or in some occasions thousands of lives are sacrificed because of these two catastrophic events, but unfortunately the Earth is not aware of the loss of these lives, it is trying to prevent a greater global disaster.

Everything in the Universe that has conscience movement has intelligent life. That applies to everything from an atom up to the Earth itself and beyond.

Here, believe it or not, the Earth acts similarly to a human. As when we eat, our body is trying to save some of the energy for future needs, and the Earth is doing the same thing. It keeps this energy inside the inner core for two reasons, one it is part of its nature or growing to be completed, and keep the heat for a crucial moment that may arise.

This procedure of transferring heat to the center core is the natural behavior of any spherical atomic element in the space of the Universe, because in general the heat always transfers with outer chemical elements into the core of that planet. This course of action is the formation for the creation of a planet.

We learned from my paper on Gravity, how we walk on the Earth and how the Earth creates an electromagnetic force field in conjunction with a space wave. This friction of the Earth and space causes the Earth, after a long period of time, to lose its momentum in space of both its rotation and its revolution around the Sun by a very small fraction of its speed. To re-energize its momentum and movement to coordinate with the solar system and galaxy’s movement, it needs this energy from the Sun, inside at the center core, to generate its speed back to normal. The Earth is an intelligent planet and has been performing this procedure for billions of years. It wants to keep all its elements in good working order, especially with today’s demand of humankind which uses so many natural resources which change the distribution of the weight on Earth and pollutes the Earth in all sectors; here the Earth must create more of the heavier elements in the center to maintain this momentum.

The space of the Universe is very clear, but when there is wave and temperature that exist, friction also exists. We experience this phenomenon with all the satellites in orbit around the Earth. Sometimes, from the control room on Earth, for similar reasons, we must boost the satellite’s speed or get it back to its original speed. Otherwise they would lose their orbit and momentum and sometimes they fall back to the Earth. For the same reason, if the earth was going mechanically (the Big Bang theory) around the Sun, it would stop spinning after a period of time.

An earthquake is based on this same principle; when micro gravity is trying to pull heavier matter to the center it pushes the lighter elements up as we have observed with volcanoes. Probably, by knowing this phenomenon we should be able to predict the region of earthquakes better.

Here I should mention that the inner core of the Earth helps the Earth to keep the magnetic field of the North and South Poles in an orderly manner as well.

At the end of this segment, I should mention that the nature of the Earth is that it has had volcanic eruptions and earthquakes all its lifetime, for the natural release of this excess heat and also to support the vegetation life as well, by producing carbon-dioxide. In a sense, in layman’s terms, the Earth is breathing, by naturally absorbing the heat from the Sun and placing the heavier elements towards the center and pushing lighter elements to the surface of the Earth, through volcanoes and earthquakes.

Suad Mohammed Ali added a reply:

At the moment, there are several hypotheses in geophysics that explain especially dangerous processes of the earth's crust movements - sudden outbursts of rocks and gas from a rock mass from the point of view of classical physics. Despite the fact that various macroscopic systems can be accurately described using classical mechanics and electrodynamics, a real mechanism and a working model of this phenomenon cannot be built. Consequently, to develop a model of sudden outbursts of rocks and gas, it is necessary to apply new approaches and methods, different from the description of macroscopic systems. This article describes a quantum version of the process of the ejection of rocks from a rock mass. In particular, we described the mechanism of the Coulomb explosion that occurs in the rocks of the earth's crust with a sharp change in rock pressure and built a model of the sudden release of rocks and gases. In our opinion, the quantum processes described by us can be sources not only of sudden outbursts and rockslide but also sources of more formidable phenomena - earthquakes and volcanic explosions.

Hasan Altawil added a reply:

In quantum mechanics, earthquakes can be understood metaphorically in terms of fluctuations and disturbances at the quantum level, but they are not directly related to classical seismic events. Quantum fluctuations, for instance, involve temporary changes in energy in a point in space, somewhat analogous to how stress builds and is released in an earthquake. However, quantum mechanics primarily deals with phenomena at the subatomic scale, making the analogy only conceptual rather than literal.

The exploration of concealed porphyry Cu Au deposits is challenging as their footprints in aeromagnetic surveys can be rather complex depending on the respective magnetic susceptibilities of their wallrocks and possible postmineral tectonic overprints or structural offsets. Unfortunately, magnetic anomalies of porphyry Cu deposits are poorly documented (and illustrated) in the literature. However, locally their magnetic responses consist of two rather distinct subtypes: 1) magnetic bulls eye and 2) magnetic doughnut anomalies.

The most common magnetic response of a hydrothermal porphyry system is a distinct magnetic high anomaly, typically measuring several hundred meters in diameter, and reflecting the magnetite-rich potassic altered core. A well documented example is the Bajo de la Alumbrera porphyry Cu Au deposit, Catamarca Province, Argentina (Fig. 1). During the waning and cooling stages of the hydrothermal system, cooler late-stage fluids can overprint the stockwork mineralization and its associated potassic alteration assemblage. This may lead to the subsequent oxidation (i.e. martitization) of hydrothermal magnetite to hematite. This process may cause the de-magnetization of the magnetic high into a “doughnut-shaped” or “torus-like” magnetic anomaly as recorded at the Northparkes and Cadia porphyry Cu Au clusters in the Lachlan Fold Belt in N.S.W., Australia (Fig. 2). The latter type of magnetic anomalies appears to be more common at alkalic porphyry Cu Au deposits that are hosted by high potassic and shoshonitic intrusions.

I should be grateful for any comments on this topic! Additional illustrations of magnetic anomalies of porphyry Cu deposits are most welcome! Many thanks.

Geophysical

what is the best geophysical machine or device for detecting groundwater? Are there any machine that can detect the depth and the type of water? do I have to buy one machine or more than one to get the accurate result?

Applications of geophysical methods and their importance in geotechnical investigations

A gravity gradient is different than an absolute gravity value.

What is the interpretation of horizontal and vertical gravity gradient?

I am thrilled to announce that our special section titled "Frontiers in Electromagnetic Geophysics" is available on Geophysics (https://library.seg.org/page/gpysa7/geophysics-frontiers-in-electromagnetic-geophysics). This topic is related to the technical improvement of EM geophysics and/or their applications on field data to recover subsurface structures. The submission starts ends on July 1st, 2024.

If your research interest matches with this special section, please do not hesitate to contact me and other guest editors. We really appreciate if you can also help us promote this special issue among your community.

Best wishes,

Sizhuang Deng

If it is true that space-time is expanding, how does the measure of space-time change?

The shape of space-time is the shape of the universe; how can expansion without a boundary be called expansion? If the boundary of spacetime is the boundary of the universe, can spacetime expansion with a boundary have no background? How is the boundary maintained? If the boundary of spacetime is infinite, how does it expand?

We will use these paired terms to describe spacetime: infinite/finite, absolute/relative*, flat/curved, continuous/discrete, four-dimensional†/higher-dimensional, and so on. Normally we think of these properties as opposites ‡ and only one or the other can be chosen. But the full range of properties of spacetime will be combinations between these different properties. For example, spacetime has infinite, absolute, continuous, flat, four-dimensional properties, or spacetime has finite, discrete properties, etc. In any case, none of us thinks that there is a concept of "multiple spacetimes", or that spacetime should have its own background, or that spacetime can overlap, although physics suggests that there may be local "warps" in spacetime.

Astronomical observations show that the universe is in a process of accelerated expansion [1][2][3], with all stars moving away at an accelerated rate and possibly never returning. Physics attributes the expansion of space-time to the presence of dark energy with negative pressure [4]. Dark energy has been hypothesized in various ways (including non-existence), one of which is the cosmological constant Λ in Einstein's field equations (the zero-point radiation of space [5], the energy of the vacuum, the zero-point energy [6]).

Physics has not exactly explained the exact relationship between spacetime and the various fields assumed by the Standard Model [7], but only assumes the existence of vacuum energy [8][6], and is not sure which field's vacuum energy it is, whether it is the electromagnetic field, the electron field, the muon field, or the up-quark field, the charm-quark field, the Higgs field [9], or just the sum of their respective vacuum energies. So when it is assumed that space-time is expanding, and vacuum energy is expanding, are they created in it, or are they diffused across the boundary? Are they the driving force or the result? How do they manifest within microscopic particles when expanding at high speeds on the macroscopic scale?

Physics does not explain the origin of the dynamics of the Big Bang, nor does it explain when and how all the various fields in the Standard Model were formed, how they were formed, how they were maintained in existence, and how they evolved along with, or determined, the evolution of the Universe throughout the entire evolution of the Universe from the Big Bang onward. It is not clear how the various particles were excited initially from their own fields, but the explanation of nucleosynthesis [10] to the current period is relatively clear.

Usually we think of the universe as a set of space-time and matter-energy. There are many different models of the universe, and in addition to the Standard Model, there are many cyclic universes and multiverse views [11][15]. Then, when we haven't confirmed the model of the universe, there is no confirmed goal of the evolution of the universe, and there is no confirmed shape and boundary of the universe.

Both Einstein and Hawking say that the universe is "finite and unbounded" [12]. They believe that the universe is a finite three-dimensional sphere with a finite volume but no boundary. Topological theory says, "The boundary of a region has no boundary itself. "** [13]. Wheeler's statement is, "The boundary of a boundary is zero" [14]. What is the result of the infinite extension of the three orthogonal coordinate axes for a finite three-dimensional spherical universe?

Mathematically, there are four combinations between measures and boundaries: finite bounded, infinite unbounded, finite unbounded, and infinite bounded. The first two concepts are clear, but the latter two need to be recognized carefully when translated to physics. The "singularity" is a typical example of an "infinite bounded". Usually in physics, when time or space shrinks to zero, the corresponding physical quantity tends to infinity. For example, E=hν, when ν→0; F=q1*q2/r^2, when r→0. However, we believe that this is only a trend and that there can be no state that reaches a singularity. Therefore, "infinitely bounded" is not real. The Koch Curve, often thought of as a fractal geometry expressing "finite unbounded", is one of the nth iterations of the Koch snowflake that can be implemented in the Wolfram Language as KochCurve[n]¶. The difference between physical reality and mathematics can be shown here, as n cannot be chosen to be infinite, so the Koch Curve will always be in a definite state in reality, and although it can evolve, "finite and unbounded" is a tendency, not a state. The formulation of the Mobius strip††, the irrational numbers, is another way of saying "finite unbounded". In physics, a typical example of "finite unbounded" is the electron. The electron has a fixed charge e, but the boundary of the electric field E of the charge extends infinitely (the field strength is convergent). Of course, the concept of zero-dimensional "point particles" is also a kind of abstract "finite unbounded". In short, in physical terms, finite must have boundaries.

General relativity is the basis for modeling the universe, but is there any good reason why we should be able to determine the evolutionary goals of the universe, its shape, and its boundaries through general relativity alone? Shouldn't such boundaries be "boundary conditions" of GR?

There should not be any boundary conditions, which are the conditions necessary for the model of the universe to hold correctly.

------------------------------------------------------

Notes

* cf, https://www.researchgate.net/publication/373877548_Convergent_and_Disperse_Cyclic_Multiverse_Model_CDCMM.

† cf, https://www.researchgate.net/post/NO1_Can_This_Be_an_Argument_for_3-D_Space;

‡ As long as we do not have a precise definition of spacetime, viewing these properties as opposites can only be taken for granted. As with the wave-particle duality of particles, which property is presented depends on the observer's perspective; the structure of the particle itself does not change. Further characterizations of spacetime include whether it is inherently existent or generative, whether the vacuum contains energy, and so on.

¶ https:// mathworld.wolfram.com/KochSnowflake.html; Stephen Wolfram, Founder of Wolfram Language, is very interested in the question of the evolution of the universe, and is the author of the book "a new kind of science", which has been trying to find out how the universe evolves using metacellular automata.

** e.g. the two-dimensional region has as its boundary a one-dimensional loop; the loop has no end, that is, it has no boundary itself.

†† The Möbius strip is bounded as long as one does not confuse metrics with boundaries.

------------------------------------------------------

References

[1] Linder, E.V., Exploring the expansion history of the universe. Physical Review Letters, 2003. 90(9): p. 091301.

[2] Riess, A.G., The expansion of the Universe is faster than expected. Nature Reviews Physics, 2020. 2(1): p. 10-12.

[3] Freedman, W.L., The Hubble constant and the expansion age of the Universe. Physics Reports, 2000. 333: p. 13-31.

[4] "Dark Energy Survey, Collaboration." from https://www.darkenergysurvey.org/the-des-project/overview/.

[5] Oks, E. (2021). "Brief review of recent advances in understanding dark matter and dark energy." New Astronomy Reviews 93: 101632.

[6] Carroll, S. M., W. H. Press and E. L. Turner (1992). "The cosmological constant." Annual review of astronomy and astrophysics 30: 499-542.

[7] Group, P. D., P. Zyla, R. Barnett, J. Beringer, O. Dahl, D. Dwyer, D. Groom, C.-J. Lin, K. Lugovsky and E. Pianori (2020). "Review of particle physics." Progress of Theoretical and Experimental Physics 2020(8): 083C001.

[8] Jaffe, R. L. (2005). "Casimir effect and the quantum vacuum." Physical Review D 72(2): 021301.

[9] Springer (2020). 100 Years of Fundamental Theoretical Physics in the Palm of Your Hand: Integrated Technical Treatment.

[10] Cyburt, R. H., B. D. Fields, K. A. Olive and T.-H. Yeh (2016). "Big bang nucleosynthesis: Present status." Reviews of Modern Physics 88(1): 015004.

[11] Carr, B. and G. Ellis (2008). "Universe or multiverse?" Astronomy & Geophysics 49(2): 2.29-22.33.

[12] Hawking, S. W. and M. Jackson (2001). A brief history of time, Bantam Books New York.

[13] Yang, C. N. (1980). "Einstein's impact on theoretical physics." Physics Today 33(6): 42-49.

[14] Misner, C. W., K. S. Thorne and J. A. Wheeler (2017). GRAVITATION, Princoten University Press.

[15] https://www.researchgate.net/publication/373877548_Convergent_and_Disperse_Cyclic_Multiverse_Model_CDCMM.

Is it possible to have a VP/Vs ratio of less than 1 in near surface seismic studies (using seismic refraction and MASW methods)? If yes, What is the geological and geophysical explanation for this phenomenon?

Hello dear network, I'm a PhD student in geophysics , in the field of Magnetotelluric (MT) and transient electromagnetic(TEM), I would ask you to help me find data from Africa in the field cited above.

I will really appreciate any help from you , giving me a website for downloading data, any forum of discussion .

hello dear network, I'm a PhD student in geophysics , in the fied of magnetotelluric and transient electromagnetic, I would you to help me find data from Africa in the field cited above.

I will really appreciate any help from you , giving me a website for downloading data, any forum of discussion .

Which anomaly, Bouguer or Free Air, is more suitable for geophysical modeling offshore basin, and what are the reasons behind this choice?

In need of GRACE data.

Dear all,

Good day to you. I performed a magnetic surveyof an area in Pahang and currently doing diurnal correction using GemLink 5. I find that GemLink 5.3 is a good tool when we have less data, but it taking so much time and tediuos when we have too much data. Therefore, I would like to ask if anybody can show how to carry out Diurnal Correction by using Oasis Montaj?

Many thanks to everyone who helped.

Regards,

Ong Min

What are different techniques in Non-linear, Non-stationary signal processing? Which one is much effective in view of Geophysical signals?

Reservoir Management Process by a Reservoir Engineer/Team Work/AI

1. Upon joining a petroleum industry,

immediately following graduation in PE,

how long, in general, would take

for a ‘fresh petroleum engineer’ –

in order for him/her

to apply the ‘classroom knowledge’

on ‘drainage principles of reservoir engineering’

along with the application of

the latest available ‘industrial technology’ -

towards ‘controlling reservoir operations’

that would positively

‘maximize the economic value

of a petroleum reservoir’?

2. In a span of say, 10 years,

upon joining a petroleum industry,

whether a reservoir engineer

will be able to acquire the ability

to predict the consequences of

implementing

various reservoir decisions

that he/she acquired

based on the expected behaviors of a reservoir system

through modeling studies

along with the evaluation of its associated uncertainties?

3. How exactly a fresh petroleum engineer gets translated to become an expert in

(a) reservoir characterization;

(b) reservoir performance;

(c) well performance; and

(d) field development –

over a period of time in an oil/gas industry?

4. How quickly a reservoir engineer

would be able to identify

an appropriate model

for simulating

a dynamic reservoir system

(either by deterministic or by stochastic methods)

by successfully integrating

both ‘static data’ (reservoir structure description involving geology, geophysics,

geochemistry & petro-chemistry)

as well as

‘dynamic data’ (reservoir fluid flow behavior involving pressure/temperature, water/oil/gas

rates, saturations, production logs, well tests, geo-mechanics) –

towards precisely predicting both ‘data’ as well as ‘results’?

5. Whether a reservoir engineer by himself/herself would be able to precisely check,

whether the diagnosed reservoir model

remains ‘nearly consistent’

with reference to the ‘model output’ and ‘field data’ (through history matching)?

Or,

will we require AI in the event of a lack of match -

resulting from an inconsistent/incomplete/incorrect reservoir model – in order to reassure

the ‘optimum and cost effective field development

considering economic, environmental and safety constraints’

as a coupled effect of reservoir performance, well performance and surface facilities?  

6. Feasible to become a Master of All the related disciplines:

Basics (Geology, Geophysics, Reservoir, Production, Drilling);

Reservoir Characterization (Geological/Geophysical Modeling, Geochemistry,

Geomechanics, Petrophysics, Production logging, Well Testing, and Integration into Reservoir Model);

Well Performance (Completions and Production Problems, Nodal Analysis);

Reservoir Performance (Analytical/Numerical Predictors, Upscaling, History Matching & EOR), and

Field Development (Pipelines and Surface Facilities, HSE, Economics) by a field reservoir engineer;

or,

a 'team work' would suffice;

or,

need AI

for characterizing complicated unconventional-, fractured-, carbonate-reservoirs?

Dear everyone,

The images below are ERT resistivity pseudosections. Please look at the red circled part.

I realized some of the models have blurry or has very limited information (as the L06), while some of the models have so many data (L10).

I wonder if this is due to over removal of data points at the "externate bad data points" and also over filtering at the "RMS error statistic". However, only these two method can reduce the RMS error of the model.

Please help to answer if you know what does this representing. I really appreciate your help.

Dear everyone，

I just started to learn ERT data processing and am confronting a problem:

We are using the same data. The model that I produce is different from what my colleage produced. (Results are attached below)

I understand that the differences are controlled by the parameters input, however, I wonder how to determine which model is the best representing the real situation?

How to determine which model is the best to carry out interpretation?

Dear Everyone,

Good day to you. I am processing some ERT data to look for potential mine. The origin RMS is >50% and I filtered the data using "exterminate bad data points" and edit the "RMS error statistic". However, when the RMS error reduced to <10%, all of my IP data went wrong (as shown in the picture).

I would like to know what cause this to happen and how to obtain a good IP pseudosection while the RMS of resistivity is <10%.

I attached the inversion data for the line at below. It mentioned Reference IP used is 0.000.

Thank you so much in advance and I appreciate your kind assistance.

Dear everyone,

I am just started in the geophysics field and trying to familiarize the RES2DINV software. However, the model displaying in the software are all cut into half. Is there any way to change the display size of the model?

Thank you so much in advance.

In this era of data-driven techniques taking over traditional analysis, I wish to know what are the different problems that can be solved in the field of Geophysical signal processing. What is the current research that is going on in this field?

A geophysical model is obtained before inversion process.

I admitted as an undergraduate to multiple universities in Arizona and Colorado! I have been actively looking for admission to the university to continuously prepare me as an investigator/innovation scientist in mineral exploration by building my foundational knowledge in metallurgy, chemistry, control systems engineering, geochemistry, geophysics, etc. These might be included in my coursework. My focus may be on "control system engineering" compared to "geoscience," as I want to spend my effort investigating sensor innovation using metallurgy, geophysics, chemistry, etc. for mineral exploration. Precisely, investigative research will be on creating "detection technology for purposing of Mining exploration and extraction" So, I'm confused with two queries: 1. Which university would be the best option based on my research interests? 2. Which major and region for internship/ real time research job corresponds to what I'm actually looking for?

Hope you already understand I’ve applied many universities with getting rejection that didn’t also find exact research team yet I’m looking. Thank you so much.

Dear All,

I am working on P & S logging data for geotechnical investigation. This survey provides P wave and S wave interval velocities. Poisson's ratio is being calculated by the basic formula (please see attached image).

1. How does the water table affect the poisson's ratio? Should it be increased in saturated formation?

2. In a water-saturated formation, P wave velocity typically increases. How is the water table affecting S wave velocity?

3. Is it feasible to determine the poisson's ratio below water level?

Please share your experience and any relevant papers or publications.

I am seeking your advice on geophysical methods (acoustic, ERT, GPR...) that could be used to track deformations in backfill composed of sand and clay. This backfill is used to fill a tunnel of 4 to 5 m in diameter. The backfill is initially unsaturated and is artificially hydrated until it is completely saturated. The aim is to follow vertical and horizontal deformations over several years on a 2-3 m portion of the tunnel. The expected deformations are at most centimetric.

If it is not possible to follow the deformations of the backfill itself, I thought of adding targets positioned at different places of the backfill during its construction. These targets can move freely with the backfill and they have of course an impedance or permittivity very different from those of the surrounding environment.

Would geophysical methods allow to follow the displacement of these targets with enough precision? Which method would be the best? A combination of several methods can also be considered.

I worked at field with EM38-MK2 instrument. Results of raw readings vizualised at picture below. I don't understand why readings for 0.5 m base are predominantly negative. Calibration? But I calibrate instrument before survey at 1.5 m. Conditions around were uniform.

I would like to know how to use MATLAB to process the derivation of gravity and magnetic data in geophysical inversion, such as calculating the Jacobian matrix, do we need to convert it to the frequency domain, or use other methods.

There are publicly available datasets in most deep learning fields. However, there are no such datasets for geophysics, especially gravity and magnetic studies. How to quickly generate millions of gravity magnetic images as a training dataset for deep learning?

In my recent studies, I found references, where the equations presented were incorrect. Especially in a case like Eaton's pore pressure estimation equation, these mistakes were widespread.

Respected Researchers,

I just resumed for my master’s program in geophysics this fall and I was hoping to start working on my research topic as soon as possible. I’m kinda clueless on possible research topic and I would really appreciate your assistance. My interests are in the area of reservoir geophysics, reservoir characterizations and seismic interpretations. thank you

I'm working on an update to our previous global geochemical database. At the moment, it contains a little over one million geochemical analyses. It contains some basic geochronology data, crystallization dates for igneous rocks and depositional dates for sedimentary rocks. The database differs from GEOROC and EarthChem, in that it includes some interpretive metadata and estimates of geophysical properties derived from the bulk chemistry. I'd like to expand these capabilities going forward.

What would you like to see added or improved?

Here's a link to the previous version:

Hello, professors

I am a graduate student from China. My majors are geothermal and geophysical methods.

In the past few years, I have devoted myself to studying the coupling between geothermal and geophysical , and the application of some machine learning in geothermal. I believe that geophysical signals applied in geothermal have many potential responses that can be analyzed. Therefore, the complex geothermal coupling field can be simulated and then converted into geophysical parameters for further discussion. This kind of methods is applied to statistical and empirical functions. But its limitations are also obvious. There are still large errors in the statistical geophysical parameters and empirical functions of a large number of samples. It is suitable for general geothermal problems, which requires a lot of assumptions and conditions.

The hydro-thermal equation gives a reasonable coupling form from the physical laws of materials. This allows more properties to be linked to geothermal systems, including THM and THMC. THM model can further discuss the stress change and possible fracture by simulating the pressure and heat distribution in the water injection, which provides help for the simulation of micro-seismic method. Carcione et al. (2018) obtained the sensitivity of heat and pressure in seismic methods with burgers-Gassmann model. self-potential is a geophysical method that is very suitable for coupling with geothermal because it is related to Darcy velocity and thermoelectric response. The gravity method can also be directly related to the hydrothermal model through Archie formula, saturation and other parameters. Therefore, geophysical signals are not limited to obtaining intrinsic parameters, and the deep relationship between them and geothermal parameters should be quantified.

I would be happy to receive any suggestions for this study. Are there more articles to discuss and analyze such study? Are empirical functions and sample statistics more applicable? If the coupling calculation can be well solved, geophysical inversion and joint inversion will restore more useful information? If you have new ideas about this study, your suggestions may be of great help to me, although it is a single geophysical method, including MT, seismic, gravity or magnetic.

In addition, since I am not a native speaker, I use a lot of machine translation to describe this study, sorry.

Yes. I have many researches published and available in RG.

Dear Professor,

I am looking for the recent age data using dating of zircons from beach placers. What is the implication of these ages in the sedimentary environment?

Best Regards

Debashish Sengupta

Dept. of Geology & Geophysics

Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur

West Bengal, INDIA

If a rigid plate is bounded by two transform faults and the plate is moving, with the translatory motion of the plate will there be oscillatory motion as well? If not, why and if there is an oscillatory motion then what will be the mechanism of it?

In the oil and gas industry, for technical, economic, and similar reasons, well-Log running is done from special intervals. Therefore, to build comprehensive models for field development, we will need more information at different depths. Today, with advances in numerical methods, especially machine learning and deep learning methods, we can use their help to eliminate these data gaps. Of course, there are methods such as rock physics that are very practical. But according to my results, part of which is described below. It is better to combine the rock physics method with the deep learning methods, in which case the results will be amazing. I selected wells from the Poseidon Basin in Australia for testing and got good results. In this study, by combining the rock physics method and deep learning (CNN + GRU), the values ​​of density, porosity, and shear wave slowness were predicted. A comprehensive database of PEF, RHOB, LLD, GR, CGR, NPHI, DTC, DTS, and water saturation logs was prepared and used as training data for the wells. The below figure is the result of a blind well test for Torosa well in the Poseidon Basin, Australia. As you can see, the prediction results are very close to the measured values ​​of shear wave slowness in this well.

Hello to all experts, researchers!

A charming best wish for you all!. In this economic era, in case of mineral industries, it is very crucial to obtain information about the approximate volume of the ore bodies concealed in the subsurface of the zone of interest for future purposes. I like request you all to make your own insight in the following points

1. Which near surface geophysical methods have the potential to give best estimation on the volume of the ore bodies

2. In this case, which algorithms can be potential with highest accuracy?

3. Is it possible to predict the volume of the ore bodies sing only high resolution ground gravity and magnetic data? (Supposed bore hole data is available)

4. Best geophysical approaches for this purpose

4. Any specific Literature like to suggest regarding this

Thank you in advance

Sincerely

Dr. S Mondal

I intend to seek supervising professors and a university in Petroleum Engineering to do a PhD either in Canada, US, or the UK. But my undergrad studies was in geology with a minor in Petroleum technology, and my Masters thesis was basically geophysics and petroleum geology oriented. I want to know if I stand a chance of getting into a Petroleum engineering program for a PhD.

Conventional geophysics have been deployed and observed to be the methods of choice (magnetics and electrical sounding). Is it possible to distinguish the different types of iron ores from the identified anomaly, eg can one distinguish magnetite from hematite? The correct answer and contributions to this question will be greatly appreciated...

I am working on 2D pre-stake marine seismic sections and I need to make Surface Related Multiples Elinmiantions (SRME) by using REVEAL. Unfortunately, this is the first time for me to deal with seismic processing and reveal. I finished the first five steps which are Importing a SEGY, Survey QC, Creating a project binning, Sorting to CMP, and Velocity Analysis.

Now I am trying to apply SRME flow and I started with SRMENearInsert but when I submit the flow an error appears every time. So I need someone who has experience in seismic processing to help me to solve this problem.

I attached some screenshots for a seismic section sorted to CMP, input and parameters for SRMENearInsert, and the error.

I need help on getting a research topic for my PhD dissertation, in the fields of seismics and earthquake geophysics. I will also appreciate suggestions in the field of hydrogeology.

I am working on subsurface crustal modelling. I am looking for suggestions related to geophysical techniques and software interpretations.

Regards

What is the initial information required for GM-SYS modelling in Geosoft Oasis Montaj other than importing potential field data?

I want to create a model in GM-SYS. Sometimes it needs only 2 layered model(basement and upper surface ---is it basement modelling?) and sometimes it requires multiple layers with complex structures.

Without getting additional information from any other survey than potential field data of a virgin area (mining field) ... only geological information is available but in a general view ....is it still possible to create a 2d model of magnetic anomaly data of the available area?

I want to work my PHD thesis with data of Remote Sensing and Geophysics and want some one to work in this section and be my advisor and we would have some articles in this section if it would be possible.

Geophysical model for

How can I optimize the positions of sensors (Broadband Accelerometers) around a meter scale experimental site to record the microcosmic signals ???

Simulation of sensors around a source before going into field

Dear all,

   Am testing AVO Envelope attributes  calibration between well and seismic. The work involved rock physics, seismic forward model, facies model and AVOE derived from seismic.

  I have read about BP method ( far envelope - near envelope)/far envelope. But lost the reference. Appreciate if someone can help me by sharing literature review particularly on AVOE. 

Best regards

Haslina

I have collected the ground magnetic data at an interval of 25m in gridded rectangles. How can I acutely utilize voxi model(Geosoft Montaj) for the TMI Data. Also, I am trying to analyze the geological faults in 3D models also. Hope for effective suggestions

Thank You

I'm doing a research to get updates about geophysical applications in mining.

Would be thankful if you can provide me with data/material/ course regarding up to date techniques.

email: geomsoliman@gmail.com

Hello everybody. I am a student at the end of my bachelor's degree in marine geology. I'm looking for proposals and suggestions for the end of the course work. In particular, I would be interested in geophysical methods (petrophysical, seismic,) and Coastal geology. That said, I evaluate proposals in all areas of Marine Geosciences.

Does anyone know where I can get any free 3-D smoothing spline code for irregular data in fortran?

I've used 1-D and 2-D code from Inoue, H., 1986: A least-squares smooth fitting for irregularly spaced data: Finite-element approach using the cubic B-spline basis. Geophysics, 5, 2051–2066.

cheers, arthur

For the RHUM-RUM project, we are writing a SKS paper and I try to review SKS measurements carried out in the context of Mantle Plumes with or without ocean-bottom seismometers.

this question is about space geophysics

I want to know about theory of the upward continuation and why do we use upward continuation and down ward continuation? Other thing is what is the relationship between the filtration and up/downward continuation?  

Dear All,

I am currently looking for different international examples (papers) of soviet-type/Russian-type geophysical well-log interpretation and application.

This type of archival, geophysical devices were widely used mainly in Europe and Asia in the 1960s-90s. The main difficulty is the proper standarization of this quite specyfic kind of measurements.

I have already found some examples from Poland, but I would like to apply my research to a broader, international perspective. I cannot find any examples from any different area even though I know that these measurements have been used in many countries around the world.

I would really appreciate your help.

This method gives a good or more or less depth by potential field data.

I am looking for gravity data with high resolution on the Red Sea Rifted Margin (Lat 22-27, Long 33-38), I've downloaded data from the XYZ data website with a resolution of 1.82 km, unfortunately, it is not good enough to achieve my objectives!!. So If anyone knows another source I will be grateful.

Dear colleagues

I would like to have your kind opinions on the issue that concerns rock mechanics and geophysics in relation to it, for a very specific problem I have.

I have attempted to find a range in the Barton’s graph (Barton 1995), for Qc vs Vp, which applies to the rock masses which I study (those of Doha, Qatar). However, I only have data from MASW geophysical surveys, which yield only Vs.

Hence, I looked for a way to convert Vs values range into a Vp range. I came to discover that there is a very active Nigerian scientific community which deals with geophysical research at their home turf. So I came across the below expression

ni(poisson) = [(Vp/Vs)^2 - 2]/[2(Vp/Vs)^2 - 2]

from which Vp can be obtained from Vs, with a known Poisson’s ratio. The formula is from a paper by Atat et al. (2012).

Qatari rock masses are sedimentary limestone and dolomite soft to medium hard rock masses situated in a very flat terrain (so there is no need for obtaining Vp, I suppose), and in the above paper, the Authors have used the formula on sedimentary shale layers of Niger delta.

Would you use this formula without reservation, for Vs to Vp conversion, regardless of rock (mass) type?

Dear all, I'd like to open here a sort of forum for understanding how the geodesists community is moving in view of the X-band SAR satellite constellation. The new constellation will offer new "free, near real-time SAR data" with the "latest information about any spot on the planet within the hour". This will open completely new horizons for InSAR monitoring of ground deformation especially for rapid phenomena such as eruptions and seismic crises. The huge amount of so frequent data acquisitions will open also new needs for rapid and automatic processing. My question are: who knows more? Are you planning a routine use of these data? How?

Dear Colleagues,

I am glad to find you well and healthy. I hope to provide me any references, notes, lectures, or links that can help me making a complete and perfect course about the "Basin and Petroleum System Analysis" and "PetroMod Software" to be used in undergraduate learning syllabus.

Best wishes,

Rami.

Petroleum Geologist Ministry of Higher Education and Scientific Research

Al-Karkh University of Sciences College of Remote Sensing and Geophysics 

Department of Geophysics E-mails: ramisc3@kus.edu.iq ramisc3@gmail.com

How we can identify clay from groundwater zones using geophysical methods!

How to establish a regional shear zone using Geophysical databases such as gravity, magnetic, and seismic anomalies and tomographic models.