1. MH370 speculation has become excessive recently. Metabunk is not a forum for creating theories by speculation. It's a forum for examining claims, and seeing if they hold up. Please respect this and keep threads on-topic. There are many other forums where speculation is welcome.
    Dismiss Notice
  1. deirdre

    deirdre Moderator Staff Member

    that's not really accurate. they registered as a business in Feb 2013. we don't know exactly when the full (as we now see it) site was finished. could have been anytime between Jan 2014 and April 2014 when it was cached.
     
  2. bume

    bume Member

    Based on the available data, in my opinion, it is much more likely they are doing some scientifically questionable stuff in that university than somebody faking all those references. Especially considering that it's a former navy college, not necessarily something of the highest scientific standards.

    Also look for example what they are doing in Princeton:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_Consciousness_Project
     
  3. txt29

    txt29 Active Member

    OK, the Black Sea university document looks perhaps more credible. Sergiy Smirnov is or was the rector of the Sevastopol National University of Nuclear Energy and Industry, and the "нуяе" abbreviation I could not find, is derived from "национальный университет ядерной энергии" (National University of Nuclear Energy). Sergiy Smirnov was arrested in 2008 and accused of a large scale defrauding of funds for the University, the property of his wife was seized, but later in 2010 he was reinstated at the request of the Ministry, allegedly because of lack of evidence. I did not find more details yet. Not sure whether he is now still in the office. The information comes from this article: http://new-sebastopol.com/news/novo...oobscheniya_SMI__chto_v_vuze_gotovyat_debilov
     
    • Informative Informative x 1
  4. InterpreDemon

    InterpreDemon Member

    That was probably just a temporary changing of the guard as a different mob muscled in... that's how they do it in Putin's Russia.
     
  5. RobertNC

    RobertNC New Member

    My thoughts on why the GeoResonance claims are harmful to the search effort for MH370. This is intended to maybe help some people understand why so many of us are outraged at GeoResource's activity.

    I believe most people have a strong sense of honesty and fairness that they live by. I try to honor this and do my share to look out for people when they are being conned. It upsets me to see someone take advantage of a tragedy like the loss of MH370 to promote their "company". I believe it is this sense of fairness that drives the members of this forum to question something that looks misleading and then actually do research to expose misconduct for the benefit of others. This has already happened in this thread with respect to GeoResonance and I commend all the efforts here to bring out the facts.

    So I am posting this to those people who cannot seem to understand why this type of activity by GeoResonance is not only dishonest but actually harmful in several ways. It creates a distraction to the many people working very hard to locate MH370. Because the people at GeoResonance have been skillful enough to launch themselves onto the world stage under the guise of "providing help to the families" they have forced the search leaders to take some kind of action. This will end up putting search teams at risk out in an area of the ocean that is unrelated to MH370. The additional stress and confusion this puts on the families is real. Putting this type of bogus information in the press without proper vetting just makes some people even more distrustful of genuine scientific knowledge and breakthroughs.

    As for GeoResource, I believe they have already far exceeded their hoped for publicity benefits. Their press release of May 1 makes it clear that they are going into "bunker mode" now so that deeper investigation into their "technology" will fade away. Like their ridiculous claim to have "located" the sunken ship Armenia (despite the fact that searchers are still trying to find it), they will probably have a page on their website claiming credit for having provided "valuable assistance" to the MH370 search effort. It won't matter that nothing was found. If they really wanted to help, they would have published well documented examples of their "technology" having imaged an aircraft under water.

    Sorry if my post is not on topic. I trust the moderators to use their judgement on whether this adds any value to the discussion.

    I am really looking forward to Metabunk as a tool to separate fact from fiction.

    Robert
     
    • Like Like x 5
  6. bume

    bume Member

    I took a better look at this:

    There's some interesting details and pictures. For example, if you want to see the kind of high tech they are using at the office, take a look at slides 11-16. Looks like cold war era to me... There's also a helicopter involved, shown on slide 24, quite funny looking.

    On slide 31 you can find a letter where "the Ministry of Fuel and Energy of Ukraine confirms reliability of this technology, underlining the economic profitability of its use in the industry". I can't read that but that is an additional connection to that ministry.

    To me it looks quite clear already that be this scam or bad science, it's state sponsored in a significant way.
     
  7. Martin Burger

    Martin Burger New Member

    The GeoResonance man looked credible to me, hear him out send a boat up to Bengal and take a look. Remote sensing has been around for a long time, data is just that, data, and it can be quickly reviewed and determined to be sound or unsound data.

    They haven’t found anything looking down in Antarctica.

    Having directed R&D for the last 30 years, patenting etc I can say that the state of science today is almost laughable. Give me a break, they are still teaching the big bang theory. Quantum physics remains un-integrated in the realty model, the second law of thermal dynamics is bogus, CEO Bill Rich from Lockheed Martin’s skunkworks said when they corrected Maxwell’s flawed equation they solved interstellar flight. The pace of technology today is breathtaking and often it can eclipse the accepted science.

    In my last two years I researched LENR element forming processes and in 200 lab trials learned how to make gold from barren artificial seed ores. The metal yields were extraordinary so I took the data to a physicist’s blog, and within an hour my membership was revoked and I was banned until the year 2217. That was a bunch of open minds :)

    The $200 billion BOSON Buz is misspent research monies going nowhere. Blue Eagle Refiners Inc has now filed the gold making patent (pending), the technology discovery story is about to break on Kitco.com and TreveriMarket.com is near completing its due diligence for $5.0 mil raise to move the work in the lab where we made large gold beads, to a series of pilot plants where we will pour gold bars.

    Nature continuously creates the elements in LENR conditions and all we did was to recreate those “elemental bloom” conditions and optimize for duration and yield. To view a discovery video of the gold making process, go to: https://vimeo.com/90037448

    I can say after my experiences here that it is much easier to actually make gold than it is to share the verifiable data with a dogmatic closed mind.
     
    Last edited: May 2, 2014
    • Funny Funny x 2
    • Disagree Disagree x 1
  8. flashcoder

    flashcoder New Member

    Setting aside all the theories of underwater spectral imaging from space, maybe there happen to be some flying airplane passing the area at the time of image taking on March 10? That would explain why they got something actually scanned that was not there on March 5th..
     
  9. RobertNC

    RobertNC New Member

    This is a valid point.

    However, any "legitimate" company would have re-scanned the site on March 17 and March 24, etc to prove the repeatability of their "technology". I believe this is one of the main reasons that GeoResonance totally fails the credibility test.
     
  10. Pete Tar

    Pete Tar Moderator Staff Member

    Hey @David Coulter, what is your opinion of the techniques described here by Geoinformation Research. It seems legit to me as it's describing looking at physical surface features, but I wouldn't know.


     
    Last edited: May 2, 2014
  11. Pete Tar

    Pete Tar Moderator Staff Member

    I'm sure member's here would love to hear more about this, would you create a new thread for it? Go to the Science and psuedoscience forum and create a new thread there.

    Do you have any relevent information on the techniques alleged to have been used in this case to add to this thread though?
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  12. Anti-Spin

    Anti-Spin New Member

    GeoResonance's descriptions are broadly consistent with well-known methodologies. Check Google or Wkipedia for
    Earth's Field NMR (how geo-NMR works)
    Proton Magnetometer (How NMR can be used to detect underwater metal)
    ELF (Extremely low frequencies penetrate deep oceans for sub communication.)
    NMR signal sensitivity for non-hydrogen signals is an obvious issue (search "multinuclear NMR") but military is willing to throw big bucks into the mix to solve the problem. Russian submarine service is likely to know a lot about all the above.

    So technical merits are an open question. Re the company's rep, if GeoResonance' results were valid, I'd be most surprised to find VIP's NOT working mightily to make sure GeoResonance results remain uninvestigated. So I wouldn't credit mudslinging. Bismarck said something like "Don't believe anything in politics until it is officially denied". ...or discredited, I would add.
     
  13. Pete Tar

    Pete Tar Moderator Staff Member

    Could you be more specific as to how their technique would work as claimed? Because 'broadly consistent' could still leave room for deliberate obfuscation in the details.

    ETA

    It doesn't sound like what they claimed their method was.
     
    Last edited: May 2, 2014
  14. deirdre

    deirdre Moderator Staff Member

    so you're a real live alchemist? that is super cool.
     
    • Funny Funny x 3
    • Like Like x 1
  15. scombrid

    scombrid Senior Member

    How about the company demonstrate their technology before that time and money is spent?

    Yes. Let's review the data before sending a boat to chase after GeoResonance claims. Where're those data anyway? I've just seen bold claims of a find from GeoResonance but no actual data.

    Doing a little fund raising here?

    Why are you spamming the thread with this?

    Do you have some information to share on why or why not GeoResonance should be taken seriously?
     
    • Agree Agree x 3
  16. InterpreDemon

    InterpreDemon Member

    I was not aware that Lockheed had managed to achieve interstellar flight. Perhaps that's how GeoResonance obtained their advanced technology... from the Vegans.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  17. InterpreDemon

    InterpreDemon Member

    As I pointed out before, with geo-survey satellites capable of providing the image information they claim to utilize, the information over any particular spot on the globe is generally updated every 16-18 days (the time it takes for such satellites to complete a scan of the entire globe before repeating the process), so the five day window GeoResonance claims would not be possible unless they are in control of the satellite and can re-task it, which is no simple matter. Do you really think this pipsqueak company owns its own satellite or has the clout to get a Landsat re-tasked? I mean, really.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  18. Lee Swordy

    Lee Swordy New Member

    The Larmor frequency for aluminum in a 31 uT magnetic field (typical of the Earth's magnetic field near the equator) is 343 hz. The skin depth of seawater at that frequency is about 15 m. That means the a EFNMR signal drops to about a third of its strength at a distance of 15 m. While the Navy used an ELF frequency of 76 Hz, which has a skin depth of 30m, to communicate with deep submarines, they also had a honking big antenna the size of a county and megawatts of power, by the time it got to the submarine it was nanowatts. EFNMR starts out as nanowatts and by the time it penetrates 700m of seawater it would be undetectable from noise at the surface, let alone by airplane or satellite.

    But that not withstanding, NMR requires an excitation, that is you transmit a radio carrier to get the atomic nuclei resonating, then you remove the carrier and listen for the resonance of the atoms dying off (like plucking a guitar string). This requires a transmitter, in the case of searching for aluminum it would have to pulse a carrier of 343 Hz, with a hefty power level and a huge antenna.

    The literature shows there is some recent success in the GeoPhysics arena mapping underground water this way, they move a gigantic coil antenna (50m to 150m diameter) around the surface in a grid to map water to depths of 100m. This results in a very coarse map of sub-surface water. But as of 2012, this method is still in its embryonic stage, it is very low-res, and requires a huge antenna. There is nothing suggesting it can be applied to locating metals, or that it works at sea, or that it can be made small enough for an aircraft. It certainly is not satellite deployable and could not be expected to produce the fine grain image of the airplane GeoRes presented.

    If GeoRes (or any of the associated companies or institutes) can do this then it would be a quantum leap in technology, nothing short of a Star Trek scanner. If such a revolutionary ability existed the science and geology world would be abuzz with excitement; instead there is no mention of it.
     
    • Like Like x 2
    • Informative Informative x 1
  19. InterpreDemon

    InterpreDemon Member

    Star Trek scanner? More like the Star Trek viewer that somehow visualizes the Enterprise from some outside location in space. Of course you and I both do not need to point out that in order to generate a 2D image by getting time/coordinate related echoes you need to be aligning all of them sequentially with an oscillating magnetic gradient field (where spin axis is deflected from alignment in two planes simultaneously) overlay to the earths magnetic field, listening to the string of spin echo returns and essentially streaming them serially into the bitmap. In an MRI scanner, the hammering and humming you hear are the gradient coils, which are layered inside the magnet bore, and the RF detector coils (antenna that listens to the stream of echos) are the innermost layer inside of the gradient coils. It is not enough to just detect the presence of aluminum, you have to be able to create an image of the aluminum object, which they claim to have done, and that cannot be done by flying over it with an airplane or ship towing a VLF antenna any more than you could generate an image of a flight recorder from its pings.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  20. Lee Swordy

    Lee Swordy New Member

    The static magnetic field of the Earth means you can't sweep the magnetic field to polarise specific areas, and excite and detect with a wide RF field like in an MRI. Instead you have to do the opposite, leave the entire area polarised with a wide field (the Earth's field) and try to selectively excite and detect specific areas with RF. In the case of mapping underground you can only excite and detect by proximity, being right over a 30m cube of earth, testing it, then moving to the next 30m cube of earth, in a big grid. You can't do it remotely because the farther away you get the wider the grid squares (pixels) become. If you tried it from a plane you would only be able to test areas with a resolution of thousands of square metres, and from space hundreds of thousands of metres. Unlike with light, you can't illuminate a large area with long wavelength radio waves then directionally focus the returned radio waves into a point to raster-scan an area, at those frequencies it would require a dish the size of the Moon.
     
  21. Anti-Spin

    Anti-Spin New Member

    GeoResonance is not divulging details of exactly what they're doing (nor how many of the 20 techniques to which they refer are exclusively NMR). Their obfuscation is typical for a small high-tech company, which is probably paranoid about trade secrecy. But any specific explanation I might provide would be a speculative design done by someone with very limited expertise in this area (i.e., myself). Lee Sword raises a number of technical objections below, and I reply to those in more detail.

    Interestingly, GeoResonance seems to claim Crimea as its birthplace, whereas another company, GeoNMR, which claims to provide similar services (and is equally reticent about divulging its methods), is headquartered in Kiev. A strange parallel to the ongoing geo-political rivalry in that region!


    [mod edit to fix quote formatting error]
     
    Last edited by a moderator: May 2, 2014
  22. jn20

    jn20 New Member

    What data are you basing the skin depth on? Secondly how do you determine that the signal cant be picked up?
     
  23. Anti-Spin

    Anti-Spin New Member

    Disproofs based on impossibility rely on the assumption that if we can't imagine a solution to a technical issue, no one else can either. So these discussions are fraught with pride, and peril..

    Your point is very well made. (Cu and Ti have similar frequencies, H in organics is even higher). However, we don't know whether all 20 of the methods GeoResonance quotes are purely NMR, or whether some prescreening might be done, to allow, for instance, dropped coils or undersea drones to carry NMR equipment into proximity of a suspected object.

    This argument is also valid, but no as strong. Multi-megawatt transmitters would be no problem, nor are towed coils. Then again, why not bring everything closer underwater?

    I disagree to the extent that magnetometry was used shortly after WWII to locate magnetic field distortion caused by submarines. I agree in that high resolution images would be difficult from the surface.

    I wouldn't necessarily consider this a revolution, nor do I think I'm alone. Small startups have been toying with this idea for some time, with successes similar to Potemkin's villages. But photolithography has simplified manufacturing of ultrasensitive detectors like SQUIDS and high-temperature superconducting coils, so it might be that these and related incremental improvements have brought these rather old concepts to fruition. People in this field might not be so surprised to find that the ugly dickling has turned into a swan. Also, when an incremental advance leads to a success, the success is often resisted (or inflated) based on prior failures. Then again, if the technology really came from submarine military applications, the approach itself might be radically different from what's gone before.

    My position on this is agnostic: we don't know whether GeoResonance's approach might be valid without further technical disclosure on their part. But since they gave the location, dropping something down to have a peek would risk little, given the enormous futile effort already expended.
     
  24. Anti-Spin

    Anti-Spin New Member

    Topical NMR imaging of animals and people has been done by moving a detection coil (usually flat) over the region of interest, relying on the coil's limited range for spatial resolution. There's no reason this couldn't be done here in a number of ways. One is to attach a circular coil, roughly the size of the desired resolution, to a computer-controlled submersible and do a drive-by of the suspected area, recording signal continuously. But here I'm trying to design an underwater Earth's field NMR spectrometer on the fly, in under a day at that! Cut me a little slack if this sounds too foolish.

    As I said above, the arguments get to be a bit theological. At some point, an experimental check is the best way to test the theory.
     
  25. Lee Swordy

    Lee Swordy New Member

    The following document contains skin depth vs. frequencies (see Table 1):

    http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a149638.pdf

    As to not picking up the signal (from a depth reported to be about 700m), that is an educated guess. The power level of RF energy in a submarine ELF communication is adequate to reach a submarine at depths up to about 300m, the depth the navy will admit submarines can reach, but unofficial reports say they may be able to reach 500m. If a strong signal on the surface is merely adequate to produce an acceptable signal to noise at depth, then it would logically take a strong signal at depth to produce a detectable signal at the surface (submarines can't use ELF to transmit because they can't generate the RF power required). I can't locate the reference, but in a document related to water detection using surface NMR (SNMR) they mentioned that the NMR emissions are proportional to the number of resonant atoms in the area, and it took a substantial amount of water to generate few microwatts of RF power. Therefore, that a few microwatts would be inadequate to achieve a decent S/N ratio at the surface (where noise levels are considerably higher than undersea).
     
  26. Lee Swordy

    Lee Swordy New Member

    That would suggest ships doing grid surveys of the Bay of Bengal, and the company mentioned only aircraft and sats. It would also be unlikely they could survey a large enough area by ship on two separate days, before and after the crash, to have a statistical likelihood of finding the plane.

    And as previously mentioned, the inability to focus an ELF wavefront into a point means the "pixel" resolution of a grid search would be effectively miles across, whereas the GeoRes images show a suggested pixel size of one to three feet.

    Magnetic anomaly detection, the measurement of nearly static deflections in the Earth's field where magnetic lines converge through a ferrous body, is a considerably different science from measuring alternating EM fields (e.g. RF photons), although SQUIDS seem to have some benefit in SNMR detection. SNMR seems to be limited to a couple of hundred metres, which would put the detectors in the near-field of the RF source, making purely magnetic field measurements easier.
     
  27. fubaya

    fubaya New Member

    This should be noted. Of all the claims that are so wild and vague as to defy testing, the satellite details are rooted in the real world. GeoResonance claims to have searched 2 million square kilometers of imagery around Malaysia taken on March 10th (image showing their search area here: http://dmnewsi.com/tag/georesonance/).

    I'm no expert on satellites or orbital mechanics, but if anyone believes GeoResonance's claims, I'd like to be shown a high-res satellite that is capable of that.

    A 60x60km scene size is the same as the SPOT family of satellites produces, but they have a revisit time of 1-4 days. They could be tasked to image that area in a 60km wide strip of images then come back in 1-4 days and do it again until the whole area is imaged several weeks later. This is typical of all high-resolution satellites. Look at GeoResonance's alleged search area and explain how they could stitch together coverage of that area in a single day.

    For comparison, DigitalGlobe repositioned two satellites shortly after MH370 went missing and by March 14th, had only 24,000 sq km of coverage of the area around Malaysia (http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/mar/14/tomnod-online-search-malaysian-airlines-flight-mh370).

    A satellite like Landsat would have better luck because they're low resolution and take images of large areas, but you can't see anything the size of an airplane with them and I still doubt they could cover that whole area in one pass. There is a very real and physical trade-off here, to see something the size of an airplane requires about 5-meter resolution and any satellite with that resolution is in low orbit and images a narrow area.

    Why debate some article on some theoretical technique that has a couple buzzwords that sound sorta related to what GeoResonance claims when we can take a shortcut and look at whether it's even possible for them to get their hands on that much imagery to begin with.
     
  28. InterpreDemon

    InterpreDemon Member

    The VLF waves submarines pick up are not sky waves that penetrate the water, they are ground waves, waves transmitted by a buried array that even a fleet of Anatov-225's could not tow. It is a one-way arrangement, subs cannot transmit back, used basically as a pager to tell the sub to poke its antenna above the water and call mommy. In any event we see all this talk of various scenarios that might be possible under extraordinary circumstances and/or with sufficient resources, all kinds of pseudo-science that certainly deserves its own thread someplace, however what is NOT possible is that this unknown company with its "large team" of unknown scientists has done it, let alone perfected the technology such to be able to find and create an image of a single aircraft 1000' under the sea among the thousands of other submerged wrecks and moving aeronautical and maritime vehicles within a 2.3 million km3 area.

    Breaking news... I have hacked into the GeoResonance repository of intellectual property and proprietary technology. To find out precisely how their process works:

    1. Go to this secret web page disguised as a university web site: http://pdos.csail.mit.edu/scigen/

    2. In the "authors" section, enter (in order) Kursa, Pope and Dorsch

    3. Click "Generate" and their original scientific paper submitted to Sevastopol is retrieved.
     
    • Funny Funny x 3
  29. jn20

    jn20 New Member

    I am a bit weak when it comes to NMR (I work with protein crystallography, not NMR), but assuming for a moment that they could somehow measure the larmor precession in the plane, how large a signal could they get from several metric tonnes of aluminium?

    I guess what we really need to know in order to pass verdict on whether or not they are using NMR is the following:
    How large an amount of aluminium, copper, etc do they have to measure on?
    How large a signal should they be able to produce? With EFNMR and with and artificial magnet field?
    Related to the above, How sensitive equipment would they need and could they in any feasible way pickup a signal from under 700 meters of seawater?
     
  30. Lee Swordy

    Lee Swordy New Member

    All the papers I can find regarding using NMR to find something below ground (Surface NMR, as opposed to lab NMR or borehole NMR) relate to finding subsurface water. I have yet to find any mention of it being applied to minerals (or petroleum). The water they are searching for (or more specifically hydrogen) would be measurable in tons, so may be roughly comparable to tons of metal, but the substrate is earth instead of seawater so the penetration comparison is more complex. RF penetration in earth is dependant on moisture content and other factors, however experimental penetration studies seem to be limited to 100m or less.

    As to why they don't apply this to finding minerals (or oil), I can't find any explanation. I can only surmise there must be some obstacle they have yet to overcome, probably the signal levels are too small to detect. If the Crimean scientists have overcome this obstacle it would be nice if they publish a paper or two, but I expect Putin will want to keep it to himself now.
     
  31. David Coulter

    David Coulter Active Member

    You correctly identified another flaw in the Georesonance story - the timing for data acquisition doesn't hold up based on satellite orbital parameters. Landsat has a revisit period of 16 days and covers an area of 185x185 Km. There are commercial satellites that have much more frequent revisit rates but they have a smaller footprint and covering 2M Km^2 would cost millions of dollars. My main argument remains: it doesn't matter what imagery they use, the technique is based on pseudoscience and is snake oil.
     
  32. David Coulter

    David Coulter Active Member


    LOL, Gobbledy gook.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  33. David Coulter

    David Coulter Active Member


    Watch a few episodes of Hustle. Con men always look "credible", that is their job!
     
    • Agree Agree x 2
  34. Pete Tar

    Pete Tar Moderator Staff Member

    So is it not true that the forces that form certain mineral deposits have effects on the landscape which are observable and can therefore be indicators of location? Because that seems sort of credible.


     
  35. David Coulter

    David Coulter Active Member

    I appreciate all the musings about what technologies could be used to to fulfill the Georesonance claims but there is one simple reality:

    Is there ANY technology that can measure the elemental composition of something under the sea? No.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  36. Pete Tar

    Pete Tar Moderator Staff Member

    Yeah I was getting off-topic a little, but I just wanted to know if that particular company was a legit operation or another in the line of dubious dowsers. As a layman it all looks like magic and it's easy to get dazzled by the sciencey-sounding sell, but I wouldn't want to throw out the legit ones with the others.
    The impression is that high-tech prospecting is a bit of a frontier ripe for exploitation as well as actual advances.
     
  37. David Coulter

    David Coulter Active Member

    Putting one credible statement in in a bunch of gobbledy gook does not make the the rest credible.

    My expertise is in using imagery to map surface mineralogy to assist in the exploration for economic metallic deposits (check my LinkedIn profile). The key word is assist as exploration for ore deposits requires a range of skills and technologies, I provide just one of those skills. The level of precision of the technology I use is a function of the spatial and spectral resolution of the instrumentation utilized. Currently, airborne imaging spectroscopy (see http://aviris.jpl.nasa.gov/) is the most accurate method but has many limitations:

    It can not identify elemental composition.

    It can not identify anything deeper than one micron on land and has very limited penetration on water (wavelength dependent but ~30m is pretty much the max).

    It is only available through custom airborne surveys (there is one satellite system called Hyperion but it has very limited capabilities and coverage).
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
    • Informative Informative x 1
  38. David Coulter

    David Coulter Active Member

    The concept that there are undiscovered prospecting techniques is what the scam companies live on. People have been prospecting for metals for thousands of years. Scientists have been applying the scientific method to exploration since the 1500's publication of de re Metallica by Georgius Agricola. Modern exploration involves identifying geologic settings wherein ores are most likely to occur and ignoring the areas where ores can not occur (we call the favorable areas "elephant country" and the unfavorable areas "moose pasture"). The favorable areas are defined by plate tectonics - most ore deposits occur in belts that are or where "active margins" (where plates collide - think of the Andes). But even in elephant country finding an ore deposit is a needle in the haystack problem. Post WWII the mineral exploration scientists have studied and measured all the physical properties of ore and ore bodies - we understand the types of measurements that need to be made and how to make them. It would be fantastic if there was a way to remotely identify specific elements below the surface, but there isn't. So we rely on pathfinder responses that can be measured remotely - conductivity, magnetic susceptibility, density, etc.
     
    • Like Like x 1
    • Informative Informative x 1
  39. David Coulter

    David Coulter Active Member

    The latest from CNN... "Two Bangladeshi navy ships have begun searching the Bay of Bengal for traces of missing Malaysia Airlines Flight 370, but have yet to find anything, a commander said Friday."

    Wow, I thought Georesonace had the size, shape, and location perfectly defined ;)
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  40. bume

    bume Member

    My understanding is that the sat is likely a former spy sat and they (Sevastopol) might even have full control of it. The orbit height was specified as 280km, so can't be Landsat, and sounds like spy sat territory to me instead of commercial imaging sat. If that is the case, the question is what could be possible for such a spy sat (designed for sub hunting for example), assuming full control and that it's likely some decades old if it is given to such use already.