HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: rob@xyzoom.info.com (Rob Lingelbach)
Newsgroups: sci.geo.geology
Subject: Re: where to get rock hammer?
Date: 30 Dec 92 23:18:04 GMT
Reply-To: rob@xyzoom.info.com (Rob Lingelbach)
Distribution: na
Organization: Altruistic Intentions, Hollywood CA

In article <51723@seismo.CSS.GOV> stead@skadi.CSS.GOV (Richard Stead) writes:

>
>You can get the fancy Estwings or whatever at specialty stores, but personally,
>I have always used an ordinary masonry hammer - you can get them at any
>hardware store, Sears, etc.
>
>You should probably get protective eyewear as well.

Thanks to everyone who sent me information on this.  I might check
into the CalTech bookstore (thanks Bob Myers), or a few local hardware
stores.

I phoned "Ward's Natural Science Establishment" and they are going to
send me a catalog (thanks Kathleen).  

I tried the 800 dierectory for "Forestry Supply" and there isn't a
listing. (Reginald)

Since I have only been reading this newsgroup for about 2 days, I
thought I'd ask some advice and introduce myself.  I am not at all
educated in mineralogy or geology except for having read, with great
interest, John McPhee's popular books ( e.g. "Basin and Range"), and
the recent articles in the New Yorker, "The Assembly of California".
I recently took a few days vacation in Colorado, and visited
Leadville, Glenwood Springs, and environs.  I visited a store in
Leadville called "The Rock Hut" and was fascinated by the thumbnails
and other displays of local minerals.  There were a couple of books I
picked up on minerals and gems of the California Desert that have some
incredibly detailed maps locating collecting areas.

I do a lot of backpacking and hiking, and one of my weird
habits--something I've always done-- is to pick up interesting rocks
and bring them home (my father used to do this also)...I'm not sure of
the ethics of this --by doing so I am not displacing or hurting a
living thing, but I am altering the terrain; then again, the rocks are
always moving around anyway (in geologic time). 

I'd like to go out into the desert and check out some of the locations
in the books.  My questions are:

1) where would I find someone knowledgable to go with me?
2) are there any group-type field trips for amateurs like me, led by a
geologist? 
3) is it OK these days to remove, from BLM land mostly I guess,
specimens?  The books I have do cover the possibility of mining claims
and what to do about them.
4) when I use my rock hammer, are my glasses, which have safety glass,
considered protective eyewear?
5) is this the best place for me to be asking these questions?  ;-)


-- 
Rob Lingelbach KB6CUN | 2660 Hollyridge Dr LA CA 90068 213 464 6266 (voice) 
rob@xyzoom.info.com   | "I care not much for a man's religion whose dog or 
robl@netcom.com       |  cat are not the better for it."  --Abraham Lincoln
From: simon@earth.monash.edu.au (Simon Cox)
Newsgroups: sci.geo.geology
Subject: Re: Unconfined shear strength of common roc
Date: 23 Dec 92 00:57:00 GMT
Reply-To: simon@earth.monash.edu.au
Organization: Monash University Dept of Earth Sciences

In article 15158@hou.amoco.com, zmyd02@hou.amoco.com (Denton Meredith) writes:
>
>>In article 9oF@mach1.wlu.ca, jbeebe6@mach1.wlu.ca (john t beebe 9208 G) writes:
>>>Hi there. I am looking for information on the unconfined shear strength of
>>>common rocks and soils. If anyone can help, I would be most greatful. For
>>>example, I need to find the unconfined shear strength of 
>>>	limestone?
>>>	granite?
>>>	sandstone?
>>>	quartz?
>>>	topsoil?...etc.
>>>
>>
>In article 23924@monu6.cc.monash.edu.au, simon@earth.monash.edu.au (Simon Cox) writes:
>>
>>The problem is that rocks, like many other pressure sensitive brittle 
>>materials, do NOT usually fail in shear when unconfined - rather, a sample 
>>will split with "tensile" fractures perpendicular to the zero stress direction.
>>Who put you onto this?
>>
>>SImon Cox
>>
>
>
>Not quite true.  While they theoretically should (and sometimes do) fail with tensile fractures parallel to the loading axis, the majority of failures of unconfined materials are fractures inclined at some small angle (usually less than the "common" ~30 degrees in triaxial tests) to the load axis.  This is generally agreed to be due to virtually unavoidable end effects;  in order to split in a tensile fashion, the specimen must have the ability to slide against the loading pistons transverse to the l
>
>
>
>
>
>
>is, and most rigs simply don't have a low enough coefficient of friction to allow this at the stresses required to fracture a given rock.  Thus, the specimens generally fail in a shear manner.
>
>
>Meredith Denton
>Amoco Production Company
>Houston, Texas
>
>(formerly of the Texas A&M University Center for Tectonophysics)


OK - I can be a pedant too  ;-) - if you consider the real state of stress in the case that you 
describe (with platen friction) then it is strictly NOT a uniaxial test any more!  In the 
CENTRE of the sample, where the assumption of uniaxial conditions is best satisfied, 
the sample splits.  Or, if you use a longer sample, which has the uniform stress state 
over a greater proportion of its length, then you will find that the failure is tensile.

In any case, it is very difficult to assign a "shear strength" to the results of any of these 
tests.


Simon Cox
From: stead@skadi.CSS.GOV (Richard Stead)
Newsgroups: sci.geo.geology
Subject: Re: where to get rock hammer?
Date: 30 Dec 92 13:18:05 GMT
Distribution: na

In article <1992Dec30.013955.1030@xyzoom.info.com>, rob@xyzoom.info.com (Rob Lingelbach) writes:
> I'd like to purchase a rock hammer, but don't have the slightest idea

You can get the fancy Estwings or whatever at specialty stores, but personally,
I have always used an ordinary masonry hammer - you can get them at any
hardware store, Sears, etc.

You should probably get protective eyewear as well.

Happy hunting!
--
Richard Stead
Center for Seismic Studies
Arlington, VA
stead@seismo.css.gov
From: stead@skadi.CSS.GOV (Richard Stead)
Newsgroups: sci.geo.geology
Subject: Re: Planet Earth
Date: 30 Dec 92 13:27:38 GMT

In article <1992Dec30.042305.21570@netcom.com>, alden@netcom.com (Andrew L. Alden) writes:
> I see I should have used Emiliani's words:
> 
> [T]he spectacular advances that have been made in many fields of science
> [...] now make it possible, for the first time in history,
> to construct a model of the events from the Big Bang to today....Having
> a model does not mean that we know the ultimate truth--it only means
> that things =could be= that way, or =could have gone= that way....Our
> model demonstrates the unity of science....

Thanks for posting this.  This is a very satisfactory scientific statement,
and I am much relieved about the book.

> provide the solutions that are desperately needed....If the political
> and religious philosophies that have made the twentieth century the
> bloodiest in the long and troubled history of humankind should carry
> over into the next, then the twenty-first century will be much, much worse

I can see the historians cringing.  Looks like he should stick to science
and leave history and social analysis to historians and social scientists.
This is not the group in which to discuss the details of this however, and
a few comments like this in an introduction are pretty harmless.


--
Richard Stead
Center for Seismic Studies
Arlington, VA
stead@seismo.css.gov
Xref: sparky sci.geo.geology:2622 ca.earthquakes:1511
From: Frank Bilotti <frank@wanda.princeton.edu>
Subject: Re: Planet Earth
X-Xxmessage-Id: <A7655910AB01700D@rambo.princeton.edu>
Originator: news@nimaster
X-Xxdate: Tue, 29 Dec 92 01:23:28 GMT
Organization: Geology Dept, Princeton Univ
X-Useragent: Nuntius v1.1.1d12
Date: Tue, 29 Dec 1992 06:21:26 GMT

In article <1992Dec29.050047.14921@netcom.com> Andrew L. Alden,
alden@netcom.com writes:
>I paid exceptionally close attention to Emiliani's book, being the
>editor Cambridge contracted to brush it up when it was in manuscript.
>His book was written because, he points out, science now has a complete
>explanation of the universe in all four dimensions that is authoritative
>and should supersede every religious myth.
>
>The book is a joy, and it repays close reading.  It is meant as a true
>compendium of the natural sciences, and is full of his wit and humor and
>erudition.  I recall making only two changes that stand out today, three
>years later:  I corrected William Gilbert's birthdate, which is usually
>wrong, and I had Emiliani move his discussion of religion to the front
>of the book.
>
>Other books like =Planet Earth= will be written, but he has set the
>standard.

	I am glad to see that Cesare is appreciated by others.  He was my
undergraduate adviser and his influence was the most important factor in
my becoming a geologist.  He is a brilliant guy who has a great ability
to communicate his ideas.

	Several previous posts mention his views on religion vs science.  I was
told that a fellow student of mine had asked him which religion should he
practice and Cesare replied "the one that takes the least of your time"

FRANK
__________________________________________
Princeton University- Department of Geological and
Geophysical Sciences                  Structural Geology
frank@wanda.princeton.edu
From: stead@skadi.CSS.GOV (Richard Stead)
Newsgroups: sci.geo.geology
Subject: Re: Planet Earth
Date: 29 Dec 92 12:49:10 GMT

In article <1992Dec29.062126.3820@Princeton.EDU>, frank@wanda.princeton.edu (Frank Bilotti) writes:
> In article <1992Dec29.050047.14921@netcom.com> Andrew L. Alden,
> alden@netcom.com writes:
> >His book was written because, he points out, science now has a complete
> >explanation of the universe in all four dimensions that is authoritative
> >and should supersede every religious myth.
> >[...]
> >wrong, and I had Emiliani move his discussion of religion to the front
> >of the book.
> 
> 	Several previous posts mention his views on religion vs science.  I was
> told that a fellow student of mine had asked him which religion should he
> practice and Cesare replied "the one that takes the least of your time"

I have not yet seen this book, but it appears from these comments that the
author has levelled a blast against religion in general.  I do not think
that science should be in the business of doing this.  Science should only
respond when religion makes claims about science.  Good examples would be
the age of the earth and firewalking.  But attacking religion in general
in the name of science is wrong, and is one of the main reasons the general
public views science with such suspicion and paranoia.

Also, claims like "science now has a complete explanation of the universe"
are about as unscientific as any statement can get.  Just look at how many
times this was claimed before the discovery of quantum mechanics, for example.
A scientist always looks for the undiscovered - if we have a complete
explanation of the universe, we may as well fire all the scientists and
use the money for something else.  The correct statement is
"science now has a satisfactory and self-consistant explanation of the vast
majority of known observations of the universe".  Of course, this statement
has also been true for the past few centuries, at any given time.

I hope these are just misinterpretations by people who have read the book,
rather than the author's intent.


--
Richard Stead
Center for Seismic Studies
Arlington, VA
stead@seismo.css.gov
From: GC.GGG@forsythe.stanford.edu (Gwyn Gordon)
Newsgroups: sci.geo.geology
Subject: FUNDING ANNOUNCEMENT
Date: 29 Dec 1992 14:50:05 -0800
Organization: Stanford University
NNTP-Posting-Host: morrow.stanford.edu


***FUNDING OPPORTUNITY***

Research Expeditions International is accepting applications for
funding for research projects scheduled for 1994.

Research Expeditions International specializes in Participatory
Research, in which well-educated lay people provide funding and
volunteer as the on-site work force. Studies best suited for
Participatory Research involve data collection or unskilled labor
which is easily taught to one or several groups of adults.
Preference will be given to studies in the following areas: animal
behavior; archaeological excavation; and tourist impact on culture,
economy and ecology. Studies in other fields will certainly be
considered if appropriate.

Applications for the 1994 season are due February 1, 1993.

For informational materials and application, contact:

Gwyn Gordon
gwyn.gordon@forsythe.stanford.edu
415-494-2515
806 Los Robles Avenue
Palo Alto, CA 94306
From: ivan@rec.msk.su (ivanov oleg petrovich)
Newsgroups: sci.geo.geology
Subject: ??E-mail Addresses of Magellan, Trimble and other firms made GPS devices
Keywords: GPS devices, Trimble , Magellan
Date: 23 Dec 92 14:19:37 GMT
Reply-To: ivan@rec.msk.su
Organization: RECOM Association

Hello,

who has any experience in work with GPS devices of TRIMBLE,
MAGELLAN or other firms ?
I want ask some questions about  boards of these firms and
E-mail addresses of these firms are interesting for me.

Mary Christmas,
Thanks in advance,

-- 
Sincerely 
      Oleg Ivanov
RECOM Ltd
Moscow  |||  Email:   ivan@rec.msk.su             Fax: 007 (095) 196 1635
From: mjohnson@cco.caltech.edu (Mary L. Johnson)
Newsgroups: sci.geo.geology
Subject: Re: Planet Earth
Date: 29 Dec 1992 20:04:54 GMT
Organization: California Institute of Technology, Pasadena
NNTP-Posting-Host: alumni.caltech.edu
Summary: Another Emilinai story ...

>undergraduate adviser and his influence was the most important factor in
>my becoming a geologist.  He is a brilliant guy who has a great ability
>to communicate his ideas.
>
Hi there,

Emiliani is also one of the authors on the paper in geology in
English that has the highest author/word-of-text ratio;
I believe it's in the 1964 Journal of Geology and you should 
all check it out :^) :^) :^)

-- Mary L. Johnson
mjohnson@alumni.caltech.edu
From: andy@pangea.Stanford.EDU (Andy Michael USGS Guest)
Newsgroups: sci.geo.geology
Subject: Re: Planet Earth
Date: 27 Dec 1992 03:11:54 GMT
Organization: Stanford Univ. Earth Sciences
NNTP-Posting-Host: pangea.stanford.edu

In article <1992Dec26.155349.27561@mailer.cc.fsu.edu> cain@geomag.gly.fsu.edu (Joe Cain) writes:
>	Has anyone more than perused the new book "Planet Earth" by
>Cesare Emiliani? It seems to be an interesting tome, but at first
>glance seems like written by a nut and/or a flamboyant Italian. It
>has material all the way from science and religion, basic physics,
Well the first time I met Cesare, when we passed through Miami on
our honeymoon, he decided to argue with me about whether the San Andreas
fault went out to sea south of San Francisco (it does, he was wrong).

This year his comment on Hurricane Andrew's affects on his life was,
"I don't see the problem with no hot water and no refrigerator.
You take cold showers and drink warm beer.  No problem."

I vote for flamboyant Italian, although he would be flamboyant in any
ethnic group.

>meteorology, and geology (planetary, historical...) to biological
>evolution. 107 of the 718 pages are tables.  (Cambridge U. Press,
>1992) 
>
>	It seems to have many historical notes and humor, some good,
>much supercilious, but in the sections I have read and know about have
>not found any outlandish ideas or obvious errors. There are some
>either odd or new-to-me terms used. e.g. "siderosphere" seems to apply
>to the core.  

We did buy his book.  My wife took some classs from him as an
undergrad and from what we can tell he may be one of the few people
capable of writing such a book (and believing that he is capable of
it :-) ).

>	I want to learn more about historical geology and biology so
>my main question is whether there are any off the wall sections that
>might be better learned elsewhere. I find it hard to believe that one
>person can be expert in such a broad range of subjects to the detail
>presented.

I'll check out the seismology sections and see how they are.  I would
bet in print he was careful to get things correct.

Andy
Newsgroups: sci.geo.geology
From: martin@space.ualberta.ca (Martin Connors)
Subject: Re: VistaPro Demo Wanted (was Re: Software to Make Realistic)
Reply-To: martin@space.ualberta.ca (Martin Connors)
Organization: University Of Alberta, Edmonton Canada
Date: Mon, 21 Dec 1992 17:51:31 GMT

In article <1992Dec19.023415.6684@netcom.com> noring@netcom.com (Jon  
Noring) writes:
> I seem to remember seeing the demo somewhere on the Internet.  So I  
checked
> Archie using vpdemo, vista, vpro, etc., but no luck.  Thus, does anybody
> know if the demo is on the Internet, and if so, where?

I would also like to get a VP demo. There was a very favorable review of  
VP in Earth for January 1993. VP seems to be advertised at about $120 mail  
order but I was in the Bay Area recently and saw it in Fry's for $59.95.
Being near my duty free limit and since the box seemed to mention less  
DEMs than I thought the advertising mentioned I declined to buy. Anyone  
know if the $59.95 package is the same as what one gets by mail order? I  
will be in the US again soon and may well buy VP then.

--
Martin Connors         |
Space Research         | martin@space.ualberta.ca  (403) 492-2526
University of Alberta  |
From: dtomack@mv.us.adobe.com (Darin Tomack)
Subject: Looking for Seismic/Geological Maps of NE Santa Clara County
Keywords: seismology, geology
Reply-To: dtomack
Organization: Adobe Systems Incorporated
Distribution: ba
Date: Tue, 22 Dec 1992 19:31:12 GMT

I've seen maps of the whole S.F. bay area before.  Basically, they detail known  
fault lines and show projected energy that would be released/damage that would  
be done due to earthquakes based on proximity to known fault lines and soil  
composition of the areas.

Does anyone have copies of maps like this for NE Santa Clara county?  Or does  
someone know where I get copies of maps like this?

Thanks,

darin

P.S. Direct email responses would be prefered.  I'm willing to summarize should  
there be a demand.

--
Darin Tomack       dtomack@mv.us.adobe.com       ...!{sun,decwrl}!adobe!dtomack
"...And then the alien anthropologists/Admitted they were still perplexed/But  
on
eliminating every other reason/For our sad demise/They logged the only
explanation left/This species has amused itself to death"     -- Roger Waters
From: stead@skadi.CSS.GOV (Richard Stead)
Newsgroups: sci.geo.geology,ca.earthquakes
Subject: Re: Earthquake Filmed from Space
Date: 22 Dec 92 15:40:04 GMT
Followup-To: sci.geo.geology

In article <1992Dec22.000927.13874@netcom.com>, alden@netcom.com (Andrew L. Alden) writes:
> I watched his display both at the press conference and later downstairs,
> and it was quite striking.  The SPOT images are 10 m per pixel, the best
> unclassified images you can get, yet even so, movements that were

Actually, the current best are the 2m resolution images from Russia.  They
are theoretically offering these for anywhere except the former USSR.  I have
yet to see any, but hope to at some point.  Still, I understand from the
limits of the atmosphere, etc, that 3 cm is theoretically possible, and
I'm sure the military must have determined if this is true in practice.
Given that, they should declassify all photographic resources of all
areas that are not sensitive, and all equipment well within the theoretical
and practical limits of the technology (ie:  don't release 3 cm resolution
images - non-friendly nations should have to guess at what our technical
capabilities are).


--
Richard Stead
Center for Seismic Studies
Arlington, VA
stead@seismo.css.gov
From: ivan@rec.msk.su (ivanov oleg petrovich)
Newsgroups: sci.geo.geology
Subject: Help with E-mail addresses of Trimble, Magellan and other GPS- devices firms !!!
Date: Fri, 25 Dec 92 17:29:01 +0200
Distribution: world
Organization: RECOM Association
Reply-To: ivan@rec.msk.su
Keywords: NAVSTAR, Global Positioning System

Hello,
Happy New Year!
Does any one have used GPS devices of Magellan Corp , Trimble Navigation or
any other firms in differential mode? I search the best choice for system which must take position
must get position with accuracy about 1 meter. I am interesting in E-mail
addresses firm mentioned above too.
Any proposals will be welcome.
Send answers on my E-mail address, please.
Thanks in advance,

-- 
Sincerely 
      Oleg Ivanov
RECOM Ltd
Moscow  |||  Email:   ivan@rec.msk.su             Fax: 007 (095) 196 1635


Newsgroups: sci.geo.geology
From: muttiah@thistle.ecn.purdue.edu (Ranjan S Muttiah)
Subject: Geology vs.  lithology map
Organization: Purdue University Engineering Computer Network
Date: Tue, 22 Dec 1992 14:54:16 GMT

If I were to scoop out all the topsoil, would I be seeing geology or
lithology ?
Newsgroups: sci.geo.geology,sci.astro,alt.sci.planetary
From: cain@geomag.gly.fsu.edu (Joe Cain)
Subject: Planet Earth
Followup-To: sci.geo.geology
Summary: question on accuracy of material
Organization: Florida State University Geology Dept.
Date: Sat, 26 Dec 92 15:53:49 GMT

	Has anyone more than perused the new book "Planet Earth" by
Cesare Emiliani? It seems to be an interesting tome, but at first
glance seems like written by a nut and/or a flamboyant Italian. It
has material all the way from science and religion, basic physics,
meteorology, and geology (planetary, historical...) to biological
evolution. 107 of the 718 pages are tables.  (Cambridge U. Press,
1992) 

	It seems to have many historical notes and humor, some good,
much supercilious, but in the sections I have read and know about have
not found any outlandish ideas or obvious errors. There are some
either odd or new-to-me terms used. e.g. "siderosphere" seems to apply
to the core.  

	I want to learn more about historical geology and biology so
my main question is whether there are any off the wall sections that
might be better learned elsewhere. I find it hard to believe that one
person can be expert in such a broad range of subjects to the detail
presented.


Joseph Cain		cain@geomag.gly.fsu.edu   
cain@fsu.bitnet		scri::cain

Newsgroups: sci.geo.geology
From: alden@netcom.com (Andrew L. Alden)
Subject: Re: Planet Earth
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest) 
Date: Tue, 29 Dec 1992 05:00:47 GMT

I paid exceptionally close attention to Emiliani's book, being the
editor Cambridge contracted to brush it up when it was in manuscript.
His book was written because, he points out, science now has a complete
explanation of the universe in all four dimensions that is authoritative
and should supersede every religious myth.

The book is a joy, and it repays close reading.  It is meant as a true
compendium of the natural sciences, and is full of his wit and humor and
erudition.  I recall making only two changes that stand out today, three
years later:  I corrected William Gilbert's birthdate, which is usually
wrong, and I had Emiliani move his discussion of religion to the front
of the book.

Other books like =Planet Earth= will be written, but he has set the
standard.

--Andrew

Newsgroups: sci.geo.geology