Читать книгу The Economic Aspect of Geology - C. K. Leith - Страница 38

Table of Contents

Any classification of mineral deposits on the basis of origin is more or less arbitrary. The sharp lines implied by the use of class names do not exist in nature. Mineral deposits are so complex and so interrelated in origin, that a classification according to genesis indicates only the essential and central class features; it does not sharply define the limits of the classes.

It is practically impossible for any geologist to present a classification which will be accepted without qualification by other geologists, although there may be agreement on essential features. Difficulties in reaching agreement are increased by the inheritance from the past of names, definitions, and classifications which do not exactly fit present conceptions based on fuller information—but which, nevertheless, have become so firmly established in the literature that it is difficult to avoid their use. In the progress of investigation many new names are coined to fit more precisely the particular situation in hand, but only in fortunate cases do these new names stand up against the traditional currency and authority of old names. The geologist is often in despair in his attempt to express his ideas clearly and precisely, and at the same time to use terms which will be understandable by his readers and will not arouse needless controversy.

As illustrative of the above remarks reference may be made to a few terms commonly used in economic geology, such as primary, secondary, syngenetic, epigenetic, supergene, hypogene, protore, etc.

The most commonly used of these terms are primary and secondary. It is almost impossible to define them in a way which will cover all the conceptions for which they have been used, and yet in their context they have been very useful in conveying essential ideas. An ore formed by direct processes of sedimentation has sometimes been called primary, whereas an ore formed by later enrichment of these sediments has been called secondary. An ore formed directly by igneous processes has been called primary, while an ore formed by enrichment of such primary ore by later processes has been called secondary. It is clear, however, that these terms are merely relative, with application to a specific sequence, and that they do not fix the absolute position of the ore in a sequence applying to all ores. For instance, ores deposited directly as sediments or placers may be derived from the erosion of preëxisting ore bodies—in which case it may sometimes be convenient to refer to the sedimentary ores or placers as secondary and the earlier ores as primary. Or a sulphide deposit originating through igneous agencies may undergo two or three successive enrichments, each successive one secondary to the preceding, but primary to the one following. In spite of these obvious difficulties, the terms primary and secondary may be entirely intelligible as indicating relative order of development under a given set of conditions.

The term syngenetic has been used for mineral deposits formed by processes similar to those which have formed the enclosing rocks and in general simultaneously with them, and epigenetic for those introduced into preëxisting rocks. In certain cases syngenetic may be roughly synonymous with primary, and epigenetic with secondary, and yet a primary ore may be epigenetic. For instance, zinc sulphides in the Mississippi valley limestones (pp. 54–55) are epigenetic, and yet are primary with reference to a later enrichment. The two sets of terms are meant to convey somewhat different ideas and are not interchangeable.

Ransome[4] has suggested, especially for vein and contact deposits, a series of names which has the considerable advantage of definiteness:—hypogene ores, formed in general by ascending non-oxidizing solutions, perhaps hot; supergene ores, formed in general by oxidizing and surface solutions, initially cold and downward moving; and protores, or metallized rock or vein substances which are too low in tenor to be classed as ores, but which would have been converted into ores had the enriching process been carried far enough. In this connection Ransome defines primary ore as unenriched material that can be profitably mined. In view of the general use of the terms primary and secondary as expressing a sequential relation of ore development, it is doubtful whether this more precise definition will supersede the older usage. Also it may be noted that commercial conditions might require, under these definitions, the designation of an ore as a protore at one time or place and as a primary ore at another. Hypogene ores are dominantly primary, and supergene ores are dominantly secondary, but either may include both primary and secondary ores.

The terms of these several classifications overlap, and seek to express different aspects of the same situation. While almost synonymous in certain applications they are not in others.

In this text the writer has certainly not escaped the difficulties in regard to names above referred to, nor in fact has he made any exceptional effort to do so. His chief purpose is to convey, in somewhat elementary terms, an understandable idea of the central features of economic geology. In the main, the most widely accepted terms are used. Almost at every turn it would be possible, in the interests of precision, to introduce qualifying discussions of names—but at the expense of continuity and perspective in the presentation of the principal subject-matter. The writer does not wish to minimize the necessity for careful and precise nomenclature; but he regards it important that the student focus his attention on the central objective facts of the subject, and that he do not become misled by the sometimes over-strenuous advocacy of certain names or classifications in preference to others. If the facts are understood, he will ordinarily have no difficulty in judging the significance of the variety of names proposed to express these facts. If, on the other hand, the student approaches the subject with a ready-made set of names and definitions learned by rote, he is in danger of perceiving his facts from one angle only and through a distorted perspective.