Limitations of Geologic Field in Commercial Investigation Of Common Rocks
In general the qualities of the earth materials which determine their availability for use are only to a minor extent the qualities which the geologist ordinarily considers for mapping and descriptive purposes. The usual geological map and report on a district indicate the distribution and general nature of the common rocks, and also the extent to which they are being used as mineral resources. Seldom, however, is there added a sufficiently precise description, for instance of a clay, to enable the reader to determine which, if any, of the many different uses the material might be put to. The variety of uses is so great, and the technical requirements for different purposes are so varied and so variable, that it is almost impossible to make a description which is sufficiently comprehensive, and at the same time sufficiently exact, to give all the information desired for economic purposes. If the geologist is interested in disclosing the commercial possibilities in the raw materials of an area, he may select some of the more promising features and subject them to the technical analysis necessary to determine their availability for special uses. In this phase of his work he may find it necessary to enlist the coöperation of skilled technicians and laboratories in the various special fields. The problem is simplified if the geologist is hunting for a particular material for a specific purpose, for then he fortifies himself with a knowledge of the particular qualities needed and directs his field and laboratory study accordingly.
Too often the geologist fails to recognize the complexity and definiteness of the qualities required, and makes statements and recommendations on the use of raw materials based on somewhat general geologic observations. On the other hand, the engineer, or the manufacturer, or the builder often goes wrong and spends money needlessly, by failing to take into consideration general geologic features which may be very helpful in determining the distribution, amount, and general characters of the raw materials needed.
It is difficult to draw the line between the proper fields of the geologist and those of the engineer, the metallurgist, and other technicians. It is highly desirable that the specialist in any one of these fields know at least of the existence of the other fields and something of their general nature. Too often his actions indicate he is not acutely conscious even of the existence of these related branches of knowledge. The extent and detail to which the geologist will familiarize himself with these other fields will of course vary with his training and the circumstances of his work. Whatever his limit is, it should be definitely recognized; his work should be thorough up to this limit and his efforts should not be wasted in fields which he is not best qualified to investigate.
These remarks apply rather generally to mineral resources, but they are particularly pertinent in relation to the common rock materials which the geologist is daily handling,—for he is likely to assume that he knows all about them and that he is qualified to give professional advice to industries using them. In connection with metallic resources, the metallurgical and other technical requirements are likely to be more definitely recognized and the lines more sharply drawn, with the result that the geologist is perhaps not so likely to venture into problems which he is not qualified to handle.
The limits to geologic work here discussed are not necessarily limits separating scientific from non-scientific work. The study and determination of the qualities of rocks necessary for commercial purposes is fully as scientific as a study of the qualities commonly considered in purely geologic work, and the results of technical commercial investigations may be highly illuminating from a purely geological standpoint. When a field of scientific endeavor has been established by custom, any excursion beyond traditional limits is almost sure to be regarded by conservatives in the field as non-scientific, and to be lightly regarded. The writer is fully conscious of the existence of limits and the necessity for their recognition; but he would explain his caution in exceeding these limits on the ground of training and effectiveness, rather than on fear that he is becoming tainted with non-scientific matters the moment he steps beyond the boundaries of his traditional field.