I really appreciate your visiting my channel, friend. And because watch time is so important to us all, I am always happy to bring back the love with a play *_in full_* (38 minutes) and a big like #6 from Bits of Real Panther! I remember the days when I had time to actually sit and watch people's videos! :O Anyway, we are winding our way through the week, a little bit at a time... I hope your week has been incredible so far, Mr. Baumann!
Thanks Steve - this helped a lot. I have a question though - one of the examples I plotted falls directly on the Alkali-Feldspar Granite and the Granit boundary. In the rare situation when it falls on the boundary like this is there a rule on how to classify it?
No. There isn’t. If that happens, it’s really up to you. Some people with say you always got right and up. OT here’s down and left. I generally will include them both. I might say “granite to granodiorite” or something like that. Or if it’s one sample of many from the same pluton and it’s the odd one out, say I got 9 others that were granite, I would just include it in granite.
Seems like the whole thing revolves around the accuracy of your percent estimates - what kind of error bars in those estimates would be acceptable before they start skewing your results?
It depends on how good you are. You can check it with density as well. I’ve done that. Especially in aphanitoc rocks where it’s hard to see the minerals even under magnification. The large and more euhedral the crystals, the easier it is. I would say, on phaneritic rocks, if you’re good at it, +/-2.5%
I'm in shorts until it gets below 50. I managed to follow pretty well until you got to the equations, and I followed that pretty well, but I really do hate math of any kind. Good video.
Jamie Eckles maths is your friend! This is one of the things in geology where you have to do the maths. You can’t just plot things in an orthographic projection or on a stereonet. Although I do prefer the latter myself.
I was really struggling to plot this. Thank you so much🙏🏽💯
I really appreciate your visiting my channel, friend. And because watch time is so important to us all, I am always happy to bring back the love with a play *_in full_* (38 minutes) and a big like #6 from Bits of Real Panther!
I remember the days when I had time to actually sit and watch people's videos! :O
Anyway, we are winding our way through the week, a little bit at a time... I hope your week has been incredible so far, Mr. Baumann!
Bits of Real Panther I can do that!
I think you're trying to make my head explode with all this math stuff lately Steve. 😂👍💯
Casual Carolina Fishing maths friend
Wow, great workshop my friend! Very educational video. Thumbs up
Thanks for explaining so well
It's not the sexiest, but I appreciate the glimpse into real-world geology. Thank you.
Jimmy P I agree. Totally not hot. I do these on occasion to help students. If you think this one is dry, you should see my stereonet video!
loved your explanation sir
thanks a lot for such great video
now I know I will never make a mistake in plotting a qapf diagram
from India 🇮🇳
Thanks. I hoped it was helpful.
Love your method, that's fantastic and very easy to learn
Thanks
Thanks Steve - this helped a lot. I have a question though - one of the examples I plotted falls directly on the Alkali-Feldspar Granite and the Granit boundary. In the rare situation when it falls on the boundary like this is there a rule on how to classify it?
No. There isn’t. If that happens, it’s really up to you. Some people with say you always got right and up. OT here’s down and left. I generally will include them both. I might say “granite to granodiorite” or something like that. Or if it’s one sample of many from the same pluton and it’s the odd one out, say I got 9 others that were granite, I would just include it in granite.
@@stevenbaumann8692 Great, thanks Steve!
Seems like the whole thing revolves around the accuracy of your percent estimates - what kind of error bars in those estimates would be acceptable before they start skewing your results?
It depends on how good you are. You can check it with density as well. I’ve done that. Especially in aphanitoc rocks where it’s hard to see the minerals even under magnification. The large and more euhedral the crystals, the easier it is. I would say, on phaneritic rocks, if you’re good at it, +/-2.5%
I'm in shorts until it gets below 50. I managed to follow pretty well until you got to the equations, and I followed that pretty well, but I really do hate math of any kind. Good video.
Jamie Eckles maths is your friend! This is one of the things in geology where you have to do the maths. You can’t just plot things in an orthographic projection or on a stereonet. Although I do prefer the latter myself.
@@stevenbaumann8692 Just never been my wheelhouse. Some folks like me just cant grock it. My favorite subjects in school were history and English.
You "highlight" some good points with those markers.
Vibrantly Brantly o see what you did there.