Retain the same regional-background assumption as in part (b). The northern pluton is about thick beneath the station near the northern trough, while its gravity anomaly is about . Its anomaly relative to the greenstone maximum is approximately . Therefore the contrast equation is
Using the result of part (b), the second term contributes , leaving a net pluton anomaly of about . Hence , effectively close to the host-rock density at the precision of this diagram.
The apparent trough is strongly negative relative to the greenstone belt, but hardly negative relative to the southern host-rock background. If a northward regional trend is intended instead, it must be stated: in general,
with both gravity values in milligals. For example, a northern background of would give , but the same reference would also change part (b). No regional curve is explicitly identified in the supplied figure, so the numerical result must retain its reference-field assumption. This is the geological nonuniqueness of geophysical inversion of potential-field interpretation, rather than a reason to force a presumed textbook granite density onto the plot.

Articles by others on the same topic (0)

There are currently no matching articles.