论文部分内容阅读
近年来,业已深入到地质学各个分支领域的活动论思想,在成矿理论和区域或矿方面取得的成就暂时还很小。然而,建立在构造学和岩石学基础上的这一科学方向,似乎经受了相当大的变化。这类试验虽进行了多次,但是,正如评论性分析所指出的,它们在大多数情况下是不能令人满意的。现在,苏联的成矿研究,正如从这一科学分支的实用方向自然得出的,是沿着各种矿藏的大比例尺予测的道路发展的。它们是基于对含矿区地质构造的分析,而这种分析并不涉及矿区形成作用的实质。但是,由于包括地槽成矿理论在内的成矿理论基础,在新的地质情报压力下发生
In recent years, the thought of activity, which has been deeply involved in the various branches of geology, is still small in the aspects of metallogenic theory and regional or ore achievements. However, this scientific direction based on tectonics and petrology seems to have undergone considerable changes. Although these trials have been conducted many times, they are unsatisfactory in most cases, as the critical analysis points out. Now, the study of mineralization in the Soviet Union, just as it is naturally derived from the practical direction of this scientific branch, has been developed along the path to be expected from the large scale of various mineral deposits. They are based on the analysis of the geological structure of the ore-bearing area, and this analysis does not involve the essence of the formation of the mining area. However, due to the basis of metallogenic theory, including the geotectonic mineralization theory, under the pressure of new geological information