fun with new graphs
Jun. 19th, 2013 12:19 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
kareinaI have been aware of the existence of "spider" diagrams to display the concentration of Rare Earth Elements (REE) within a rock sample since I was an undergrad. However, I have never really used them because A) my data from my previous research projects didn't include that sort of data, and B) I didn't really understand how to "normalize" the data in order to create the diagrams.
However, for my current research project it turns out that I do have REE data for most of my samples. I hadn't really thought about that fact yet, but today, when putting together an outline for a paper based on my research, inspired by a paper I recently read by some people who are doing a very similar project to mine, looking at geochemical data in 3D, but for a VERY different type of ore deposit. In their paper they used spider diagrams to look at their REE data and drew some conclusions as to how the REEs differ based on different patterns of alteration in their rocks. This inspired me to look at my own REE data.
Therefore I spent the day playing with it. That part about "don't know how to normalize the data" is no longer an issue, because my favorite program for plotting geochemical data knows how to do that, and does it automatically. (Have I mentioned recently how much I love this program--there is nothing like using a tool that was developed to do EXACTLY what I want to do, by people who need to do the exact same things with it?)
When doing these sorts of diagrams one organizes the data into groups, and all of the samples in one group contribute to a single line on the diagram. One possible way to group them is by rock type. Another is by concentration of one (or more) ingredient within the rock (oxides or elements). Because I have no idea which ones would be the best I decided to take a systematic approach, and, after playing with it all day, I now have a pdf of some 60 different diagrams, each one focusing on grouping the samples by the concentration of a single ingredient. I also have a spreadsheet summarizing the results--for some of them the resultant patterns are smooth regular curves, for others they are more of a saw-tooth shaped. For some of them the pattern is smooth for the groups with not much of that ingredient, but saw tooth for the group with the highest concentration of that ingredient. For others it is the exact opposite--saw toothed for the low concentrations, smooth for high.
It was a fun, and reasonably productive day at work, followed by a nice, reasonably productive evening. We bought some second hand scythe blades (because some of what is growing in the field will be easier dealt with by hand with them, than trying to use the ride on mower we got second hand from his brother), we managed to stack half of what was left of the pile of wood in the yard--one more session should see that done, which is good, because it will be nice to have it gone for the midsummer SCA event we are hosting here, and I made time to play hammer dulcimer, too. I have nearly worked out the one tune I never quite learned on the nyckleharpa--I can play most of it, but there is a couple of spots that call for a very quick sequence of four notes, and which four notes it is changes from one spot to the next, and I never quite managed to memorize that bit, and I do not yet have any other option for playing other than memorizing what I should do.
But tonight I think I managed to finally learn them on the dulcimer. hopefully I can find the time to try it again tomorrow and see if it stuck, and, perhaps, even check the nyckleharpa and see if learning the sequences on the hammer dulcimer translates to also being able to push the correct keys on the nyckleharpa.
Oh--yes, I nearly forgot--yesterday's adventure. The department had a "meeting", which, in this case, is to say, a boat trip to the local archipelago. The archipelago of the northern Swedish coastline is, our guide (the park ranger for this area) told us, unlike any other in the world. It consists of islands made of sand and rounded stones which are growing rather quickly, as this part of the world continues to rise in rebound after the glacier melted. The sand and stones (ranging from gravel to boulders in size, with more on the small end than on the large), was all deposited here by the glacier, and gradually pushed southwards as the glaciers advanced. As a result the Bothnian bay is kind of shallow, and shallowest in the area where these deposits were thickest. One might wonder why these islands exist at all, if they are built from loose sand, gravel, and rocks--wouldn't storms and the resultant waves wash them away?
Nope-the storms are from the south, which is the direction the glaciers pushed the sand in the first place, so there is more of it out there, and during the storms the waves push the sand and rocks back to the north, and each storm builds the islands up, just that little bit. Add to that the rebound, and the islands are growing noticeably. Our guide says that the island he brought us to has grown 18 centimeters taller in the 21 years since he first started going there. What does this mean in terms of how it looks? Well, the old fishing village, which was very active there from the late 1800's to the early 1900's, has a cluster of houses all facing what was once the harbour. They houses are all offset from one another, because it was forbidden to build your house somewhere where it could block another man's view of his boat from his house. Today there is a wide, grassy field with a bit of forest where that old harbour was, and there is a much newer harbour, built by manual labour by folk who would have otherwise been unemployed during the 1930's.
Yes, I did take some photos, and there remains a chance that I might yet upload some to share, if anyone actually wants me to (e.g. the links aren't good enough), but not tonight--tonight I need to do yoga and get to bed. This is a short work week, and I have lots to do...
However, for my current research project it turns out that I do have REE data for most of my samples. I hadn't really thought about that fact yet, but today, when putting together an outline for a paper based on my research, inspired by a paper I recently read by some people who are doing a very similar project to mine, looking at geochemical data in 3D, but for a VERY different type of ore deposit. In their paper they used spider diagrams to look at their REE data and drew some conclusions as to how the REEs differ based on different patterns of alteration in their rocks. This inspired me to look at my own REE data.
Therefore I spent the day playing with it. That part about "don't know how to normalize the data" is no longer an issue, because my favorite program for plotting geochemical data knows how to do that, and does it automatically. (Have I mentioned recently how much I love this program--there is nothing like using a tool that was developed to do EXACTLY what I want to do, by people who need to do the exact same things with it?)
When doing these sorts of diagrams one organizes the data into groups, and all of the samples in one group contribute to a single line on the diagram. One possible way to group them is by rock type. Another is by concentration of one (or more) ingredient within the rock (oxides or elements). Because I have no idea which ones would be the best I decided to take a systematic approach, and, after playing with it all day, I now have a pdf of some 60 different diagrams, each one focusing on grouping the samples by the concentration of a single ingredient. I also have a spreadsheet summarizing the results--for some of them the resultant patterns are smooth regular curves, for others they are more of a saw-tooth shaped. For some of them the pattern is smooth for the groups with not much of that ingredient, but saw tooth for the group with the highest concentration of that ingredient. For others it is the exact opposite--saw toothed for the low concentrations, smooth for high.
It was a fun, and reasonably productive day at work, followed by a nice, reasonably productive evening. We bought some second hand scythe blades (because some of what is growing in the field will be easier dealt with by hand with them, than trying to use the ride on mower we got second hand from his brother), we managed to stack half of what was left of the pile of wood in the yard--one more session should see that done, which is good, because it will be nice to have it gone for the midsummer SCA event we are hosting here, and I made time to play hammer dulcimer, too. I have nearly worked out the one tune I never quite learned on the nyckleharpa--I can play most of it, but there is a couple of spots that call for a very quick sequence of four notes, and which four notes it is changes from one spot to the next, and I never quite managed to memorize that bit, and I do not yet have any other option for playing other than memorizing what I should do.
But tonight I think I managed to finally learn them on the dulcimer. hopefully I can find the time to try it again tomorrow and see if it stuck, and, perhaps, even check the nyckleharpa and see if learning the sequences on the hammer dulcimer translates to also being able to push the correct keys on the nyckleharpa.
Oh--yes, I nearly forgot--yesterday's adventure. The department had a "meeting", which, in this case, is to say, a boat trip to the local archipelago. The archipelago of the northern Swedish coastline is, our guide (the park ranger for this area) told us, unlike any other in the world. It consists of islands made of sand and rounded stones which are growing rather quickly, as this part of the world continues to rise in rebound after the glacier melted. The sand and stones (ranging from gravel to boulders in size, with more on the small end than on the large), was all deposited here by the glacier, and gradually pushed southwards as the glaciers advanced. As a result the Bothnian bay is kind of shallow, and shallowest in the area where these deposits were thickest. One might wonder why these islands exist at all, if they are built from loose sand, gravel, and rocks--wouldn't storms and the resultant waves wash them away?
Nope-the storms are from the south, which is the direction the glaciers pushed the sand in the first place, so there is more of it out there, and during the storms the waves push the sand and rocks back to the north, and each storm builds the islands up, just that little bit. Add to that the rebound, and the islands are growing noticeably. Our guide says that the island he brought us to has grown 18 centimeters taller in the 21 years since he first started going there. What does this mean in terms of how it looks? Well, the old fishing village, which was very active there from the late 1800's to the early 1900's, has a cluster of houses all facing what was once the harbour. They houses are all offset from one another, because it was forbidden to build your house somewhere where it could block another man's view of his boat from his house. Today there is a wide, grassy field with a bit of forest where that old harbour was, and there is a much newer harbour, built by manual labour by folk who would have otherwise been unemployed during the 1930's.
Yes, I did take some photos, and there remains a chance that I might yet upload some to share, if anyone actually wants me to (e.g. the links aren't good enough), but not tonight--tonight I need to do yoga and get to bed. This is a short work week, and I have lots to do...