AdamB wrote:
Never in my career has a single geologist ever said "gee, the reason those wells are different is because of how isotropic they are!!". Not once.
You are a bit of a thickie, aren't you. I get that you don't understand what the words mean---I get that----but why don't you just look up the words?
Now you don't understand the word "isotropic." I've already explained this word to you once. But you still don't get it.
Soooo---Do I have to do it again?
I guess so......OK, here we go.
Once again, you are posting nonsense.
You obviously still don't know what the word "isotropic" means even after I explained it to you.
It doesn't mean heterogeneous. It doesn't mean different.
The word isotropic means substances that have similar physical properties throughout the body of the material. In geology it used to describe rocks or minerals with similar properties. And now lets consider your silly claim that geologists don't use the word "isotropic". All I can say is you are a bit of a thickie. Geologists, biologists, physicists, engineers and material scientists all frequently use that term. I'm a scientist and I use that term. Its a common scientific term. For instance, the wikipedia article on the term "isotropy" defines the word "isotropic" this way:
In the study of mechanical properties of materials, "isotropic" means having identical values of a property in all directions. This definition is also used in geology and mineralogy.WIKI: Isotropy Now lets look more closely at the exact usage you don't understand, i.e. the use of the word Isotropic to describe oil production from oil bearing formations.
Have you heard of the Schlumberger Corporation? Do you know what they do? Probably not, so I'll have to explain that to you as well. Schlumberger is the leading company doing well logging. In other words, Schlumberger is in the business of describing the characteristics of rocks that produce petroleum.
If anyone knows what the proper terms are to describe oil bearing formations it would be Schlumberger, right?
Got it so far?
OK, lets check out Schlumberger's "OILFIELD GLOSSARY" where they define the terms they use to describe the rocks in oilfields.
What do we find?
Oh LOOK, you thickie. There it is. Its the word "isotropic"---and its being used exactly as I used the word, and exactly as I defined it for you. I said the Bakken formation was not isotropic.....
And how how does Schlumberger define an "isotropic formation?"
Schlumberger says:
isotropic formation1. n. [Well Testing]
A type of formation whose rock properties are the same in all directions. Although this never actually occurs, fluid flow in rocks approximates this situation closely enough to consider certain formations isotropic.
Antonyms: anisotropic formation
isotropic_formationDo you get it now, you thickie?
This is what---the third time in the last two weeks you've struggled to understand a word I used? I strongly suggest you look up the words you don't know in a dictionary before posting about words you don't know.
And after I explain something to you once, please read my explanation closely and try to understand the explanation the first time. Your inability to understand what various words and terms mean even after they are explained to you is ridiculous.
Even though you are a bit of a thickie, you should at least be able to use a dictionary. SHEESH
Cheers!