uraniumbull on pfn tool calibration

From SS

No this will not lead to a significant downgrade.
eU308 Readings do not take into account "disequilibrium"
The Gamma tool does not measure Uranium, it actually largely measures RADIUM!

So what are we using a Gamma tool for anyway.

Gamma tools work really well in deposits where the uranium is not mobile.
Thats because the gamma tool measure the gamma rays emitted from daughter products caused by the decomposition of U 235 and U 238.

Unfortunately Uranium is highly soluble.

So the actual uranium could in certain deposits get washed away and leave the less soluble radioactive Radium behind.

So gamma logging actually shows you where uranium once was, rather than where it is.
Uranium is not very radioactive and does not give off any gamma rays at all.

Uranium is also an absolute bugger to assay.
It could well be the higher PFN tool reading is correct.

We know one PFN Tool is calibrated closely to the assay results obtained from ANSTO.

But are the ANSTO results correct?

Of course what ANSTO measured would be the correct amount...
But what about the sample?

Here lies another problem. While drilling they use water to cool the drill bit.
Remember that uranium is highly soluble!
So guess what can happen to your core sample. Its extremely easy to wash your uranium away!!! especially considering it is in sand.

So if you calibrate your PFN tool to the core sample, you will get a higher reading in the hole. (Which would actually be accurate!)

If you assume the core sample is correct and you calibrate your tool to the hole.
Your PFN Tool will read the hole, the same as the assayed core sample.
This would actually report an artificially low figure.
I gather though it will be this figure that gets used for the JORC.

So I hope you begin to understand where all this confusion is coming from.