The foregoing analysis was undertaken from the viewpoint that the narrow range of uranium mobilization, migration, and fixation mechanisms considered by most explo-rationists to be permissible for economic concentrations possibly was being overemphasized. Not only has this narrow range of concepts been extended beyond the limits of applicability for the deposit types on which the criteria were developed, but the concepts have been applied to other types of deposits whose differences, once recognized, demand a revision of exploration concepts. The goal of the study was to verify or disprove this inference regarding mobilization, migration, and fixation mechanisms. The method chosen was to review and evaluate all the latest data and concepts pertaining to the original distribution of radioelements in the earth, and all the possible ways they might be mobilized, redistributed, and refixed. Once identified, the possible mechanisms could be classified by their relative importance in producing economic uranium ore deposits.
The study is considered a success by the writer, at least to the extent that such a large number of possible processes was revealed and that they were easily resolved into important categories simply by considering them on a continental or global scale. The condition of overextension of a limited range of guiding technology beyond its applicability limits is believed to be verified. The accuracy and usefulness of the existing technology are considered substantiated within its valid range. That it has not been helpful in duplicating other types of deposits to which it was believed applicable is considered evidence that such deposits actually represent different types which are only partly explained by the limited interpretation range; their distinctive generation mechanisms and characteristics have not all been recognized.