Geophysical Prospecting 32, 142-143, 1984.

R E P L Y TO C O M M E N T B Y D.S. P A R A S N I S
A. ROY**

There is nothing in Parasnis comments that is new and has not been already
covered adequately in the original paper (Roy 1978) and the three subsequent sets of
comments and replies (Guptasarma 1981, Roy 1981a, 1981b, Barker 1981, Guerreiro
1983, Roy 1983). For instance, physical implications of relations (A) and (Bkwhich
are quite different from each other-were discussed at some length in the 1978
paper: (i) Thus, the potential at P can be thought of either as a direct effect of the
point source of current I (as in B) or as a sum of the indirect effects of the volume
elements (as in (A) bottom of p. 444), and (ii) The first expression (meaning (B))
gives us a means of finding the potential distribution, and, once that is known, the
second (meaning (A)) allows us to compute the contributions separately for each
volume element, which together constitute the observed signal (p. 451, italics in
original in both cases).
The two interpretations-dipoles
for (A) and monopoles for ( B t a r e correct
simultaneously and have different uses. If the integrations extend over the entire
space, both (A) and (B) will yield the same result for the potential at P . For (A),
however, one can also perform the integration over any specified volume-or consider the volume element itself-and obtain its contribution to the total measured or
computed signal. Relation (B) cannot do this. On the other hand, (A) is dependent
on (B), because only the latter can solve the boundary value problem and determine
the potential distribution in space.
No, equation (A) was not meant to be a sort of short cut or the royal road
to solution of boundary value problems.
The situation is analogous to, say, a gravity anomaly or signal being examined
either in space or in frequency domain. If all frequencies are added up, the result is
the same as that from the space domain. For the frequency domain, however, one
can examine/use the amplitude and phase characters of each frequency individually.
Space domain analysis lacks this facility. On the other hand, frequency study is
possible only after the space data have been gathered.
Chapter VIII in Kellogg (1953) derives 13 theorems, three Greens identities and
various other formulae. (A) is not one of them, although (B) is. Nowhere in this
chapter or elsewhere does Kellogg speak of volume elements acquiring dipole

* Received June 1983.

** Department of Geology, University of Ife, Ile-Ife, Nigeria
142

REPLY

143

moments, as (A) does. Derivation of (A) in Roy (1978)-one

ought to verify
firsthand-is not any more elementary, difficult, forbidding, or falsely pretentious
than any of the derivations in that chapter. The 1828 reference (taken from Kellogg)
to Greens essay, where he derived the three identities, is wholly irrelevant.
I invite Professor D.S. Parasnis to raise specific issues on the pages of the
relevant journals.

REFERENCES
BARKER,
R.D. 1981, Reply to comments by A. Roy, Geophysical Prospecting 29,958.
GUERREIRO,
S.C. 1983, Comment on A theorem for direct current regimes and some of its
consequences by A. Roy and some related papers and comments, Geophysical
Prospecting 31, 192-195.
GUPTASARMA,
D. 1981, Comments on A theorem for direct current regimes and some of its
consequences and related papers, Geophysical Prospecting 29, 308-3 11.
KELLOGG,
O.D. 1953, Foundations of Potential Theory, Dover, New York.
ROY, A. 1978, A theorem for D C regimes and some of its consequences, Geophysical
Prospecting 26,442-463.
ROY,A. 1981a, Reply to comments by D. Guptasarma, Geophysical Prospecting 29, 312-315.
ROY,A. 1981b, Comments on The offset system of electrical resistivity sounding and its use
with a multicore cable by R.D. Barker, Geophysical Prospecting 29,956957.
ROY,A. 1983, Reply to comment by S.C. Guerreiro, Geophysical Prospecting 31, 196.