MEMORIAL Ol- G. F. DECKER 17 



llie tlevelopiiioiit of apparatus for the inoasuroinoiit of the high tempera- 

 tures involved aiul of a trustworthy scale in which to express and com- 

 pare them, of appropriate means for determining and expressing rigidity, 

 viscosity, and other determinative qualities. 



The program was evidently directed to a quantitative study of igneous 

 rocks, but did not then reach so far. Nearly ten years were consumed in 

 the preparation of the weapons for the attack, which from any viewpoint, 

 whether physical or geological, was at that time a herculean task. Tlien 

 the political uplieaval of 1S92 intervened to put an end to the under- 

 taking tlirougli the familiar Washington method — the discontinuance of 

 appropriations. 



In consequence of this Dr. Becker returned perforce to a routine of 

 Survey work, being occupied mainly with the location and development 

 of the mineral resources of the country. 



Notwithstanding the fact that he had enjoyed a rare training for just 

 this kind of activity and had opportunity to work in a region of alto- 

 gether exceptional interest (California to Colorado), the task failed to 

 hold his interest, and he reverted constantly to the necessity for a strict 

 and more comprehensive application of physical law and method to all 

 genetic problems of geology. 



In the "Finite homogeneous strain, flow, and rupture of rocks" (1893), 

 wliicli is perhaps the finest product of Dr. Becker's analytical genius, we 

 recognize a splendid attempt to define and formulate in precise terms 

 some of the relations in the science of "rock mechanics." This was a 

 magnificent task of pioneer quality and of extraordinary difficulty, but 

 was not immediately fruitful, because clothed in somewhat abstruse 

 mathematical form. The paper is destined to exert a considerable influ- 

 ence upon future geological thought (geodynamics). 



His papers on schistosity and slaty cleavage were severely criticised, 

 l)ut in many instances his critics failed completely to understand the 

 rigorous metliods which he developed for dealing with these rather ab- 

 struse problems. His paper on the age of the earth was severely criticised 

 by Barrell. Doctor Becker apparently had no intention of replying to 

 Barrell, although the discovery just before his death of large quantities 

 of helium in natural gas served, I believe, to convince him that his esti- 

 mate of the age of the earth was not seriously in error. 



In 1900 Dr. Becker was able to reestablish his (geophysical) laboratory 

 with the writer as his assistant. The work was resumed substantially 

 where Barus and Hallock had left it in 1892, but with the advantage of 

 more appliances, and proceeded with less interference. The first paper, 



II — Ki r.i.. (Jkoi.. Soc. A.m.. V<ir.. ;il. 1010 



