7.8 preliminary estimated strength
Blogging on phone more to follow
http://ptwc.weather.gov/ptwc/?region=1&id=pacific.TIBPAC.2012.03.20.1813
7.8 preliminary estimated strength
Blogging on phone more to follow
http://ptwc.weather.gov/ptwc/?region=1&id=pacific.TIBPAC.2012.03.20.1813
Whoa, that site (sustania) would probably look great on a 16-color display….
Would rather have Freedonia – better Groucho Marx than Karl Marx any day….
Is there any analysis being done to compare the current
alignments to similar ones in the past, i.e. to see where
we could predict in retrospect? (Not putting this too well,
I suspect, but it’s late here…sorry).
160km down. Depth is key when looking at magnitude. Look at Christchurch NZ for comparison where M6+ destroyed the city from 10km depth.
Larry wrote:
I think the perceived increase in seismic activity is more a case of increased reporting.
========================================================================
… to which I would add: “and improved detection.” The advent of solid state technology
(transistors et al & esp. strain gauges) made really sensitive seismographs cheap. Such
cheapness enabled installation everywhere. The global seismograph network did not exist
50 years ago. Now, an earthquake such as the one at Acapulco, registers on almost all seismographs around the world.
I read the article and have another question. The term Earth Tides is repeatedly used but never defined.
I ran a search and found this which presents many of the same conclusions ( http://www.okgeosurvey1.gov/tide.html ):
Earth tides, like ocean tides, are caused by the gravitational attraction of the sun and moon on the rotating earth. The ocean tides are similar, but they vary from place to place according to the shape of the shorline. What we commonly call “TIDE” is the DIFFERENCE between the ocean tides and the earth tides seen at shorelines.
The DIFFERENCE seen at shorelines? This doesn’t make any sense to me.
excerpt from the article:
This proves beyond any doubt that the vast majority (98%) of worldwide earthquakes are governed by the Sun and Moon. Even the smaller earthquakes in the magnitude range of 2-3 faithfully follow this relationship. It is also seen that numerous aftershocks, which follow any major earthquake, faithfully follow straight-line curves, generated by the plot for (EMD+SEM) vs GMT timings.
If I’m following, the article basically states that for the seismically active regions selected, earthquakes can be predicted, with a reasonable probability, to the day and hour based solar moon cycles and the results clearly show a 98% regional conformance to this pattern.
That’s more that pretty amazing if its true.
Richard Scott Bixler says:
March 20, 2012 at 4:49 pm
There was just a 5.0 aftershock that struck Acapulco, Mexico – http://earthquake.usgs.gov/earthquakes/recenteqsww/Quakes/usc0008me2.php
==============
Hi Richard,
That doesn’t appear to be an aftershock, its in a different area and possibly along the rift I mentioned earlier.
Quake:
very close to Colonia Guadalupe, Mexico
5.0: 16.449°N, -98.657°W | 21.3 Km Deep
2012 March 20 22:25:43 UTC
map location: http://www.gorissen.info/Pierre/maps/googleMapLocation.php?lat=16.449000&lon=-98.657000&setLatLon=Set
Distances between Quakes:
Approximate distance between the 7.4 and the 5.1 quakes = 24 km or 14.9 miles
Approximate distance between the 5.1 and the 5.0 quakes = 69.49 km or 43.1 miles
Approximate distance between the 7.4 and the 5.0 quakes = 54.96 km or 34.15 miles
Surface Distance: http://www.chemical-ecology.net/java/lat-long.htm
Convert Decimal Degrees: http://transition.fcc.gov/mb/audio/bickel/DDDMMSS-decimal.html
OMG, please tell me that people are NOT thinking that fewer sunspots is triggering earthquakes!!!! On the other hand, this opens up possibilities for me. Sacrifices accepted at 8:00 evening services and then again at 8:00 AM services. Money preferred.
Time duration between quakes is strange — approximately 2 hours 12 mins. plus or minus 1 min.
If another follows the pattern…
Pamela Gray says:
March 20, 2012 at 6:36 pm
========
Hi Pamela,
No one is suggesting sunspots as far as I can tell. It has something to do with Earth Tides (what ever they are) and Solar Moon alignments (New Moon to Full Moon to New Moon). The study is interesting but I’ve got a lot of unanswered questions.
John from CA says:
March 20, 2012 at 6:54 pmTime duration between quakes is strange — approximately 2 hours 12 mins. plus or minus 1 min.
If another follows the pattern…
__________________________________________________________
I bet it has to do with wave propogation down into the core and then reflected back
John, that reminds me of a song, but I’m either too old or had too many glasses of red wine to remember much of it.
Alright you jokers who say these quakes are predictable, make some quake predictions. You have a world-wide audience. Tell us what elliptical numbers or sun-moon-etc axis predicts for the next most likely times for large earthquakes. Give a list with likelihood of happening. Quakes happen all the time. So, make them Mag 7+ if you can.
Identification of a ‘parallel’ or analogy without identifying the linkage in causation, as requested.
What is the analogous event or ‘process’ in the ‘water flow’ (delay) stage where ‘water flows down the river’ before flooding the City of New Orleans?
The ‘force’ exerted by changes in the geomagnetic field would have felt (imparted a force on the earth) the day and the hour and the minute the field began to experience changes, so what/where was the energy stored for a week? Had the liquid core of the earth been disturbed we would have seen a static change for a week in the earth’s magnetic field, and a change back would have been a dynamic change that could also have been detected and measured.
.
Do I detect posers (the U.S. EMP Preparedness folks); how familiar do you suppose they are with EMP testing on COTS equipment (and related areas, including lightning survivability testing, as well as Electrostatic discharge testing at the IC-pin level on up to the final, deliverable, consumer equipment) ? They should also be familiar with the parallels and differences between GIC influences (geomagnetic storm affects) and a high-altitude nuclear burst … but I am wondering …
You have cited more ‘scare press’ if you ask me. At this point, the posters on this blog should understand the awareness of, and the practices implemented and used by the utilities to avert GIC/geomagnetic storm trouble and possible damage to equipment (when following proper procedure); the goal of ‘the U.S. EMP Preparedness folks’ would be seem to be the same as ‘the MSM press’ which may be summed up in one word: drama.
.
John from CA says:
March 20, 2012 at 6:58 pm
No one is suggesting sunspots as far as I can tell. It has something to do with Earth Tides (what ever they are) and Solar Moon alignments (New Moon to Full Moon to New Moon).
There is no evidence that earthquakes have anything to do with the phases of the Moon. Here is the number of earthquakes greater than M5.5 since 1900 as a function of moon phase: http://www.leif.org/research/Earthquakes-Full-New.png there is no correlation.
Vukcevic;
See also quotes of two conflicting views, from two major USA scientific institutions, USGS and NASA.>>>
That’s only one Vuk. NASA was converted to Muslim outreach at the beginning of the Obama administration.
JDN says:
March 20, 2012 at 7:41 pm
Alright you jokers who say these quakes are predictable, make some quake predictions. You have a world-wide audience. Tell us what elliptical numbers or sun-moon-etc axis predicts for the next most likely times for large earthquakes.
And WHERE.
For a comprehensive overview of the study of solar electromagnetic influences on quake production, with regards to earth currents, lunar tidal effects, and earth harmonic frequencies with regard to latitude see;
http://www.geo-seismic-labs.org/
http://www.geo-seismic-labs.org/GSL/REPORTS/2007/MT_ULF_2007.htm#GLBULF
http://www.geo-seismic-labs.org/GSL/gslfla1.htm
Hi Jim
What makes you think that the geomagnetic storms stopped a week ago?
http://www.vukcevic.talktalk.net/EQM7.htm
1. we don’t know if there is a connection
2. if there is we don’t know the mechanism
see quotes from USGS and NASA scientists in the above link.
Aim of the post is for ‘thought initiating’ process, since idle brains are hardly of any use.
_Jim says:
March 20, 2012 at 8:22 pm
Had the liquid core of the earth been disturbed we would have seen a static change for a week in the earth’s magnetic field, and a change back would have been a dynamic change that could also have been detected and measured.
Possibly. One step at the time, Jim.
Here is what it looks like:
http://www.vukcevic.talktalk.net/Tromso.htm
We don’t know, so it is better to monitor the daily data then do nothing.
origin studies…
1873
Rudolf falb
http://query.nytimes.com/mem/archive-free/pdf?_r=1&res=9F00E3DC1739E233A25755C2A9609C94669FD7CF
Nicola Scafetta say :
November 10, 2011 alle 9:51 pm
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2011/11/10/aurora-borealis-and-surface-temperature-cycles-linked/#comment-793830
I see that some persons insist with the thesis that a finding would be scientific only if everything is already fully understood and clear. However, I need to say that in scientific research one does not start with a full and complete knowledge about an issue. The full and complete knowledge of an issue is the conclusive step of a scientific research not its beginning. In scientific research people start with the data and try to understand what the data tell us. Then they try to model the phenomenon and/or propose possible mechanisms. This is what makes a theory. A specific proposed theory may then be further supported or rejected by additional research on the topic. This is the way in which science, in every field, progresses. So, there is nothing wrong if a single paper on an ongoing research does not explain in detail every possible issue related to the studied phenomenon, in particular if, as it is in this case, the phenomenon under study is extremely complex. And there is nothing wrong is such a kind of paper may contain some conjectures which may also be found wrong in the future.
About the comments from Leif Svalgaard, I need again to invite him to read my paper before criticize it and to do that with a little bit of open mind (of course he does not need to open it too much because we do not want that his brain get lost somewhere).
About the tides Svalgaard does not really appear to understand the issue. Time ago he was claiming that nobody in the past, before Newton, knew that the tides were induced by the moon. I needed to prove to him that in the past, on the contrary, everybody knew that the tides were induced by the moon even if the people did not know about Newtonian mechanics.
Now he insists that I do not understand Kelvin’s argument about the tides because in his opinion I ignore Doodson’s work, which by the way I have referenced in my paper together with the work of Kelvin.
Svalgaard does not understand the fact that it is not possible accurately calculate and predict the tides using the fundamental law of physics because of the enormous physical complexity of the problem, which is not limited to only know the existence of the gravity but also requires a detailed knowledge of a lot of other things including thermodynamics, fluido-dynamics and the fundamental local resonances. To overcome this ignorance issues Kelvin proposed a harmonic model based on astronomical cycles without putting any physics in it, but using astronomical geometry. Doodson simply expanded the argument of Kelvin.
That the method of Kelvin does not require any modern quantitative physics but only a qualitative argumentation based on empirical astronomy is proven not only in the same works of Kelvin on the topic but also by the fact that an equivalent methodology was adopted since ancient times to predict the tides. One medieval work that addresses the issue and explains quantitatively how the tides could be predicted based on astronomical cycles is the De temporum ratione (The Reckoning of Time) by the Northumbrian monk Bede in AD 725: quasi 1000 years before Newton.
Volker Doormann says:
March 20, 2012 at 4:05 pm
I did some harmonic research on earth quakes. Using a simple algorithm adding ecliptic integer modes. ..
The true point is, intelligent people have more interest in refuting the unknown, then to do lonesome hard science work or even tolerate it.
“From: Volker Doormann <noreply@volker-doormann.org
Date: Thu, 02 Jun 2005 21:13:29 +0200
Subject: 2006.01.02
Message-ID: <d7nlqu$lc4$00$1@news.t-online.com
Zum Beispiel Djakarta 2. Januar 2006</b<, 13h45 (06:45 GMT)”
"A major earthquake occurred at 06:10:49 (UTC) on Monday, January 2, 2006. The magnitude 7.4 event has been located EAST OF THE SOUTH SANDWICH ISLANDS. (This event has been reviewed by a seismologist.) Location: 60.807°S, 21.474°W ”
I could make this demonstration because of the knowledge of the harmonic laws in the solar system.
Who is interested in evidence, there is a correlation between the yearly earthquake frequency mag >7.0 and the yearly component of the solar system harmonics:
However, I have made a prediction correct in time of about 35 minutes a half year before a major quake, but for a wrong place (120° East from right place) because I was not aware that there is a quake region in the South Atlantic.
Any better science based quake predictions known?
BTW. The work of j. H. Nelson
V.
Volker Doormann says:
March 20, 2012 at 4:05 pm
I did some harmonic research on earth quakes. Using a simple algorithm adding ecliptic integer modes. ..
The true point is, intelligent people have more interest in refuting the unknown, then to do lonesome hard science work or even tolerate it.
“From: Volker Doormann <noreply@volker-doormann.org
Date: Thu, 02 Jun 2005 21:13:29 +0200
Subject: 2006.01.02
Message-ID: <d7nlqu$lc4$00$1@news.t-online.com
Zum Beispiel Djakarta 2. Januar 2006</b<, 13h45 (06:45 GMT)”
"A major earthquake occurred at 06:10:49 (UTC) on Monday, January 2, 2006. The magnitude 7.4 event has been located EAST OF THE SOUTH SANDWICH ISLANDS. (This event has been reviewed by a seismologist.) Location: 60.807°S, 21.474°W ”
I could make this demonstration because of the knowledge of the harmonic laws in the solar system.
Who is interested in evidence, there is a correlation between the yearly earthquake frequency mag >7.0 and the yearly component of the solar system harmonics:
http://www.up-research.com/image/35year.gif
However, I have made a prediction correct in time of about 35 minutes a half year before a major quake, but for a wrong place (120° East from right place) because I was not aware that there is a quake region in the South Atlantic.
Any better science based quake predictions known?
BTW. The work of j. H. Nelson
V.
As I understand it, the assertion is that both sunspots and earthquakes have a common controlling / influencing modality. (Exactly what that is varies a bit by thesis 😉 So not “sunspots cause” but more “they come together when they come”.
This could have a realistic foundation in that tidal forces could be acting on both in some harmonic / resonant pattern. (Orbital Resonance is one of the defining features of all these things moving in space; and lots of things are ‘synchronized’ due to such properties.)
@Leif:
As I understand it, it is not just “phase of the moon” but is “phase of the moon at perigee”. (Then again, I’m not all that exact on it. There may be some offset from exact perigee. I’ve not been motivated enough to dredge through it all…) So the “Magic Handwaving” has to do with looking at when does a very high tide happen “near” closest lunar approach (but with some odd bit having to do with offset angle to the sun, too… Like I said, “undermotivated” to absorb it all…)
Oh, and both new and full “count” in that both raise higher tides. (So you have fully 1/2 of the time being preferred… but the other two phases may be “enough” if they happen when at perigee… or some such [ waves hands frantically 😉 ]
@All:
Rocks slowly build up stress. Eventually they let loose. I could easily see a tidal or EMP driven ‘nudge’ acting to trigger at the last moment (and in geologic terms, the ‘moment’ could be a month long). At the same time; some times it’s just going to break loose when it feels like it.
So IMHO you can predict SOME increase in probability, but no actual moments of quaking. Which is kind of useless for my needs. ( I live between two major faults. I “rode the beast” during Loma Prieta – a 7.2 at the time, since re-written lower…) So it’s nice to know that the Hayward / Calaveras might let loose on a full or new moon perigee… but that only narrows it down to a few hundred of them per break cycle, except when it just lets loose anyway…
That the sun might also be somehow stirred by various tidal forces as an Orbital Resonance Coincidence is amusing too, but not exactly useful, for the same reasons.
But hey, if you start batting 500 on calls with dates constrained to a one week window and for particular 10 degree boxes of geography, sign me up…
tallbloke says:
March 20, 2012 at 1:30 pm
“Michele predicted this two days ago.”
And also where? If not, it’s a useless prediction. There is a magnitide 7,0 – 7,9 earthquake somewhere every three weeks. That’s about a 5% chance every day. So if there are 100 bloggers randomly predicting M7 quakes on specific dates, quite a few of them will be successful.