Ahhhhh, ok. I have trouble reading that map sometimes. Those circled in yellow are supposed to be the most recent. Go figure. Thanks.

Originally posted by apex

forestlady: I hadn't really noticed that sort of thing really,but that seems very deep yes. Perhps some deep subduction zone occurence?

Oh and what do you mean by this exactly?

You can chart the progress of the Ring of Fire quakes moving from Fiji area north and then east over to Alaska.

Hi Apex: Check out the URL I gave in my post. It has a nice feature - it has a list of quakes in the last 30 days. You can check it as the reports come in. Anyway, check out that 30 day list (you can click on the button beneath map). Study it for the last week or so. You will find that there was a 7.2 quake in Fiji followed by numerous other ones 4.0 and above, all in that area. Next, notice that the earthquakes seem to be moving north. Last week, Fiji was the hot spot, now it's between Aleutian Islands and Siberia. Also, check out the vast amount of activity all along the eastern shores of South America. In short, the only spot not affected so much is Calif, Washington and Oregon. But to me, it looks like it's closing in on the Pacific Coast. There was also an 8.2 in China I believe about a week ago. Lots of high level quakes in the last 10 days or a week - which may mean that it's aggravated other plates enough to shift and keep on shifting for awhile. Today, the above 4.0 quakes have been all day long near the Kuril Islands, off the coast of SE Siberia, not too far from the Aleutians.
Hope that helps make it more clear. What do you think about all this Apex?

It's an interesting idea that, but I think you missed Malaysia or Indonesia, but there was the Tsunami generating earthquake there, which may mean that there will not be anything there. The San Andreas Fault is also transverse rather than a subduction zone. it is an interesting hypothesis though, So lets wait to see what happens. After all it is known (and accepted by some) that one event can affect places further away, so there may be something that happens.

I might have miscounted, because i counted them myself, but it would be a big miscount.

Most have been 5.0 or higher as well.

Where does it say 50? And USGS says there have been 29 there. I have no idea how many aftershocks is considered normal.

There is no formula for how many aftershocks are normal for a particular size...each quake is different, each has it's own features, and each moves it's own way.

That being said, it is not uncommon to have thousands of aftershocks in short order of a quake especially of this magnitude. I recall from the 94 quake here in LA that we reached over 1000 aftershocks within several days; some of them were nearly as large as the original shake. And there were devastating aftershocks as long after that quake as 6 months.

If you think about it, if there were no aftershocks I'd be rather concerned...a massive amount of earth just shifted; it will continue to resettle for quite some time...and if it doesn't, then there is additional pressure which needs to be considered.

So yes, that many aftershocks (either 50, or 29) is really rather normal.

Regards~
Aimless