Whats going on at yellowstone?

My eQuake started popping up like crazy so I hit www.isthisthingon.org... and WOW! look at the jump in activity across the entire park.

I also saw they got Norris Junction back up.


[edit on 2/2/10 by quietright]

reply to post by quietright


Yep, noticed this too - this latest batch is really being felt in places the previous swarm activity hasn't - Mary Lake and Thumb in particular if feel.

Does distribution affect views on whether it's tectonic or volcanic?

[edit on 2-2-2010 by MoorfNZ]

Originally posted by shutterbugw
Ok I have the ability to check graphs, I just need to know how to access the correct ones

I am using DSL and am ready to see what the real thing looks like.

Follow the instructions here:
www.abovetopsecret.com...

Originally posted by Robin Marks
reply to post by Shirakawa

 

And this swarm is 4.32M so it wins by a nose at this point. Have you calculated in these new ones? And how much data are you waiting on? How many quakes?

Please note this isn't a linear scale, so the higher the magnitude number, the exponentially higher is the energy involved. I have not counted new ones. I'm still waiting for the 1000+ small ones + the about 80-100, maybe more, which occurred in the last few hours.

reply to post by quietright


The same Quiet Right that's joined my Facebook Quake Watch page?

just started and clicked on a red dot about where Yellow stone is, and I got a screen display stating that there were 4 quakes registering at greater the 3 kind confusing as I have 2 data streams though ones coppersih and the other is blue so Ill be viewing the instructions on how to operate this thing but so far it is a really great find . so I'll be off a bit while learning this thing

reply to post by MoorfNZ


Yea, hope you don't mind.

I have a lot of interests, earthquakes & volcanoes among them. I used to post quite a bit in the Google earthquake discussion group but they got hit by spam bots alot & a couple of nut jobs & trolls that made it almost useless. I love this group as there is real intelligent discussion & I am learning so much more from you folks.

reply to post by quietright


No, I'm really pleased like-minded people are joining it

It's a place I hope will build into discussion and also good place to keep general quake stuff away from this thread

I'll shut up now and let the ruminations continue

I've got zero work done today because of this!!

quake.utah.edu...

today's flurry seemed more intense that the start of the swarm.
and only a couple other day appear to be more dramatic.

Here's the start of the swarm.

theinterveners.org...

Here's the 20th, it's very active all day, our flurry today came after a long quiet.

theinterveners.org...

And although the YVO states the swarm started on Jan 17th, here's the real start of the swarm on the 15th, 16th in the area of YMR.

theinterveners.org...

theinterveners.org...

It seems to have calm. Good time for a spectothingy.

"It seems to have calm. Good time for a spectothingy. "

Famous last words - I don't think she'll be calm for long as you said, I don't think this is just any old swarm...

Eh I broke GEE or broke something I clicked on the wrong thingy. and can't get a wave.

Folks I am off to bed as it is 04:40 here. This difference between the two sets of data is beginning to look very peculiar.

It is going to take me quite a long time to sort through all 3000 entries so don't expect a result for a day or so.

As a taster the YC catalog has 3000 and the ANSS has 639. The magnitudes in the ANSS have been adjusted - and it is looking as if it may be around the 0.9 mag but in a lot of cases it is more. Either way the inaccuracy leadinf to the 0.9 adjustment downwards means the cumulative value for the 1985 swarm is wrong even if the numbers are right.

earthquake.usgs.gov...

How fast would this quakes p waves get to Yellowstone?

Would it get there before this next Yellowstone quake?

earthquake.usgs.gov...

Just curious is all. Thanks Shirakawa for the graphs. Love em.

reply to post by Sf18443


Glad to help

I just updated that GEE tips thread with more information for monitoring Yellowstone particularly. See this post:

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Well guys. I do not care if everyone of you want to call it tectonic quakes. Tectonic movement of plates are caused by magma. You might just not want to call it volcanic. When it comes to YS, then I seem to be "offline" with most of you. I am sure the quakes are volcanic, meaning that pressure is building up.

Ok, so there have been no harmonics yet? Does it matter? Yes, Harmonic Tremors is an indication that magma are on the move, but how do we know the state of the magma?

I also posted before that the quakes seem to get more shallow, and according to what I can see at Earthquake List for Map Centered at 47°N, 110°W the list confirm it.


I'm sure that we don't have to wait that long until we also would see changes in the hydrothermal systems.

So, am I wrong when I see this as a sign of looming geological upheaval?

reply to post by Roald


Tectonic movement of plates are caused by friction and gravity.

Originally posted by jvz123
reply to post by Roald

 

Tectonic movement of plates are caused by friction and gravity.

In the absence of a volcano, yes.

Yellowstone is a big bubble of pressure being held in by layer upon layer of rock. As the pressure waxes and wanes, the rocks above grind together, like (as Robin mentioned) the I-35 bridge collapse being caused by expanding and contracting over and over for decades. It can't help but weaken the rock. That's been happening at Yellowstone for... well, since Neanderthals and Cro-Magnons started Doing It. Every little tiny quake is something else loosening up or cracking, some part of that shield holding back the pressure, so it has to be tectonic plate grinding caused by magma pressure (if not intrusions). The heat is slowly melting the ceiling away, too, thinning it out gradually over the eons. The eruptions over that enormous plume are so regular because of all those factors. It wears away until one day, poof... it can't take anymore. Structural failure. It is inevitable... but it's not inevitable that we'll see harmonic tremors before it. You don't see those as a needle's piercing a balloon. Ol' Yellow could easily pop without a single one. Nobody knows; it all depends on how fast it comes out once it begins.

There's also no way to know when it'll give way, not until either (a) it happens, or (2) the signs are so unmistakable that nobody will miss them. There really is no reason to panic yet. At this point, it's just fireworks. There's probably lots of time before it turns into artillery. Probably. But nobody knows. Just keep remembering that. It can't be predicted, only watched for; to pretend anything else is self-delusional. If it goes in our lifetimes, though, I'll be moderately surprised. There's still about five miles of rock sitting on it. That's pretty heavy. Heavy enough? Who knows? Nobody.

Most deaths are totally unexpected. Everything's fine, and then, not. Dying from Yellowstone's eventual eruption is exactly as predictable as being taken out by a serial killer. Does anyone worry about those all the time? Or even prepare for them? How many ATS threads have over 500 pages dedicated to people being hit by a bus, or falling off a building, or dying of cancer? I'm not sure what I'm trying to say, but... just stop worrying, everyone. If it happens, it happens, just like everything else, and we'll try to let you know sometime beforehand..

reply to post by Thought Provoker


Yeah, we get it. "Nobody knows."

Funny how one sentence completely irrelevant to anything you said causes a three paragraph response.

Originally posted by jvz123
reply to post by Thought Provoker

 

Yeah, we get it. "Nobody knows."

Funny how one sentence completely irrelevant to anything you said causes a three paragraph response.

Well that was rude.

I am curious to see if the trend of more shallow quakes continues. If so, than the swarm has definately 'changed'. Makes me think of it as a 'progression'....I guess the question is of what. Mother nature will answer the question in her own sweet time!

reply to post by jvz123

That's because it was a response to you and Roald, and a hundred other earlier posts. The part addressed just to you (the first paragraph) was the part about volcanic pressure being another reason plates grind together. Similar to how hearing constant doom predictions causes my teeth to grind together. It was an appeal to everyone to be realistic, not sensationalistic. Science First, that's my motto...

reply to post by westcoast


Is it really a trend if there's deeper quakes in the mix of said shallow ones anyway?

Maybe if all of them were getting progressively shallower.