posted on May, 30 2004 @ 04:37 AM
Looks pretty normal to me, it looks like it originated near China as it has the largest activity but I can't be certain. But if you look at it it
started it seems around 23:00 and 10 minutes in China, and then about 20 minutes later was picked up by the Alaskan monitors and 10 minutes after that
picked up by monitors in Albuquerque, NM. Australia picked up the event about the same time Alaska did so I'm sure you can triangulate its position
Keeping with the logic Texas picked up an event just after New Mexico did.
South Korea picked it up very close to when China did, about 5 minutes before. Spitzbergen picked it up a little before Kongsberg which makes sense
to me as Kongsberg is a little farther away from the Japanese Islands than Spitzbergen and I have a feeling that it is some siesmic event located near
the convergent boundaries off Japan, which is a perfect assumption earthquakes only happen at convergent boundaries as earthquakes only happen where
colder rocks are coming together so that rules out the divergent boundaries.
Since China picked it up only shortly after Korea I have a feeling it is actually caused near the convergent boundary that runs with the Ryukyu
Islands just south of Japan.
And Petropavlosk picked it up just after Korea started to and it's just north-east of Korea (south Korea).
Yeah...so where ever it was it hit Korea and China very soon, then Petropavlosk, then moved outward in circles, hit spitzbergen hit Kongsberg Alaska
Hawaii New Mexico then Texas and so on...
Hmm that's cool, hit Arizona like half a minute before New Mexico.
Anyways, there's your daily viewing of the Seismographs, a single event recorded at different times by location seemingly from the area of Japan. If
only a Japanese data was available it'd probably be the most earliest detection.
I'd be concerned if all the monitors picked up really massive seismic events at the same time