It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Quake Watch 2011

page: 345
203
<< 342  343  344    346  347  348 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 1 2011 @ 06:23 AM
link   
reply to post by westcoast
 


Analysis from 00:00:00 UTC to 09:00:00 UTC GPW.UW..EHZ.2011.305

00:34:03 Distant quake - possibly N Cali
00:39:54 A more local quake but not immediately by the seismo
00:51:36 Distant small quakes - hardly audible.
01:07:53 Definitely a small local quake to the seismo with the double beat (P/S) clear.
01:13:03 Distant small quakes
01:46:56 Looks like a quake on the seismogram but sounds like a monk's gong!
UW_MEGW_BHE_Monks-Gong_1000sps.wav
You can actually hear that it is an earthquake under the ringing.
02:03:46 This and other similar sound like the sharp knock from tree root rock.
02:39:52 Small almost local quake
02:47:34 Whilst this looks like tree root it is a very small pretty much local micro quake. Clear p/s
03:08:33 Far distant quake follow by a couple more.
03:52:08 Reasonably local larger quake (but probably sub 1.0)
03:58:55 As above.
04:48:47 Tree root?
05:07:47 Smlightly larger reasonably local quake but not right under the seismo.
05:49:13 Sharp small local quake very close to seismo. The drawn out signal just before this does not sound local, if indeed even a quake. Could be wind.
06:06:32 Two localish quakes close coupled that sound just like a hearbeat! Nothing of any note until
06:57:47 Sharp small local quake followed by a larger one at 06:58:54
08:14:55 You can hardly see it on the seismo but is a very short local 'tap' - probably a microquake.
08:16:28 A series of about 6 small quakes not immediately close to the seismo. Could be some distance from the signatures.

Generally many very small rumbles that could be wind or trees and actually in the final analysis not so many sharp tree root pops as it first appears on the seismogram. The rumbles seem possibly to be increasing. Have not looked at the weather there.




posted on Nov, 1 2011 @ 06:54 AM
link   
reply to post by zenius
 



By the way, I am 2 days away from graduating as a 'scientist'


Congratulations. We won't be able to say we need a geologist then!


yet I feel more educated from this and related threads over the last few years than I do from 4 years at uni. I owe that to the likes of you,Puterman, and Muzzy, Moorfnz, TrueAmerican, justmike & Westcoast.


Well thank you for the kind words. I think it would be fair to say that we are not constrained by the system and are able to think freely about these things. No 'prof' is going to pooh-pooh a suggestion as there is none to do so and that gives us a freedom that you will not find in the establishment. (ETA: BUT we have much more justification to do, and there are TAs out there with fangs to whittle us down to size if what we are saying makes no sense. Best of all however we can agree to disagree.)


Yes some scientists do wonderful work, but if they don't take a critical view point and look at the whole system, the results of their study are bound to have a larger margin of error. People such as those mentioned above, have been following quakes for long enough to see things that most of us don't.


I think there is a danger in the sciences of following the beaten path, and as you say not looking at the whole system. I believe one of the constraints is that the 'establishment' viewpoint and requirements force people to take a certain path and in many cases restrict the ability to think.

One of my big bug bears is this perpetual need to quote other peoples work as if that gives credence to their own. It does not, in fact I have for fun followed 'papers' back through several levels of quoting other people and it is quite plain to see that often there is not a stitch of originality in the article at all. Despite this that article is then quoted by the next batch of articles.

What science needs is more of the old style original thinkers. References may act as a check that you are not going over the mark of credibility but reading about science (Smith 1998) in this fashion (Jones 2010) where people are not original (Jenkins, Cain and Wilkinson 1996) becomes very tiring (PuterMan 2011) after while.

Conclusion and discussion. We think that what we said is right because we said it and so did all these other people and therefore it is right. (Wrong!!! PuterMan 2011)



edit on 1/11/2011 by PuterMan because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 1 2011 @ 07:47 AM
link   

Magnitude 6.5 (Preliminary magnitude — update expected within 15 minutes)
Date-Time

Tuesday, November 01, 2011 at 12:32:02 UTC
Tuesday, November 01, 2011 at 05:32:02 AM at epicenter

Location 19.980°N, 109.193°W
Depth 10 km (6.2 miles) set by location program
Region REVILLA GIGEDO ISLANDS REGION
Distances

231 km (144 miles) NE (53°) from Socorro Island, Mexico
325 km (202 miles) SSE (167°) from Cabo San Lucas, Baja Calif. Sur, Mexico
331 km (206 miles) SSE (167°) from Cabo San Lucas, Baja California Sur, Mexico
417 km (259 miles) W (261°) from Puerto Vallarta, Jalisco, Mexico
1038 km (645 miles) WNW (291°) from Acapulco, Guerrero, Mexico

Location Uncertainty Error estimate not available
Parameters NST= 50, Nph=0, Dmin=0 km, Rmss=0 sec, Gp=238°,
M-type="moment" magnitude from initial P wave (tsuboi method) (Mi/Mwp), Version=B
Source

NOAA Pacific Tsunami Warning Center

Event ID pt11305001


USGS

Map

Just off the Mexico coast


edit on 1/11/2011 by PuterMan because: (no reason given)



A strong earthquake has occurred, but a tsunami IS NOT expected along the California, Oregon, Washington, British Columbia, or Alaska coast. NO tsunami warning, watch or advisory is in effect for these areas.

Based on the earthquake magnitude, location and historic tsunami records, a damaging tsunami IS NOT expected along the California, Oregon, Washington, British Columbia, and Alaska coasts.

At 5:32 AM Pacific Daylight Time on November 1, an earthquake with preliminary magnitude 6.5 occurred near the Revilla Gigedo Islands, Mexico region . (Refer to the United States Geological Survey for official earthquake parameters.)

Pacific coastal regions outside California, Oregon, Washington, British Columbia, and Alaska should refer to the Pacific Tsunami Warning Center messages for information on the event.


Tsunami statement



edit on 1/11/2011 by PuterMan because: (no reason given)



Magnitude mb 5.5
Region REVILLA GIGEDO ISLANDS REGION
Date time 2011-11-01 12:32:05.0 UTC
Location 19.91 N ; 109.44 W
Depth 40 km
Distances 446 km W Puerto vallarta (pop 187,134 ; local time 06:32:05.5 2011-11-01)
334 km S Cabo san lucas (pop 42,601 ; local time 05:32:05.5 2011-11-01)


EMSC


edit on 1/11/2011 by PuterMan because: (no reason given)


No longer preliminary. Confirmed 6.5
edit on 1/11/2011 by PuterMan because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 1 2011 @ 07:55 AM
link   
reply to post by PuterMan
 


So we have two networks saying 5.5 and the other stating a possible 6.5? That is again, a big difference.


Oh....good morning Puterman and everyone else... of course
(((HUGS)))!!!!



posted on Nov, 1 2011 @ 07:56 AM
link   
reply to post by PuterMan
 

Great analysis -- much appreciated!


Query: would you agree that the trace registering at ~12:35 on that same seismo (GPW.UW..EHZ) is a teleseism from the Revilla Gigedo Islands 6.5 Mw event? Seems that the timing is about right for the waves to propogate that distance -- around 3 minutes.

Regards,

Mike



posted on Nov, 1 2011 @ 08:08 AM
link   
reply to post by JustMike
 


Hi Mike. I would have said that was a big telemetry error. I don't actually see GPW in the phase data so maybe it is temporarily off line as I would have expected to see it.

That seismo seems to have stopped at 12:54:35


edit on 1/11/2011 by PuterMan because: (no reason given)


SLBS.IU.00.LHZ.2011.305
You can even see it in Chile: LCO.IU..LHZ.2011.305
And just wobbling into Australia: Australia, Charters Towers [IU]
And of course Hawaii: Hawaii, Pohakaloa [IU]



edit on 1/11/2011 by PuterMan because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 1 2011 @ 08:09 AM
link   
Just by the way I thought some of you might like to know that Robin did a post over on his "ruminations" thread yesterday. As it relates to the subject of quakes and fracking I thought I'd mention it. Here's a linky to his post.

I wrote a reply there but have the feeling a few more comments wouldn't go astray, if you feel inclined.

Just saying.

Mike



posted on Nov, 1 2011 @ 08:27 AM
link   
reply to post by PuterMan
 

Thanks for the reply... The phase data wasn't yet up in the USGS pages when I wrote my query, but you're right -- GPW is not listed there at all.

However at least for me, it's still running and no apparent breaks... BUT!! While it's now showing trace up to around 13:18:30 as I write this, I've noticed that it has some delay and will not load the latest trace very fast and can display ten or fifteen minutes behind. Now at 13:27 UTC it still has not yet updated from the time mentioned above. So as you say, might be problems there.

Mike



posted on Nov, 1 2011 @ 08:31 AM
link   

Originally posted by PuterMan
reply to post by zenius
 


And there frankly you have it. Every area is different and every grant is more money and atmosphere is the new earthquake holy grail. Memory! Pah, what complete and utter nonsense. Sometime I wonder if they educate these scientists at all.

As Zenius points out quite correctly it is a matter of the type of fault and the stress to which it is being subjected, and to a degree the amount of friction reduction that is available.


power-law autocorrelations are quite common in a large number of natural phenomena ranging from weather [24–26], and physiological systems [3, 27–30], to financial markets

from the article referenced by jadedANDcynical.

So basically as Bank Of America shares tumble we can expect more earthquakes?
Remember Shamans, and magical incantations? That is how that article reads to me.


Actually, I don't think that is what is being implied in the article at all. I think that what is being said is that these different systems (seismic, physiological, and financial) behave in similar fashions and by implementing techniques used to study those other systems (physiological and financial) then a deeper understanding of seismic systems can be achieved.

I understand and share much of your skepticism of scientists and the "establishment" and agree wholeheartedly that many of those in the halls of academia have much too narrow a view. That is what you get when you have a bunch of specialists working together without having any generalists around to make sure they aren't going to microscope themselves into a corner.

A generalist such as myself can take a look at the material generated by the specialists and apply a wider field of view as we are not constrained by blinders, allowing connections that might not be apparent to others to make themselves clear. By exploring these possible connections, a generalist can gather seemingly different bits of knowledge and fit them together in ways not intended by their authors. This sometimes results in spectacular successes, or a big ol' face plant.

I have learned much from you (and many other people here as well) over the brief time I have been here and look forward to continuing to do so, but I am also going to continue to see what those eggheads are getting up to in their ivory towers because, just maybe, one day something might strike a particular thought in my wee little brain which results in an astounding bit of insight.

Or not.

But we'll never know if we are as blind to what is being done in the hallowed halls as they are of anything outside their narrow fields of study.



posted on Nov, 1 2011 @ 08:33 AM
link   
reply to post by JustMike
 


Yes I went to BUD to get it. My browser was just pulling it from cache. Lazy thing.

Odd it shows almost no trace at all. Very peculiar seeing as I can see it in Chile, Australia and Hawaii.



posted on Nov, 1 2011 @ 08:37 AM
link   
reply to post by jadedANDcynical
 



I think that what is being said is that these different systems (seismic, physiological, and financial) behave in similar fashions and by implementing techniques used to study those other systems (physiological and financial) then a deeper understanding of seismic systems can be achieved.


Oh don't worry I understood that. I was just being facetious as is my way. I do not however think that seismic systems behave in similar fashion to financial systems in any way shape or form. I do agree however that there is certain evidence to suggest that financial systems are affected by seismic systems



posted on Nov, 1 2011 @ 08:41 AM
link   
reply to post by PuterMan
 

Just for the record for folks who might come along later and wonder what on earth we're talking about right now, this is a screenshot of GPW I took a couple of minutes ago:


Source for image: Iris Washington stn GPW

EDIT: I must be out for some hours now. (A thing called "work". Most annoying.) I'll check in later, in the hope that all will be realtively peaceful in seismic world.

Mike

edit on 1/11/11 by JustMike because: edded an adit.



posted on Nov, 1 2011 @ 08:48 AM
link   
reply to post by JustMike
 


Thanks for that Mike. I thought that perhaps TXT might like to see the Hockley Texas webicorder.

Nice big signal on that one: USA, Texas, Hockley [IU]



posted on Nov, 1 2011 @ 09:14 AM
link   
reply to post by JustMike
 


I had to satisfy my own curiosity. That is a telemetry error. but why just as the 6.5 should have registered?




UW_GPW _EHZ_20111101-123000_2000sps.wav

If you listen to that you hear the error but then it is straight back to background pops and small micro quakes. The 'telemetry' error takes up just 44.03 seconds of the signal time and starts at 12:34:59 which as you said should have had the signal from the 6.5 in it. I would have expected that to extend just beyond the telemetry block, but it does not.



Meagh! Maybe not: JCW.UW..EHZ.2011.305 close by and does not show it much - but more than GPW

MRBL.UW..BHZ.2011.305 is better (40 sps against 100 sps on the E channels)


edit on 1/11/2011 by PuterMan because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 1 2011 @ 09:23 AM
link   
reply to post by JustMike
 


I am still trying to understand what you and Puterman are talking about. *sigh* oh well.....as I remain silent I will still try and comprehend.

It looks as if the 6.5 is staying the same and EMSC is remaining steady, well they now have it as a 5.6. This must be two different eq's??


Is it safe to say this area and the west coast should be monitored over the next 48 hours for more eq's in the area. I still do not see a listed aftershock.



posted on Nov, 1 2011 @ 09:34 AM
link   
reply to post by MamaJ
 


No it got demoted to a 6.3 just now.

EMSC is still showing as Mb

They must have an anti USGS seismologist on. The last two they have stuck to their guns so far.


edit on 1/11/2011 by PuterMan because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 1 2011 @ 09:45 AM
link   
reply to post by PuterMan
 


I think the second graphic you have is a spectra?

Whatever type of data it shows, that trace looks decidedly artificial. If it's telemetry error, that could certainly be explanation, could it not?



posted on Nov, 1 2011 @ 09:47 AM
link   
For reference for others, I have jotted down the larger quakes in the Cali area for October:


October

Magnitude 4.2 VANCOUVER ISLAND October 10, 2011
Magnitude 4.3 BAJA CALIFORNIA, MEXICO October 13, 2011
Magnitude 3.7 CALEXICO CALIFORNIA October 14, 2011
Magnitude 3.8 BAJA CALIFORNIA, MEXICO October 15, 2011
Magnitude 4.0 CENTRAL CALIFORNIA October 15, 2011
Magnitude 3.5 HIKO, NEVADA October 16, 2011 - Depth of 3.9km
Magnitude 4.0 LUDLOW, CALIFORNIA October 17, 2011 - Depth of 1.1km
Magnitude 4.0 BERKELEY, CALIFORNIA October 20, 2011 - Depth of 8.1km
Magnitude 3.8 BERKELEY, CALIFORNIA October 20, 2011 - Depth of 8.0km
Magnitude 3.0-3 BAJA, CALIFORNIA October 21, 2011 - Depth of 26.6 / Depth of 0.9km
Magnitude 3.4 PRITCHARDS, NEVADA October 22, 2011 - Depth of 0km
Magnitude 4.7 - NORTHERN CALIFORNIA October 27, 2011 - Depth of 13.9km
Magnitude 3.6 - BERKELEY, CALIFORNIA October 27, 2011 - Depth of 8.2km
Magnitude 4.1 - NORTHERN CALIFORNIA October 30, 2011 - Depth of 14km
Magnitude 3.5 - CENTRAL CALIFORNIA October 30, 2011 - Depth of 0.0km


Also, a Quake Index for 2011, anything over 6.5 or over 6.0 that's especially strange.


Earthquakes over 6.5 magnitude for the year 2011

January

Magnitude 7.0 SANTIAGO DEL ESTERO, ARGENTINA January 01, 2011
Magnitude 7.1 ARAUCANIA, CHILE January 02, 2011
Magnitude 6.6 VANUATU January 09, 2011
Magnitude 7.0 LOYALTY ISLANDS January 13, 2011
Magnitude 7.2 SOUTHWESTERN PAKISTAN January 18, 2011

Key: 1, 2, 9, 13, 18

February

Magnitude 6.5 CELEBES SEA February 10, 2011
Magnitude 6.8 OFFSHORE BIO-BIO, CHILE February 11, 2011
Magnitude 6.6 OFFSHORE MAULE, CHILE February 14, 2011

Key: 10, 11, 14

March

Magnitude 6.5 SOUTH SANDWICH ISLANDS REGION March 06, 2011
Magnitude 6.6 SOLOMON ISLANDS March 07, 2011
Magnitude 7.3 NEAR THE EAST COAST OF HONSHU, JAPAN March 09, 2011
Magnitude 6.5 NEW BRITAIN REGION, PAPUA NEW GUINEA March 09, 2011
Magnitude 9.0 NEAR THE EAST COAST OF HONSHU, JAPAN March 11, 2011
Magnitude 6.6 OFF THE EAST COAST OF HONSHU, JAPAN March 22, 2011
Magnitude 6.9 MYANMAR March 24, 2011

Key: 6, 7, 9, 9, 11, 22, 24

April

Magnitude 6.7 SOUTH OF JAVA, INDONESIA April 03, 2011
Magnitude 7.1 NEAR THE EAST COAST OF HONSHU, JAPAN April 07, 2011
Magnitude 6.5 VERACRUZ, MEXICO April 07, 2011
Magnitude 7.1 EASTERN HONSHU, JAPAN April 11, 2011
Magnitude 6.9 SOLOMON ISLANDS April 23, 2011

Key: 3, 7, 7, 11, 23

May

Magnitude 6.8 LOYALTY ISLANDS May 10, 2011

Key: 10

June

Magnitude 7.2 FOX ISLANDS, ALEUTIAN ISLANDS, ALASKA June 24, 2011

Key: 24

July

Magnitude 7.6 KERMADEC ISLANDS REGION July 06, 2011
Magnitude 7.0 OFF THE EAST COAST OF HONSHU, JAPAN July 10, 2011
Magnitude 6.7 SOUTH OF THE FIJI ISLANDS July 29, 2011
Magnitude 6.8 NEAR NORTH COAST OF NEW GUINEA, P.N.G. July 31, 2011

Key: 6, 10, 29, 31

August

Magnitude 7.0 VANUATU August 20, 2011
Magnitude 7.1 VANUATU August 20, 2011
Magnitude 6.8 NORTHERN PERU August 24, 2011
Magnitude 6.8 BANDA SEA August 30, 2011

Key: 20, 20, 24, 30

September

Magnitude 6.7 SANTIAGO DEL ESTERO, ARGENTINA September 02, 2011
Magnitude 6.8 FOX ISLANDS, ALEUTIAN ISLANDS, ALASKA September 02, 2011
Magnitude 7.0 VANUATU September 03, 2011
Magnitude 6.6 NORTHERN SUMATRA, INDONESIA September 05, 2011
Magnitude 6.4 VANCOUVER ISLAND, CANADA REGION September 09, 2011
Magnitude 7.3 FIJI REGION September 15, 2011
Magnitude 6.7 NEAR THE EAST COAST OF HONSHU, JAPAN September 16, 2011
Magnitude 6.9 INDIA-NEPAL BORDER REGION September 18, 2011

Key: 2, 2, 3, 5, 9, 15, 16, 18

October

Magnitude 6.5 EASTERN NEW GUINEA REG, PAPUA NEW GUINEA October 14, 2011
Magnitude 7.4 RAOUL ISLAND, KERMADEC October 21, 2011
Magnitude 7.2 EASTERN TURKEY October 23, 2011
Magnitude 7.0 OFF COAST, NAZCA LINES October 28 2011

Key: 14, 21, 23, 28


Key = Quick Jot of Quake Days

Hope this helps for reference of this year.



posted on Nov, 1 2011 @ 10:06 AM
link   
reply to post by jadedANDcynical
 


Yes the second is the spectrum or spectra of the signal.

It has the classic telemetry error format.



posted on Nov, 1 2011 @ 10:35 AM
link   
Abruzzo, Italy, Earthquakes of April 2009: Heterogeneous Fault-Slip Models and Stress Transfer from Accurate Inversion of ENVISAT-InSAR Data

doi: 10.1785/0120100220

Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America October 2011 vol. 101 no. 5 2340-2354


www.bssaonline.org/content/101/5/2340.abstract

New paper on L’Aquila earthquake
Salvatore Barba Oct 1, 2011


m.paleoseismicity.org/blog/2011/10/01/new-paper-on-laquila-earthquake/



Based on a new inversion of InSAR data, De Natale et al. predicted that the Avezzano and Sulmona tectonic domains, in Central Italy, may anticipate by 15-20 yr the next large earthquake, as a result of stress transfer. Avezzano and Sulmona were razed by a large earthquake in 1915 and 1706, respectively.

Giuseppe De Natale, Bruno Crippa, Claudia Troise and Folco Pingue. Abruzzo, Italy, Earthquakes of April 2009: Heterogeneous Fault-Slip Models and Stress Transfer from Accurate Inversion of ENVISAT-InSAR Data. Bull. Seism. Soc. Am., 101(5), 2340-2354, 2011. DOI: 10.1785/0120100220.




new topics

top topics



 
203
<< 342  343  344    346  347  348 >>

log in

join