Quake Watch 2011

page: 4
203
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join

posted on Jan, 2 2011 @ 04:09 PM
link   
reply to post by MoorfNZ
 


Last 90 days plotted + the 8.8 so you can see the relationship.



This still could be connected to Argybargy




posted on Jan, 2 2011 @ 04:15 PM
link   
quake watch 2011 is starting out with some great action!!



posted on Jan, 2 2011 @ 04:24 PM
link   
reply to post by JustMike
 


Hi Mike,

I realise the concept is difficult, but let me show you this and it should satisfy you that everything we are seeing is connected.

This chart is a cumulative count of all quakes in the region since 01 Jan 2009 - sorry about the masses of white space I accidentally put in 2008 and I have no data until 2009. Even so you can see fore-shocks building very slowly up to the 8.8 and then away she goes and has not come back down yet.



This is the build up to the 8.8

Date/Time UTC,Latitude,Longitude,Magnitude,Depth(Km),Location
2009-12-29T11:47:35.000Z,-36.53590,-72.71110,5.1000,28.4000,Bio-Bio. Chile
2010-01-19T05:36:54.000Z,-32.38080,-69.94770,4.6000,96.0000,Mendoza. Argentina
2010-01-21T00:15:14.000Z,-36.00960,-73.00480,5.2000,4.0000,offshore Bio-Bio. Chile
2010-01-21T00:38:14.000Z,-36.06300,-72.83310,4.8000,43.5000,offshore Bio-Bio. Chile
2010-02-09T07:48:10.000Z,-31.08590,-71.38170,4.5000,59.6000,Coquimbo. Chile
2010-02-27T06:34:14.000Z,-35.90890,-72.73270,8.8000,35.0000,offshore Maule. Chile

These were the magnitudes in 2008 - only 120 events.


edit on 2/1/2011 by PuterMan because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 2 2011 @ 04:25 PM
link   


According to the news hundreds of people have fled to higher ground in the feat that the tremor may trigger a tsunami. Chilean Navy officials have not issued a warning. Still citizens there are leary of any quake on or so close to shore. The quake occurred at 20:20:16 UTC time according to the official USGS notifier in the Araugania region some 370 miles Southwest of Santiago. The quake was at a relatively shallow depth of only 10.5 miles deep, but so far no significant damage or any injuries have been reported. According to the USGS’s shakemaps, the quake was of moderate felt intensity reaching out to about 100 km from the epicenter.


www.pamil-visions.net...



posted on Jan, 2 2011 @ 04:39 PM
link   
reply to post by PuterMan
 

I appreciate the graph and your comments. I understand the concept. I was aware that the number of quakes there had run well above the average since the big one of last year.

That's not a problem. The problem I have is what I set out in my previous post, namely (in summary) that the concept of aftershocks as some kind of assumed cause-and-effect relationship is way too simplistic. We are using statistics to support an assumption that may not even be wholy valid.

I'll put it another way before I get out of here for the night.

As I see it, the term "aftershock" implies that the later events in a given region are either caused by the effects of an earlier, larger event in the same region, or are directly attributable to those effects. That's where I have a problem -- which wasn't a problem for me until about an hour ago when you led my mind in that direction.

The aftershock concept doesn't allow enough for the fact that energy is coming into the local seismic system from outside. It's way too assumptive and I think we need to study it more, because we are being led to use it as the answer to quakes when it may not always be so.

That's all I'm trying to say.

Okay I will now find that whisky. Good night, all. Let's hope nothing else happens. This sort of quake "action" is not what I like to see, as it means many people in that part of Chile will now at the very least have some more sleepless nights -- and some might even have been killed.

Terrible way to start the new year.

Best regards and stay safe,

Mike



posted on Jan, 2 2011 @ 05:53 PM
link   
The 2010 Analysis is done

View it here



posted on Jan, 2 2011 @ 06:13 PM
link   
I don't think this is an "aftershock" of the 8.8 as such, but there may be a "triggering" effect.

Geologists did a bit of research on earthquakes in the Fiordland area of NZ which is also a subduction zone like Chile, and they think that each quake triggers the next one, and it can span 10-30 years.
In the New Zealand case they were getting bigger each time, from 1938's 6.9 Charles Sound, 1989's 6.4 in Doubtful Sound, 2003 Secretary Is. 7.3Mw, through to the 2009 Dusky Sound 7.6 Mw, with a bunch of 6's along the way for good measure.

In Chiles case it seems to be in reverse, back from the 1960 Mag 9.6 [Catalog of worldwide earthquakes with Ms 7.0> 1900-1989 Pacheco and Sykes (1992)]



posted on Jan, 2 2011 @ 06:20 PM
link   
reply to post by PuterMan
 


Interesting, I think you are onto something with this Energy thing, I see Chris Crowe is following the same path with the Christchurch quake quake.crowe.co.nz...



posted on Jan, 2 2011 @ 06:32 PM
link   
reply to post by PuterMan
 
Awesome job Mr PuterMan on the graphics


could we get one for the volcanoes
edit on 2-1-2011 by Lil Drummerboy because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 2 2011 @ 07:16 PM
link   
A picture they say speaks a thousand words. Sometimes they say it speaks volumes. Sometimes it just scares the sierra hotel india tango out of you!

The Red dot is the 7.1 today. The other, just 17.5 miles away was........





posted on Jan, 2 2011 @ 07:26 PM
link   
IC USGS have upgraded to 7.1 Mi/Mwp, closer to EMSC who had 7.2Mwright from the start

The Chileans are onto listing the aftershocks, (in ML)
2011/01/02 20:43:02 -38.203 -74.165 25.5 4.9 Ml GUC No 60 km al O de Tirúa
2011/01/02 20:27:03 -38.756 -72.87 8.2 4.8 Ml GUC No 24 km al O de Temuco
2011/01/02 19:35:28 -38.301 -73.954 5.2 4.7 Ml GUC No 40 km al O de Tirúa
2011/01/02 18:44:50 -39.399 -74.773 30.5 5.1 Ml GUC No 139 km al O de Valdivia
2011/01/02 18:10:12 -38.381 -74.332 32.7 5.1 Ml GUC Si 73 km al O de Tirúa
2011/01/02 17:20:07 -38.362 -75.032 32.1 6.9 Ml GUC Si 134 km al O de Tirúa
www.sismologia.cl...

Thanks for that last map Puterman, I was going to have a look at that when I got this one up on GoogleEarth


edit:are you sure about those co-ordinates for todays quake?
DEPARTAMENTO DE GEOFISICA SERVICIO SISMOLOGICO UNIVERSIDAD DE CHILE has the epi centre offshore
www.sismologia.cl...
edit on 2-1-2011 by muzzy because: (no reason given)
edit on 2-1-2011 by muzzy because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 2 2011 @ 08:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by muzzy
DEPARTAMENTO DE GEOFISICA SERVICIO SISMOLOGICO UNIVERSIDAD DE CHILE has the epi centre offshore
www.sismologia.cl...


What do they know? They only live there! The USGS says it is on land so it is.


Magnitude 7.1
Date-Time

* Sunday, January 02, 2011 at 20:20:18 UTC
* Sunday, January 02, 2011 at 05:20:18 PM at epicenter
* Time of Earthquake in other Time Zones

Location 38.354°S, 73.275°W
Depth 25.1 km (15.6 miles)
Region ARAUCANIA, CHILE

USGS decimals values convert to

-38° 21' 14.3994", -73° 16' 30"
Chile has
-38 21' 43'' , -75 1' 55''

One of them is wrong. But which one? Ah, must the the Chileans. Uncle Sam knows best!


Edit: EMSC has it on land as well


Further Edit: Comparing the data from USGS and Chile for the 7.1 and the 5.0 we get:

Araucania
Date/Time UTC,Latitude,Longitude,Magnitude,Depth(Km),Location
2011-01-02T20:20:18.000Z,-38.35430,-73.27500,7.1000,25.1000,Araucania. Chile
2011-01-02T20:20:07.000Z,-38.36200,-75.03200,6.9000,32.1000,134 km al O de Tirúa

Bio-Bio
Date/Time UTC,Latitude,Longitude,Magnitude,Depth(Km),Location
2011-01-02T21:10:19.000Z,-38.04180,-73.53120,5.0000,26.6000,offshore Bio-Bio. Chile
2011-01-02T21:10:12.000Z,-38.38100,-74.33200,5.1000,32.7000,73 km al O de Tirúa

They have everything further off shore.
edit on 2/1/2011 by PuterMan because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 2 2011 @ 10:12 PM
link   
Wow, two 7.0+ EQ's to start out 2011 in the first two days!
Thanks for the thread Puterman, I'll be watching this one just like the others. S&F



posted on Jan, 2 2011 @ 11:20 PM
link   
reply to post by PuterMan
 


Yeah USGS might be quick off the mark with poting events, but IMO in the rush they screw it up more times than get it right, thats why all the updates and revisions thereafter.

Its not only the magnitude differences between the networks that gets up my nose, it the locations as well.

I had a play around with GPS Visualiser and created a map of the various locations, with the networks marked by a flag type icon.
Chile Quake EpiCentres Map

Now I've done it I'm not sure what to do with it.
Maybe I could put a link inside the popup baloon inside the main 2011 Map on my blog, I already list the different magnitudes there.
eg.
Date/Time: 2011/1/2 20:20:17
Lat: -38.362 Long: -75.032
Region: o/s, Tirua, Araucania, Chile
Magnitude:
Mw 7.2 [emsc] Ms 7.2 [ras]
mb 6.7 [usgs],[ras] ML 6.9 [dgfudc]
Depth: 32 km
Deaths: n/a Injuries: n/a
Tsunami: n/a
Catalog Source: dgfudc

Reported to Departamento De Geofisica Servicio Sismologico, Universidad De Chile as Felt as
MM6 Curanilahue, Lebu, Tirua
MM4 Arauco, Chillán, Constitución, Coronel, Corral, Lanco, Linares, Máfil, Mariquina, Mehuín, Panguipilli, Parral, Valdivia
MM3 Calbuco, Cauquenes, Frutillar, La Unión, Los Muermos, Navidad, Osorno, Paredones, Pichilemu, Puerto Montt, Rancagua, San Fernando,



posted on Jan, 2 2011 @ 11:36 PM
link   
reply to post by muzzy
 


I'm with you on this one Muzzy - I don't see these two 7's as aftershocks - IMO. At All!!! We had aftershocks of a main event that has gone of since the main event simmering back down to near backround levels (got that line from our friends at yvo ;-)) - as the graphs show -steady but surely. Then two 7's back to back in the same general area, but not right on top or really near each other, after the quietness - no - I think something else is about snap or major re-adjustment is about to happen.



posted on Jan, 3 2011 @ 12:07 AM
link   
I'm in the "they're aftershocks" camp
- large aftershocks can occur months or years after a large mainshock... while there's generally a tailing off in mag/frequency, having very large aftershocks after a period of relative calm isn't unusual, particularly for large quakes like their 8.8.



posted on Jan, 3 2011 @ 02:48 AM
link   
I'll go with this answer for now but I don't really get the Gutenberg-Richter relation rule:


Aftershocks are also interesting because they're fairly well behaved—meaning that they have a detectable pattern, unlike all other quakes. The definition that scientists use for an aftershock is any seismic event occurring within one rupture-zone length of a main shock and within the time it takes for seismicity to fall off to what it was before the main shock. This body of quakes fits three mathematical rules, more or less. The first is the Gutenberg-Richter relation, which says that as you go down one magnitude unit in size, aftershocks increase in number by about ten times. The second is called Bath's law, which says that the largest aftershock is, on average, 1.2 magnitude units smaller than the main shock. And finally, Omori's law states that aftershock frequency decreases by roughly the reciprocal of time after the main shock. These numbers differ a bit in different active regions depending on their geology, but they're close enough for government work as the saying goes.


link



posted on Jan, 3 2011 @ 06:17 AM
link   
Magnitude 4.9 - UTAH
2011 January 03 12:06:36 UTC

Earthquake Details

* This is a computer-generated message -- this event has not yet been reviewed by a seismologist.

Magnitude 4.9
Date-Time

* Monday, January 03, 2011 at 12:06:36 UTC
* Monday, January 03, 2011 at 05:06:36 AM at epicenter

Location 38.258°N, 112.385°W
Depth 0.3 km (~0.2 mile) (poorly constrained)
Region UTAH
Distances

* 14 km (9 miles) NW (315°) from Circleville, UT
* 14 km (9 miles) W (280°) from Junction, UT
* 18 km (11 miles) WNW (288°) from Kingston, UT
* 200 km (124 miles) ENE (68°) from Caliente, NV
* 281 km (174 miles) S (189°) from Salt Lake City, UT

Location Uncertainty horizontal +/- 0.8 km (0.5 miles); depth +/- 7.2 km (4.5 miles)
Parameters NST= 43, Nph= 43, Dmin=30 km, Rmss=0.61 sec, Gp= 40°,
M-type=duration magnitude (Md), Version=1
Source

* University of Utah Seismograph Stations

Event ID uu00005268



Edit: Yes, I know it is under 5 but this is UU/USGS so it is probably a 10+


I just thought it was of interest in terms of the area.
edit on 3/1/2011 by PuterMan because: See above



posted on Jan, 3 2011 @ 06:38 AM
link   
reply to post by PuterMan
 

You beat me to it (again)!


Anyway, as quakes in Utah sometimes seem to get deleted after a short time I'll just note that I have screen shots of the data page (being the page you've quoted from), as well the World map, USA and Nth America maps, and the Local Region map. So if by chance this quake does a disappearing act then I'll upload those images here and post them on the thread.

Best regards,

Mike



posted on Jan, 3 2011 @ 06:56 AM
link   
It got demoted!

Earthquake Details

* This event has been reviewed by a seismologist.

Magnitude 4.5
Date-Time

* Monday, January 03, 2011 at 12:06:36 UTC
* Monday, January 03, 2011 at 05:06:36 AM at epicenter
* Time of Earthquake in other Time Zones

Location 38.255°N, 112.367°W
Depth 0.3 km (~0.2 mile) (poorly constrained)
Region UTAH
Distances

* 13 km (8 miles) NW (319°) from Circleville, UT
* 13 km (8 miles) W (279°) from Junction, UT
* 17 km (10 miles) WNW (288°) from Kingston, UT
* 201 km (125 miles) ENE (69°) from Caliente, NV
* 281 km (175 miles) S (188°) from Salt Lake City, UT

Location Uncertainty horizontal +/- 0.6 km (0.4 miles); depth +/- 4.9 km (3.0 miles)
Parameters NST= 31, Nph= 31, Dmin=29 km, Rmss=0.36 sec, Gp= 86°,
M-type=local magnitude (ML), Version=2
Source

* University of Utah Seismograph Stations

Event ID uu00005268





top topics
 
203
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join