Quake Watch 2012

page: 266
159
<< 263  264  265    267  268  269 >>

log in

join

posted on Nov, 16 2012 @ 03:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by PuterMan

Maybe it is a feature of the distance from the epicentre?

edit on 16/11/2012 by PuterMan because: (no reason given)


That is what I was thinking, but do the travel times work? Your recording is from the IU.PET.BHZ station, right? 454 km away, so at 8km/sec for the p-wave, that gives 56 seconds travel time for the p-wave and 94 seconds for the s-wave (at 60% of p-wave, or 4.8km/sec---if my numbers are semi-close.) Does your spectrogram show those spikes 38 seconds apart?


Did you notice the m 5 Parkfield quake on the USGS link you provided also has 2 booms? A bit closer together than the Kuril quake(?s), but similar.
edit on 11/16/2012 by Olivine because: more info




posted on Nov, 16 2012 @ 04:03 PM
link   
earthquake.usgs.gov...

It just came down to 6.4. Told ya



posted on Nov, 16 2012 @ 04:19 PM
link   
reply to post by Olivine
 



PET ePn 18:13:44.63 1.9 4.3 27 PET
eSn 18:14:32.16 S res = 0.7


Phase data shows nearly 48 seconds between P and S. Measuring on the trace (not terribly accurate) I get 50.2 seconds but that second part of the P wave comes at roughly 22 seconds from the start.

The Arrival time calculator does not show any component that matches that.

travel arrival time
# code time(s) dy hr mn sec
1 Pn 62.81 0 18 13 41
2 pPn 69.27 0 18 13 48
3 PnPn 70.34 0 18 13 49
4 sPn 73.60 0 18 13 52
5 Pb 74.09 0 18 13 53
6 sPb 82.77 0 18 14 1
7 sPg 88.26 0 18 14 7
8 Sn 112.23 0 18 14 31
9 sSn 122.79 0 18 14 41
10 SnSn 124.52 0 18 14 43
11 Sb 128.37 0 18 14 47

ETA: Incorrect. This one pretty much matches.
6 sPb 82.77 0 18 14 1


The times pretty much match for P and S

It is difficult to pinpoint the sound as that runs at 100 times faster. I will see if I can get a fix on it.


edit on 16/11/2012 by PuterMan because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 16 2012 @ 05:08 PM
link   
Knowledgeable call on the magnitude, PM. Have you petitioned any of the seismic centers for a paid position?


So it was just one earthquake, with 2 thumps because of the distance involved? Good sleuthing, sir!



posted on Nov, 16 2012 @ 06:55 PM
link   
reply to post by PuterMan
 


Oh, my gosh!
The 1992 Petrolia ones sound like the 'Seneca Booms' that I heard.
Is that even possible?

I thought it was hubby outside in the middle of the night getting firewood!
Sounded like when we throw the wood in the empty metal wheelbarrow.
Just like those recordings!!! Go figure! (Not literally!!!)

WOQ



posted on Nov, 16 2012 @ 07:08 PM
link   
some more gumph on the Burmapost by muzzy
 

Thabeikkyin is a bit of a mouthful, "tha-bee-ken" ???, maybe I should have called it at Shwebo or Male



page with Network plots, TMD map of aftershocks, ANSS History map, NOAA History map, GFZ MTS, SNZO graph of it etc.
here

FWIW It is alleged by the Democratic Voice of Burma that a secret nuclear facility is located there.

edit on 16-11-2012 by muzzy because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 16 2012 @ 11:10 PM
link   
was just working my way up the mag 6 list from this last week and thought I would check the
2012-11-13 04:31:27.0 45.69 S 77.07 W 10 6.0 OFF COAST OF AISEN, CHILE that EMSC has and see what GUC (Geofísica Universidad de Chile) had for that;


2012/11/13 04:31:27 -45.595 -77.094 15 5.2 Mw GUC No 325 km al SO de Melinka


pffft 5.2Mw

It didn't even get a page of its own off the list

the one the next day
2012-11-14 19:02:05.0 29.10 S 71.23 W 60 6.1 ATACAMA, CHILE
was a sixer though

2012/11/14 19:02:04 -29.243 -71.205 81.9 6.2 Mw GUC Si 30 km al N de La Higuera


not many aftershocks from that one either, just looking at the latitudes on the pages thereon
www.sismologia.cl...

just make the last number on the address 5 instead of 4 and tap your "enter" key to move to the next day, then 6 then 7and so on to get the lists for the next few days after that

so thats 2 mag6's that I can scratch of my todo list,not much point doing aftershock maps if there isn't anything to put on them eh.

Next........ Gulf of Alaska looks interesting



posted on Nov, 16 2012 @ 11:38 PM
link   
Earthquake Details

This event has been reviewed by a seismologist.
Magnitude
6.1
Date-Time
Saturday, November 17, 2012 at 05:12:56 UTC
Friday, November 16, 2012 at 06:12:56 PM at epicenter
Location
18.311°S, 172.374°W
Depth
9.8 km (6.1 miles)
Region
TONGA REGION
Distances
174 km (108 miles) ENE (78°) from Neiafu, Tonga
271 km (168 miles) WNW (287°) from Niue Island
435 km (270 miles) NE (44°) from NUKU'ALOFA, Tonga
2413 km (1499 miles) W (264°) from PAPEETE, Tahiti, French Polynesia
Location Uncertainty
horizontal +/- 14.6 km (9.1 miles); depth +/- 2.7 km (1.7 miles)

Source

Earthquake Details

This event has been reviewed by a seismologist.
Magnitude
5.7
Date-Time
Saturday, November 17, 2012 at 02:51:24 UTC
Saturday, November 17, 2012 at 01:51:24 PM at epicenter
Time of Earthquake in other Time Zones
Location
15.026°S, 167.426°E
Depth
128.4 km (79.8 miles)
Region
VANUATU
Distances
35 km (21 miles) E of Port-Olry, Vanuatu
59 km (36 miles) NNE of Luganville, Vanuatu
314 km (195 miles) NNW of Port-Vila, Vanuatu
650 km (403 miles) N of We, New Caledonia
Location Uncertainty
horizontal +/- 14.3 km (8.9 miles); depth +/- 6.1 km (3.8 miles)

Source[

Some frackin goin on tonight also maybe lol

Magnitude
3.0
Date-Time
Saturday, November 17, 2012 at 04:49:00 UTC
Friday, November 16, 2012 at 10:49:00 PM at epicenter
Time of Earthquake in other Time Zones
Location
36.262°N, 97.514°W
Depth
5 km (3.1 miles)
Region
OKLAHOMA
Distances
20 km (12 miles) W of Perry, Oklahoma
36 km (22 miles) ESE of Enid, Oklahoma
42 km (26 miles) N of Guthrie, Oklahoma
43 km (26 miles) WNW of Stillwater, Oklahoma

Source
edit on 16-11-2012 by lurksoften because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 17 2012 @ 09:02 AM
link   
Wow,, a 6 and above almost everyday for a few weeks now
Hmmm. how about that Puterman.




posted on Nov, 17 2012 @ 09:42 AM
link   
"ring around the rosie"
or rather, ring around the ring of fire. it is certainly busy with 6's all around. it makes me a bit easier about cascadia since everywhere is getting a shake. maybe this release is a good thing.

i've heard that lots of little earthquakes are a good thing. so, in my email i thought this story was about little earthquakes silently moving on the west coast- relieving the pressure. stupid me.

it was about the "good" little earthquakes at a volcano where they are spraying( yes spraying- it's like they're big cats, and they're strutting around, all over town, spraying everything with their foul "expressions/experiments) water on some hot rocks. i didn't read passed the first sentence or two, once i figured out it was newberry.

www.mailtribune.com.../20121116/NEWS/121119986/-1/NEWSMAP

yes we should focus on the big quakes to understand geology and the earth. but, the little ones are so telling.

3m oklahoma. but wait. i can't get good siesmo's - whatever- i don't want to hurt my head too much. but when you look at the okie geological cartel, you find there are many earthquakes, and in 24 hours there have been four.
i'd copy list but the site is a pain in the and i also want to laugh at some thing on their site. wait

"The Oklahoma Geological Survey Observatory in rural Tulsa County, south of Leonard is a comprehensive
geophysical observatory which records, identifies, and locates 50 to 167 earthquakes in Oklahoma each year, and also records at least seven worldwide earthquakes per day."

This is freakin' frackin' funny. 167 earthquakes. ha ha ha. ya, every two months maybe. four in a day today. how many thousand wwwas were there last year? not gonna look

www.okgeosurvey1.gov...

the list of okie frackquakes
www.okgeosurvey1.gov...

www.valleyadvocate.com...



edit on 17-11-2012 by ericblair4891 because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 17 2012 @ 09:46 AM
link   
Why is IRIS showing a 5.6 in OK ? I see a 3 from earlier......



posted on Nov, 17 2012 @ 12:25 PM
link   
reply to post by muzzy
 


The 6.0 is a 6.1 in the ANSS catalogue and the 6.1 is a 6.2.

I find the difference between Chile and ANSS very disturbing for that quake of the 13th. That is a massive difference and I would dearly like to know the reason.



posted on Nov, 17 2012 @ 12:28 PM
link   
reply to post by ujustneverknow
 



Prov,Date/Time UTC,Latitude,Longitude,Magnitude,Depth(Km),Location
usgs,2012-11-17 04:49:00, 36.261, -97.514, 3.0, 5.0, Oklahoma




'Cos it winds everyone up? No idea.

It is still up there grigging us!!


17-NOV-2012 04:48:57 36.56 -97.49 5.6 5.0 OKLAHOMA

Source

edit on 17/11/2012 by PuterMan because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 17 2012 @ 12:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by Lil Drummerboy
Wow,, a 6 and above almost everyday for a few weeks now
Hmmm. how about that Puterman.



I can't speak for the Pman, but in my opinion some of those "6's"are BS/overblown.
see the post 2 above yours about the Chile one 6.0 versus 5.2

and now this last one near Tonga

I think that will come down, based on the S waves showing on my local SNZO (on the 05:00:00 line)

strangely the AFI (Samoa station which is closer) shows a very strong P wave

which you an also see (less powerful P wave) on RAR Cook Islands


you can see them all on (for a limited time only) LISS Global
LDEO have it at 5.8 which I think is more realistic
and the Russians have it at 5.9mb. UsuallyRAS convert a mb that high into Ms,but in this case not, I wonder if that means it wasn't very big surface waves.


I think its just that magic number 6 that stands out ( and the fact USGS highlight them in RED)

yeah just answered my own question, have a look at the USGS phase data

mb = 5.8 (433) ML = 5.7 ( 2) mblg = 4.8 ( 3) md = 0.0 ( 0) MS = 5.1 ( 11)

the mb is lower than RAS, and the MS is a piddly 5.1, I think the "6.0Mw(GS)" is the result of dodgy conversion formulas.
edit on 17-11-2012 by muzzy because: space bar is stuck and doesn'twork sometimes, fixed the punctuation

that one was shallow too (9.8km), so you would expect the S waves to be stronger
edit on 17-11-2012 by muzzy because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 17 2012 @ 11:25 PM
link   
near the coast Guatemala 2012/11/07, 7.4Mw and aftershocks
According to SSN (Servicio Sismológico Nacional, Mexico) data there have been 192 aftershocks in the 212 hours since the Main Shock, giving a total energy release of equivalent to 1,383,298.152 tons of TNT. The main shock released 1,344,028.024TTNT and the a 6.2 (strong) quake 30,089.039 TTNT leaving 39,270TTNT for the others consisting of 6 in the mag 5 (moderate) range, 46 in the mag 4 (light) range and 139 in the mag 3 (minor) range .
interactive map
the maps there don't look as good as this ArcGIS topo map screenshot, its too bad that Google have a strangle hold on the i-frame mapping, they are cluttering up their Map map with way too much text.


I had a lot of trouble with the main SSN page, I just couldn't get their data to down load in rows and columns, it had too much html/css junk in it, until I found the search page. It's the first time I've used SSN since they started the fancypants map/list thingy.
this the place to go for Mex. data now

The 5.9mb-6.5Mw map on the eqarchives page is quite interesting, location fixed +/- 120km by the networks

I think they all struggled with that one, USGS didn't have any alternative magintudes on their phase data page, just 6.5 (GS)
I also notice the similarity to Chile quakes, where the Global Networks always seem to have the epi-centres closer to the shore line that the local guys who tend to put them out by the trench



posted on Nov, 18 2012 @ 04:01 AM
link   
reply to post by muzzy
 


Tonga is 5.9 Mw according to EMSC and 5.8 M (useful scale ML?) according to New Caledonia but on the other hand they say there are 2 x Mag 6 (mb) bracketing the Solomon Islands which everyone else has as high 5s. I think we have thought them unreliable in the past, but then just who exactly is unreliable?

Until the whole world goes onto some sort of standard which means using the same instruments and software and magnitude scales worldwide you will NEVER get agreement.

The difficult thing I find to get a grip on is why different software using the sane data gets different results. Maybe they just all work on DIGO (Data In Garbage Out) instead of GIGO (Garbage In Garbage Out), or sometimes it seems to be GIDO - you can work that one out for yourselves.



posted on Nov, 18 2012 @ 04:39 AM
link   
reply to post by Lil Drummerboy
 


Apologies I had not spotted your post. It does not seem out of the ordinary to me. Did you make the same observation in October or August or indeed April? Did you make any observation of there not being such a sequence at other times?

I am not getting at you, simply pointing out that whilst the average number of mag 6 quakes in simple maths may be 120 giving one every three days, that does NOT mean that Mother Nature will oblige and space them nicely apart for us.

Over the year so far the average number of Mag quakes in a month is 9.5. In 323 days we have had 104 Mag 6 and even without a calculator it is easy to see that is about 1 every three days. (One every 3.105 days to be more accurate)

So despite the fact that we have a small bunching right now is it really out of the ordinary? In my humble opinion no it is not.



posted on Nov, 19 2012 @ 02:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by PuterMan
reply to post by Lil Drummerboy
 


Apologies I had not spotted your post. It does not seem out of the ordinary to me. Did you make the same observation in October or August or indeed April? Did you make any observation of there not being such a sequence at other times?

I am not getting at you, simply pointing out that whilst the average number of mag 6 quakes in simple maths may be 120 giving one every three days, that does NOT mean that Mother Nature will oblige and space them nicely apart for us.

Over the year so far the average number of Mag quakes in a month is 9.5. In 323 days we have had 104 Mag 6 and even without a calculator it is easy to see that is about 1 every three days. (One every 3.105 days to be more accurate)

So despite the fact that we have a small bunching right now is it really out of the ordinary? In my humble opinion no it is not.



Agreed PM.

Many of us will remember many periods this year when we questioned how quiet it was, with no 6's or higher for longish periods, that went way past the average timeline(s).

As usual things have a way of 'balancing' out



posted on Nov, 19 2012 @ 09:37 PM
link   
Hey,puterman,I came across something and I was wondering if you have seen it.

It's from the NEIC catalog.



solarimg.org...



posted on Nov, 20 2012 @ 12:41 AM
link   
Could any of you who are more familiar with reading seismos take a look at this thread real quick and set this person's mind at ease?

I took a look at the heli's linked and it sure looks like human activity to me (he says another site is claiming HT), but I'd prefer someone who watches these more closely than I do to weigh in.

Much appreciation in advance.





top topics
 
159
<< 263  264  265    267  268  269 >>

log in

join