Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

New Activity at Mt. Rainier Confirmed to Be Seismic (...or ICE?), Right here on ATS!

page: 2
67
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join

posted on Dec, 31 2011 @ 08:20 PM
link   
I'll have to keep an eye on this.

my brother lives in that area.




posted on Dec, 31 2011 @ 08:21 PM
link   
I just took a screen-shot off the old webi for the RCS station (Rainier-Camp Sherman)

This is just a VERY small section, yet there are multiple quake-like signatures. I went ahead and circled what I would normally write off as an ice quake (in red). Note the very sharp, short spike. This is quite typical up there. However, all those other sigs that I circled in blue is what has us all scratching our heads. You can see the difference....it is not nearly as sharp a spike and is drawn out more, which you do NOT normally see with an ice quake.




This reminds me of the seismos for Helens, leading up to steam eruptions......and I won't say what else.


I'll see if I can dig up some of those screen shots.
edit on 31-12-2011 by westcoast because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 31 2011 @ 08:30 PM
link   
reply to post by TrueAmerican
 


Yes I am but I was more interested in he myriad small ones. Even the bigger ones are not large really.



posted on Dec, 31 2011 @ 08:32 PM
link   
reply to post by westcoast
 


What does this mean???




Thats a lot of red!

If what your graph shows, then is that a big ice quake??



posted on Dec, 31 2011 @ 08:38 PM
link   
reply to post by Olivine
 


Fascinating. Yes this is what we are seeing. Quakes under 1 and probably under 0. The Richter scale actually goes down to -3 but very few realise that.

Mag, Kilojoules energy
-1.0, 2.0
-0.9, 2.8
-0.8, 4.0
-0.7, 5.6
-0.6, 7.9
-0.5, 11.2
-0.4, 15.8
-0.3, 22.4
-0.2, 31.6
-0.1, 44.7
0.0, 63.1



posted on Dec, 31 2011 @ 08:41 PM
link   
reply to post by Jerisa
 


No that is a telemetry signal from calibration

Basically the seismo self checking.



posted on Dec, 31 2011 @ 08:41 PM
link   
reply to post by PuterMan
 


Could the movements and adjustments of a glacier cause frequency content from 3-4 Hz? Maybe it's the ice cap.



posted on Dec, 31 2011 @ 08:42 PM
link   
reply to post by westcoast
 



leading up to steam eruptions


Interesting you should say that in light of the text I found which mentions these steam caves.

Thing is it is hot, and active unlike me!!



posted on Dec, 31 2011 @ 08:45 PM
link   
reply to post by TrueAmerican
 


I don't know. I had understood ice quakes to be a higher frequency range. 3-4Hz is spot on for seismic activity either by faulting or from pressure causing rock cracks.

I will see if I can find out.

ETA Have a read of this one

Thousands of quakes strike glaciers every day
edit on 31/12/2011 by PuterMan because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 31 2011 @ 08:48 PM
link   
reply to post by Jerisa
 


That's nothing....just something local or the seismo reseting itself. That webi isn't showing any of the activity the other three are.

Here is some interesting stuff.

First, the helicorder fromt he May 1980 eruption at helens:

May 18th 1980


Now...

May 17th, 1980


May 16th, 1980

may 15th, 1980

May 14th, 1980



Now here is the IRIS RCS Station (current) for Mount Rainier


Obviously, what we are seeing at Rainier are not as strong as those at Helens prior to it's eruption. But I want to show you what kind of signatures and trends we need to be watching for.

I have sent an email to the PNSN. I will let you know if/when I hear back.



posted on Dec, 31 2011 @ 08:49 PM
link   
Great sharing of info. I'll keep watch on this! Hopefully this isn't the beginning of the predicted heightened activity/giant eq of the NW: Experts say an earthquake surely will devastate the Northwest
edit on 31-12-2011 by dreamingawake because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 31 2011 @ 08:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by PuterMan
3-4Hz is spot on for seismic activity either by faulting or from pressure causing rock cracks.


Yeah, which is why all indications are it is seismic...unless the ice cap is freaking out- and that's a pretty big cap. Might be capable of producing frequencies that low. So I am interested to see what you find out.



posted on Dec, 31 2011 @ 08:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by PuterMan
reply to post by TrueAmerican
 


I don't know. I had understood ice quakes to be a higher frequency range. 3-4Hz is spot on for seismic activity either by faulting or from pressure causing rock cracks.

I will see if I can find out.

ETA Have a read of this one

Thousands of quakes strike glaciers every day
edit on 31/12/2011 by PuterMan because: (no reason given)


Very interesting article. And here is the key sentance as it relates to this thread:


However, they are uncertain about how volcano-linked, low-frequency icequakes might occur.


Because clearly, we have the low frequency present.



posted on Dec, 31 2011 @ 08:57 PM
link   
reply to post by TrueAmerican
 


Try this one. I think it may be indicating that these are ice. I am too tired to take it in now - 3am here

Characteristic seismic signals associated with ice sheet and glacier dynamics



posted on Dec, 31 2011 @ 08:57 PM
link   
Okay...wow. I already got a response. This is the email:


Tara


They look like glaciers stick-slipping down hill. Here are 3 events each two minutes apart. There was another triplet about 2:15, 20 minutes later.


We saw a lot of that last year - one glacier apparently popped many hundreds of times over about a month.


If they were earthquakes, the onset should be more abrupt and we'd see a distinct S wave a second or so after the P.


Thanks for pointing them out, it is hard watch these seismograms as often as they deserve.


There is a gif attached with the quakes in question....what do you think?


ETA: I have always been impressed with how open and quick they are to respond!!!
edit on 31-12-2011 by westcoast because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 31 2011 @ 08:58 PM
link   
reply to post by PuterMan
 


Ah, thank you, Sir. I had no idea the Richter scale went negative.



posted on Dec, 31 2011 @ 09:01 PM
link   
reply to post by westcoast
 


Hmm, well if they are saying that it is glaciers stick-slipping down hill, as proposed already, then they must be aware of the frequency content. And ice can go down this low? Hmm....new one on me...

question is, ARE they aware of the frequency content?
edit on Sat Dec 31st 2011 by TrueAmerican because: (no reason given)


and wc, did you mention to them that the frequencies of these are centered around 3-4 Hz? Cause that ought to raise an eyebrow...
edit on Sat Dec 31st 2011 by TrueAmerican because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 31 2011 @ 09:18 PM
link   
reply to post by westcoast
 


Thank you so much, when you open them side by side, I see the "trend" you are referring to. Still learning and a long way to go but I am happy to have great teachers I can ask questions to and have a seismic 101 response



posted on Dec, 31 2011 @ 09:37 PM
link   
PM mentioned temp increase, or have I misunderstood? If I haven't then wouldn't this account for glacial slippage?
Like PM, it is 3.30 here now, and I am struggling to stay awake....but I don't like what I am seeing!
Oh, and yes I was watching Dantes Peak with my son....out of all the 'disaster' movies, it is probably the closest as far as 'facts' go. Well worth a watch! Just a bit unerving that I was watching it when this popped up.....uuuggghh!
Rainbows
Jane



posted on Dec, 31 2011 @ 09:38 PM
link   
reply to post by TrueAmerican
 


That was my next question to him. Here is the response:



We're never entirely sure what's what for the very small events, but the speculation is that the glacier events send their waves out through the lossy shallowest few hundred meters of the volcano, which damps out the high frequencies. If the seismometers were on that glacier, close in, the seismograms would be much higher in frequency. The earthquakes tend to break a little deeper, and are coupled better to the ground, so also have more high frequencies than the current events.



Again, very quick and to the point. Some similar answers as to when Glacier Peak was noisy. A lot of this is speculation, for obvious reasons. Another tick on my list as to why I watch.





new topics

top topics



 
67
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join