well considering all the recent activity along california inland coast, I was when Yellowstone was gonna answer,.
thanks for the heads up TA

Hmm, I just picked up another small one on real time seismos, coming from that area. Showed at B206 and at Mary Lake. Just creaks and groans.... Shh baby, go back to sleep now...ANYTHING but a swarm at the SC dome. Cause that would be unbearable...

And another thing: several of the stations are down right in that area. That means there could be even smaller activity going on that is not being detected right now. Darn it.

Thanks TA for keeping your eye on it!
One of my worst fears is Yellowstone Blowing......If it were to, I guess it really would be the end of the world as we know it.....

One question I have, where is the part of the park that is rising in altitude?

Yellow stone will not goto a full eruption anytime soon. There will be visible signs before that happens and one of the most visual will be the caldera rising to form a large mountain. So untill that happens nothing to see here

Originally posted by minor007
There will be visible signs before that happens and one of the most visual will be the caldera rising to form a large mountain.

Is that right? Glad you were around to witness the last super eruption. I guess that makes you, what, 640,000 years old?!

No one knows exactly what will take place before such an event. They speculate, but they don't know. And neither do you. The pressure could be so great from the huge cap on the caldera that it may not rise very much at all before the big boom. And it could come out of nowhere, with little or no warning.

Again I say, these tiny quakes appear to have come and gone, just like the rest of the seismicity at YS. I have been monitoring the park closely over the last days, and she's pretty much silent. Been that way for a while now for the most part...but if past experience with YS dictates the future any, there should be another swarm any time now. I am just hoping it doesn't take place in one of the resurgent domes.

Originally posted by minor007
the video i was looking for is also there.IF you goto video 14 26mins in shows you what i am talking about the volcano rising to be a mountain

Just because they have some evidence that the uplift may have been extreme before the last super eruption doesn't necessarily mean it would have to be that extreme again for the same to occur. Because there HAS been uplift, it's just that no one knows how high that will go before it blows again. It's a newer patch of ground above it as the continental crust moves southwest over the fixed hotspot, so it is uncharted territory.

But the lack of extreme uplift makes a big huge eruption less likely, and the more mainstream view is that if there was an eruption at YS, it will be smaller, and probably not a Caldera Forming Eruption (CFE). We are probably more likely to see some kind of hydrothermal explosion...Problem is, at YS those can be HUGE, as the video points out.

As to the "plume" video, that is junk imo.

Seems like you could get an eruption when the lava receeds to a point where there is a gap between liquid magma and hardened or cooled magma. The gap growing as molten lava receedes until the hard magma then falls into the molten magma and releases massive amounts of gas and pressure. Even worse if a lake where to empty on top of the hot magma. Prssur egoing both up and down could initiate additonal chamber failures deeper down causing a cascading event of pressure that would have to be released.

So...I would not consider a bulge that grows and then receedes as a happy place nessasarily.

Originally posted by Flavian
........in other words, we actually know diddly squat when you get right down to it.....

Hmm, let's see...If I was Smith or Christensen, or any number of other people who have near lifetimes studying volcanic systems, I would characterize that statement as "highly exaggerated." They know A LOT about volcanic behavior, and in modern times, baseline activity has been monitored and established for years. It is reasonable to expect some kind of detectable change even in supervolcanoes before they erupt. Seismicity, water temperature and levels, gas emissions, ground deformation, and any number of other indicators exist which would provide clues.

I guess it just depends to what degree you are willing to believe that scientists have a handle on any particular volcano. And a lot of that is going to depend on to what degree it is monitored. And that varies widely. Most of the most dangerous ones are covered pretty well, but many seismic networks are aging and in need of upgrades. No money.

Also, more directly on topic of these micro quakes at the SC dome, things have not picked up any, and aside from these rogue quakes, seismically speaking it is near dead quiet at YS. In other words, so far there doesn't appear to be any kind of increased activity beyond that. Sleep my love, sleep.

In my view Toba and Krakatoa are two good examples.
Both are growing out of the remains of the last eruption.
A caldera is formed when the volcano collapses after a big eruption.
So i think although Yellowstone is big in size, most likely if an eruption is to happen it will be the same as in Iceland (Katla caldera)
What we cannot see is the uplift in certain places of the caldere as it is below the mýrdalsjökull icecap.
But in Yellowstone we should be able to see the deformation before an upcoming eruption.

Ive noticed there are reports that some of the older geysers that were dormant for many years have become active. wonder if this relates to the recent activity there in quakes