4.7 quake right in the Toba supervolcano caldera... ruh roh

This is a pretty good documentary about Toba. It definitely needs to be watched. Although I dont know what we could do if this baby goes off.

Originally posted by poet1b

There is that pesky geological record.

Planet Earth gets warm, ice melts, oceans rise, super volcano erupts, new ice age.

Looks like a pattern to me.

It's a pattern, absolutely agree ...

But something being a super volcano, doesn't mean that whenever it erupts it must be a super eruption. The "super" in super volcano, is not the causality of the eruption.

To put it differently, for this super volcano or any other super volcano to erupt in a super manner ... you need some major activity down under, and I'm not talking Australia, that causes it to take it out in a "super" vent ... because that's basically what volcanos are ... vents.

If that was the case, that there was some "major" activity down under, it would not just be measurable by rising crust ... but also by immense, chaotic changes in gravity over a wide area. Until that occurs as a precursor, I think we can safely leave the "mass extinction" factor out of the equation.

reply to post by ahnggk


Don't forget that the warming of deep ocean waters is also causing them to expand.

The real kicker is to multiply that .3 psig by a thousand square miles. Than one can see how much force is at play. We are talking hydraulics here. How many sq inches are in a sq mile?

Just off the coast of Sumatra is the Java Trench, and the ocean drops down very quickly, with a huge cliff/massive wall.

en.wikipedia.org...

The Sunda Trench, earlier known as, and sometimes still indicated as the Java Trench,[1] located in the northeastern Indian Ocean, with a length of 2,600 kilometres (8,500,000 ft) and a maximum depth of 7,725 metres (25,344 ft)[citation needed] (at 10°19'S, 109°58'E, about 320 km south of Yogyakarta), is the deepest point in the Indian Ocean.

I don't know how much pressure a warming and therefore expanding ocean puts up against such a massive wall/surface, but a few tenths of pressure per square inch would add up to a great deal of total pressure. Nobody else is talking about this, but it wouldn't be the first time I came up with a point that others have overlooked.

Originally posted by poet1b
reply to post by ahnggk

 

Don't forget that the warming of deep ocean waters is also causing them to expand.

The real kicker is to multiply that .3 psig by a thousand square miles. Than one can see how much force is at play. We are talking hydraulics here. How many sq inches are in a sq mile?

Just off the coast of Sumatra is the Java Trench, and the ocean drops down very quickly, with a huge cliff/massive wall.

en.wikipedia.org...

The Sunda Trench, earlier known as, and sometimes still indicated as the Java Trench,[1] located in the northeastern Indian Ocean, with a length of 2,600 kilometres (8,500,000 ft) and a maximum depth of 7,725 metres (25,344 ft)[citation needed] (at 10°19'S, 109°58'E, about 320 km south of Yogyakarta), is the deepest point in the Indian Ocean.

I don't know how much pressure a warming and therefore expanding ocean puts up against such a massive wall/surface, but a few tenths of pressure per square inch would add up to a great deal of total pressure. Nobody else is talking about this, but it wouldn't be the first time I came up with a point that others have overlooked.

Take a fish tank and fill it with water to the top. That's your current sea level.

Now continue to add water to it. What happens? Do the sides of the fish tank crack, part or rupture from adding volume to the fish tank?
No, it does not. The water flows out over the top. The "sea level" rises. If you buried the fish tank in the ground to where it's top is level with the ground and did the same thing with it, the water would simply flow out of the tank and flood the surrounding areas, but it does not add pressure to rupture the tank.

Get a pot and fill it with water and place on the stove. Have the fill level to almost full and heat the water.
Heating the water will cause it to expand, and if you heat it to boiling, it can "boil over" out the top. But it will not crack, bend or rupture the pot in any way, because the expanding water has a place to go: over the lip of the top of the pot.

Now, if you repeat the above examples, only you seal the top of the fish tank and rigged it to still have water to it...yes, it would crack, break or push the sides out.....or if you used a pot like a pressure cooker that seals the top, and you seal the steam valve on it, it can explode from the pressure that builds up (only in the case of the pressure cooker, it's steam pressure doing it).

However, the good news is our oceans are not sealed in. Add more water to them and they spill on to the land that is not normally underwater (sea levels rise). You see this all the time with tides. Heat the water to expand (and to really expand you'd have to heat the oceans by a LOT more than just a few degrees), it would still spill over.

Water's density is 1.0 g/cm^3 where as say basalt rock's density is almost 3.0 g/cm^3. Even glass has a density of 2.4-2.8 g/cm^3.

So the only thing that would increase pressure would be to increase the depth of the water (as you mentioned, rising sea levels). Sea Levels would need to drastically change to increase any pressure, even at the deepest parts of the oceans, and even then, the amount of pressure change would be so small that it would be insignificant compared to the pressures that the crust itself places on plate faults, and the pressures actually below the crust.

Originally posted by caitlinfae
Absolutely no disrespect to you, TA, but this is one of the threads I really didn't ever want to read. Even the biggest earthquake we have experienced is nothing compared to what one of these beasts will do. Let's just collectively focus on soothing him back to sleep.

But I will be watching...thank you for the heads up.

On the other hand, this would solve our global warming problems for some time, no?

Originally posted by DestroyDestroyDestroy
Some fun facts.

Last time this thing blew was ~70 thousand years ago.
It is attributed to having caused a bottleneck in the evolution of many mammals, including humans.
It covered all of South Asia with volcanic ash.
Its volcanic winter lasted roughly a decade and it caused a millennium long cooling episode.

Chances are we'd survive as a species, as we did in the past, but modern civilization would be devastated. Then again, we can't really survive without technology anymore, at least in most developed nations, and as such most of the developed world would likely die off, leaving only cultures who have yet to lose their way with nature to persevere and propagate our species.

we are long overdue a kick in the butt i hope it does blow and cause a neutlear winter .

it would be the best thing for humanity the planet cannot go on being raped daily like it is a 3-4 billion reduction of people would be a good thing .

survival of the fittest maybe a better world would emerge from it as long as the 1% died i would be happy we are a cancer on this planet the way we are

reply to post by eriktheawful


That is because the fish tank was designed to hold the amount of water it can contain. The Earth probable doesn't have such a design factor, more of a safety valve that creates ice ages,

Use the same thickness of glass for a 10 gal tank, and make a 100 gal tank keeping the same footprint. See if you can fill the tank until it is completely full before the glass breaks or it comes apart at the seems.

Get a pot and fill it with water and place on the stove. Have the fill level to almost full and heat the water.
Heating the water will cause it to expand, and if you heat it to boiling, it can "boil over" out the top. But it will not crack, bend or rupture the pot in any way, because the expanding water has a place to go: over the lip of the top of the pot.

Turn that pot into a pressure cooker with out relief valves and see what happens. Clearly you know absolutely nothing about boilers.

Clearly you know nothing about water pressure, and the effects that ocean depth has on pressure of the water in the deeper parts of the ocean, as well as increase in temperature on the expansion of water. One water column of pressure multiplied by the sized of the edges of the continental shelves is a lot of force.

Sorry, but what I am saying is very basic physics.

reply to post by openminded2011


Thanks for the vid, I have been educating myself with it all day off and on.
Glad youtube has a pause...lol

reply to post by openminded2011


Nice video... and name.

Hmm, well I have some interesting news after I have spent a considerable amount of time reviewing scientific documents. It turns out that this 4.7 quake occurred underneath a particular area of Samosir that has been known for recent uplift, so it could possibly be associated with that process- rather than a tectonic induced quake.

Here is the quake, more zoomed in:


And here is a crop from a scientific doc of studies about the Toba Caldera Complex:

Pink ovals are areas of recent uplift that may be underlain by hypabyssal intrusions.

Some intrusive rocks solidified in fissures as dikes and intrusive sills at a shallow depth beneath the surface and are called hypabyssal. Those formed at greater depths are called plutonic or abyssal.

en.wikipedia.org...

So if this area is underlain by these solidified intrusions, and yet uplift is being experienced above it, then either the uplift is coming as a result of magmatic influx in the chamber below the hypabyssal intrusions- pushing them and the rock above it upwards, or as a result of magma above the hypabyssal intrusions, still pushing the rock upwards.

Now anywhere else, I could see the quake being induced from a tectonic (fault line) source. But at this spot, given what I read in the doc, I am inclined to think not. Something might have happened under there. Scientists that study Toba, and known this area intimately from seismic tomography and gravity studies, have probably raised some eyebrows at a 4.7 magnitude quake, which is rather high, at that specific spot at that depth. I'll bet there are already intentions of an expedition to examine this further. And if there aren't, there should be.

I will also dispute any notion that severe gravity changes would necessarily have to occur before an eruption, and I will further dispute that enough gravity studies are taking place frequently enough to catch the change. They are extremely expensive, and take a long time to decipher. They are complicated by hydrothermal features, as well as degrees of magma crystallization features, and plenty of other things. Further, a magma body deep enough, like at Toba (they have never identified the bottom of that chamber it goes so deep) may thwart attempts by gravity meters to spill its secrets.

And even furthermore, a static magma body exerting upwards pressure on rock can be supplemented by gas pressure accumulating and increasing, completely defying any attempts at eruption prediction with gravity specifics as a basis for that prediction. So no, to me the gravity argument is lame at best. Sorry.

Just out of curiosity....if the last eruption was 70k years ago, what about the previous one, two or 3? Is there a regular periodicity involved, or is it just fairly random in nature?

Originally posted by bbracken677
Just out of curiosity....if the last eruption was 70k years ago, what about the previous one, two or 3? Is there a regular periodicity involved, or is it just fairly random in nature?

Now that's a reasonable question.

And the answer is, that eruption cycles there are on the order of every 340,000 years- meaning- we are not likely to experience one any time soon- IF those cycles hold true. But the first thing they will tell you at a volcano is never trust eruption cycles, cause they are continually broken. And at a supervolcano, we just don't know- never trust anything.

reply to post by poet1b


I'm not pretending to comprehend the theories in hydraulics in relation to volcanism. Could someone tell me if this is related? It just seems peculiar to have 7-20 meter waves unrelated to a storm or local eq.

Just a question, seems like a long distance tsunami, especially the force, if it is related.

Originally posted by poet1b
reply to post by eriktheawful

 

That is because the fish tank was designed to hold the amount of water it can contain. The Earth probable doesn't have such a design factor, more of a safety valve that creates ice ages,

Use the same thickness of glass for a 10 gal tank, and make a 100 gal tank keeping the same footprint. See if you can fill the tank until it is completely full before the glass breaks or it comes apart at the seems.

Get a pot and fill it with water and place on the stove. Have the fill level to almost full and heat the water.
Heating the water will cause it to expand, and if you heat it to boiling, it can "boil over" out the top. But it will not crack, bend or rupture the pot in any way, because the expanding water has a place to go: over the lip of the top of the pot.

Turn that pot into a pressure cooker with out relief valves and see what happens. Clearly you know absolutely nothing about boilers.

Clearly you know nothing about water pressure, and the effects that ocean depth has on pressure of the water in the deeper parts of the ocean, as well as increase in temperature on the expansion of water. One water column of pressure multiplied by the sized of the edges of the continental shelves is a lot of force.

Sorry, but what I am saying is very basic physics.

Ex Navy. Surface Warfare pin awarded. I know quite about about how boilers, steam and water pressure works. Type 2 chilled water cooling system on the AN/SPS-48C 3D radar is under pressure.....and I'm a engineer. Need I say more?

"Water Pressure" that is experienced from the depth of the water is experienced due to the volume and weight of that water.

Not because is "squeezed" by an external factor (IE filling a sealed tank beyond it's capacity or placing the water under heat in a sealed container).

The Earth's crust is thickest at the continents and thinnest at the bottom of the ocean. The continental shelves are part of that crust and are quite thick since they themselves help form the continents.

Simply increasing the volume of water in the ocean basins will NOT move continent around due to the amount of mass they have as compared to the waters themselves. It's the continents themselves that force one under another, and the enormous upwelling of magma from below the crust that forces them apart. Again, not the water in our oceans.

Simply adding water to the oceans will not increase the pressure enough to have any effect on the Earth's crust, and especially even if all the ice in the world were to melt. Sea Level would only rise by a few hundred feet. Do the math. It's not enough to cause enough of a pressure increase at the bottom of the sea to have any effect on plate tectonics.

As water heats, it becomes less dense. Lower density will affect that pressure, have a read:

Properties Of Water

As a engineer, who understands water and pressure quite well, I would urge you to go back and review what you think you know about water, heat, gravity, pressure, and especially about plate tectonics......

reply to post by eriktheawful


Ok, you have some knowledge, then you are not thinking this through. It is pretty basic.

All the water on top of deep water acts like a boiler chamber.

As water heats it becomes less dense because it expands. When that water is under a great deal of pressure, like deep ocean water or water in a boiler, it creates more pressure due to thermal expansion.

www.reportingclimatescience.com...

Sea level has been rising at around 3 mm per year on average since 1993, with about half of that caused by ocean thermal expansion and the other half because of additional water added to the ocean, mostly from melting continental ice, according to NOAA.

Your claim -

Simply adding water to the oceans will not increase the pressure enough to have any effect on the Earth's crust, and especially even if all the ice in the world were to melt. Sea Level would only rise by a few hundred feet. Do the math. It's not enough to cause enough of a pressure increase at the bottom of the sea to have any effect on plate tectonics.

Thermal heating of the deep ocean is increasing sea level. The deep waters are pushing up the waters above, and that takes a lot of force. Some of that force will be applied to the continents.

Doing the math on the effect of deep water thermal expansion on the continents would not be a simple thing. A truer perspective, IMO, is that we don't know enough about the Earths structure to know how much affect thermal expansion will have on the continents, or tectonics, or the mantle below. When you start multiplying these tiny changes over thousands of square miles, that is a lot of force. Considering the amount of seismic and volcanic activity that goes on, there might be a delicate balance.

reply to post by poet1b


It's simply not enough pressure to move continental plates, change fault lines, or cause volcanoes to erupt.

If you can find any geologist, volcanologist, or earthquake expert, oceanographer at all that you can quote or agreeing with your theory, I'll stand corrected.

But until you do: there is not enough pressure for the oceans to do what you are suggesting.

reply to post by eriktheawful


I am going to send in a request for more emoticons.

It's simply not enough pressure to move continental plates, change fault lines, or cause volcanoes to erupt.

Just a few posts ago, you were claiming that thermal expansion could not raise sea levels, so that pretty much blows you claims of being an expert on the subject, capable of making that call. :-!

Here is a link that gives a good idea of how complex the situation is to model.

climatephysics.com...

I think any scientist with a degree of credibility to put on the line, would be very leery of making such a claim. Here on ATS is where such theories are typically bantered about, until they are picked up by the academics.

I have presented my case, and backed it with knowledge, logic, and reason, while you have not.

Originally posted by poet1b
reply to post by eriktheawful

 

I am going to send in a request for more emoticons.

It's simply not enough pressure to move continental plates, change fault lines, or cause volcanoes to erupt.

Just a few posts ago, you were claiming that thermal expansion could not raise sea levels, so that pretty much blows you claims of being an expert on the subject, capable of making that call. :-!

Here is a link that gives a good idea of how complex the situation is to model.

climatephysics.com...

I think any scientist with a degree of credibility to put on the line, would be very leery of making such a claim. Here on ATS is where such theories are typically bantered about, until they are picked up by the academics.

I have presented my case, and backed it with knowledge, logic, and reason, while you have not.

No where in any one of my posts did I claim that thermal expansion can not raise sea levels. No where. Go back and actually read my posts. No where.

As a mater of fact, I explained quite clearly that if you either add water to the oceans, or heat them up so that the water expands, that they will indeed raise sea levels (pot in the water over flowing, remember?).

What I did say is that thermal expansion of the oceans can not move continents, move fault lines, or make volcanoes erupt.

Please quote the post where I made the statement that expanding water from heat would not cause sea levels to rise.

Then go find something to help support your theory that rising sea levels are causing more quakes, volcanoes or continental movement due to rising "pressure" from the ocean.

Could the earthquake that recently happened in New Guinea have any connections to this?

reply to post by eriktheawful


So what was your unrelated fish tank example, your statement on simply adding water, and your link about heating water makes it less dense about? All of them had no relation to what I was stating, and you failed to recognize that thermal expansion was raising the sea level.

Now that I proved your points inapplicable, after I have proved thermal expansion of deep ocean waters is raising sea levels, meaning increase pressure, and therefore pressure on the continents, you dismiss it without any evidence provided on your part. Now after making your inapplicable argument, way off base, you still insist you are right without anything to back up your claims.

Where is your proof that planet Earth is so solid that something like deep ocean pressure couldn't affect the rim of fire?

Being that there are Earthquakes and volcanic eruptions, things aren't as solid and stable as you claim.

The fact is that it is very possible that increase ocean pressure could in fact upset the delicate balance that keep the surface of the Earth stable. If a tsunami can change the tilt of the Earth's axis, what could increased deep ocean pressure do? It is in fact very possible.