A Deeper Earthquake Cycle?

reply to post by CLPrime


Not touching that comment with a 10 meter pole!

reply to post by kdog1982


Well, there is a known cycle, you can see it. Its there, whether its natural or man made, the cycle is right before our eyes, whether it is within a day or two, or not.

I run with the man made amping up a much milder natural.

Statistics, code, numbers in general can always be manipulated in order to prove or disprove a theory such as this. Since you seem to have a handle on things and I do not see the question posed such as yet, let me throw this out there for your consideration and hopefully answer. What other than number manipulation, do you have to prove this theory? Are there planetary alignments that coincide with the numbers? Tidal influences? Moon phases??

I look forward to your reply or a reply from any other that would care to tackle it.

~MMIMO

reply to post by Phage


I had a previous post to this thread removed as I made the grievous error that you were doing this tongue in cheek. I didn't realize that you were serious. My apologies. Let's discuss the topic.

As someone very well versed in many basic sciences, I would love to hear your thoughts on the significance of patterns to quakes, and what you feel may be some of the causation influences. I know that there are those who have considered solar cycles, moon/tidal cycles and forces, astronomical alignments, etc. What are the possibilities that you are considering with the potential patterns that you have presented here?

Edit to add: I see a previous poster mentioned possible man-made influences. I would love to hear your thoughts on this as well.

reply to post by MyMindIsMyOwn

I have no theory. The talk about the 188 day cycle aroused my interest and I decided to see if there were any significance to it. Because there are so many such "cycles" I really don't think there is, as I implied in the OP.

Cycles are not hard to find. Finding a true correlation is much more difficult. Assigning causation to a correlation can be even more problematic.

reply to post by Phage


And NOW you get your cookies you asked for Phage!

Wanna bet against my prediction? Oh well. Party time.

Frequency of Occurrence of Earthquakes

Average Annually

8 and higher

1 ¹
-----------------
7 - 7.9

15 ¹
-----------------
6 - 6.9

134 ²
------------------
5 - 5.9

1319 ²
-----------------


4 - 4.9

13,000
(estimated)

---------------------

3 - 3.9

130,000
(estimated)

---------------------

2 - 2.9

1,300,000
(estimated)
----------------------------

earthquake.usgs.gov...

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by MyMindIsMyOwn

 

I have no theory. The talk about the 188 day cycle aroused my interest and I decided to see if there were any significance to it. Because there are so many such "cycles" I really don't think there is, as I implied in the OP.

Cycles are not hard to find. Finding a true correlation is much more difficult. Assigning causation to a correlation can be even more problematic.

edit on 3/21/2012 by Phage because: (no reason given)

Phage is quite correct on this. He's show cycles (other than a 188 day one), number of repetitions, etc.

Finding numbers that cycle is quite easy, as long as you have a database of number (dates and magnitudes of quakes).
The hard part now, is trying to see if there is a causality. This would be a very hard task (not impossible, just very, very time consuming).

All of you (this is a suggestion, the more people that do look however, the greater the chance to see if there is a common causality) can take his past dates, on various cycles and see if it matches up with things (either ordinary, or extrodinary, you pick).

Look for planetary cycles, solar cycles, tidal cycles, weather cycles, etc.

If you can find something, then share it, and we can see if things line up. If they do, we have something new to argue.....uhm....discuss about!

If nothing does seem to line up, then Phage still deserves a cookie, because he's shown that given enough numbers and data, you can make anything look like it has a cycle......

reply to post by Phage


hahaha phage, you really quake me up!! hahaha, bad joke!

i bet there is a 4:20 conspiracy where earthquakes happen @ this time of day, and i bet there is on every 67 years when the leafs win the trucking Stanley cup!!! go leafs go! hope Toronto will still be there when the Madrid goes! lol
one love

reply to post by Phage


Wow, pretty neat. Good find!

I wonder if science is watching these threads and trying to understand how it is getting so accurate.

What does this mean? I have heard that people are saying this means intelligent design. I see it as nature. Everything has a pattern a frequency, and a color that is not does not reflect off of it-thus making it the color it is.
I am watching out in April now.

Perhaps the math is knowing as many patterns as possible. This way we could be more accurate in predictions. So if they occur every 188 and 232 then there must be opposites of these or other similar variables. Hmm. We need to keep thinking.

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by MyMindIsMyOwn

 

I have no theory. The talk about the 188 day cycle aroused my interest and I decided to see if there were any significance to it. Because there are so many such "cycles" I really don't think there is, as I implied in the OP.

Cycles are not hard to find. Finding a true correlation is much more difficult. Assigning causation to a correlation can be even more problematic.

edit on 3/21/2012 by Phage because: (no reason given)

I'm glad I'm not the only one who sounded off on this.

post

I found similar cycles, but they don't persist. And as you said, correlation is not causation.

I have to say, I got a chuckle from your post.

~Namaste

reply to post by eriktheawful


I hate to steal Phage's thunder, but I did post on this already, but because it's the Wizard of Phage, his thread is going to garner more attention, and that's fine.... as long as people get the point.

Take them down the Emerald Road Phage.

~Namaste

ETA: Phage has gone a bit further and exposed the root flaw in this by showing several examples of "cycles", so by that, he's gone above and beyond my post, which just exposes the 188 day cycle by itself.

Well if 5 repetitions seems to be the magic number(or at least the last number in the repetition), we should be looking at the earthquake cycles that are on their 4th repetition for there is a good probability of there being a 5th one.. Hmm. Maybe we could predict every last earthquake in its repetition.

reply to post by Phage

09/03/11 - 7.0: 233 days

01/13/11 - 7.0: 231 days

05/27/10 - 7.2: 232 days

10/07/09 - 7.7: 231 days
10/07/09 - 7.8: 231 days
10/07/09 - 7.4: 231 days

02/18/09 - 7.0: 233 days

06/30/08 - 7.0

How is that a 232 day cycle when only one of them is 232 days?

The 188 day cycle is much more precise:

Chile — February 27, 2010 (06:34:14 UTC) — 8.8

< 188.42 days | 4522 hours >

New Zealand — September 3, 2010 (16:35:46 UTC) — 7.0

< 188.54 days | 4525 hours >

Japan — March 11, 2011 (05:46:24 UTC) — 9.0

< 188.54 days | 4525 hours >

Fiji — September 15, 2011 (19:31:02 UTC) — 7.3

If another quake happens today then all 5 quakes will be exactly 188 days apart.

Originally posted by Phage
Well my little bit of code has been running long enough. It sniffed out cycles (up to 5 years in length) in the occurrence of earthquakes of 7.0 and greater since 1973. The minimum number of repetitions to "qualify" is 5. There are a whole lot (a whole lot) of cycles with repetitions less than 5.

Based on various cycles, these are the results. The last column indicates when the earthquake would fall if the cycle continues.

edit on 3/21/2012 by Phage because: (no reason given)

Wow.. very cool Phage!
Could I get the source code from you? It would be fun to play with.

Any of the 4 or 3 rep cycles land on 12-21-12? LOL

reply to post by ChaoticOrder


It is an average.

Originally posted by Morpheas
reply to post by ChaoticOrder

 

It is an average.

Obviously it's an average, but that wasn't my point. If the 232 cycle has such a high range of error then it's probably not a cycle, it's most likely just coincidence quakes have happened close to those dates. The 188 day cycle is much more likely to be a real pattern because the time between all the quakes are extremely close. In fact two of the times between the events were exactly the same, down to the hour. If another quake over mag 7 happens today I will be absolutely convinced the 188 day pattern is completely real.

reply to post by greeneyedleo


Okay riddle me this, how come every serious member here who obviously sees what this thread is about, get's slapped with an off-topic sticker around his post.

And your telling us this thread should be treated as a real !legit! thread?!?! As in Phage didn't make this thread just to laugh with what has become of the ATS community ?

This is a new low.

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by DerepentLEstranger

 

Why is it trolling?
These cycles are just as real as the 188 day cycle.

But the 188 day cycle wasn't real...

Originally posted by Cyanhide
reply to post by greeneyedleo

 

Okay riddle me this, how come every serious member here who obviously sees what this thread is about, get's slapped with an off-topic sticker around his post.

And your telling us this thread should be treated as a real !legit! thread?!?! As in Phage didn't make this thread just to laugh with what has become of the ATS community ?

This is a new low.

So, according to you, anyone on here that does not "step in line" with a popular idea or theory, and in fact offers evidence that might point to other things, possibilities or theories, is not a "serious member"?
That their threads are not "legit"?

That people with a real science back ground are here to just laugh at people?

Phage posted some very realistic numbers (much better than the single 188 day theory), to show that there might be other cycles. He even said that the 188 cycle theory piqued his curiosity, and guess what?

GASP! He actually went to the numbers and did some honest to god research (instead of gobbling down just what someone says, he actually LOOKED for himself), and not only did he YES find a pattern that is 188 days, but several others too, and then shared this information on here.

Your post (and the others that were removed earlier) are prime examples of being hypocritical. You all exclaim how everyone should have an open mind, yet when Phage offered evidence that there might be more than one cycle to consider, and gave you hard numbers to use for finding correlations to possible causes, you all instead turn around and claim that he's "making fun" of you guys.



Yes, he did say that you can find cycles in just about any set of numbers. However, he didn't just say that. He's given the numbers to everyone so if they want they can try and see if there really ARE other cycles....

God forbid if any of you were to actually go look, instead of just sitting there and lapping up a YouTube video.......