Quote:
Originally Posted by ckissick
I used to work at the USGS on an earthquake prediction project in Parkfield, CA. Earthquakes can theoretically be predicted before they happen. There's evidence that there is a "strain event" that precedes the rupture by hours or days.
My project used anomalous water level changes in deep water wells to indicate a strain event. Unfortunately, the correlation between a strain event and a subsequent earthquake appears to sporadic. It can be done, but it's not reliable.
As for a quake in Japan triggering a quake in California, I doubt it. The Hayward fault is overdue, and if it goes next year, it won't be because of what happened in Japan. Faults do affect one-another, and one earthquake has caused another, but only where the faults are within much less than 100 miles of each other.
|
Everything is interrelated. When you think of a Tectonic Plate it is really one interrelated set of fault zones. So when an EQ the size of the one that hit Japan can move the land mass of Japan 8 to 10 feet and cause the rotation of the earth to slow..doesn't one think that much of an energy release (adjustment) is going to have an effect on a related set of fault zones on the other side of its' Tectonic Plate?
The thing is to think bigger and be inclusive as we are talking about a complete system and not just random pieces.
Since 64 you have had Alaska at roughly a 9, You have had Indonesia in 04 at close to 9, Chile a a couple of years back at close to 9 and now in Japan a 9...so what piece of this Tectonic Plate map has still been quite? The only question is when...
The problem is that TABS time and Geologic time don't mesh very well...I might very well be dead before the earth moves again...in such a significant way.