Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
United States Science

Is This The Big One? 151

Posted by timothy from the shaky-ground dept.
Quivering Coward writes "There has been a marked increase in seismic activity in southern California in the past several days," pointing to this map from Caltech Earthquake Net, including a 5.2 and 3.6 this morning (2004/06/15). "Could this be the big one? Is 'the big one' ever going to happen? NASA is doing their part to predict the future of Earthquakes."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Is This The Big One? More

Is This The Big One?

Comments Filter:

  • Run (Score:5, Funny)

    by Isosonys ( 589846 ) on Wednesday June 16, 2004 @11:15AM (#9442175)
    Run go to another state. Just RUN. That is all Thank You.

    • Re:Run (Score:5, Interesting)

      by cluckshot ( 658931 ) on Wednesday June 16, 2004 @12:30PM (#9443058)

      You might have a day or two left but well the Lunar Land tides maxed on June 3 and they do it again on July 1. The orbital max differential occurred on June 15 for apogee and will max for Paragee on July 1. I suppose with all the other data we see a high probablility of Earthquake as the moon approaches the close approach on July 1.

      The time to be concerned is when the moon is at 45 Deg to the longitude of So. CA.

      Click on the Earth Moon Viewer Apogee/Paragee Calc [fourmilab.ch] if you want to check out the exact times etc.

      • Paragee? What the hell is that? I've heard of perigee....
      • > the Lunar Land tides maxed on June 3 and they do it again on July 1

        Note that there is NO empirical correlation between either the intensity of lunar tides and earthquakes nor the phase of the lunar tide and earthquakes. Exhaustive scans through 50 years of data show total non-correlation.

        It is possible that we may someday discover something that will allow that affects or causes earthquakes, and that we might therefore be able to predict them. However, the answer is not lunar tides, despite the num

  • What happens when I click on an earthquake? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Bob Cat - NYMPHS ( 313647 ) on Wednesday June 16, 2004 @11:19AM (#9442226) Homepage
    That's from the Caltech quake map link. heehee.

    Anyway. A couple of small quakes and /. starts worrying about the end of the world? Get real.

  • Yeah, sure.. (Score:4, Funny)

    by Lord Bitman ( 95493 ) on Wednesday June 16, 2004 @11:27AM (#9442329)
    NASA is "predicting [imdb.com]" the earthquakes

    • Re:Yeah, sure.. (Score:4, Informative)

      by Pi_0's don't shower ( 741216 ) <ethan@isp.northw ... u ['est' in gap]> on Wednesday June 16, 2004 @01:16PM (#9443543) Homepage Journal
      Exactly. As every goephysicist knows, you cannot predict earthquakes! [anl.gov] We just don't know enough about the Earth's interior, including all the fault lines and their details to be able to do it. The best we can do, as far as I know, is to detect tremors and give a few minutes warning. From the article above, here's what Arthur Smith has to say:
      Scientists cannot predict earthquakes - otherwise we would not have so many where hundreds or thousands of people get killed, like the recent one in Japan. After an earthquake has happened there are various things geologists look for in the "fault" associated with the earthquake to give some idea of how long it will be till the next one. The "fault" is the part of the earth's crust where two sections are sliding against one another in some fashion. To make real predictions would require knowing the location of all these faults (some kind of map), knowing at what stage each of them is (how much tension there is and what kind of things are preventing the fault from slipping) and how they interact with one another. Even for very carefully studied regions like southern California, we have only a very small fraction of the information that would be needed for true prediction.
    • no no no... NASA is causing the earthquakes... not predicting them

  • The future... is now (Score:5, Funny)

    by Jorkapp ( 684095 ) <jorkapp&hotmail,com> on Wednesday June 16, 2004 @11:32AM (#9442393)
    We simply cannot allow this to happen. Should the ground open up, then the land of the molemen, warlocks, and trolls will release their soldiers! We must defend ourselves!

    Therefore, I am introducing the MWTDA (Molemen, Warlock, and Troll Defense Act). All citizens are to be in posession of:

    * Either a large water gun or a hose
    * Trashbags

    Military combat units are also under orders to be in posession of the forementioned weaponry.

    [Obligatory Simpsons Quote]
    [Homer] You're right. I'll deal with those murderous trolls.
    [Bart] Huh?
    [Homer] I mean - I'll deal with those murderous trolls. ...Later...

    [Homer] (Being chased) Marge! Lisa! Now!
    * Marge and Lisa open fire on the jockeys with a watergun and hose - incapacitating them.
    [Homer] Bart - Go get me a trashbag.

    • Re:The future... is now (Score:1, Funny)

      by Anonymous Coward
      Should the ground open up, then the land of the molemen, warlocks, and trolls will release their soldiers! We must defend ourselves!

      We're ready for them. When the ground opens up and the soldiers are released, buildings and freeways will collapse crushing them.

  • All we have to do is ... (Score:5, Funny)

    by LennyDotCom ( 26658 ) <Lenny@lenny.com> on Wednesday June 16, 2004 @11:36AM (#9442428) Homepage Journal
    We just need to blow up a small tactical nuke deep within the fault line and we can save the west coast. Trust me I saw it in a movie once. It worked like a charm.

  • Belive it or not... (Score:5, Informative)

    by Repran ( 560270 ) on Wednesday June 16, 2004 @11:38AM (#9442448) Journal
    ...but a russion scientist actually predicted this would happen [kuro5hin.org].

    • If you keep making predictions... (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Chemisor ( 97276 ) on Wednesday June 16, 2004 @01:25PM (#9443634)
      If you keep making predictions, eventually one of them will come true.
    • Dr. Keilis-Borok's office is about 3 doors down from mine. :) I haven't actually talked to him yet though, but I'm working at UCLA this summer for the Southern California Earthquake Center.

      Interestingly enough, his team of researchers are claiming to have predicted the San Simeon earthquake in December and an earthquake last year in Japan. Using the same methods, he is predicting a minimum magnitude 6.5 to strike a 12,000 square mile region of Southern California by September 5th. This 12,000 square mile r

  • Science Fiction can inform us (Score:4, Interesting)

    by justanyone ( 308934 ) on Wednesday June 16, 2004 @11:38AM (#9442457) Homepage Journal

    I read a really cool sci-fi story once where there was a big earthquake coming, everybody believed it and moved east of the line (into Nevada) and waited.

    The big day came, the earthquake happened, and ... it was the Eastern part that fell into the ocean. The western sliver remained, newborn cliffs towering above a freshly minted surf far below, having swallowed the rest of the U.S.

    Maybe those of us in Chicago ought to have life rafts, too (grin).

    -- Kevin Rice
  • Could this be the big one? Is 'the big one' ever going to happen?

    Look earthquakes can and do happen. But as to the 'Big One' idea well I hate to be the one to point this out but the reason why that area is above sea level is because it floats so no earthquake can change that fact or sink it. As to moving out in the ocean yea it's going to happen but You me, our kids, our grand kids and our great great great great grand kids are going to be dead before that strip of land moves one mile from where it stan
    • Umm ... .it floats on magma .. not on the ocean.
    • So if California floats... like wood. And wood burns... like a witch... it's a witch!
      Burn it! Burn it! Burn it! Burn! Burn!... [mwscomp.com]
    • March 28, 20005

      Looks like I have plenty of time to prepare...
    • That's so incredibly wrong that it's not even funny. Imagine the (likely) case where the fault isn't exactly vertical. There are two California-in-the-ocean scenarios:

      1) A cross-section of the fault slants like this, as seen facing North:

      California / Rest of US

      If that fault served as a major support for that edge of the tectonic plate, and during a quake the western plate slides further west, then it will also likely slide down the slope of the fault.

      2) The fault slants like this:

      California \ Rest

      • And that is also wrong.
        You forgot the real scenario:

        California | or / or \ Rest of US...doesn't matter

        It's a strike slip fault...California is moving north relative to the rest of the continent at a rate of a cm or two per year, so give it a while (millions and millions of years) and California will border Alaska.

        Of course that's a massivly simplified view, but it adequately descibes the situation.

        There is absolutely no danger of California ever sinking into the Pacific (sadly), the best we can hope for
    • 1. Land doesn't float on water. It's denser than water. It *does* float on magma, but that fact alone doesn't account for land above sea level. Even the ocean floor floats on magma.

      2. The California plate is moving north, the San Andreas being a strike-slip fault rather than a nascent rift valley. Its evenutal fate is to move to Alaska rather than head out into the Pacific.

      3. And what qualified you to make earthquake predictions anyway? You don't seem to know much about the geology around here.

  • Think of what this would do to the Continental US as we know it. Alas, no more would there be 10-10 numbers that call California, no white meat chicken at the Los Angeles Taco Bell, and higher prices prevailing on all laundry machines at the San Fransisco Sears!

  • Earth moved (Score:5, Funny)

    by sckeener ( 137243 ) on Wednesday June 16, 2004 @11:56AM (#9442648)
    Shhh...my wife thought it was me.
  • In Yuma. Buy it now, while it's still cheap!
  • ..Most buildings in california are not earthquake proof.

    Also most web servers in California are not /. proof. When will the next effect hit? ... SOON!

  • Hopefully... (Score:1, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward
    too much crap coming from Hollywood these days...

  • So what? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by dacarr ( 562277 ) on Wednesday June 16, 2004 @12:19PM (#9442885) Homepage Journal
    It's an earthquake. BFD. Yes, during Northridge, it levelled an apartment building, knocked over a freeway interchange ramp or two, and toppled the big screen at Anaheim Stadium, but that was really it. The damage and death toll for that six pointer was trivial. And ten years ago, I heard it predicted by seismologists that there would be a 50/50 chance of a major earthquake hitting within the next thirty years.

    I mean, come on, people, are we expecting The Big One to cause the entire state of California to break away at its borders, and we start floating around the Pacific Ocean in some sort of bad remake of Space:1999, with Arnold Schwarzenneger in charge of Earth Base California or something?

    • For Northern California I've heard numbers closer to 90-95% for the next 30 years.

    • I mean, come on, people, are we expecting The Big One to cause the entire state of California to break away at its borders, and we start floating around the Pacific Ocean..


      We can only hope ;)
      • Oh, great! GREAT! Somebody here WANTS Gerry Anderson to produce it!

        I can see it now. "California: 2004".

        (Cue melodramatic funky yet inappropriate scifi theme from Space:1999)

    • This earthquake yesterday was really no big deal at all, especially since it was located 49km off the coast of San Diego.

      However the Northridge Earthquake was one of the costliest disasters in United States history [dis-inc.com]. There were also 51 deaths attributed to that quake too.

      Revised predictions have an even greater probability of a large earthquake happening in Southern California soon. 85% chance of a M7.0 or greater happening within the next 30 years [scec.org].
      • But in total, earthquakes pale in comparison to the dollar and life damage caused by hurricanes - because hurricanes are far more common then earthquakes of equal destructive power.
        __________________________________________ ___

  • Not Southern Cal (Score:5, Informative)

    by sfjoe ( 470510 ) on Wednesday June 16, 2004 @12:28PM (#9443023)

    Many researchers believe the next major earthquake will be in northern California, not southern California. One reason is that the San Andreas fault 'creeps' in the south, slowly releasing energy (so the theory goes). In the north, the San Andreas is locked and last moved in 1906, when it released all its energy at once, devastating San Francisco.

    • The San Andreas fault demonstrates aseismic creep in the central section of the fault, just north of Parkfield. Another area this occurs is around Hollister.

      The last time the San Andreas fault moved in Southern California was the 1857 Fort Tejon earthquake.

      The last time it moved in Northern California is the 1989 Loma Prieta earthquake.

      Despite this, both areas have a high potential for devastating earthquakes. (The section around San Francisco itself last moved in 1908. The Loma Prieta quake was centered

  • Ahem... (Score:3, Insightful)

    by linuxwrangler ( 582055 ) on Wednesday June 16, 2004 @12:35PM (#9443123)
    ...How the bleep did this get by the editors. All this is is links to a couple of generic sites on earthquakes and some vague and unsubstantiated assertion about increasing frequency.

    The first link points to a recent earthquake map that has been available for ages. It's on my bookmarks to look at when there is an interesting event.

    The other is an article on NASA earthquake research.

    Nothing in either points to an increase in frequency and indeed typing "earthquake" and "increase" into Google news turns up no interesting articles.

    I guess those top-secret black government agencies have done a great job of keeping this monumental (non) story out of the news.

    • Re:Ahem... (Score:3, Insightful)

      by GeoGreg ( 631708 )
      Agreed. Not much news here. Plus, there is no particular reason (that I know of anyway) to believe that the next Big Quake will be preceded by increased seismic activity.
      • Well, there is some pretty decent evidence for "fore-shocks", or a swarm of activity immediately before SOME big quakes.

        Unfortunately, this phenomenon isn't always present, and significant fore-shocks (3,4,5 on the richter scale) tend to happen within hours of the bigger hit. There MAY be a swarm of small (2 or less) quakes for weeks beforehand, but these are tough to distinguish from regular background noise (and in fact may be just that.).

        I live in earthquake country, and don't worry about it too much.

  • The San Andreas fault is nice and all, but (Score:5, Interesting)

    by bersl2 ( 689221 ) on Wednesday June 16, 2004 @12:41PM (#9443172) Journal
    What about the New Madrid fault? It's overdue for a 7+ magnitude earthquake, and it's in the middle of America.

  • No It's not the one. (Score:4, Informative)

    by EvilTwinSkippy ( 112490 ) <yoda AT etoyoc DOT com> on Wednesday June 16, 2004 @12:54PM (#9443306) Homepage Journal
    Wrong fault line. (The 5.5 Earthquake was out in the Pacific.)

    In fact, the earthquake patterns on the map show that today is a pretty ho-hum day.

    Nothing to see here. Move along.

  • One great big, festering neon distraction (Score:3, Funny)

    by georgewad ( 154339 ) on Wednesday June 16, 2004 @01:04PM (#9443417) Homepage
    I've an idea to keep you all occupied:
    Learn to swim

  • Learn to swim (Score:4, Funny)

    by Discoflamingo13 ( 90009 ) on Wednesday June 16, 2004 @01:05PM (#9443424) Homepage Journal
    I'll see you down in Arizona Bay.

  • Eh? (Score:3, Informative)

    by torinth ( 216077 ) on Wednesday June 16, 2004 @01:32PM (#9443712) Homepage
    What?

    I'm sorry, but since when is a tiny 5.2 earthquake followed by an aftershock at the same location even notable?

    5.2's are nothing in Southern California, and you can see a map that looks exactly like that maybe once every month or two.

    I imagine that what probably threw people off is the extra earthquake that was originally reported by the USGS. That one was supposed to be centered near Lancaster, or some such, but it wasn't long before they took back the claim on grounds of instrument error.

  • Sorry about that.... (Score:5, Funny)

    by clintp ( 5169 ) on Wednesday June 16, 2004 @01:32PM (#9443714)
    Those "earthquakes" are actually just the collective sobbing and shaking of the Los Angeles Lakers fans.

  • My first time was good (Score:2, Informative)

    by ee_moss ( 635165 )
    That 5.2 was my first earthquake, and it wasn't much. Building kind of shook a bit. Everyone went on with work like nothing. Some people didn't even notice.
    • Hey, that's a good intro to quakes then. Most quakes are like that. Things shake a big, nothing big happens. Most quakes sound like a big truck drove down the street.

      However, note that you were 50 miles from the epicenter, and you are on a different faultline. That severely decreases the dramatic effect :)

      If you and the 5.2 were on the same faultline, it would be much more intense.

      We felt the San Simeon earthquake in the Bay Area, and we were a couple hundred miles away!

  • Duct Tape (Score:2, Funny)

    by gCGBD ( 532991 )
    Maybe if you left coast people unrolled some big rolls of duct tape from the coast up to the mountains you could hold it together and avert the worst of the disaster. If you have some extra, cover over the primary fault lines really well as well ....
  • Why is it that earthquakes are refered to as temblors [reference.com] and not tremblers [reference.com]? I mean really! The earth TREMBLES during a TEMBLOR!?

    I'm tembling with fear over the answers or moderation this post may get.
  • http://www.syzygyjob.com/ [syzygyjob.com]

    Be sure to put on your foil hat, as Jim Berkland is a frequent coast to coast guest

  • Stop Plate Tectonics! (Score:3, Funny)

    by wcrowe ( 94389 ) on Thursday June 17, 2004 @12:38PM (#9453542)
    I am outraged that neither political party is doing anything about plate tectonics! How many earthquakes must occur before something is done about it?

  • including a 5.2 and 3.6 this morning

    Whoa, calm down. There's nothing unusual here.

    Magnitude 5 earthquakes happen about once or twice every year in Southern California [trinet.org]. There were several smaller quake a few hours after the 5.3, but those are aftershocks and happen after every big quake.

    Also, a 3.6 is not unusual at all.
    Statewide every week, there are about 5-10 earthquakes that are magnitude 3-4. [usgs.gov] They happen all the time, and aren't really an indicator of anything.

    So calm down, take a deep breath and

Slashdot Top Deals

The rule on staying alive as a program manager is to give 'em a number or give 'em a date, but never give 'em both at once.

Close