Simulating 800,000 Years of California Earthquake History To Pinpoint Risks

aarondubrow shares a report from the Texas Advanced Computing Center: A new study in the Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America presents results from a new earthquake simulator, RSQSim, that simulates hundreds of thousands of years of seismic history in California. Coupled with another code, CyberShake, the framework can calculate the amount of shaking that would occur for each quake. [The framework makes use of two of the most powerful supercomputers on the planet: Frontera, at the Texas Advanced Computing Center, and Summit, at Oak Ridge National Laboratory].

The new approach improves [seismologists'] ability to pinpoint how big an earthquake might occur at a given location, allowing building code developers, architects, and structural engineers to design more resilient buildings that can survive earthquakes at a specific site.

Map the Fault

[rtb61]

They are only measuring the quakes that were and it does not have all that much to the quakes that will be. It is all tied to the strength of the rocks at the fault face, and magma flows. It depends which part of the fault fails when and how far it slides until it locks in place again and the new strength of the fault face and when it will fail and where and how much it will slip before it locks up again, as it redistributes load across the face.

They will be lucky to get 60% out of it and for many years ju

Re:

[MrL0G1C]

It might not ever be possible to measure the stresses with enough accuracy at the same time as mapping the fault face with enough accuracy to then be able simulate / determine when a quake will occur.

Perhaps a better solution would be to encourage small quakes rather than allow stresses to build up enough for very large quakes to occur... but maybe that'd require setting off nukes underground though! Or maybe fracturing would be a way of setting off small quakes to prevent large quake stresses from building

Re:

[drinkypoo]

Perhaps a better solution would be to encourage small quakes rather than allow stresses to build up enough for very large quakes to occur... but maybe that'd require setting off nukes underground though! Or maybe fracturing would be a way of setting off small quakes to prevent large quake stresses from building up.

Did you even attempt to research this before commenting? Because we already know that won't work, have known for quite some years, and you could have found out with google.

Re:

[MrL0G1C]

Did you even attempt to research this before commenting

No, I didn't and LOL since when does anyone on the internet ever do that. Sometimes I research stuff, sometimes I don't.

Do you know what I'd like, I'd like for the ignorant as fuck half of the planet that keeps voting for right-wing politicians to fuck them over again to learn something and stop being stupid consumerist sheeple that think there aren't too many humans on this planet and that they can continue to rape it to bits forever without consequen

Re:

[drinkypoo]

I would like that very much as well, but unfortunately most of those voters think global warming is a hoax and qanon makes some good points. They have to be worked around at this point, there's just not time to get them onboard. It would literally take at least a generation even if we went all in.

Re:

[CrimsonAvenger]

that think there aren't too many humans on this planet

Don't tell me, let me guess - YOU are not part of the problem of "too many humans"?

Just remember, everyone who thinks there are "too many humans" can help to solve the problem by doing themselves in....

And yes, I know that when you types "too many humans" you REALLY meant "too many OTHER humans"....

Re:

[jbengt]

They will be lucky to get 60% out of it and for many years just a coin toss.

The quakes that were are only good for general information over the next geologic time period and how the fault will change over hundreds of thousands of years and provide little information about what will happen next month.

What are you rambling about?
They've simulated a long period of time to get an idea of the likelihood of different magnitude quakes at different locations, not to predict any particular moment in time.
And

Re:

[cusco]

My wife grew up in Peru, and lived through a huge quake in the mid-80s in Cusco. There was a quake large enough to make the hanging lamps swing a foot in each direction when we lived in Cusco and she didn't even bother to get out of bed.

Look up Cascadia Subduction Zone

[Morgaine]

VERY few people die or are injured even during the biggest quakes, etc. As much as it can reasonably be earthquakes are a solved problem.

Unfortunately, you're very misinformed about this. Go read up on the Cascadia subduction zone [wikipedia.org] just off the US west coast.

The Juan de Fuca plate is subducting beneath the North American plate, but it is currently locked (stuck) and will continue to build up energy until it's suddenly released as a megathrust earthquake, the strongest kind. This has been happening every

Re:

[dsgrntlxmply]

Each major quake reveals some deficiency in the assumptions underlying building codes. Note the spalled concrete and mushroomed rebar on various freeway support columns in 1994 Northridge. 1992 Ferndale had accelerations exceeding 2 g, and made a large bulldozer move from one place to another by hopping (evidence in muddy imprints). The Cascadia subduction zone there might have generated an M9 quake in 1700, evidence in tsunami records in Japan. Years ago I was somewhere or other on the Oregon coast. T

Nice

[digitalworld1]

Thanks for this beautiful article. In fact, we normally evaluate earthquakes in line with human damage and environmental damage.

Ha ha...

[LeeLynx]

Once again, these fools have failed to account for *the device*....

Re:

[Mattcelt]

Hi, beautiful and naughty girl.

Clearly you are very, very lost. This is the last place on the internet you would want to be.

Kindly fuck right off.