If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(ABC)   Earthquakes prompt fears over the Ring of Fire, causing people to I'm not even going to finish this thought because you're singing the Johnny Cash song in your head   (abcnews.go.com) divider line 100
    More: Obvious, Chile, Los Angeles, earthquakes, sings, lawsuits, Pacific Rim, fears  
•       •       •

2953 clicks; posted to Main » on 02 Apr 2014 at 5:46 PM (16 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



100 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
Oak
2014-04-02 06:47:07 PM
 
2014-04-02 06:47:30 PM

theMagni: Rent Party: Well, the good news is that a 9.0 would probably put Seattle into the dark ages for a week or so.   And Cascadia is ready to pop open soon.

/ My earthquake rider is paid and up to date.


I'm going to play a game which I call "which is more likely?"

It's simple.  I just ask you which is more likely:
1. In the event of an earthquake, the handful of underwriters that cover earthquake insurance will pay out tens of billions of dollars in claims
2. Those underwriters will declare bankruptcy and their boards of directors will get large bonuses.

Take all the time you need to figure out... which is more likely.


Yes, that is exactly why there are no insurance companies in California.  They all went broke.

The actual fact will be.

3.  The vast majority of people lose their asses because their policy doesn't pay for earth movements, just like it says right here in your policy documents we sent you, you signed, and didn't read.  Except for Rent Party.  He gets to rebuild.   You, on the other hand, can get a "low interest loan" from FEMA and buy your house twice.
 
2014-04-02 06:50:22 PM

Stone Meadow: Smeggy Smurf: As long as it kills Port Angeles, WA while my folks aren't there I'm ok with that happening

Sure is a purty town you got there. Be too bad if something happened to it...

[aios-staging.agentimage.com image 850x437]


PA is beautiful but it has a weird vibe. I'm sure it will be the first to sink unfortunately.
 
2014-04-02 06:51:59 PM
FTA: "Both cities lie along the so-called Ring of Fire, where two plates underneath the earth's surface occasionally bump up against other plates, according to Kate Hutton, staff seismologist at California Institute of Technology."
The plates are not beneath the earth's surface, they ARE the earth's surface. There is no "bumping". One plate is sliding under the other one. They lock, build up pressure, then slip past each other like a Poppin Hoppie releasing it's suction.
 
2014-04-02 06:53:35 PM
I wasn't. But nice try, subby
 
2014-04-02 06:55:07 PM

obenchainr: bobothemagnificent: Does this mean that California will FINALLY fall into the ocean?  I usually spend a day or two during my summer break to go out there and jump on the San Andreas in an attempt to make it happen faster.

No, but it would probably bring Los Angeles and Berkeley closer together.  It's SF that would "fall into the ocean", if anything.


I don't know if that's a good thing or a bad thing.  I think I'll support the Lex Luthor solution, nuke the fault, and make a city called Otisland.
 
2014-04-02 06:59:25 PM

Smeggy Smurf: Stone Meadow: Walker: Quakes are moving up and down the rim. Chile, then Panama got hit with a 5.8, probably Mexico next (Oh wait, they got a 4.2 today), then a big one for Cali.

Hey, we had ours last month. It's the Cascade Subduction Zone's turn.

*Sploosh*

Coastal Oregon, Washington and the outer coast of Vancouver Island slip beneath the waves.

As long as it kills Port Angeles, WA while my folks aren't there I'm ok with that happening


Actually, we plan on nuking that and Bellingham when the aliens invade.

/thuktun fishiathy-chaytrif
 
2014-04-02 06:59:34 PM

divgradcurl: CanuckInCA: Important part,

The magnitude of an earthquake is related to the length of the fault on which it occurs -- the longer the fault, the larger the earthquake. The San Andreas Fault is only 800 miles long. To generate an earthquake of 10.5 magnitude would require the rupture of a fault that is many times the length of the San Andreas Fault. No fault long enough to generate a magnitude 10.5 earthquake is known to exist.

Daedalus27: It is self limiting as the higher magnitudes become impossible as there isn't a continuous fault fracture of sufficient length to generate such a quake (at least based upon the present understanding of earthquakes). I think something like a 12.0 would require a quake from Seattle, all the way down the Juan de Fuca plate joining the San Andreas and then running down the length of California to the Mexican border. I don't know that it is possible given the way the faults line up and whether they could propagate all the way down but If that would somehow happen, the West coast, Hawaii, coastal Alaska and even the east coast of Asia would be devastated.


okay, but why does length play such an important part? if it is all just a matter of coefficients of static and dynamic friction, and how much energy is bound up in the plates pushing against one another, couldn't equal magnitude quakes happen from 2 different sized faults?

i imagine it to be like rubberbands. the distance i can get it to fly isn't based on how long the band is, but more on its elasticity and how much energy i can get into the spring.

/completely unscientific comparison
//just asking questions


the area of contact that slips, as well as the amount, determines the earthquake energy, or "moment".  So strike-slip earthquakes, on faults that slide up against each other and which only extend to a shallow depth, are largely relative to the fault length.

Then there are the reverse/thrust/subduction zone quakes, which extend at angles into the earth and which one side slides up onto the other. these can have a shallow angle and much higher area in contact, therefore much higher energy.

An aside are big quakes that happen at hundreds of miles deep, which apparently happen when one kind of rock changes to another under extreme pressure. They happen minimums of hundreds of miles away from people and cause little strong movement on the surface.
 
2014-04-02 07:00:47 PM
The Marty Robbins version is much better.
 
2014-04-02 07:09:07 PM

phalamir: Earth and stone are nowhere near as elastic as, well, elastic.  There is only so much stress the rock can take before it gives.  Once you (okay, the planet) apply more force than that, the rock will fail, and you will get an earthquake.  If the earthquake's power is that force times the length of the fault, and the force is (relatively) low, then length will ov ...


ok, this sounds like a good explaination and i can understand it. but what if (and bear with me for a moment) what if there were DIAMONDS pushing against DIAMONDS with an aggravated shearing force?!? and and...

yes, i will stop. its just that i grew up watching every quake disaster movie ever. i was confident that i had nothing to worry about being in the middle of the continent (far away from california and the ring of fire) until somebody introduced me to the new madrid fault which could have -

"In a report filed in November 2008, the U.S. Federal Emergency Management Agency warned that a serious earthquake in the New Madrid Seismic Zone could result in "the highest economic losses due to a natural disaster in the United States," further predicting "widespread and catastrophic" damage across Alabama, Arkansas, Illinois, Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky, Mississippi, Missouri, Oklahoma, Texas, and particularly Tennessee, where a 7.7 magnitude quake or greater would cause damage to tens of thousands of structures affecting water distribution, transportation systems, and other vital infrastructure.[20] The earthquake is expected to also result in many thousands of fatalities, with more than 4,000 of the fatalities expected in Memphis alone."

so now i am a bit nutty about earthquake predictions and the next Big One HYOOOOOOOOOOOOOJ ONE

thanks to everybody else for the replies
 
2014-04-02 07:13:24 PM

cretinbob: or not


That
 
2014-04-02 07:14:34 PM
Begs to differ...
upload.wikimedia.org
 
2014-04-02 07:18:34 PM
Wasn't "Ring of Fire" the theme song for "Preparation H"?
 
2014-04-02 07:18:47 PM

divgradcurl: CanuckInCA: Important part,

The magnitude of an earthquake is related to the length of the fault on which it occurs -- the longer the fault, the larger the earthquake. The San Andreas Fault is only 800 miles long. To generate an earthquake of 10.5 magnitude would require the rupture of a fault that is many times the length of the San Andreas Fault. No fault long enough to generate a magnitude 10.5 earthquake is known to exist.

Daedalus27: It is self limiting as the higher magnitudes become impossible as there isn't a continuous fault fracture of sufficient length to generate such a quake (at least based upon the present understanding of earthquakes). I think something like a 12.0 would require a quake from Seattle, all the way down the Juan de Fuca plate joining the San Andreas and then running down the length of California to the Mexican border. I don't know that it is possible given the way the faults line up and whether they could propagate all the way down but If that would somehow happen, the West coast, Hawaii, coastal Alaska and even the east coast of Asia would be devastated.


okay, but why does length play such an important part? if it is all just a matter of coefficients of static and dynamic friction, and how much energy is bound up in the plates pushing against one another, couldn't equal magnitude quakes happen from 2 different sized faults?

i imagine it to be like rubberbands. the distance i can get it to fly isn't based on how long the band is, but more on its elasticity and how much energy i can get into the spring.

/completely unscientific comparison
//just asking questions


Length plays an important part because the magnitude of an earthquake scales with the fault area. However, faults are only seismogenic down to a certain depth (where the rocks become plastic instead of elastic and can no longer store stress). So for larger earthquakes, the length of the fault is the limiting factor. Along the San Andreas, the fault is only seismogenic to about 15 km depth. So, in order to get a magnitude 8 you would need hundreds of kilometers of fault to rupture. To get a nine you would need several thousands of kilometers of fault, which simply arent there. To get a 12, the fault would need to wrap around the earth many many times, and we're pretty close to 100% sure there are no faults like that.

To your comparison: The shear modulus (or Young's modulus) is what stores the elastic energy. This value does not change very significantly from rock type to rock type.

/seismologist
/published papers on South American seismicty
 
Biv
2014-04-02 07:19:09 PM
Came for a 1632 reference.  Leaving disappointed.
 
2014-04-02 07:19:47 PM

JoieD'Zen: Stone Meadow: Smeggy Smurf: As long as it kills Port Angeles, WA while my folks aren't there I'm ok with that happening

Sure is a purty town you got there. Be too bad if something happened to it...

[aios-staging.agentimage.com image 850x437]

PA is beautiful but it has a weird vibe. I'm sure it will be the first to sink unfortunately.


I can believe the weird vibe thing, what with all those werewolves and sparkly things living around there.
 
2014-04-02 07:26:35 PM
The Devil is using his vibrator on Saddam ... again.
 
2014-04-02 07:30:21 PM

bobothemagnificent: and make a city called Otisland.


Trollin..
 
2014-04-02 07:32:01 PM

SmithHiller: Word on the street says Two strong Planetary Alignments (Mars-Earth-Mercury on April 15-16) and (Mars-Earth-Uranus on April 21-23) feature prominently this month may coincide with significant earthquakes to be registered at high latitudes (Alaska, Norwegian Sea) between 7.0- 7.5 Magnitude on either April 15 or 16. The second time frame covvers April 21-23 where the forecast isolates the Indonesian region for a possible 7.2-7.7 Magnitude earthquake.


All three planets are too far away to cause earthquakes. The moon has a greater pull on Earth than any of those, and I don't see anyone blaming the moon for earthquakes.
 
2014-04-02 07:35:37 PM
meanwhile, facebook told me today the animals are fleeing yellowstone because the caldera is gonna blow sky high

blow sky high

you'll shiat your pants 'cause That's Armageddon!
 
2014-04-02 07:36:12 PM
I like the Zappa version.
 
2014-04-02 07:39:19 PM

bingethinker: SmithHiller: Word on the street says Two strong Planetary Alignments (Mars-Earth-Mercury on April 15-16) and (Mars-Earth-Uranus on April 21-23) feature prominently this month may coincide with significant earthquakes to be registered at high latitudes (Alaska, Norwegian Sea) between 7.0- 7.5 Magnitude on either April 15 or 16. The second time frame covvers April 21-23 where the forecast isolates the Indonesian region for a possible 7.2-7.7 Magnitude earthquake.

All three planets are too far away to cause earthquakes. The moon has a greater pull on Earth than any of those, and I don't see anyone blaming the moon for earthquakes.


The we must get to the rocket! Flash is our only hope! Zarkov, start the engines!

dum  dum  dum  dum  dum  dum  dum  dum  dum  dum  dum  dum   dum  dum  dum  dum  FLASH! AAAAAAAAH!
 
2014-04-02 07:42:15 PM
sgh46:

cool. i appreciate the info which you probably know if you saw my other post. next time i try to sound smart about geology i will try to include 'the seismogenic properties of fault zones to varying depths'
 
2014-04-02 07:48:26 PM

bingethinker: SmithHiller: Word on the street says Two strong Planetary Alignments (Mars-Earth-Mercury on April 15-16) and (Mars-Earth-Uranus on April 21-23) feature prominently this month may coincide with significant earthquakes to be registered at high latitudes (Alaska, Norwegian Sea) between 7.0- 7.5 Magnitude on either April 15 or 16. The second time frame covvers April 21-23 where the forecast isolates the Indonesian region for a possible 7.2-7.7 Magnitude earthquake.

All three planets are too far away to cause earthquakes. The moon has a greater pull on Earth than any of those, and I don't see anyone blaming the moon for earthquakes.


There are also 2 eclipses this month.
 
2014-04-02 07:51:47 PM

divgradcurl: "widespread and catastrophic" damage across Alabama, Arkansas, Illinois, Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky, Mississippi, Missouri, Oklahoma, Texas, and particularly Tennessee, where a 7.7 magnitude quake or greater would cause damage to tens of thousands of structures affecting water distribution, transportation systems, and other vital infrastructure.


So, about $35.95 in total damages
 
2014-04-02 07:55:15 PM

JoieD'Zen: bingethinker: SmithHiller: Word on the street says Two strong Planetary Alignments (Mars-Earth-Mercury on April 15-16) and (Mars-Earth-Uranus on April 21-23) feature prominently this month may coincide with significant earthquakes to be registered at high latitudes (Alaska, Norwegian Sea) between 7.0- 7.5 Magnitude on either April 15 or 16. The second time frame covvers April 21-23 where the forecast isolates the Indonesian region for a possible 7.2-7.7 Magnitude earthquake.

All three planets are too far away to cause earthquakes. The moon has a greater pull on Earth than any of those, and I don't see anyone blaming the moon for earthquakes.

There are also 2 eclipses this month.


There is virtually no difference in gravity during a solar eclipse and a new moon, or during a lunar eclipse and a full moon.
 
2014-04-02 08:02:04 PM

sgh46: divgradcurl: CanuckInCA: Important part,

The magnitude of an earthquake is related to the length of the fault on which it occurs -- the longer the fault, the larger the earthquake. The San Andreas Fault is only 800 miles long. To generate an earthquake of 10.5 magnitude would require the rupture of a fault that is many times the length of the San Andreas Fault. No fault long enough to generate a magnitude 10.5 earthquake is known to exist.

Daedalus27: It is self limiting as the higher magnitudes become impossible as there isn't a continuous fault fracture of sufficient length to generate such a quake (at least based upon the present understanding of earthquakes). I think something like a 12.0 would require a quake from Seattle, all the way down the Juan de Fuca plate joining the San Andreas and then running down the length of California to the Mexican border. I don't know that it is possible given the way the faults line up and whether they could propagate all the way down but If that would somehow happen, the West coast, Hawaii, coastal Alaska and even the east coast of Asia would be devastated.


okay, but why does length play such an important part? if it is all just a matter of coefficients of static and dynamic friction, and how much energy is bound up in the plates pushing against one another, couldn't equal magnitude quakes happen from 2 different sized faults?

i imagine it to be like rubberbands. the distance i can get it to fly isn't based on how long the band is, but more on its elasticity and how much energy i can get into the spring.

/completely unscientific comparison
//just asking questions

Length plays an important part because the magnitude of an earthquake scales with the fault area. However, faults are only seismogenic down to a certain depth (where the rocks become plastic instead of elastic and can no longer store stress). So for larger earthquakes, the length of the fault is the limiting factor. Along the San Andreas, the fault is only seis ...


out of curiosity, what effect does the bend on the san andreas have on potential magnitude, and how is the bend even possible, as the san andreas is an actual plate boundary??
 
2014-04-02 08:12:58 PM

bingethinker: All three planets are too far away to cause earthquakes. The moon has a greater pull on Earth than any of those, and I don't see anyone blaming the moon for earthquakes.


Actually, if you check back in the historical record you will find that the vast majority of large earthquakes happened within 2 weeks of a new or full moon.
 
2014-04-02 08:17:14 PM

Ivo Shandor: bingethinker: All three planets are too far away to cause earthquakes. The moon has a greater pull on Earth than any of those, and I don't see anyone blaming the moon for earthquakes.

Actually, if you check back in the historical record you will find that the vast majority of large earthquakes happened within 2 weeks of a new or full moon.


Yep, and 2 eclipses that close together increase the likelihood.
 
2014-04-02 08:21:58 PM

SmithHiller: Word on the street says Two strong Planetary Alignments (Mars-Earth-Mercury on April 15-16) and (Mars-Earth-Uranus on April 21-23) feature prominently this month may coincide with significant earthquakes to be registered at high latitudes (Alaska, Norwegian Sea) between 7.0- 7.5 Magnitude on either April 15 or 16. The second time frame covvers April 21-23 where the forecast isolates the Indonesian region for a possible 7.2-7.7 Magnitude earthquake.


This needs a better punch line. It's just not as funny otherwise.
 
2014-04-02 08:36:23 PM

Ivo Shandor: bingethinker: All three planets are too far away to cause earthquakes. The moon has a greater pull on Earth than any of those, and I don't see anyone blaming the moon for earthquakes.

Actually, if you check back in the historical record you will find that the vast majority of large earthquakes happened within 2 weeks of a new or full moon.


I see what you did there.
 
2014-04-02 08:37:52 PM
www.reformation.org
 
2014-04-02 08:48:18 PM

Ivo Shandor: bingethinker: All three planets are too far away to cause earthquakes. The moon has a greater pull on Earth than any of those, and I don't see anyone blaming the moon for earthquakes.

Actually, if you check back in the historical record you will find that the vast majority of large earthquakes happened within 2 weeks of a new or full moon.


even stranger, almost 40% of the ones that happened on weekdays instead of weekends happened on a Monday or Friday.
 
2014-04-02 08:59:07 PM

dwlf: out of curiosity, what effect does the bend on the san andreas have on potential magnitude, and how is the bend even possible, as the san andreas is an actual plate boundary??


The San Andreas "bend" is pretty minor when you see the larger view, no more than a bump really, but that exact bend is where the largest quake in California history took place (the one I linked earlier).  It's also the "least active" portion of the fault otherwise, so it's possible that the shape itself helps to make earthquakes less common but more severe.
 
2014-04-02 09:12:58 PM

obenchainr: dwlf: out of curiosity, what effect does the bend on the san andreas have on potential magnitude, and how is the bend even possible, as the san andreas is an actual plate boundary??

The San Andreas "bend" is pretty minor when you see the larger view, no more than a bump really, but that exact bend is where the largest quake in California history took place (the one I linked earlier).  It's also the "least active" portion of the fault otherwise, so it's possible that the shape itself helps to make earthquakes less common but more severe.


And it pushes up the east-west Transverse Ranges where it compresses, spreading the quakes onto other faults.
 
2014-04-02 09:23:29 PM
This is why I live in Colorado.  I lived in Anchorage (on the Ring of Fire, FYI) for a while and was in 3 earthquakes.  Nothing says good morning, you're going to die, like your bed shaking at 4:30AM and the doors banging open.  Here in CO, there are no damaging earthquakes (we do have them, they're just not serious), no hurricanes, and very few bugs compared to the rest of the country.  I'll stay put, thanks.
 
2014-04-02 09:25:02 PM
But, there's that whole nasty Yellowstone super-volcano thingie not too far from where I live, so I am still taking my chances...
 
2014-04-02 09:53:23 PM

dready zim: I like the Zappa version.


Yeah, I play that disc quite often. It also has a great version of Purple Haze.
 
2014-04-02 10:30:29 PM

SwiftFox: obenchainr: dwlf: out of curiosity, what effect does the bend on the san andreas have on potential magnitude, and how is the bend even possible, as the san andreas is an actual plate boundary??

The San Andreas "bend" is pretty minor when you see the larger view, no more than a bump really, but that exact bend is where the largest quake in California history took place (the one I linked earlier).  It's also the "least active" portion of the fault otherwise, so it's possible that the shape itself helps to make earthquakes less common but more severe.

And it pushes up the east-west Transverse Ranges where it compresses, spreading the quakes onto other faults.


Thanks.  Very cool stuff. My kids think I'm nuts for getting all excited as we approach Gorman when driving to socal
 
2014-04-02 10:47:59 PM

bobothemagnificent: obenchainr: bobothemagnificent: Does this mean that California will FINALLY fall into the ocean?  I usually spend a day or two during my summer break to go out there and jump on the San Andreas in an attempt to make it happen faster.

No, but it would probably bring Los Angeles and Berkeley closer together.  It's SF that would "fall into the ocean", if anything.

I don't know if that's a good thing or a bad thing.  I think I'll support the Lex Luthor solution, nuke the fault, and make a city called Otisland.


Otisburg? Otisburg!?

1.bp.blogspot.com
 
2014-04-02 11:09:52 PM
Here we go again, 7.8 in Chile, within the last hour
 
2014-04-02 11:17:08 PM
farm1.staticflickr.com

Nothing on Fark ever goes to waste.  This won me a PS contest in 2007.

//fnurve
 
2014-04-02 11:19:16 PM

Kit Fister: Best ad evar: Preparation H commercial set to Johnny Cash's "Ring of Fire".

Ah, good times, good times.


Yeah. That.
 
2014-04-02 11:55:02 PM

zerkalo: Here we go again, 7.8 in Chile, within the last hour


Here's anotherhttp://www.iris.edu/seismon/

www.iris.edu
 
2014-04-03 12:33:10 AM
the problem with magnitudes is the very short observation basis.
science has no idea what forces combined and caused entire mountain ranges to form or crumble catastrophically millions of yrs ago.

science does know, dimly, that the earth has been a lot more violent geologically, in the past.
a 12 pt eq could be generated by several large faults triggering each other, similar to the 9+ eq in indonesia, and what nearly happened in fukushima.

The duration of the quake is the most damaging aspect, thats why a chain reaction quake could be called a '12'

As far as stellar influences, Gravity waves propagating at random thru the galaxy might be an unobserved cause, we see evidence of huge upheavals in the past, but the causes are hard to define... this theory seems to fill the gap.

A Gravity wave might be caused by a neutron dwarf, or black hole speeding thru the neighborhood...
like waving a magnet past a plate of iron filings..
Then you might observe crustal waves up to 10 s or 100 s of miles high, and blobs of lava pulled off into eventual orbit... like the moon.

Good thing that God still cares about the planet, eh?
Good thing people are wise enough not to fark up that relationship, right?

Mountains fleeing away, and being thrown down...
obscure?
 
2014-04-03 08:09:49 AM

dwlf: Thanks.  Very cool stuff. My kids think I'm nuts for getting all excited as we approach Gorman when driving to socal


Gorman always was an asshole.
 
2014-04-03 08:51:46 AM

SmithHiller: Word on the street says Two strong Planetary Alignments (Mars-Earth-Mercury on April 15-16) and (Mars-Earth-Uranus on April 21-23) feature prominently this month may coincide with significant earthquakes to be registered at high latitudes (Alaska, Norwegian Sea) between 7.0- 7.5 Magnitude on either April 15 or 16. The second time frame covvers April 21-23 where the forecast isolates the Indonesian region for a possible 7.2-7.7 Magnitude earthquake.


Is SH a Troll or raging Idiot..?  You be the judge..

http://www.slate.com/blogs/bad_astronomy/2014/03/27/zero_g_day_again _n ope_just_nope.html

Does not specifically address his particular comment..but does a good layman's job of explaining why such alignments have virtually no effect on our planet (if they are even 'alignments'..as the rumor-spreaders promote them, which usually is far from the case..)..  I would expect BA and Snopes, among others, to have targeted debunking articles out in the coming weeks..if this "word on the street" is actually making the current rounds..

/..you got a bite..pat yourself on the back..
 
2014-04-03 11:46:35 AM

RaiderFanMikeP: more concerned about animals fleeing Yellowstone!


Rookie mistake. The were not fleeing "Yellowstone" per se, it was more of an attempt to flee ALL of the potentially volcanic/quake prone places in the western U.S. of A.

/I, for one, welcome the new era of extreme geological activity.
 
2014-04-03 12:48:52 PM

Cybernetic: Still would have been the greatest Preparation H commercial ever.


that and "Pushin' too Hard" by the Seeds.
 
2014-04-03 01:40:37 PM

dwlf: out of curiosity, what effect does the bend on the san andreas have on potential magnitude, and how is the bend even possible, as the san andreas is an actual plate boundary??


Curved plate boundaries are not uncommon, in fact they are very common. Realize that the Earth is very heterogeneous, a big mish-mash of strong and weak rocks of various sources. A fault simply takes the path of least resistance, which is often curved over large distances (Also, since the earth is a sphere, the large scale interaction of the plates isn't on a flat plane). Sometimes, but not always, bends in plate boundaries can cause large earthquakes to stop, which could segment one large earthquake into two smaller ones. For example, this seems to be the case at the Arica bend in South America. For the San Andreas however, we know that the 1850's Fort Tejon earthquake propagated all the way through the "Big Bend" without a problem (but, that is a sample size of 1, which is very bad in the world of statistics). For a strike slip system like the San Andreas, the largest effect of the bend is probably that it has caused all the other faults in the area. The Big Bend is a restraining bend, meaning the whole area is in compression. Basically there is a space problem, and this is why you have thrust faults all throughout the LA region, and hills north of LA. All those other faults have earthquakes on them, which is proably the biggest impact in terms of hazard potential to LA.
 
Displayed 50 of 100 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report