Abbreviations.com Convert.net Definitions.net Quotes.net Synonyms.net USZip.net References.net
Bookmark & Share
 
Synonyms.net
Search for Synonyms:     
Browse Alphabetically:
A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z #
 random synonym 
Personalize Yedda, (And make Danny Happy)
People ask & answer about almost everything. Tell us what you're interested in... So we can personalize Yedda especially for you
I'm interested in:
Originated from
AOL Search

Why is short-term prediction of earthquakes so ...

Why is short-term prediction of earthquakes so much less successful than long-term prediction?Why do you think seismologists are extremely cautious about making predictions? Do you think it will ever be possible to predict earthquakes accurately? Research and support your answer


Share Send to a friend Watch Report
 
 

Posted Answers

 

Earthquake Prediction By Ruth Ludwin Because of their devastating potential, there is great interest in predicting the location and time of large earthquakes. Although a great deal is known about where earthquakes are likely, there is currently no reliable way to predict the days or months when an event will occur in any specific location. Worldwide, each year there are about 18 earthquakes magnitude (M) 7.0 or larger. Actual annual numbers since 1968 range from lows of 6-7 events/year in 1986 and 1990 to highs of 20-23 events/year in 1970, 1971 and 1992. Although we are not able to predict individual earthquakes, the world's largest earthquakes do have a clear spatial pattern, and "forecasts" of the locations and magnitudes of some future large earthquakes can be made. Most large earthquakes occur on long fault zones around the margin of the Pacific Ocean. This is because the Atlantic Ocean is growing a few inches wider each year, and the Pacific is shrinking as ocean floor is pushed beneath Pacific Rim continents. Geologically, earthquakes around the Pacific Rim are normal and expected. The long fault zones that ring the Pacific are subdivided by geologic irregularities into smaller fault segments which rupture individually. Earthquake magnitude and timing are controlled by the size of a fault segment, the stiffness of the rocks, and the amount of accumulated stress. Where faults and plate motions are well known, the fault segments most likely to break can be identified. If a fault segment is known to have broken in a past large earthquake, recurrence time and probable magnitude can be estimated based on fault segment size, rupture history, and strain accumulation. This forecasting technique can only be used for well-understood faults, such as the San Andreas. No such forecasts can be made for poorly-understood faults, such as those that caused the 1994 Northridge, CA and 1995 Kobe, Japan quakes. Although there are clear seismic hazards in our area, Pacific Northwest faults are complex and it is not yet possible to forecast when any particular fault segment in Washington or Oregon will break. Along the San Andreas Fault, an earthquake prediction was made in the 1980s for the segment near Parkfield CA considered likely to rupture. Earlier this century it produced a series of identical earthquakes (about M 6.0) at fairly regular time intervals. Using a set of assumptions about fault mechanics and the rate of stress accumulation, the USGS predicted that a Parkfield earthquake of about M 6.0 earthquake would occur between 1988 and 1992. USGS scientists monitored Parkfield for a wide variety of possible precursory effects, but the predicted earthquake did not materialize until 2004, long after the prediction window expired. "Capturing" the magnitude 6.0 Parkfield earthquake in a dense network of instrumentation was a significant accomplishment, providing data to determine whether precursory effects exist (none were found), and give new insights on the mechanics of fault rupture More from the USGS...More from CISN. The segment of the San Andreas fault that broke in the 1989 M 7.1 Loma Prieta or "World Series" earthquake had been identified by the USGS as one of the more likely segments of the San Andreas to rupture. Magnitude 5+ earthquakes 2 and 15 months before the damaging earthquake were treated as possible foreshocks, and the USGS issued 5-day Public Advisories through the California Office of Emergency Services. Even in areas where foreshocks are fairly common, there is no way of distinguishing a foreshock from an independent earthquake. In the Pacific Northwest, there is no evidence of foreshock activity for most historic earthquakes. One well-known successful earthquake prediction was for the Haicheng, China earthquake of 1975, when an evacuation warning was issued the day before a M 7.3 earthquake. In the preceding months changes in land elevation and in ground water levels, widespread reports of peculiar animal behavior, and many foreshocks had led to a lower-level warning. An increase in foreshock activity triggered the evacuation warning. Unfortunately, most earthquakes do not have such obvious precursors. In spite of their success in 1975, there was no warning of the 1976 Tangshan earthquake, magnitude 7.6, which caused an estimated 250,000 fatalities. Earthquake prediction is a popular pastime for psychics and pseudo-scientists, and extravagant claims of past success are common. Predictions claimed as "successes" may rely on a restatement of well-understood long-term geologic earthquake hazards, or be so broad and vague that they are fulfilled by typical background seismic activity. Neither tidal forces nor unusual animal behavior have been useful for predicting earthquakes. If an unscientific prediction is made, scientists can not state that the predicted earthquake will not occur, because an event could possibly occur by chance on the predicted date, though there is no reason to think that the predicted date is more likely than any other day. Scientific earthquake predictions should state where, when, how big, and how probable the predicted event is, and why the prediction is made. The National Earthquake Prediction Evaluation Council reviews such predictions, but no generally useful method of predicting earthquakes has yet been found. It may never be possible to predict the exact time when a damaging earthquake will occur, because when enough strain has built up, a fault may become inherently unstable, and any small background earthquake may or may not continue rupturing and turn into a large earthquake. While it may eventually be possible to accurately diagnose the strain state of faults, the precise timing of large events may continue to elude us. In the Pacific Northwest, earthquake hazards are well known and future earthquake damage can be greatly reduced by identifying and improving or removing our most vulnerable and dangerous structures. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Posted 2009-10-08T20:00:12Z
duba was invited by Yedda to answer this question.

Helpful?(1)
Rated as Best Answer

Sign in to participate

Got an answer for diane robinson? Would you like to comment on the posted answers, or vote for the one which you think is the best?

Sign up for a free account, or sign in (if you're already a member).

Explore Related Questions

Other people asked questions on similar topics, check out the answers they received:


Q:

Geologic terminology

discontinuous fault line
Submitted by Nancy Wright   10 months ago.
  • viewed 85 times


Q:

Geologic Outsourcing

Does anyone know of any companies that I can outsource Geologic research / analysis to in India, China or Pakistan?
Submitted by treywilmer   3 years ago.
  • viewed 569 times
Last answer posted 26 days ago by claire


Q:

Could I get any information about Abu Dis geology ...

could I get any information about Abu Dis geology Please ?
Submitted by rubaiyam   2 years ago.
  • viewed 573 times
Last answer posted 2 years ago by duba



» More...

Explore Related Posts in Forums

Anybody doing geophysics/geology/earth science?

Anybody doing geophysics/geology/earth science? How's it going? :) I can't seem to find many Re: Anybody doing geophysics/geology/earth science? hey i've applied for geophysics aswell ... there doesnt seem to be many of us... :-(Re: Anybody doing geophysics/geology/earth science? Yay

Geology?

Anyone here in Geology/Earth Science/Meteorology ? ) there is always something about Geology. I can't pick which to do Geology or Meteorology. You said much more to it, the class i took last semister was a borefest though all about making geologic maps

geology

geology it maybe a stupid question, but is geology more than just the study of rocks ? the southampton website states 'Study geology and you could soon be exploring for new economic resources Re: geology Quote: : it maybe a stupid question, but is geology more than just the study of rocks
» More...
Powered by
Feed - Subscribe to changes to this Q&A Blog
ADVERTISEMENT
Synonyms.net Q&A is powered by Yedda an AOL Company
Copyright © 2006-2009, Yedda Inc. and respective copyright owners
Home |  Add New Abbreviation |  Your List |  Tools |  Become an Editor |  Tell a Friend |  Links |  Awards |  Testimonials |  Press |  News |  APIs new! |  About
Copyright ©2004-2007 STANDS4 LLC. All rights reserved.  Terms of Use  |  Privacy Policy  |  Contact Us