• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

8.8 Earthquake hits Japan

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
freesia39 said:
No. I don't understand the sciency-mathy part of it, but:

2.0 is 10 times stronger than a 1.0
3.0 is 100 times stronger than a 1.0

10 fold increase between readings on the scale.
Click to expand...

yeah, the richter scale is base 10 logarithmic scale.
 
The footage of the waves didn't look that bad. Until I realized they were rolling over the initial wave and well inland and still several meters high.
 
BoomerD said:
Apparently, it's been extremely active there for the past couple of days:

http://earthquake.usgs.gov/earthquakes/recenteqsww/Maps/region/Asia_eqs.php

44 earthquakes, mostly "off the coast of Honshu, Japan" since 03/09/2011. Maybe ActiveX is right.

I don't believe the seismologists when they say that earthquakes and volcanoes in different regions aren't connected. Push a bit over here, earthquake over there...push over there, volcano over here...they're all connected.
Chile just had another large quake a few days ago as well.
Click to expand...

Many seismologists no longer believe that they are not related. In fact I think the current consensus is that Earthquakes very much to effect one another. They have seen evidence of one earthquake setting off another some time later. However it's still not very well understood exactly how it happens, nor the relations one earthquake has or does not have with another.
 
Locut0s said:
Many seismologists no longer believe that they are not related. In fact I think the current consensus is that Earthquakes very much to effect one another. They have seen evidence of one earthquake setting off another some time later. However it's still not very well understood exactly how it happens, nor the relations one earthquake has or does not have with another.
Click to expand...

It doesn't seem plausible that the energy could be strong enough to cross two tectonic plates (I think the one between Chile and the Pacific plate are divergent) to set off another fault. But fuck if I know.

I just had my Geology midterm today (earthquakes were included). :\
 
nkgreen said:
It doesn't seem plausible that the energy could be strong enough to cross two tectonic plates (I think the one between Chile and the Pacific plate are divergent) to set off another fault. But fuck if I know.

I just had my Geology midterm today (earthquakes were included). :\
Click to expand...

I don't think it's the plates that are affected as much as the magma underneath the plates.
It's a thick viscous liquid, and I believe the movement in one place affects it in other places.

Of course, I'm not a vulcanologist, geologist, or smart guy in any way...😛

(but it just makes sense)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top