earthquake!

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

brtspears2

Diamond Member
Nov 16, 2000
8,659
1
81
Well that was great. Need of of these on WEEKDAY mornings so my ass gets outta bed on time.
 

Mill

Lifer
Oct 10, 1999
28,558
3
81
I was just playing around. I would think a 9.5 would be the end of Cali. I still remember the damage the Northridge caused and it wasn't even in the 7's. Which is worse a shallow quake or a deep quake? I figure I would get out of bed if I felt it. We have quakes here in AL every so often but they are never over 4. :)
 

Eli

Super Moderator | Elite Member
Oct 9, 1999
50,419
8
81
Johnny- Lets continue our discussion here since the other thread was locked. :frown:

Yeah.. that wasn't centered in Oregon though. Although we sure felt it here. It was a 6.8, up by Olympia. But it was ~30 miles under the ground, so the shockwaves really traveled far.

And yeah.. Mt. Hood is a very real danger. Did you know that the only mountain that hasn't erupted in the last 2000 years in the Cascade range of Oregon is Mt. Jefferson?
 

bUnMaNGo

Senior member
Feb 9, 2000
964
0
0
Originally posted by: SuepaFly


And heads right to the computer to post, thats dedication for you.

actually I stayed in bed for about 10 minutes to see if anything would pop up on the news ;P
 

SuepaFly

Senior member
Jun 3, 2001
972
0
0
Frequency of Occurrence of Earthquakes
Based on Observations since 1900

Descriptor Magnitude Average Annually
Great 8 and higher 1
Major 7 - 7.9 18
Strong 6 - 6.9 120
Moderate 5 - 5.9 800
Light 4 - 4.9 6,200 (estimated)
Minor 3 - 3.9 49,000 (estimated)
Very Minor < 3.0 Magnitude 2 - 3: about 1,000 per day
Magnitude 1 - 2: about 8,000 per day
 

Eli

Super Moderator | Elite Member
Oct 9, 1999
50,419
8
81
Originally posted by: Millennium
I was just playing around. I would think a 9.5 would be the end of Cali. I still remember the damage the Northridge caused and it wasn't even in the 7's. Which is worse a shallow quake or a deep quake? I figure I would get out of bed if I felt it. We have quakes here in AL every so often but they are never over 4. :)

I think a shallow quake causes more damage. The shockwaves are much more violent, compared to deeper.. where they are allowed to spread out more.

The 6.8 that happened in Washington 2/28/2001 was realitivly large, and it did cause some significant damage.. but it woul have been much worse if it was not so far underground.

It was felt as far away as San Francisco and Salt Lake City. It actually registered around the world.
 

Mill

Lifer
Oct 10, 1999
28,558
3
81
Originally posted by: Eli
Originally posted by: Millennium
I was just playing around. I would think a 9.5 would be the end of Cali. I still remember the damage the Northridge caused and it wasn't even in the 7's. Which is worse a shallow quake or a deep quake? I figure I would get out of bed if I felt it. We have quakes here in AL every so often but they are never over 4. :)

I think a shallow quake causes more damage. The shockwaves are much more violent, compared to deeper.. where they are allowed to spread out more.

The 6.8 that happened in Washington 2/28/2001 was realitivly large, and did cause some significant damage.. but it woul have been much worse if it was not so far underground.

The last one here that was widely felt was in NE AL and was a 3.8 or something. They do not happen very often though. Now my parents lived in Washington and Oregon for a little while and they felt a few while they were up there.

 

The Dancing Peacock

Diamond Member
Dec 22, 1999
3,385
0
0
Originally posted by: Millennium
I was just playing around. I would think a 9.5 would be the end of Cali. I still remember the damage the Northridge caused and it wasn't even in the 7's. Which is worse a shallow quake or a deep quake? I figure I would get out of bed if I felt it. We have quakes here in AL every so often but they are never over 4. :)

Shallow ones are worse iirc, because the closer they are to the surface, the less "earth" there is to absorb it and spread the shock around, and it's just more power that gets dispersed topside. Most earthquakes are a couple of miles below the surface or more.
 

JonnyDuke

Senior member
Jul 24, 2001
369
0
0
At the time that one occured I lived about 45 min north of Vancouver, felt it very well... it woke me up from a Graveyard shift workers type of sleep.

Did not know that about the Cascades, interesting though.

Would definitly not want to see the destruction caused if Hood erupted even half as much as St. Helens did.
It's just too close... especially if it points in MY direction (NW):Q
 

Eli

Super Moderator | Elite Member
Oct 9, 1999
50,419
8
81
Originally posted by: Millennium
Originally posted by: Eli
Originally posted by: Millennium
I was just playing around. I would think a 9.5 would be the end of Cali. I still remember the damage the Northridge caused and it wasn't even in the 7's. Which is worse a shallow quake or a deep quake? I figure I would get out of bed if I felt it. We have quakes here in AL every so often but they are never over 4. :)

I think a shallow quake causes more damage. The shockwaves are much more violent, compared to deeper.. where they are allowed to spread out more.

The 6.8 that happened in Washington 2/28/2001 was realitivly large, and did cause some significant damage.. but it woul have been much worse if it was not so far underground.

The last one here that was widely felt was in NE AL and was a 3.8 or something. They do not happen very often though. Now my parents lived in Washington and Oregon for a little while and they felt a few while they were up there.

Yeah. We get them..

The Juan De Fuca plate is subducting under the North American plate all around here. ;)
 

JonnyDuke

Senior member
Jul 24, 2001
369
0
0
Yeah. We get them..
The Juan De Fuca plate is subducting under the North American plate all around here.

he said subducting;)
 

JonnyDuke

Senior member
Jul 24, 2001
369
0
0
I've heard that St. Helens has been making another stir... but it's been a little while since I heard it. There is also Adams.
 

Eli

Super Moderator | Elite Member
Oct 9, 1999
50,419
8
81
Originally posted by: JonnyDuke
At the time that one occured I lived about 45 min north of Vancouver, felt it very well... it woke me up from a Graveyard shift workers type of sleep.

Did not know that about the Cascades, interesting though.

Would definitly not want to see the destruction caused if Hood erupted even half as much as St. Helens did.
It's just too close... especially if it points in MY direction (NW):Q

Yeah.. It would really do some damage if it blew to the West in the way Mt. St. Helens did.

Think about it though. We had Mt. St. Helens blow its top.. And then we have Crater Lake. Even though that happened 7,000 years ago, it was the largest known eruption in the Cascades. Think of the hole it left in the ground. :Q At least there is still 3/4 of Mt. St. Helens left... lol.

Mt. Jefferson hasn't erupted in the last 50,000 years. Mt. Hood's last eruption was 1865.

Mt. Hood has yearly seismic swarms...

I haven't heard much about Adams. Rainier has been in the news, though. It had a very small fit in 1882, and there was some significant seismic activity a couple of years back.

We live amongst giant time bombs. :Q
 

The Dancing Peacock

Diamond Member
Dec 22, 1999
3,385
0
0
kind of happy socal doesn't have any volcanoes in socal. I think shasta is one, but nothing this far down, unless the La Break Tarpits decide to start spewing [dr evil]liquid hot magma[/dr evil] like in that dumb movie.
 

JonnyDuke

Senior member
Jul 24, 2001
369
0
0
Timebombs...that's for certain...

But how are things down there in Cali, Frontline?
Any more news about the surroundings?
Any big aftershocks?
 

Eli

Super Moderator | Elite Member
Oct 9, 1999
50,419
8
81
Mount Hood (45.4N, 121.7W) is the tallest mountain in Oregon (11,237 feet, 3,426 m) and popular with skiers, hikers, and climbers. It is 45 miles (75 km) east-southeast of Portland, Oregon. Mount Hood is a stratovolcano made of lava flows, domes, and volcaniclastic deposits. Most of the volcano is andesite composition. The main cone of Mount Hood formed about 500,000 years ago. In the last 15,000 years the volcano has had four eruptive periods. During the most recent eruptive period, 250-180 years ago, lava domes collapsed and produced numerous pyroclastic flows and lahars which buried the southwest flank of the mountain. Crater Rock, a prominent rocky pinnacle just below the summit, is the most recent lava dome. Similar eruptions in the future pose the greatest risk to communities on the flank of the volcano.
:Q

Yeah, Mt. Shasta is considered Active. It's last eruption was 1786, with a question mark.
 

JonnyDuke

Senior member
Jul 24, 2001
369
0
0
Well yeah... but like half of your state could fall into the Pacific if a big enough one hit right??? ;)
 

JonnyDuke

Senior member
Jul 24, 2001
369
0
0
Eli-
Where are you GETTING your information???:confused:

Wait...lemme guess... you are a USGS worker, or something like that:D
 

The Dancing Peacock

Diamond Member
Dec 22, 1999
3,385
0
0
Originally posted by: JonnyDuke
Timebombs...that's for certain...

But how are things down there in Cali, Frontline?
Any more news about the surroundings?
Any big aftershocks?

I'm not fronline, since we have the same icon, I'll answer for him ;)

tons of little ones according to the webpage, scroll down [l]http://www.scecdc.scec.org:3128/recenteqs/Maps/117-34.html[/l]

I haven't turned the TV on to see if any of the national news channels have anything.
 

JonnyDuke

Senior member
Jul 24, 2001
369
0
0
Well I hope there are no injuries more serious than bumps and bruises... and no major damage there:)
I'm going to bed now.... later Eli