The Riddle of the Great Chilean Earthquake

Anything about geophysics and geoscience: jobs, events, technical or general discussions ...
Post Reply
serguei58
Silver Member
Silver Member
Posts: 45
Joined: Thu Dec 17, 2020 7:50 pm
Top poster of the Month

The Riddle of the Great Chilean Earthquake

Post by serguei58 »

The Great Chilean Earthquake of 1960 is considered the largest seismic event in human memory. The terrain movement was unmatched. But, if we take a closer look at the dimensions of the Nazca plate, we will make sure that the released energy of the earthquake could not move the plate more than 3 centimeters! How so? What's the matter? If you are interested, then read the article in which the solution to this riddle is revealed:https://poseidon01.ssrn.com/delivery.ph ... INDEX=TRUE

The question to the respected geophysicists of the forum: Have I bored you with my articles on seismology yet? I hope not, and you are interested in the information I have presented in my works.

GuyM
VIP Member
VIP Member
Posts: 650
Joined: Sat Mar 24, 2012 11:35 pm

Re: The Riddle of the Great Chilean Earthquake

Post by GuyM »

The question to the respected geophysicists of the forum: Have I bored you with my articles on seismology yet?
I think mostly the forum posts here tend to be about answering more practical applied exploration geophysics questions rather than theoretical seismology discussions; that's the majority of the posts that get a discussion going over the last decade. I've spend some time on the geohazards side of things professionally but again that was more in the applied sense in terms of monitoring, emergency management and insurance risk.

Maybe you'd get more of a discussion going at researchgate? That said, most of the theoretical types I know tend to focus on the big academic conferences like AGU.

serguei58
Silver Member
Silver Member
Posts: 45
Joined: Thu Dec 17, 2020 7:50 pm
Top poster of the Month

Re: The Riddle of the Great Chilean Earthquake

Post by serguei58 »

GuyM wrote:
Fri Feb 05, 2021 11:00 pm
The question to the respected geophysicists of the forum: Have I bored you with my articles on seismology yet?
I think mostly the forum posts here tend to be about answering more practical applied exploration geophysics questions rather than theoretical seismology discussions; that's the majority of the posts that get a discussion going over the last decade. I've spend some time on the geohazards side of things professionally but again that was more in the applied sense in terms of monitoring, emergency management and insurance risk.

Maybe you'd get more of a discussion going at researchgate? That said, most of the theoretical types I know tend to focus on the big academic conferences like AGU.
At major scientific conferences, academic mammoths rule the show, trampling everything that contradicts their opinion. The local and personal interests of individual scientists are addressed at small conferences.
My goal in this forum is to highlight in simple language some issues of theoretical geophysics, with the hope that the questions raised will interest students who will apply them in practice. For experienced geophysicists who have passed a good practical school, my lectures are purely entertainment in nature. If someone is tired of me with my ideas, then let him say, I will understand.

GuyM
VIP Member
VIP Member
Posts: 650
Joined: Sat Mar 24, 2012 11:35 pm

Re: The Riddle of the Great Chilean Earthquake

Post by GuyM »

I'm tried of theoretical discussions. I'm also not very interested in attacks on other people's opinions, for similar reasons.

I'd like to see a falsifiable hypothesis, and the statistically robust experimental or modelling work done to demonstrate it's validity, rather than a theoretical refuting of ideas.

I'd also like to see that applied to specific datasets - for example the Oklahoma quake sequence associated with the increase in hydraulic fracturing and wastewater disposal. Or as I have suggested, the New Zealand earthquakes (you could pick Kaikoura or Christchurch, for example)

Build a less-wrong predictive model that I can apply to any of the three capitals (social, economic, natural) then I'm interested.
But then that's why I chose applied geophysics - it's the outcome I'm interested in.

serguei58
Silver Member
Silver Member
Posts: 45
Joined: Thu Dec 17, 2020 7:50 pm
Top poster of the Month

Re: The Riddle of the Great Chilean Earthquake

Post by serguei58 »

Nobody will offer you, predictive models. The point is that no predictive model exists for the simple reason that earthquake prediction is impossible in principle. And not only because the existing theories of the causes of earthquakes violate the fundamental foundations of physics, chemistry, and mechanics, but because this is an illegal physical manifestation of the laws of science, but an accidental coincidence of some physical and chemical parameters of the state of the earth's crust and mantle.

Post Reply
  • Similar Topics
    Replies
    Views
    Last post