- #1
I_am_learning
- 682
- 16
The seismic waves of earthquake travels at around 5 km/s. Wouldn't it be possible to setup network of detectors through out the world, and pre-warn people about approaching earthquake in real-time?
That's terrible, glad you are ok.Bobbywhy said:I had the misfortune to be asleep in my bed in Sherman Oaks (San Fernando Valley) of Los Angeles in January, 1994 during the "Northridge Earthquake". My building was totally trashed and I was uninjured, but in shock. (which is actually a "mental injury")
I_am_learning said:Of course, people closest to the epicenter won't benefit, but let's think about who can benefit and how much?
Suppose 8 Richter scale earthquake occurs in certain place. What is the usual radius of fatal damages? Although the radius might be small for developed cities with strong building, but for weak buildings of developing countries, it could be 100s of kilometers.
That's detection, not prediction.I_am_learning said:The seismic waves of earthquake travels at around 5 km/s. Wouldn't it be possible to setup network of detectors through out the world, and pre-warn people about approaching earthquake in real-time?
This is part of what confused me about your OP, what do you mean by "global"? These systems are very expensive, I read that japan's system cost ~one billion dollars, and not every country has problems with recurring earthquakes that would warrant such an expense.I_am_learning said:Thanks Astronuc.
But seems like the networks are still regional, not global.
Most networks are national. Instrumentation is placed in those areas deemed to be of greatest risk.I_am_learning said:Thanks Astronuc.
But seems like the networks are still regional, not global.
I_am_learning said:Thanks Astronuc.
But seems like the networks are still regional, not global.
I_am_learning said:You do get some advance warning from the faster moving, very noisy, P-waves ahead of the main S-wave shake. For an 8, that could be as much as a minute's notice.
billiards said:Note we are talking about "early warning" and not prediction as Astronuc pointed out earlier. An electronic signal travels faster than the seismic signal by some orders of magnitude. Therefore it is theoretically possible, and indeed practically possible to detect an earthquake locally and to issue an early warning to the rest of the world. A good system will respond to such a signal by shutting down power to electric trains and closing gas pipes, to limit damage when the seismic waves arrive.
Andre said:Strange that in a thread about earthquake prediction the word "radon" gets no hits. But the radon concentration could be increasing in the atmosphere due to fissures and cracks opening, shortly before an earthquake.
There must be something useful in this google search
davenn said:As I pointed out in my previous post ... early warning of shaking to the rest of the world is pointless as they are not going to feel the event anyway. The warning of impending shaking needs to be where the shaking is going to occur, and if that is close to the epicentre, say out to ~ 100 km then the warning is going to be from none to maybe around 13 sec. 10 sec or so is going to give people a chance to dive for cover but those close in still won't have time to do anything
Dave
billiards said:Obviously by rest of the world I do not mean to imply that shaking will be felt everywhere in the world.
A good system will respond to such a signal by shutting down power to electric trains and closing gas pipes, to limit damage when the seismic waves arrive.
I_am_learning said:Another Question, "Is it possible to fully know about the intensity of the Earthquake, and how far and with what force it is going to travel, just by measuring the surface shakes by a sensor?".
I ask this because, when I am standing on the road-side and a heavy vehicle passes by, I feel shaking as much as or even more than a significant earthquake. But that quake isn't going to travel far.
I may have used Layman terms, but I hope you can get what I am trying to ask.
Thanks.
I_am_learning said:Although I am late to reply, I just wanted to thank you people for providing various information and links. I really appreciate the helps.
davenn said:Radon is one useful predictor, but like a lot of predictors, it is not reliable. that is, there isn't always an increase of radon emission in the days or weeks prior to a quake.
Bobbywhy said:I had the misfortune to be asleep in my bed in Sherman Oaks (San Fernando Valley) of Los Angeles in January, 1994 during the "Northridge Earthquake".[/url]
Earthquakes occur when two blocks of the earth's crust suddenly slip past one another along a fault line. This sudden movement releases energy in the form of seismic waves, which can cause the ground to shake.
Despite ongoing research and advancements in technology, earthquakes cannot be accurately predicted. Scientists can only estimate the likelihood of an earthquake occurring in a certain area based on past seismic activity.
Scientists use a variety of methods such as monitoring seismic activity, analyzing historical earthquake data, and studying geological features to try and predict earthquakes. However, these methods are not foolproof and can only provide limited information.
While we cannot predict earthquakes with certainty, there are systems in place that can provide some warning before an earthquake strikes. These systems use sensors to detect seismic waves and can provide a few seconds to a few minutes of warning before the shaking begins.
The best way to prepare for earthquakes is to have an emergency plan in place and to be aware of potential hazards in your area. This can include securing furniture and objects that could fall during an earthquake, having a supply of emergency food and water, and knowing what to do during and after an earthquake. It is also important to stay informed and follow the instructions of local authorities during a seismic event.