"Mike Williams" <miklw...@pacbell.net> wrote in message
news:Zp2jj.39809$Pv2.8727@newssvr23.news.prodigy.net...
"Petra" <petras...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:ec308ab4-dc8a-4622-8b40-ee5bcc370afb@e25g2000prg.googlegroups.com...
Mike Williams said he wanted to talk about seismology so here's one
everyone can contemplate and comment upon:
Asperities are like teeth on a comb and as they break the fault begins
to move a little at a time until the last one goes and then the big
slip happens.
Select from the following which statements are true:
1. There is crustal deformation as each asperity 2 through 24 break.
2. Asperities 12, 18 and 23 are the only ones that cause deformation..
3. It depends upon which part of the lithospheric crust is breaking.
4. It only happens in the upper crust.
5. Statement #2 was demonstated on the Anatolia Fault.
6. Statement #4 was proven in Parkfield.
7. Statement #3 was negated in the Loma Prieta Earthquake.
8. All of the above statements are true.
9. All of the above statements are false.
10. There is no suitable statement in this list.
Have fun.... Petra
1. There is crustal deformation as each asperity 2 through 24 break.
I appreciate the work that you did attempting to bring some seismology
back into the discussion. It appears that you may have derived these
questions from a single paper on the subject, one which may or may not
represent a consensus. With those caveats, I would denote Question #1 as
false (i.e. unproven). First, I am assuming you are hypothesizing a
rupture with greater than or equal to 24 asperities breaking. And that you
are implicitly stating that asperity #1 does NOT cause crustal
deformation. Since asperities cannot be directly observed, our
instrumentation is the limiting factor. Only the larger asperities will
show up when the (synthetic) data are analyzed. It would seem extremely
unlikely that the first asperity to break (likely the largest and most
significant) would cause no deformation, and subsequent ones would not.
2. Asperities 12, 18 and 23 are the only ones that cause deformation.
False. Assuming you are hypothesizing fault ruptures in general, and not
some specific rupture. That it is false is self-evident.
3. It depends upon which part of the lithospheric crust is breaking.
False. By definition, if an earthquake is detectable by current
seismological instruments, then there is crustal deformation.
4. It only happens in the upper crust.
Not sure what you mean by "it." Crustal deformation? Or crustal
deformation from an earthquake "happen[ing] in the upper crust"? I doubt
that we can detect deformation in anything other than the upper crust.
5. Statement #2 was demonstated on the Anatolia Fault.
Statements 5 through 7 are each clearly false. No single event could
provide proof of any of the referenced statements. Those referenced
statements (2, 3 and 4) might be true for only the events cited.
6. Statement #4 was proven in Parkfield.
7. Statement #3 was negated in the Loma Prieta Earthquake.
8. All of the above statements are true.
False.
9. All of the above statements are false.
I'm going to go with True - to the extent they are individually either
false or far from being proven true, or, in the case of #4, too murky to
decipher.
10. There is no suitable statement in this list.
True.
Mike Williams
Arroyo Grande, CA USA
I left a superfluous "not" at the end of my response to question #1.
Mike Williams
Arroyo Grande, CA USA- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
