Talk:Earthquake forecasting: Difference between revisions
J. Johnson (talk | contribs) →Comments: more comment |
NeoNeoHunter (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
| Line 8: | Line 8: | ||
We have discussed before how there is no sharp boundary between prediction and forecasting. In your "Methods ...." section you are going to run into this, especially as how elastic rebound theory is the underpinning of both endeavors. Keep in mind the distinction between "the next big one", and long-term probabilistic expectation. As an example of how close these run together, and even overlap, note that UCERF2 and UCERF3 do both time-independent and time-dependent models, The former is more in the nature of long-term expectations, while the latter tries to account for stress accumulated since the last earthquake. Stay focused, much of that stuff (besides being deep) is pretty subtle. Ask if you need help. ~ [[User:J. Johnson|J. Johnson (JJ)]] ([[User_talk:J. Johnson#top|talk]]) 23:32, 30 December 2016 (UTC) |
We have discussed before how there is no sharp boundary between prediction and forecasting. In your "Methods ...." section you are going to run into this, especially as how elastic rebound theory is the underpinning of both endeavors. Keep in mind the distinction between "the next big one", and long-term probabilistic expectation. As an example of how close these run together, and even overlap, note that UCERF2 and UCERF3 do both time-independent and time-dependent models, The former is more in the nature of long-term expectations, while the latter tries to account for stress accumulated since the last earthquake. Stay focused, much of that stuff (besides being deep) is pretty subtle. Ask if you need help. ~ [[User:J. Johnson|J. Johnson (JJ)]] ([[User_talk:J. Johnson#top|talk]]) 23:32, 30 December 2016 (UTC) |
||
== Omerbashich discovery == |
|||
This Bosnia crownprince discovery for Wikipedia: |
|||
[https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-01291138 '''Astrophysical cause of tectonics'''] ''Abstract : Tectonic earthquakes, of Mw(6 ± 5%)+, are found forming a strengthening-peaking-waning pattern distinguishable from respectively quiescent times so well that the pattern means discovery of a universal natural mechanism that necessitates expanding on classical physics. The pattern is seen only during Earth’s alignments to two other heavenly bodies in our solar system lasting for more than three days. This empirical proof of astrophysical origins of seismotectonics is immediately obvious and verifiable. The find is consequential due to sheer size of processes and energies involved in defining the pattern that now enables all-or-nothing negative forecasting by foretelling dates without strong quakes. Earth’s energy budget and tectonics are primarily astrophysical in origin, instead of geophysical as previously believed. Near co-planarity of a solar system’s planets, which is for our solar system arguably regarded as odd, is in fact a necessary condition for active geophysics as a life system. The discovery has a potential for fundamentally rewriting physics, macrophysics in particular.'' |
|||
He is in fights with other scientist: '''''Paper accepted for publishing on 31 Aug 2016 by Earthquake Science journal (http://link.springer.com/journal/11589), Editor-in-Chief: Chen Yuntai, member of Chinese Academy of Sciences. Author rejected the offer as part of his protest against the way he and his discoveries were treated by the scientific community that resembled the treatment of Alfred Wegener and his historic discovery.''''' |
|||
It is historic, yes? He can [http://seismo.info forecast earthquakes thanks to aligned planets and sun]. Must read! [[User:NeoNeoHunter|NeoNeoHunter]] ([[User talk:NeoNeoHunter|talk]]) 20:15, 9 April 2017 (UTC) |
|||
Revision as of 20:15, 9 April 2017
 | Earthquakes Stub‑class High‑importance | |||||||||
| ||||||||||
Comments
Looks like a good start, Jerry. I'll see if I can find some more sources for you. You might also look into the USGS seismic hazard maps (see seismic hazard for a start, or the http://earthquake.usgs.gov/hazards/ site). "Operational earthquake forecasting" probably should be included.
I wonder if it might be better to have a more general section on "UCERF", with a subsection on the evolution of the concept and various attempts, and then a subsection on where UCERF3 has gotten to. ~ J. Johnson (JJ) (talk) 22:13, 29 December 2016 (UTC)
We have discussed before how there is no sharp boundary between prediction and forecasting. In your "Methods ...." section you are going to run into this, especially as how elastic rebound theory is the underpinning of both endeavors. Keep in mind the distinction between "the next big one", and long-term probabilistic expectation. As an example of how close these run together, and even overlap, note that UCERF2 and UCERF3 do both time-independent and time-dependent models, The former is more in the nature of long-term expectations, while the latter tries to account for stress accumulated since the last earthquake. Stay focused, much of that stuff (besides being deep) is pretty subtle. Ask if you need help. ~ J. Johnson (JJ) (talk) 23:32, 30 December 2016 (UTC)
Omerbashich discovery
This Bosnia crownprince discovery for Wikipedia:
Astrophysical cause of tectonics Abstract : Tectonic earthquakes, of Mw(6 ± 5%)+, are found forming a strengthening-peaking-waning pattern distinguishable from respectively quiescent times so well that the pattern means discovery of a universal natural mechanism that necessitates expanding on classical physics. The pattern is seen only during Earth’s alignments to two other heavenly bodies in our solar system lasting for more than three days. This empirical proof of astrophysical origins of seismotectonics is immediately obvious and verifiable. The find is consequential due to sheer size of processes and energies involved in defining the pattern that now enables all-or-nothing negative forecasting by foretelling dates without strong quakes. Earth’s energy budget and tectonics are primarily astrophysical in origin, instead of geophysical as previously believed. Near co-planarity of a solar system’s planets, which is for our solar system arguably regarded as odd, is in fact a necessary condition for active geophysics as a life system. The discovery has a potential for fundamentally rewriting physics, macrophysics in particular.
He is in fights with other scientist: Paper accepted for publishing on 31 Aug 2016 by Earthquake Science journal (http://link.springer.com/journal/11589), Editor-in-Chief: Chen Yuntai, member of Chinese Academy of Sciences. Author rejected the offer as part of his protest against the way he and his discoveries were treated by the scientific community that resembled the treatment of Alfred Wegener and his historic discovery.
It is historic, yes? He can forecast earthquakes thanks to aligned planets and sun. Must read! NeoNeoHunter (talk) 20:15, 9 April 2017 (UTC)