Re: HOW IT ALL ENDS
- From: Don Kirkman <donsno2@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 28 May 2006 13:24:51 -0700
It seems to me I heard somewhere that Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD wrote in
article <1148772840.541643.138840@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>:
Don Kirkman wrote:
It seems to me I heard somewhere that Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD wrote in
article <1148702345.037426.151850@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>:
Don Kirkman wrote:
It seems to me I heard somewhere that Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD wrote in
If that amount of energy were released at the usual 0.5 to 1 mile below
the surface, it might have been a magnitude 9-10 which would have
levelled the most populous city in the world.
Now you've betrayed your ignorance of geophysics and seismology; another
discipline to add to the catalog of your shortcomings.
Sorry you are still sore about having your ignorance, that the
"Doctrine of Original Antigenic Sin" is a real scientific doctrine,
pointed out to you. Please forgive all my iniquities.
You seem to have forgotten that I admitted I didn't know that at the
beginning of the discussion, but that I later used what I had learned to
refute a couple of your errors. Nothing to be sore about, and that's
not my style anyway. I prefer to deal in facts, not emotions.
Our past discussions would be evidence to the contrary.
I'm waiting for you to provide facts to back up your fantasies.
Meanwhile, I will continue to provide facts and citations.
The Richter
scale measures the intensity (power) of the quake at the location of the
crustal fracture, whether it be on the surface or 255 miles down. The
intensity is independent of depth, soil structure, or similar factors.
Actually, you are showing your ignorance again:
http://tinyurl.com/nrpfs
Please point out where that says Richter's scale assigns different
strengths to a single earthquake depending on its depth.
"The standard body-wave magnitude formula is
mb = log10(A/T) + Q(D,h) ,
where A is the amplitude of ground motion (in microns); T is the
corresponding period (in seconds); and Q(D,h) is a correction factor
that is a function of distance, D (degrees), between epicenter and
station and focal **depth**, h (in kilometers), of the earthquake."
Ah, I was afraid all that math had tripped you up. To simplify, the
measurements are taken at the surface, but the intensity of the
earthquake is calculated for where it occurred, shallow or deep, near or
far. The formula you cite is worked in the other direction, from the
measured ground motion to distance and depth; you also omitted the other
measurement, the surface-wave. Both measurements are necessary for
modern seismology where distance and depth are involved; Richter's first
approximations dealt only with California earthquakes at shallow depths.
Richter's "basic idea was quite simple: by knowing the distance from a
seismograph to an earthquake and observing the maximum signal amplitude
recorded on the seismograph, an empirical quantitative ranking of the
earthquake's inherent size or strength could be made."
**emphasis** added.
No emphasis necessary; the facts speak for themselves (and, BTW,
emphasizing "depth" does not have any effect on the truth that the
intensity of an earthquake, in Richterian terms, does not vary over
distance or time--it is a unary measure.
--
Don Kirkman
.
- References:
- Re: HOW IT ALL ENDS
- From: Don Kirkman
- Re: HOW IT ALL ENDS
- From: Don Kirkman
- Re: HOW IT ALL ENDS
- Prev by Date: Re: Statins and muscle damage
- Next by Date: Re: Statins and muscle damage
- Previous by thread: Re: HOW IT ALL ENDS
- Next by thread: Re: HOW IT ALL ENDS
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
