Re: HOW IT ALL ENDS
- From: Don Kirkman <donsno2@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 29 May 2006 11:10:24 -0700
It seems to me I heard somewhere that Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD wrote in
article <1148855534.032507.152490@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>:
Don Kirkman wrote:
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.
It would be your choice to deny the existence of our past discussions.
Thankfully, however, they are archived for those who are actually
interested.
Oddly, just a few lines above this you have quoted the proof that I am
not denying any previous discussions. Thankfully, this is also archived
to show who is being truthful. :-) LOL Etc.
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.
No it did not. However, it is understandable why you would fear this
since you are without the LORD.
Something certainly tripped you up; I still think it was the math, but
perhaps it was the technical language.
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.
Correct.
Yes, I know. That's why I wrote it.
The formula you cite is worked in the other direction, from the
measured ground motion to distance and depth;
Incorrect. The measured ground motion and the correction factor are on
the same side of the equation.
But the entire equation is used to develop a measure of intensity
**from** the equation *as well as* the other equation for the surface
wave.
you also omitted the other
measurement, the surface-wave.
Because the citation link has been provided, there has been no
omission.
There is an omission because **both formulas** are necessary to
calculate the intensity, distance, and depth of the event. You tried to
slide by with only one.
Both measurements are necessary for
modern seismology where distance and depth are involved;
Actually, there is one measurement and two calculations.
Ah, more proof that you are seriously confused. The surface wave and
the body wave are separate phenomena which travel at different speeds
via different paths; they are measured separately, and then both sets of
measurements are used to calculate depth, intensity, and distance.
Perhaps you would like to take a few minutes to actually read the
article you cited.
--
Don Kirkman
.
- References:
- Re: HOW IT ALL ENDS
- From: Don Kirkman
- 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: Can it be possible(human's evolution)?
- 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
|
Loading
