Notices
Results 1 to 26 of 26

Thread: Seismic

  1. #1 Seismic 
    MB
    MB is offline
    New Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    2
    I would like to discuss with you some ground motion predictios. I have been doing some researching about that and found a lot of interesting data. I was especially interested in how some foult mechanisems impact on spectral accelerations, the second parameter that is also very important is distance of projection of the foult to the ground, third parameter is magnitude. But I can not seem to understand the corelation between frequency (Hz) and spactral acceleration at certain Magnitude for certain depth.


     

  2.  
     

  3. #2  
    Geo
    Geo is offline
    Forum Junior
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    New Zealand
    Posts
    273
    Earthquakes produce four types of waves; primary, secondary, love and rayleigh waves.


     

  4. #3  
    MB
    MB is offline
    New Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    2
    That I understand...but what puzzles me is next thing. I am looking at a diagram axis y shows SA (spectral acceleration) and axis x shows 1-100 Hz. How does the curve tell me the precise peak groun acceleration?
     

  5. #4 Re: Seismic 
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    32
    Quote Originally Posted by MB
    I would like to discuss with you some ground motion predictios. I have been doing some researching about that and found a lot of interesting data. I was especially interested in how some foult mechanisems impact on spectral accelerations, the second parameter that is also very important is distance of projection of the foult to the ground, third parameter is magnitude. But I can not seem to understand the corelation between frequency (Hz) and spactral acceleration at certain Magnitude for certain depth.
    Earthquakes produce another type of wave that occurs before and after the four commonly known earthquake waves of: primary, secondary, Love and Rayleigh waves.

    A man named David Berger discovered these other detectable waves, and he discusses them in his 22 videos on YouTube. They are called Berger waves, or B waves, after the discoverer. http://www.youtube.com/user/NewMexicoGeologist

    Before any earthquake can strike, something has to set an earthquake cell into a strain mode, and this is usually another earthquake in the far distance, or a distant earthquake cell releasing, or explosives, or an impact from above earth.

    Fault mechanisms relating to earthquake prediction is mainly nothing more than unscientific theoretical theories.

    The ground itself releases all the information that is needed to predict earthquakes accurately. The ground starts pulsing, sending out B waves, and the B waves sometimes become very predictable cycles. The B waves are piezoseismically detectable using a piezoseismic system. The B waves are pure radiation and penetrate through everything, that is why B waves are detected hundreds of miles from the souce (hypocenter or foci) of larger earthquake cells, or earthquakes.

    If you are truly interested in scientific facts about earthquakes and their dynamics then you should watch the videos.

    http://www.youtube.com/user/NewMexicoGeologist
     

  6. #5 Re: Seismic 
    Universal Mind John Galt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    14,169
    Quote Originally Posted by Adventurer
    [The B waves are pure radiation and penetrate through everything, that is why B waves are detected hundreds of miles from the souce (hypocenter or foci) of larger earthquake cells, or earthquakes.
    I am unable currently to access youtube. What is the nature of this 'radiation'? What are the primary characterisitics of these waves? What, in simple terms, do B-wave detectors consist of? (And, just for the hell of it, what is a theoretical theory?)
     

  7. #6 Re: Seismic 
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    32
    Quote Originally Posted by Ophiolite
    Quote Originally Posted by Adventurer
    [The B waves are pure radiation and penetrate through everything, that is why B waves are detected hundreds of miles from the souce (hypocenter or foci) of larger earthquake cells, or earthquakes.
    I am unable currently to access youtube. What is the nature of this 'radiation'? What are the primary characterisitics of these waves? What, in simple terms, do B-wave detectors consist of? (And, just for the hell of it, what is a theoretical theory?)
    How is it that you are unable to access youtube? If you have the Internet all you have to do is type in "YouTube" on your search engine page, and your search engine will take you to YouTube automatically. Or just type in "NewMexicoGeologist" and it will take you to his YouTube page.

    The nature of the radiation if you watch YouTube is radiation given off by rocks that have abnormal pressure exerted upon them. He calls it piezo-radiation since it comes from rock giving off piezo-electricity; and quartz and/or granite is well known for giving off piezo-electricity, especially since piezoelectric crystals are used in most watches today.
    http://www.google.com/#hl=en&&sa=X&e...519659d5d079d0

    IF you watch the videos http://www.youtube.com/user/NewMexicoGeologist the characteristics of the B-Waves are detectable pulses before, during and after earthquakes strike. B-Waves are detectable for days/weeks before the earthquakes strike coming from the foci or hypocenter; and up to 1.5 days after the earthquakes strike.

    He doesn't tell what his B-wave detectors consist of. But, he does state that he uses special lenses to actually visually see the radiation and a directional dish that he uses to get the signal direction also, and some kind of piezoseismic system. Very interesting stuff.
     

  8. #7 Re: Seismic 
    Universal Mind John Galt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    14,169
    Quote Originally Posted by Adventurer
    How is it that you are unable to access youtube?
    Because I am accessing the forum from work and YouTube is a proscribed site.

    Thank you for your attempts to summarise the viedoes for me. Unfortunately I am left with more questions than answers. Piezo electricity is not a form of radiation. Rocks cannot 'give it off'. It is a charge imbalance in the rock as a consequence of strain.

    What is not clear to me is what form the 'radiation' from the piezzo electric effect is taking. Is it electromagnetic, or is it sonic. There appears to be no other viable alternative. In the answer to this lies the determination as to whether this is "Very interesting stuff", or hogs wallop.

    Thak you again for taking the time to try to explain it. When I get my home connectivty restored I'll look at the video.
     

  9. #8 Re: Seismic 
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    32
    Quote Originally Posted by Ophiolite
    Piezo electricity is not a form of radiation. Rocks cannot 'give it off'.
    All electricity gives off radiation, and since piezo-electricity is a form of electricity, then piezo-electricity gives off radiation also. Rocks under strain give off electricity and radiation.

    David Berger, or "NewMexicoGeologist" speaks in the YouTube videos very similarly as to people who have written books on piezoelectric effects.

    There are also many books on the subject if you read about piezoelectric effects. A very interesting book is the "Electrification Phenomenon in Rocks" by Eloranora Ivanovana Parkhomenko.
     

  10. #9  
    Universal Mind John Galt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    14,169
    I'm still having difficulty getting you to state what kind of radiation is emitted. Excuse me, but you are coming across as someone who is using radiation in a non-scientific way. I deduce from your comments that this is electromagnetic radiation. Can you confirm this and say what wavelength ranges it falls in?
     

  11. #10  
    Forum Freshman jlhredshift's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Madison, Ohio
    Posts
    69
    A GOOGLE Scholar search returns no peer reviewed papers on b waves or "D Berger" relating to this subject.
    I'm sorry, my responses are limited. You must ask the right question.

    "The track of a glacier is as unmistakable as that of a man or a bear, and is as significant and trustworthy as any other legible inscription"
    John Strong Newberry; 1873

    "From observations upon living glaciers, and from the known nature of ice, we may learn to recognize the track of a glacier as readily and unmistakably as we would the familiar foot-prints of an animal." G. F. Wright 1891 (108-109)

     

  12. #11  
    Forum Senior
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    399
    Electromagnetic precursors to earthquakes are well documented. Unfortunately the cannot be used to predict an earthquake yet. (Although perhaps this is what animals sense, and might explain their odd behaviour preceding earthquakes???)

    I assume "B-waves" refer to this piezo-electric, electromagnetic phenomenon.
    Don't bother visiting my Earth Sciences forum, it died a death due to lack of love
     

  13. #12  
    Universal Mind John Galt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    14,169
    Quote Originally Posted by billiards
    Electromagnetic precursors to earthquakes are well documented.
    Absolutely true, but none of that documentation - that I am aware of - offers a means of systematically observing these in a way that allows meaningful prediction. That is the claim being made for these 'B' waves. At present it is not clear to me which of these situations is the case:

    1. This is a viable concept that is being poorly communicated by Adventurer.
    2. This is a viable concept that is being poorly communicated by Berger.
    3. This is pseudoscientific claptrap

    The absence of scholarly research publications noted by jlredshift, the terminology of 'B' waves and the apparent inability of Adventurer to say specifically what kind of radiaiton is involved incline me towards option 3.
     

  14. #13  
    Forum Senior
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    399
    Quote Originally Posted by Ophiolite

    3. This is pseudoscientific claptrap
    That's my default position on this as well.

    At this stage we lack a coherent, and physically concise definition of a "B-wave".

    I don't have the patience to trawl through those youtube videos -- especially when I strongly suspect that I will be wasting my time.
    Don't bother visiting my Earth Sciences forum, it died a death due to lack of love
     

  15. #14  
    Forum Senior
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    399
    Quote Originally Posted by Geo
    Earthquakes produce four types of waves; primary, secondary, love and rayleigh waves.
    Add to that list the Biot slow wave.

    Note that P and S waves are body waves. The Biot slow wave is also a body wave, but is composed of P and S waves, that is, it is less fundamental than P and S waves.

    Love and Rayleigh waves are surface waves, but they too are composed of P and S waves, again, in a sense they are less fundamental than P and S waves.

    Surface waves can also be accurately described by the combination of Normal Modes. Normal Modes are the natural modes of the Earth's vibration. Therefore normal modes are more fundamental than surface waves.

    It is intriguing that Surface waves can be explained both by P and S waves, and by normal modes. They seem at first glance to be quite separate phenomena. What is more fundamental? Or are these just two ways of looking at the same thing?
    Don't bother visiting my Earth Sciences forum, it died a death due to lack of love
     

  16. #15 NASA and Piezo 
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    32
    Biot Slow wave has nothing to do with earthquakes as far as I'm concerned. On the other hand, piezo has lots to do with earthquake signals and NASA believes the same thing.

    http://webcache.googleusercontent.co...&ct=clnk&gl=us

    There are also other studies...

    http://webcache.googleusercontent.co...&ct=clnk&gl=us

    http://www.firstscience.com/home/art...-3-1_1246.html

    http://physicsworld.com/cws/article/news/20545

    http://www.nat-hazards-earth-syst-sc...-10-7-2010.pdf
     

  17. #16 Re: NASA and Piezo 
    Universal Mind John Galt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    14,169
    Quote Originally Posted by Adventurer
    On the other hand, piezo has lots to do with earthquake signals and NASA believes the same thing.
    No. Not so. NASA reports that low frequency magnetic signal apparently generated by the piezo electric effect may be associated with earthquakes and may provide a detection mechanism.
    I trust you see that is quite different from saying NASA believes the same thing.

    Now, will you please answer my question, for the third time of asking, what is the nature of the radiation? Are you now asserting it to be these low frequency magnetic signals reported by NASA? If not what is it? If so do you have any idea why Berger has called these B waves, other than an over inflated sense of self importance?

    The material you are now posting is interesting, but I would now like to see you link Berger's work, which still seems questionable, to these more substantial examples of proper research.
     

  18. #17 You stated your own answer, but didn't see it 
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    32
    Ophiolite wrote, "NASA reports that low frequency magnetic signal apparently generated by the piezo electric effect may be associated with earthquakes and may provide a detection mechanism."

    Looks like your standing right on top of the answer, its too bad your feet are too big to let you see it.

    In other words, NASA reports that the piezo electric effect could be associated with earthquakes and may provide the detection mechanism that lets earthquakes be detected ahead of time; but they don't know the answer, or they haven't found out the processes that will enable them to do it as NewMexicoGeologist states.

    Apparently NewMexicoGeologist does know the answer, because he has stated that he knows the answers and he supplies plenty of knowledge to support that he does know the answers. He states that he made his piezo seismic or piezo electric discoveries back in 1996; that puts him far ahead of everyone else.
     

  19. #18  
    Universal Mind John Galt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    14,169
    What is the nature of the radiation?
     

  20. #19 Watch the videos Ophiolite 
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    32
    Go to a public library and watch the videos, and you will learn more facts about earthquakes than you ever knew before, I'm sure of that.

    Put in "NewMexicoGeologist" or http://www.youtube.com/user/NewMexicoGeologist.
     

  21. #20  
    Universal Mind John Galt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    14,169
    I have watched the videos. What is the nature of the radiation?
     

  22. #21 Learn to read Ophiolite 
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    32
    If you read the first line of the first post in the thread, "Detect and Map Earthquakes Accurately Before They Strike", you would know the answer is piezo radiation. I like how many times you repeat a question when the answer was always there in front of you. That's probably the same way it is with scientists that can't understand how to detect earthquakes before they strike, the answer was always right there in front of them.
     

  23. #22  
    Universal Mind John Galt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    14,169
    What are the characteristics of piezo radiation, a radiation apparently unknown outside the realms of YouTube videos?
     

  24. #23 Ask the Earthquake Expert on YouTube 
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    32
    There is an expert on YouTube that knows your answers, somehow you believe you know everything, but instead you now nothing. So.. if you want to know David Berger's secrets, then why don't you contact him through YouTube and ask him for his secrets.
     

  25. #24  
    Universal Mind John Galt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    14,169
    Do I understand from this that you do not know what kind of radiation Berger is talking about?
    If you do understand what this radiation is why are you unwilling to share the information with us?
    If you do not understand what this radiation is why are you so willing to accept that it is real and can be used as Berger proposes?
     

  26. #25 Walking the dog. 
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    32
    Ophiolite here are your own very words below, and my replies to them.

    Ophilites exact words: I understood the videos all too well. The fallacy of his arguments was clear. I'll lay that out for you later.

    My reply: When Ophiolite? Ophiolite you sure do blow a lot of hot air; obviously from those two sentences you are ready to show us the fallacies of his arguments, but you made those statements days ago, hmmmm.

    Ophiolites exact words: My credential are irrelevant. I have made no great discoveries. But, as I said, my credentials in this are quite irrelevant. Would you try not to get fixated on them: it smacks of an inferiority complex. This has fuck all to do with me or my credentials. Let me be absolutely clear here: there is no way, shape or fashion in which I can be called an expert in seismology. I repeat I am no expert on earthquakes. I am an expert on presentation skills. Demonstrate that any statement I have made is a lie.

    My reply: Your words speak for themselves Ophiolite. I like science, and I also read or listen to everything that people say or write and the above are your exact written words here on this forum. If you are any kind of a scientist then you should know that everything that you write or say will be looked at in depth scientifically and torn apart and that is fair in science, and I have the right to show the world your very own words and tear you apart with your own words. You shouldn't write stuff down if you will be scared of people finding out the truth about you.
     

  27. #26  
    WYSIWYG Moderator marnixR's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Cardiff, Wales
    Posts
    5,760
    thread closed - reason : thread appears to be going nowhere
    "Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away." (Philip K. Dick)
     

Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •