INNOVATIVE TECHNIQUES OF EQ-PREDICTION, By Dr. Fizza Maqbool, Ph.D (Seismic Technology)

[Dr-Fizza]

INNOVATIVE TECHNIQUES OF EQ-PREDICTION:

By Dr. Fizza Maqbool, Ph.D (Seismic Technology)

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

DISCUSSION on an EARTHQUAKE PREDICTION is a PREDICTION that an
EARTHQUAKE of a specific MAGNITUDE will occur in a particular place at
a particular time (or ranges thereof). Despite considerable research
efforts by SEISMOLOGISTS, scientifically reproducible predictions
cannot yet be made to a specific hour, day, or month; but for well-
understood faults, SEISMIC HAZARD assessment maps can estimate the
PROBABILITY that an earthquake of a given size will affect a given
location over a certain number of years.
Once an earthquake has already begun, EARLY WARNING DEVICES can
provide a few seconds' warning before major shaking arrives at a given
location. This technology takes advantage of the different speeds of
propagation of the various types of vibrations produced. AFTERSHOCKS
are also likely after a major quake, and are commonly planned for in
earthquake disaster response protocols.

Experts do advise general EARTHQUAKE PREPAREDNESS, especially in areas
known to experience frequent or
large quakes, to prevent injury, death, and property damage if a quake
occurs with or without warning.

INNOVATIVE PREDICTION TECHNIQUES:
In the effort to predict earthquakes, people have tried to associate
an impending earthquake with such varied phenomena as seismicity
patterns, ELECTROMAGNETIC FIELDS, ground movement, weather conditions
and UNUSUAL CLOUDS, RADON, or HYDROGEN gas content of soil or ground
water, water level in wells, ANIMAL BEHAVIOR, and the phases of the
moon.

Many PSEUDO-SCIENTIFIC theories and predictions are made, which
scientific practitioners find problematic.[5] The natural randomness
of earthquakes and frequent activity in certain areas can be used to
make "predictions" which may generate unwarranted credibility. These
generally leave certain details unspecified, increasing the
probability that the vague prediction criteria will be met, and ignore
quakes that were not predicted. RUDOLF FALB's "lunisolar flood theory"
is a typical example from the late 19th century.

Evaluation of prediction theories
Official earthquake prediction evaluation councils have been
established in California (the CALIFORNIA EARTHQUAKE PREDICTION
EVALUATION COUNCIL) and the federal government in the United States
(the National Earthquake Prediction Evaluation Council); but have yet
to endorse any method of predicting quakes as reliable.

Scientific evaluations of prediction claims look for the following
elements in a claim:

• A specific location or area
• A specific span of time
• A specific magnitude range
• A specific probability of occurrence
•
Attribution to a plausible physical mechanism lends credibility, and
suggests a means for future improvement. REPRODUCTIBILITY and
statistical analysis are used to distinguish predictions which come
true due to random chance (of which a certain number are expected)
versus those that have more useful predictive capability, and to
validate models of long-term probability. Such models are difficult to
test or validate because large earthquakes are so rare, and because
earthquake activity is naturally clustered in space and time.
"Predictions" which are made only after the fact are common but
generally discounted.

RADON:
Emission of RADON as a quake precursor was studied in the 1970s and
1980s, with no reliable results. It is still under study at NASA as of
2009.

VAN METHOD:
VAN is a method of earthquake prediction proposed by Professors
VAROTOS, Alexopoulos and Nomicos in the 1980s; it was named after the
researchers' initials. The method is based on the detection of
"seismic electric signals" (SES) via a telemetric network of
conductive metal rods inserted in the ground. The method stems from
theoretical predictions by P. Varotsos, a solid-state physicist at the
NATIONAL & CAPODISTRIAN UNIVERSITY OF ATHENS. It is continually
refined as to the manner of identifying SES from within the abundant
electric noise the VAN sensors are picking up. Researchers have
claimed to be able to predict earthquakes of magnitude larger than 5,
within 100 km of epicentral location, within 0.7 units of magnitude
and in a 2-hour to 11-day time window.

FORESHOCKS PREDICTIONS:

FORESHOCKS are medium-sized earthquakes that precede major quakes.
An increase in foreshock activity (combined with purported indications
like ground water levels and strange animal behavior) enabled the
successful evacuation a million people one day before the FEBRUARY 4,
1975, M=7.3 HAICHENG EARTHQUAKE by the China State Seismological
Bureau.
While 50% of major earthquakes are preceded by foreshocks, only about
5-10% of small earthquakes turn out to be foreshocks, leading to many
false warnings.

PATTERN THEORIES:
According to new research to be published by Prof. SHIOMO HAVLIN, of
Bar-Ilan University's Department of Physics, earthquakes form patterns
which can improve the ability to predict the timing of their
recurrence. In November 2005 (November 11 issue) the journal PHYSICAL
REVIEW LETTERS, published by the AMERICAN PHYSICAL SOCIETY, published
an article by researchers from Israel and Germany that say that there
is a way to predict when the next earthquake will hit.

Prof. Shlomo Havlin's from BAR-LIAN UNIVERSITY in Israel, in
collaboration with Prof. Armin Bunde, of the JUSTUS-LIEBIG UNIVERSITY
in Giessen, Germany, and Bar-Ilan University graduate student Valerie
Livina used the "scaling" approach from physics to develop a
mathematical function to characterize earthquakes of a wide range of
magnitudes in order to learn from smaller magnitude earthquakes about
larger magnitude earthquakes. The team's findings reveal that the
recurrence of earthquakes is strongly dependent on the recurrence
times of previous earthquakes.

This memory effect not only provides a clue to understanding the
observed clustering of earthquakes, but also suggests that delays in
earthquake occurrences, as seen today in Tokyo and in San Francisco,
are a natural phenomenon.

FRACTO-LUMINE SCENE:
Main article: EARTHQUAKE LIGHT <<< <<< <<<
One possible method for predicting earthquakes, although it has not
yet been applied yet, is FRACTO-LUMINE SCENE. Before the 1995 KOBE
EARTHQUAKE in Japan, many people reported seeing flashes of red and
blue light in the sky up to an hour before the earthquake. Studies at
the Chugoku National Industrial Research Institute by Yoshizo
Kawaguchi have shown that upon fracturing, silica releases red and
blue light for a period of about 100 milliseconds. Kawaguchi
attributed this to the relaxation of the free bonds and unstable
oxygen atoms that are left when the silicon oxygen bonds have broken
due to the stresses within the rock.[9]

SATELLITE OBSERVATIONS:
DE-METER MICRO-SATELLITE:
The "Detection of Electro-Magnetic Emissions Transmitted from
Earthquake Regions" satellite, constructed by CNES, has made
observations which show strong correlations between certain types of
low frequency electromagnetic activity and the seismically most active
zones on the Earth, and have shown a sharp signal in the IONOSPHERIC
ELECTRON DENSITY and TEMPERATURE near southern Japan seven days before
a 7.1 magnitude occurred there (on AUGUST 29 and SEPTEMBER 5, 2004,
respectively).

QUAKE-SAT MONO-SATELLITE:
Main article: QUAKE-SAT <<< <<< <<<
QUAKE-SAT is an earth observation Mono-satellite based on 3 CUBE-SATS.
It was designed to be a proof-of-concept for collecting EXTREMELY LOW
FREQUENCY earthquake precursor signals from space. The primary
instrument is a magnetometer housed in a 2 foot (0.6 m) telescoping
boom.

ESPERIA Project:
ESPERIA is an equatorial space mission mainly conceded with detecting
any tectonic and pre-seismic related signals. More in general, it has
been proposed for defining the near-Earth electromagnetic, plasma, and
particle environment, and for studying perturbations and instabilities
in the ionosphere-magnetosphere transition region. To study earthquake
preparation processes and anthropogenic impacts in the Earth's
surface, a phase A study has been realized for the ITALIAN SPACE
AGENCY.

EARLY WARNING:
The following discussion needs to be HARMONIZED with discussion in
EARTHQUAKE WARNING SYSTEM:::

MAIN DISCUSSION: EARTHQUAKE WARNING SYSTEM <<< <<< <<<
Earthquake early warning or "pre-detection" is more reliable than
earthquake prediction since it is based upon detecting the non-
destructive PRIMARY WAVES that travel more quickly through the Earth's
crust than do the destructive SECONDARY and RAYLEIGH WAVES. (A similar
timing phenomenon is observed in storms when lightning flashes travel
faster than thunder.) The advance warning time available using this
approach is only on the order of seconds (or tens of seconds for deep
and distant large quakes).
Some devices have been developed which provide early warning alarms
based on these phenomena.

MAGNITUDE PROBLEM:
In a paper in the journal NATURE, Richard Allen of the University of
California claims that the distinction between small and large
earthquakes can be made from the very first seconds of seismic energy
recorded by seismometers, though other scientists are not convinced.
If correct this may make earthquake early warning (as distinct from
prediction) more powerful. Earthquake early warning provides an alarm
that strong shaking is due soon to arrive, and the more quickly that
the magnitude of an earthquake can be estimated, the more useful is
the early warning. However, earthquake early warning can still be
effective without the ability to infer the magnitude of an earthquake
in its initial second or two:::<>:::

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Posted by:::Dr. Fizza Maqbool, Ph.D (Seismic Technology)
Member:::<SAEA>::: NYC Center
Location:::United States
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++