Earthquake Forecasting Program July 11, 2005

[edgrsprj]

"Hank Oredson" <horedson at earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:7%UAe.4148$BK1.174 at newsread3.news.pas.earthlink.net...
> "edgrsprj" <edgrsprj at ix.netcom.com> wrote in message
> news:upBAe.1915$oZ.930 at newsread2.news.atl.earthlink.net...
> > "edgrsprj" <edgrsprj at ix.netcom.com> wrote in message
> > news:D7qAe.21003$eM6.9503 at newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net...
> >> PROPOSED EARTHQUAKE FORECASTING
> >> COMPUTER PROGRAM DEVELOPMENT EFFORT

> What observational data are used?
> What are the sources of that observational data?
> How are those sources accessed?
> Is there a database to hold historical plus current data?
> If so, is it centralized or distributed?
>
> The project might be of interest if the data sources are
> rich enough, complete enough, and current enough.
>

July 12, 2005

Thanks for the response and questions.

The following are my personal opinions on this.

       Briefly, the amount of data available for this type of effort is
virtually limitless.  And more of those data than most people could even
deal with can be obtained for free.

You don't have to build a new laboratory filled with expensive equipment.

A reasonably powerful computer,
Access to the Internet,
At least some knowledge of science
Some computer programming ability
And a little imagination

Are all that are required.

       Researchers have been attempting to do this type of work for probably
as far back as we have historical records.  The reason that previous efforts
that I am aware of have not been successful is because two key discoveries
needed to be made.  They are referred to on my 90-05.html Web page as the
"Gravity Point" and "Earthquake Triggering Symmetry."  Now that those
discoveries have been made the door should be open to tremendously rapid
advances in our understanding of how and why earthquakes occur and how to
forecast them.

       Much of this research could be easily done by computer programmers.
You don't need to be a geophysicist.  If the data you are generating look
statistically significant then they are probably important whether or not
you actually understand the geophysical theories behind them.

       To actually forecast earthquakes using the procedure I have developed
you need both warning signal data and earthquake data along with some ocean
tide and Solid Earth Tide data.  But one of the really great parts of this
particular research project is the fact that many of the basic discoveries
can be made by simply comparing earthquakes with one another.  You don't
need any warning signal data at all.  And there is certainly no shortage of
earthquake data!

       At my Web site there is a discussion of a concept called "Earthquake
Pairs."  They are two or more earthquakes which were apparently triggered in
the same manner.  My data indicate that the two highly destructive 1998
earthquakes in Afghanistan would represent an Earthquake Pair.  And the two
highly destructive 1999 earthquakes in Turkey would represent another pair.
Important discoveries can be made by determining what the similarities are
between the two or more earthquakes in an Earthquake Pair and how they
differ from other earthquakes.  And since the group of earthquake warning
signals that I am presently working with is being controlled by the same
forces that are responsible for earthquake triggering, significant
discoveries regarding earthquake triggering processes could be immediately
applied to forecasting efforts.

       One of the reasons that geologists have not yet taken an interest in
this particular effort could be because it is heavily reliant on celestial
mechanics.  And most geology researchers appear to me to prefer to focus on
measuring forces within the ground.  I presently suspect that astronomers
would be a more likely group to take an interest in this science at first.
And I am planning to contact some of them about that.