You Mean To Tell Me That They Cannot Measure the Tera Joules Leading Up To An Earthquake?
in [Basics]
|
Prev: The Earth can already be pregnant now. Embryo grow by exponent. The probability of Earth explosion, caused by 3.5 TeV collisions are not 50%, as it was before the first collisions, but less
Next: Bitscope
From: Bret Cahill on 5 Apr 2010 01:27 An earthquake ain't something subtle. If you are having problems tracking the stresses in the earth you need to switch to another field. Bret Cahill
From: Bret Cahill on 5 Apr 2010 22:53 > >An earthquake ain't something subtle. > > >If you are having problems tracking the stresses in the earth you need > >to switch to another field. > > >Bret Cahill > > Cantelever a sheet of glass. Put a bucket on it and trickle water in, > drop by drop. Predict which drop will break the glass. Show your work. Some inventor came up with sensor that could save money on helicopter rotors. It gave about 3 seconds warning before the rotor failed. It didn't sell. Bret Cahill
From: Bret Cahill on 5 Apr 2010 23:31 > >An earthquake ain't something subtle. > > >If you are having problems tracking the stresses in the earth you need > >to switch to another field. > > >Bret Cahill > > Cantelever a sheet of glass. Put a bucket on it and trickle water in, > drop by drop. Predict which drop will break the glass. Show your work. My hope was that since the earthquake dissipated a lot of energy, then everything will be safe for the next few years until more energy builds up but some knowledgeable sounding commentator on Which Way LA just said that there is about a 2% chance that yesterday's quake will trigger an even bigger one over the next few months. She didn't say where or what happens after the several months are up. I still haven't put that in with the other odds of getting killed by skin cancer or a meth head. Isn't there a Yossarian / Woody Allen "Odds of Getting Killed" calculator out there? I haven't really done much with the several months time period before. Bret Cahill
From: George Herold on 6 Apr 2010 11:25 On Apr 5, 8:39 pm, John Larkin <jjlar...(a)highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote: > On Sun, 4 Apr 2010 22:27:52 -0700 (PDT), Bret Cahill > > <Bret_E_Cah...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > >An earthquake ain't something subtle. > > >If you are having problems tracking the stresses in the earth you need > >to switch to another field. > > >Bret Cahill > > Cantelever a sheet of glass. Put a bucket on it and trickle water in, > drop by drop. Predict which drop will break the glass. Show your work. > > John Or try dropping sand grains on to a pile...with enough grains the side becomes unstable and there is a mini-avalanche. Predict the size and time of the avalanche.... (I think the answer is one of these fractal things... or goes as 1/f...) George H.
From: Bret Cahill on 6 Apr 2010 12:53
> > >An earthquake ain't something subtle. > > > >If you are having problems tracking the stresses in the earth you need > > >to switch to another field. > > > >Bret Cahill > > > Cantelever a sheet of glass. Put a bucket on it and trickle water in, > > drop by drop. Predict which drop will break the glass. Show your work. > > > John > > Or try dropping sand grains on to a pile...with enough grains the side > becomes unstable and there is a mini-avalanche. Predict the size and > time of the avalanche.... (I think the answer is one of these fractal > things... or goes as 1/f...) The real problem may be that even shallow earthquakes are just deep enough to be out of drilling range. Oil exploration companies offer a lot of data, i.e., the electrical resistance of the rock, that is generally useless as for finding oil but might have some use in predicting earth quakes if they could just drill deeper. Bret Cahill |