Don't you understand how strain, or release of strain, in crystals causes electromotive force? (some people call it "electricity")
CharlesChandler
Re: Electric Earthquakes
Maol wrote: Don't you understand how strain, or release of strain, in crystals causes electromotive force? (some people call it "electricity").
In piezoelectricity, the field, and the current, is entirely within the crystal. So there isn't going to be any net electricity due to strain in a slab of rock containing quartz crystals. And I don't think that there will be any noticeable ohmic heating just from one compression or decompression. So the idea under consideration is not that pressure causes electricity in earthquakes. Rather, it's that electricity causes pressure. Then the question is, "What causes the electricity?" I'm of the opinion that this comes from pressure, but not due to the piezoelectric effect (because that would be circular). Rather, tectonic pressure buckles the crust, which relieves the pressure on the underlying rock. If the rock had been forcibly ionized, due to electron degeneracy pressure, it can now undergo charge recombination. So when the pressure is relaxed, electrons can flow back in. Interestingly, this has two effects, both of which increase the lateral pressure, which is the prime mover here. First, ohmic heating from the electric current causes the rock to expand. Second, the electric field motivating the current causes piezoelectric deformation of quartz crystals, again causing the rock to expand. This lateral expansion forces the buckled crust to buckle even more. The increased buckle further reduces pressure on the underlying rock, enabling even more charge recombination. So it's a force feedback loop, which will continue to accentuate itself until the crust is under enough pressure to rupture the fault.
This model also explains that wave-like nature of the actual quake. The wave train of the main event starts with a very small sine wave, and each crest is successively higher, until within a dozen or so crests, it reaches a peak. It can then continue oscillating at or near the peak level, sometimes for several minutes. Granite doesn't have the elasticity to behave like this, and seismic tests in the vicinity of nuclear explosions have proved it. Even if this was elasticity, there would be no sustained oscillation — the vibrations would build up as more and more of the fault lost traction, until all at once, all of the elastic stress got released in one major thrust. Then everything would stop. Since this definitely isn't what happens, we need to look beyond elasticity. The answer comes from an understanding of the interplay between lateral pressure and electron degeneracy pressure. If a runaway feedback loop increases lateral pressure to the point that the fault is ruptured (just a little bit at first), the upper plate will lie back down on the lower plate (just a little bit at first). This restores the pressure at depth, driving out electrons, and thus driving an electric current. This current will be forced through microfractures in the rock. With a sufficient current density, those microfractures will graduate to plasma discharge channels. There is no theoretical limit to the temperatures, and thus the pressures, in such channels. Hence the buckled crust, that tries to flatten back down again, drives a current through itself that greatly increases the lateral pressure. This instantaneous increase is pressure triggers the next rupture. It also temporarily closes up the discharge channels, cutting off the current, until the lateral pressure is relieved by the next rupture. Thus even sine wave has its own electro-mechanical energy source, and all-in-all, we'd rather call earthquakes a form of electrical sputtering. Each surge of current creates lateral pressure that shuts off the current, while also rupturing the fault, which relaxes the lateral pressure, enabling more current, and cranking up on the current by forcibly ionizing the underlying rock. So once the process gets going, it keeps sputtering until all of the lateral pressure has been relieved.
If you know of a more mechanistic description of the process, let me know. But no, we're not avoiding Occam's Razor at all. We're trying to remove the mysticism and confusion.
CharlesChandler
Re: Electric Earthquakes
Here's another interesting factoid: crustal deformation that ultimately leads to fractures can be detected by two different methods: 1) GPS units showing as much as a couple of meters of crustal uplift, and 2) reduction in the gravity field.
The results of prediction of occurrence of mining tremors and bursts in the course of the exploitation of the remaining part of the hard coal in seam 510 of the mine "Pstrowski", Upper Silesia, have been presented in the paper. The exploitation has taken place under extremely difficult conditions hazardous for the mining crew.
To predict the occurrence of mining tremors, bursts and direction of migration of increased elastic strain in the rock mass, the microgravity method has been applied.
The microgravity observations were carried out in the measurement points located at mutual distances equal 20 m in three profiles of the lengths 700 m, 760 m and 260 m respectively. The profiles were located in mining workings in the vicinity of the exploited part of the bed. In the course of exploitation, lasting 25 months, 29 series of measurements including 3600 individual microgravity observations were carried out. Microgravity observations were made with a Worden-Master gravimeter.
The observed time changes of gravity microanomalies were essential for prediction. Local negative changes of gravity microanomalies signalled the approaching mining tremor. The tremor would cover an area of the radius 60 m to 100 m. The regional time changes of the gravity microanomalies appearing as linear trends of these anomalies signalled the development of the fields of elastic strain in the whole investigated area and the approaching violent release of elastic strain energy from the rock mass.
The values of the amplitudes AMP of the above-mentioned trend were the measure of this hazard. In the course of the investigations each shock was preceded by considerably increased values of AMP.
There is a lot more literature than this. Such reductions can be measured by satellites, or by gravimeters on the surface of the Earth, hundreds of kilometers away from an earthquake zone. I haven't really got my mind fully wrapped around this, but needless to say that crustal buckling shouldn't produce a reduction in gravity. If anything, bringing the crust a little bit closer to the satellite should increase the gravity field. So there has to be more to this than just gravity.
As we have discussed elsewhere, G has turned out to be surprisingly tough to determine accurately, and some of us believe that G is being perturbed by E. As discussed here and elsewhere, I'm contending that crustal buckling generates powerful electric fields inside the Earth, and attendant telluric currents. It just might be that this particular G anomaly is coming from that E. Now all I have to do is see if there are enough data to show a direct correlation between the measured gravity deficits and the measured fluctuations in the fair weather electric field. The gravity-centric mainstream doesn't look for such correlations, but geophysicists studying atmospheric electrification do collect E-field measurements, and it might be possible to connect the dots here. If so, yet another piece of the puzzle falls into place.
Note that I'm not saying that G is E, the way Miles Mathis does. I treat those as two different forces. I'm just saying that satellites develop a net negative charge, due to electron bombardment in space, and thereafter are affected by electric fields. In my model, when tectonic forces buckle the crust, it relieves pressure on the underlying rock, and thus relaxes the electron degeneracy pressure. This shifts the boundary between the positive mantle and the negative crust deeper. The result at the surface is less electric field (i.e., the net negative charge relaxes), which has been measured. The charge density in the ionosphere also relaxes, as the equal-but-opposite response to a lack of attraction to the surface, which has also been measured. So I'm thinking that the net negative satellite is not being tugged toward the net positive ionosphere as forcefully, resulting in a "gravity anomaly".
Now, researchers at the California Institute of Technology have found that within subduction zones, the regions where one of the earth's plates slips below another, areas where the attraction due to gravity is relatively high are less likely to experience large earthquakes than areas where the gravitational force is relatively low.
[...]
So why would gravity and topography be related to seismic activity?
One possible link is via the frictional behavior of the fault. When two plates rub up against each other, friction between the plates makes it harder for them to slide. If the friction is great enough, the plates will stick. Over long periods of time, as the stuck plates push against each other, they may deform, creating spatial variations in topography and gravity.
In addition to deforming the plates, friction causes stress to build up. When too much stress builds up, the plates will suddenly jump, releasing the strain in the sometimes violent shaking of an earthquake.
If there were no friction between the plates, they would just slide right by each other smoothly, without bending or building up the strain that eventually results in earthquakes.
So in subduction zones, areas under high stress are likely to have greater gravity and topography anomalies, and are also more likely to have earthquakes.
Right — so crustal deformation causes gravity anomalies. But how? Like I said in the previous post, warping the crust upward, toward the gravimeter, should increase the gravity field, not decrease it. And if the pressure is compacting the matter, again the gravity field should be increased. I just love how scientists pass off observations as explanations, and make it sound like confirmation of their model, when really, the data invalidate their model.
Maol
Re: Electric Earthquakes
When was the last time any of you read the first post in this thread?
CharlesChandler
Re: Electric Earthquakes
Maol wrote: When was the last time any of you read the first post in this thread?
Well, that would have been about 6 years ago. We knew then that there was an EM component to earthquakes. But we've come a long ways in 6 years. Now we're discussing how EM does the job.
CharlesChandler
Re: Electric Earthquakes
I've been studying up on the relationship between gravity anomalies and earthquakes, and it turns out that gravity anomalies are the top-performing earthquake predictor. In the first 6 months of operation in 2009, 66% of the major earthquakes were successfully predicted, and only 5% of the predictions that were issued were false alarms. For 11% of the quakes, the gravimeter readings were too weak for forecasts, and in 21% of the cases, the gravimeter record showed an unrecognized pattern. The forecasted earthquakes occurred in Indonesia, Japan, Taiwan, Italy and Hindu-Kush region of Afghanistan, on the basis of their standardized pattern. This was all done with just one extremely sensitive gravimeter located in Pakistan.
It's a bit odd that after a flurry of activity in 2009, and with strongly encouraging initial results, the publications just stopped. I'm searching, but I'm finding little-to-no research or practical applications since 2009. They do now have a total of 3 gravimeter stations. But there appears to be little-to-no interest in this approach on the part of the broader scientific community. Very strange indeed. Could it be that the mainstream doesn't like it, because the gravity anomalies don't make sense? Anyway, see this for more info, or the bibliography below.
V.E.Khain, E.N.Khalilov. Cycles in geodinamic processes: their possible nature. Moscow, Scientific World, 2009,520 p.
V.E.Khain, E.N.Khalilov. Space-time regularities of seismic and volcanic activity. Bourgas, Bulgaria, SWB, 2008, 304 c.[19][20];
E.N.Khalilov. Global Network of Forecasting the Earthquakes: New technology and new philosophy. SWB, London, 2009, 65 p.[21]
E.N.Khalilov. Gravitational waves and geodynamics. (Edited by academician, Prof.Dr.V.E.Khain), Moscow-Baku, IAS/ICSD, 2004, 330 p. [22][23]
V.E.Khain, E.N.Khalilov. ABOUT POSSIBLE INFLUENCE OF SOLAR ACTIVITY UPON SEISMIC AND VOLCANIC ACTIVITIES: LONG-TERM FORECAST. SCIENCE WITHOUT BORDERS. Transactions of the International Academy of Science H & E. Vol.3. 2007/2008, SWB, Innsbruck, 2009 ISBN 978-9952-451-01-6 ISSN 2070-0334 [24][25];
V.E.Khain, E.N.Khalilov. GLOBAL CLIMATE FLUCTUATION AND CYCLICITY OF THE VOLCANIC ACTIVITY. Transactions of the International Academy of Science H & E. Vol.3. 2007/2008, SWB, Innsbruck, 2009 ISBN 978-9952-451-01-6 ISSN 2070-0334 [26][27];
E.N.Khalilov. ABOUT POSSIBILITY OF CREATION OF INTERNATIONAL GLOBAL SYSTEM OF FORECASTING THE EARTHQUAKES "ATROPATENA" (Baku-Yogyakarta-Islamabad).NATURAL CATACLYSMS AND GLOBAL PROBLEMS OF THE MODERN CIVILIZATION. Special edition of Transaction of the International Academy of Science.H&E.ICSD/IAS, Innsbruck, 2007, pp. 51–69. ISBN 978-9952-81-15-2-0 [28]
Walter Kofler,Elchin Khalilov. ON PERSPECTIVES OF APPLICATION OF NEW TECHNOLOGY OF SEISMIC RESISTANT CONSTRUCTION IN YOGYAKARTA SPECIAL TERRITORY (INDONESIA). SCIENCE WITHOUT BORDERS. Transactions of the International Academy of Science.H&E. Vol.2, Innsbruck, 2005/2006, pp. 340–360. ISBN – 978-9952-25-049-7.[29]
E.N.Khalilov. Global Network of Forecasting the Earthquakes. SWB, Bourgas, 2009, 55 c. ISBN 978-9952-451-02-3
E.N.Khalilov. ABOUT INFLUENCE OF GEODYNAMIC PROCESSES ON THE RESULTS OF MEASUREMENTS OF CAVENDICH BALANS.SCIENCE WITHOUT BORDERS. Transactions of the International Academy of Science H&E. Vol.3. 2007/2008, SWB, Innsbruck, 2009. ISBN 978-9952-451-01-6 ISSN 2070-0334
Chromium6
Re: Electric Earthquakes
Saw this recently:
Solving the Mystery of 'Slow Quakes'
Geologists investigate why some earthquakes drag on for months, instead of mere seconds. By Carrie Arnold, Emily Eggleston|Wednesday, March 12, 2014
Chromium6 wrote: Solving the Mystery of 'Slow Quakes'
Cool! I'm still trying to find the seismic data for "slow quakes". I found a 2013 article by one of the principal investigators (Slip weakening as a mechanism for slow earthquakes) that talked about the structural properties of the fault, but then I hit the pay wall. The article you mentioned said "only the most sensitive seismic instruments picked up the tectonic action", but I can't find the data.
It makes me think of something I read (but didn't save) about how some Native American tribe(s) had an oral history that described how the Rocky Mountains rose over several months.
ElecGeekMom
Re: Electric Earthquakes - less OT than my previous post
Whenever I talk to my Oklahoma friends about our increasing numbers of earthquakes, I have to talk about EU as well.
I think that the injection wells contribute to the increasing numbers because those wells are being filled with brine, where there formerly was petroleum. I started tracking them in 2009.
I downloaded a paper that said that petroleum is way less conductive than water (especially brine). So it seems to me that what we end up with is essentially a 3D integrated circuit in the ground. And whenever a plasmoid passes through and grounds out, we get an earthquake in that area.
Since I concocted that hypothesis, I have been closely watching the earthquakes on various web sites. The one that has the greatest number of Oklahoma earthquakes is the Leonard Geophysical Observatory site.
I have seen quakes on that site where the magnitude is less than 1.0. Even though that site does place the quakes on a Google map, it's hard to tell which one in the list is the one on the map, so I have been copying the coordinates and placing them on my own Google map. I have been surprised to see many occurring near the LMNO2 radar installation northeast of Enid, in the middle of nowhere. Also, there have been quite a few between the Sooner Lake power generation facility and Ponca City. I was able to drill down in the satellite images and see high-tension lines there.
So now I'm thinking that electro-smog adds to the timing and location of quakes here. Even though there is a significant known fault southwest of Oklahoma City, not many quakes show up there. Many are showing up north and northeast and east of Oklahoma City, perhaps at the edge of the metropolitan area's heaviest electro-smog? The northern part of the OKC metro area has many towers for various TV stations and radio stations. There is an air force base on the east side. There is a major NWS radar at what could be called the southeast corner of the metro.
I'd like to know what's underground that makes Oklahoma (and especially central Oklahoma) such a hotbed for earthquakes, tornadoes, and thunderstorms. Sometimes they all even happen at the same time!
Just throwing this out there. I hope it's not too OT.
CharlesChandler
Re: Electric Earthquakes - less OT than my previous post
ElecGeekMom wrote: I hope it's not too OT.
The picture that is emerging here is of a large number of closely interconnected phenomena, including earthquakes, tidal forces, space weather, etc. So none of it is OT.
Crustal deformation due to tidal forces and tectonic pressures results in telluric currents. These currents follow the path of least resistance, and if the current density is sufficient, the currents graduate to plasma discharge channels, which can exert enormous pressures on the surrounding rock. This explains the catastrophic release of energy in earthquakes, and in volcanoes.
As concerns volcanoes, fractured rock is a better conductor than solid rock. So once the pressure in the magma chamber becomes sufficient to fracture the overlying rock, telluric currents will follow those fractures, further weakening them. Magma is also a better conductor than solid rock. So the magma plume is like a submerged lightning rod that attracts electric currents to itself. Ohmic heating then keeps it molten — otherwise it would cool and solidify — it wouldn't burrow through several kilometers of solid rock. So a magma plume has its own heat source, which pumps the magma to the surface, sometimes in a steady stream, and sometimes in an explosive eruption.
As concerns earthquakes in the OKC area, you might be onto something. On any flat surface (such as the Great Plains), anything that sticks up will concentrate the electric field onto itself, meaning that it becomes the footpoint for electric currents (i.e., like a lightning rod). The convergence of high power lines at a power station could be acting like a huge antenna, focusing the energy at that location. Selective ionization in the atmosphere (due to smog) can do the same thing. Then, the fracking provides the subterranean conduits for the telluric currents. So where are the quakes going to occur? Wherever you have the greatest combination of factors focusing the currents in that location.
Lloyd
Re: Electric Earthquakes
Fracking & Quakes Wow, you think fracking can help cause earthquakes? That would make sense, since microfractures increase electric current flow. What about volcanoes? Would fracking increase earthquakes overall, or make them more numerous but smaller? I suppose there's data available that might answer that. Is fracking more likely to produce another huge New Madrid quake?
Lloyd wrote: Would fracking increase earthquakes overall, or make them more numerous but smaller?
I "think" that it would be the latter — smaller earthquakes occurring more frequently. This actually would seem to be a good thing, in that the pressure necessary for a catastrophic quake would never build up, since the pressure was being periodically relieved by small quakes. That, of course, assumes that the fracking was occurring all of the way down the fault line. If the pressure was only being relieved at one end, there would still be the potential for a catastrophic quake at the other end.
Lloyd wrote: I don't well remember your explanation of Seneca guns, but do you suppose the sounds mentioned...
I couldn't hear the sounds, but my thesis on the Seneca Guns is that they occur where telluric currents encounter capacitance, and charge disparities can build up. Then, a sudden "fair weather lightning" occurs, discharging the potential. So conductivity due to fracking, and Seneca Guns due to capacitance, would be mutually exclusive.
Anyway, see this for more info, or the bibliography below.
V.E.Khain, E.N.Khalilov. Cycles in geodinamic processes: their possible nature. Moscow, Scientific World, 2009,520 p.
