Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by janrinok on Friday August 14 2015, @06:15PM   Printer-friendly
from the shake,-rattle-and-roll dept.

THIS WEEKEND, A 3.3-magnitude earthquake rattled San Francisco ever so slightly. The small quake, like so many before it, passed, and San Franciscans went back to conveniently ignoring their seismic reality. Magnitude 3.3 earthquakes are clearly no big deal, and the city survived a 6.9-magnitude earthquake in 1989 mostly fine—how how much bigger will the Big One, at 8.0, be than 1989?

Ten times! As smarty-pants among you who understand logarithms may be thinking. But...that's wrong. On the current logarithmic earthquake scale, a whole number increase, like from 7.0 to 8.0, actually means a 32-fold increase in earthquake energy. Even if you can mentally do that math—and feel smug doing it—the logarithmic scale for earthquakes is terrible for intuitively communicating risk. "It's arbitrary," says Lucy Jones, a seismologist with the US Geological Survey. "I've never particularly liked it."

[Suggested New Earthquake Scale]: Seismological Review Letters

Maybe SN could suggest a better way to measure earthquakes ...


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 4, Interesting) by KilroySmith on Friday August 14 2015, @07:17PM

    by KilroySmith (2113) on Friday August 14 2015, @07:17PM (#222967)

    We get by with 5 categories of hurricanes, 5 categories of tornados. Why do we (as civilians) need to viscerally understand the total energy released in a quake?
    I propose the Kilroy scale:

    K0 - Small, of interest only to geologists
    K1 - Half the population will notice that the quake occurred. No damage noted.
    K2 - Everyone will notice the event, light damage noted to unreinforced buildings. Most people will say "Earthquake!" and wait for it to pass.
    K3 - Unreinforced buildings cracked/destroyed, light damage to earthquake-resistant buildings. Many people will move to shelter (doorway, etc). Need only local emergency services unless the majority of the population is in poorly constructed housing.
    K4 - Widespread damage to earthquake resistant buildings. Need regional emergency response (State, etc) to manage injuries/infrastructure damage.
    K5 - Catastrophic damage. Most or all buildings badly damaged or destroyed. Need National (for large countries) or International (for small countries) emergency services.

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   +2  
       Interesting=1, Informative=1, Total=2
    Extra 'Interesting' Modifier   0  
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   4  
  • (Score: 4, Informative) by KilroySmith on Friday August 14 2015, @07:21PM

    by KilroySmith (2113) on Friday August 14 2015, @07:21PM (#222970)

    Well, hell, a comment above made mine superfluous.

    The Modified Mercalli scale https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mercalli_intensity_scale/ [wikipedia.org] does exactly what I was trying to do.

    • (Score: 2) by bob_super on Friday August 14 2015, @11:58PM

      by bob_super (1357) on Friday August 14 2015, @11:58PM (#223071)

      Those scales only work for inhabited areas, and depend on the quality of the ground and what's built on it.
      Cute for newscasters, but highly unscientific, leading to the need to use a different scale for serious work, confusion at the scientist/layman interface, and nothing gained...