8.8 Earthquake in Pacific

[Tony Starks]

Surprised there's nothing here yet, one of the top 10 highest recorded quakes apparently.

1.9 million in Japan told to evacuate, tsunami warnings in Hawaii.

Here in NZ we have warnings of surges and higher than normal tides.

https://www.stuff.co.nz/world-news/360774799/large...

[sunnygym]

Anyone in Hawaii with updates ? Got friends out there

[EmailAddress]

Was it predicted and/ or expected?

[LivLL]

sunnygym said:

Anyone in Hawaii with updates ? Got friends out there

Only 4ft waves hit Oahu. Seems like it’s dissipated with the Russian islands taking the brunt.

[valiant]

EmailAddress said:

Was it predicted and/ or expected?

Can you predict an earthquake?

[EmailAddress]

valiant said:

EmailAddress said:

Was it predicted and/ or expected?

Can you predict an earthquake?

I cannot, no. But I'm not a seismologist, hence the question.

Obviously not to the minute, but pre-stress and historical info seem to be developing ever more accurate models these days.

[anonymous-user]

sunnygym said:

Anyone in Hawaii with updates ? Got friends out there

You might see something on the live web cams from Hawaii


https://www.webcamtaxi.com/en/usa/hawaii.html

[LivLL]

It's all fizzled out, some 3-4ft waves. Thankfully.

[NRS]

EmailAddress said:

valiant said:

EmailAddress said:

Was it predicted and/ or expected?

Can you predict an earthquake?

I cannot, no. But I'm not a seismologist, hence the question.

Obviously not to the minute, but pre-stress and historical info seem to be developing ever more accurate models these days.

Don't think so. Big quakes tend to be somewhere that is active but been calm for a while. They're so big because the stress has been building for a while and not released earlier in smaller pulses via smaller quakes. If you have smaller quakes you tend to be able to know there will be smaller quakes following it up/further along the fault line as the stress is passed further down the fault plane and it gets back into equilibrium.

I'd guess this one had limited vertical displacement of the seabed, which is often the issue for tsunamis from memory.

[gotoPzero]

Concerning for Japan IMO. There was a big one about 2 weeks ago in Alaska. Seems activity is moving west.

[W12GT]

This isn’t the first big earthquake under the sea near Russia in the last couple of weeks. The sceptical me wonders if Russia are testing their tsunami weapons….that is assuming there haven’t been any warnings from seismic monitoring…..

[JoshSm]

W12GT said:

This isn t the first big earthquake under the sea near Russia in the last couple of weeks. The sceptical me wonders if Russia are testing their tsunami weapons .that is assuming there haven t been any warnings from seismic monitoring ..

An 8.8 involves a ridiculous amount of energy - you aren't doing that with any nuke ever created. Also the seismic profile would give the game away, a test shot doesn't look like an earthquake.

[W12GT]

JoshSm said:

W12GT said:

This isn t the first big earthquake under the sea near Russia in the last couple of weeks. The sceptical me wonders if Russia are testing their tsunami weapons .that is assuming there haven t been any warnings from seismic monitoring ..

An 8.8 involves a ridiculous amount of energy - you aren't doing that with any nuke ever created. Also the seismic profile would give the game away, a test shot doesn't look like an earthquake.

Interesting fact….
The largest nuclear bomb ever detonated was the Soviet Tsar Bomba, with a yield of 50 megatons of TNT. It was tested on October 30, 1961 ; it was designed as a 100megaton bomb but was ‘tweaked’ to 50.

A 5 megaton bomb is roughly equivalent to a 7.7magnitude earthquake, therefore 8.8magnitude seems achievable.

[shalmaneser]

W12GT said:

JoshSm said:

W12GT said:

This isn t the first big earthquake under the sea near Russia in the last couple of weeks. The sceptical me wonders if Russia are testing their tsunami weapons .that is assuming there haven t been any warnings from seismic monitoring ..

An 8.8 involves a ridiculous amount of energy - you aren't doing that with any nuke ever created. Also the seismic profile would give the game away, a test shot doesn't look like an earthquake.

Interesting fact .
The largest nuclear bomb ever detonated was the Soviet Tsar Bomba, with a yield of 50 megatons of TNT. It was tested on October 30, 1961 ; it was designed as a 100megaton bomb but was tweaked to 50.

A 5 megaton bomb is roughly equivalent to a 7.7magnitude earthquake, therefore 8.8magnitude seems achievable.

If Vlad had let off a 100 megaton bomb under the Pacific we would know about it.

[Halmyre]

say disappointed news editors.

[Diderot]

W12GT said:

JoshSm said:

W12GT said:

This isn t the first big earthquake under the sea near Russia in the last couple of weeks. The sceptical me wonders if Russia are testing their tsunami weapons .that is assuming there haven t been any warnings from seismic monitoring ..

An 8.8 involves a ridiculous amount of energy - you aren't doing that with any nuke ever created. Also the seismic profile would give the game away, a test shot doesn't look like an earthquake.

Interesting fact .
The largest nuclear bomb ever detonated was the Soviet Tsar Bomba, with a yield of 50 megatons of TNT. It was tested on October 30, 1961 ; it was designed as a 100megaton bomb but was tweaked to 50.

A 5 megaton bomb is roughly equivalent to a 7.7magnitude earthquake, therefore 8.8magnitude seems achievable.

Worth remembering that the Richter Scale is logarithmic.

[Sheetmaself]

My mate lives in Japan and was complaining to me that his phone was going crazy with alerts.

I pointed out give it a few hours and it will stop due ti water damage.

[Tango13]

Halmyre said:

say disappointed news editors.

Would there be much difference in the 'before' and 'after' pictures?