Whats going on at yellowstone?

Originally posted by TheCoffinman

 

Krakatoa has a VEI of 6... Yellowstone is an 8, therefore i believe your theory that it will just be a bunch of lil explosions is... absurd.

Bear in mind, the VEI refers to how much total solid matter is ejected over the entire lifetime of an eruption. If it takes Yellowstone four minutes or four weeks to finish erupting, the total amount of ejected mass would still make it a VEI-8. The VEI doesn't imply how fast it comes out, or anything about the energy of each individual eruption or seismic event associated with it. It could easily be all in one big explosion, or dozens of smaller ones, and still be a VEI-8. Make sense?

Originally posted by TheCoffinman
Krakatoa has a VEI of 6... Yellowstone is an 8, therefore i believe your theory that it will just be a bunch of lil explosions is... absurd.

It was not a theory, merely speculation. Also the main point was that earthquakes as large as M10-12 or possibly more (?) wouldn't probably happen.

The reason is that to generate such earthquakes it would require an impossibly large fault. Volcanoes systems generally have many small (geologically speaking) faults which prevent the generation of earthquakes that strong (which already can't occur on current large oceanic faults). Please note that between a M8 and a M9 and a M10 earthquake or more there is a large difference as it's a logarithmic scale. The energy required grows by a factor of about 32 for each unit. So a M10 earthquake requires about 1024 times the energy of a M8 earthquake.

As for the VEI also note that high VEI rating doesn't necessarily imply a catastrophically large explosion (in terms of sudden energy release). If you check out the VEI chart, in fact, the ash column height increase stops at >25000m, at VEI 5. The big difference is the ejecta (magma and ash erupted). An eruption which doesn't generate a cataclysmic explosion (while still being large) but erupts magma and ash at a high constant and long-lasting rate is therefore possible and eligible for a higher VEI rating. It's true though that as observed until now, generally, the bigger the explosion, the bigger the VEI rating.

As for "small eruptions" at Yellowstone, what I meant is that a small one (many have already occurred in the geologically recent past), and, I stress, "small" by Yellowstone standards, could destabilize the caldera (perhaps making it collapse in certain areas, creating new volcanic vents or waking up old ones, who knows) creating a runaway effect, worsening and growing larger over time. This is just my uneducated opinion, or speculation if you prefer. Anything might be possible and, as I said, nobody has ever witnessed how a catastrophic caldera eruption progresses over time.

Originally posted by Puterman
I have emailed you. Let me know what/where the error is. Running OK here.

I'll reply later, I'm busy at the moment
Thanks in advance for your help!

[edit on 2010-1-28 by Shirakawa]

Most days we have many small quakes within and around the park. I have noticed since the beginning of the swarm, it appears there have been no other quakes around excluding:

1.2 2010/01/28 07:38:19 44.652N 110.439W 3.1 48 km (30 mi) SSE of Gardiner, MT
3.5 2010/01/23 15:01:28 43.510N 110.260W 8.0 38 km (23 mi) NNE of Bondurant, WY

Have I just missed them? or are they just not there. If they are not there - why?

Just thinking out loud. Any thoughts would be much appreciated.

reply to post by Shirakawa

Thanks for addressing the expected quake size query. It makes sense that for a mega eruption, while it make be loud and destructive, it won't really result in a mega large "earthquake". It makes sense, because the amount of energy of tectonic plates (which weigh a LOT) grinding against/under/over each other must surely be more than a local area getting destroyed/moved.

Plus, a lot of that exploding energy is transferred to ejecting dirt up into the air, and creating shockwaves (wind, sound), and heat (thermal energy from the kinetic).

Thanks for discussing

Originally posted by Robin Marks
Shirakawa, how close to last years swarm in cumulative energy? Please, if you could, express it in terms of one big quake, and or, how many 2.5's combined. We must be getting close.

I forgot to reply to this.
I think the current swarm won't reach last year's in terms of cumulative earthquake energy.

Very roughly, It's still at 75% of the 2008/2009 swarm cumulative energy.
In terms of one big quake, it would take a single M3.9.
In terms of M2.5 earthquakes, it would take about 125 of them.

These calculations have been made on still incomplete data though.

EDIT: I forgot to add these charts I made with Gnuplot with the most recent public data:

[there was an error in the charts, edited]


[edit on 2010-1-28 by Shirakawa]

[edit on 2010-1-29 by Shirakawa]

Has anyone else noticed that YMV (Mammoth Vault) is now making like YMR? (Madison River)

Wind, or very small earthquakes? Looks like many very small quakes to me, in GEE, but I could be wrong. I'm curious to know what others think.


Edited to say: ok, it's flat as a pancake at the moment. It was more interesting 10 minutes ago, I promise.

[edit on 28-1-2010 by quakewatcher]

I see that there has been a 5.0 earthquake in Africa.. how long before Yellowstone shows a reaction? I had read a long time ago in the beginning threads that earthquakes elsewhere get a reaction in Yellowstone ( sorry as I know there is a better term than reaction, but I can't think of it right now). Anyhow, I have been a lurker since the first page and finally joined ATS to be able to comment or ask. Thanks everyone for all the scientific thought and inquiry! I continue to learn...

reply to post by Elienne


An Alaskan earthquake caused changes in Yellowstone geyers. But I don't think a 5.0M as far as Africa will affect Yellowstone. What's interesting about the African quake is that it's a rift system. The quake may have been from magma movement. The rift valley is one of the few places that have a rift on a continent. Most of them are in the Pacific and Atlantic oceans.

Shirakawa, are the numbers on the left of the graph upside down?

[edit on 28-1-2010 by Robin Marks]

What's that weird signature on YMV between 2:23 and 2:29 UTC?

Looks like the squiggle I remember seeing often on the Old Faithful webicorder just before a geyser eruption, does anyone know if there's a geyser in that area?

I rewound it in GEE but I don't seem to have data that far back.

There aren't any other webicorders (at least not in the WY network) close enough to pick it up.

I don't want to hijack anything here, but I was wondering if anyone had any theories as to why interest in this year's swarm (from both the media and netizens) seems to be lower than last year's. For example, this year, I have yet to see a YouTube video telling folks in my town in northwest Wyoming to evacuate their homes.

The Park Service's position is that 1) it and other agencies have done a better job telling the public that earthquakes are common in Yellowstone and 2)last year's swarm came during a slow period in the news cycle.

I'm a reporter for my town's bi-weekly newspaper (The Powell Tribune) and am writing a story about the quakes. I know there's been a ton of discussion here, and I'd love to hear alternate thoughts about the apparent generally-decreased interest.

reply to post by PowellGuy

"Old Hat Syndrome" and/or "The Bloggers Who Cried Wolf." Everyone's over it or doesn't believe it'll end badly. "Nothing happened last time; nothing will this time." How many times did people repeat that before the Challenger exploded? And how closely-scrutinized was the next launch after it? Yet now, shuttle launches are barely mentioned. "Dolphins Still Missing" in brief, if you've read Hitchhiker's Guide books. That's my take.

reply to post by PowellGuy


I have been wondering that exact same thing. I could see where the general public, who may not realize the possible implications, may not get as excited about this swarm due to the "old hat syndrome" and our societies amazing abilities to block out anything significant and procede as usuall with the blinders on.

What I don't get, is the silence this time around by main-stream media and the scientific community. I'm not sayiong that people should be running around crying for the end of the world. But come on! We are witnessing a possibly historic event whithin what is thought to be the worlds largest caldera. Just in the past year there have been how many documentaries about what COULD happen if it were to errupt (even just a little bit)? I would think the media and scientists would be swarming all over this and that the world would be watching to see what mother nature might do next.

Odds are, it won't be much of anything, but considering the fact that this caldera has been monitored for what, about a hundred years and it's several million years old, no one can really make an accurate prediction as to what is going to happen because we just don't know! No matter what though, I see this as something so significant on a geological and scientific scale that I don't understand the silence. How can this NOT be covered by the main-stream media? It doesn't make sense. They don't need to cause a panic, because there is no reason to, but it deserves a lot more attention than it is getting.

Originally posted by Robin Marks
Shirakawa, are the numbers on the left of the graph upside down?

Now that you tell me, yes, only the last one is supposed to have reverse y axis values. Thanks!

Originally posted by quakewatcher
What's that weird signature on YMV between 2:23 and 2:29 UTC?

I'm not sure, but it's certainly not natural and it's quite local.
It looks like some kind of air compressor/heating system kicking on like it has already occurred on LKWY station last year (or even this one) during the Lake swarm or in general in winter.

It's got a slow rise, then floor to 10 Hz, and a very fast fall.
So I don't think it's just some kind of electronic noise in the monitoring station.

[edit on 2010-1-29 by Shirakawa]

By the way, I guess this partially answers the question "is YVO really working 24/7 at the moment?". From the 2010 swarm page on YVO website:

As of January 28, 2010 6:30 AM MST there have been 1,497 located earthquakes in the recent Yellowstone National Park swarm. The swarm began January 17, 2[...]

I can confirm that the page has really been updated at around that time.

I think the public has the Haiti EQ devastation on their plate....the media has been all over it for good reason and continues to do so. The EQs in Yellowstone are tiny in comparison. I would wager that the media will be all over it if there is a 4 or more.

I'm sure that this has already been covered, but it is interesting to me that the location of this swarm is at the extreme NW corner of the caldera. The hotspot has been trekking in an easterly direction for millions of years, I would expect lots of activity at the spearhead, not so much the caboose.

Maybe the swarm is the earth settling like an aging house.

reply to post by PowellGuy


Why is there a lack of media and public interest?

I'll start by saying I agree with west coast's point. It's like a hurricane warning that doesn't pan out. Everyone ignores the next warning and become apathetic.

But there's much more to this story. Firstly, the alternative media was way out in front the mainstream media. The swarm started during the holidays, so as you know, media outlets were operating with a skeleton staff. The story was being generated on this tread, other blogs, radio, and on You Tube. The YVO was also on holidays so their contact and communication with other collegues, and the media, was disjointed. By the time they were coming back from holidays, the YVO and the media were playing catch-up.

Another big factor was the Chris Sanders affair. Having lost the center of attention, the YVO realized that the warning on You Tube was alarming the public and they needed to gain control of the message in the media. They over-reacted to Chris Sanders and threatened legal action. This only backfired and stirred up even more controversy and attention. As a reporter I'm sure you can find out whether he was charged or not. I looked briefly and couldn't find any stories about official charges or a trial. The YVO even made a video and posted it on You Tube to counter the claims from members of the public.

Another reason for the heightened interest during the 08/09 swarm was it's location. Under the lake. There is a bulge in the north of the lake and this caused real concern. That's why I was I started following the events and the media reaction.

The major factor which has led to a decreased interest is that this time around the YVO was fully prepared. I'm sure they had many meetings and developed policies to maintain control over media message and preserve their authority. They were ready when the media came back to work Monday morning. As soon as the media raised an eyebrow, they reassured everyone that swarms are "relatively" common and normal. The fact that there was another swarm only a year ago, made it seem normal and routine. Given that Yellowstone didn't erupt last year during the swarm, it would assuredly not erupt this time round.

With message in hand, the YVO repeated stressed all is normal. And without a contraversy or conflict, the media gets bored and moves on. "The medium is the message." With the media sedated, the public shrugs it's shoulder's and goes back to focusing on their daily lives. Mission accomplished.

I thought about alerting the press about my accurate prediction. But unless I got letters behind my name, they won't listen. I told the YVO about it and they politely listened.

I was surprised last year by the chaos created by Chris Sanders. But I then realized that the traditional media is in flux and they don't know how to deal with the instantaneous influence of the web. Let's face it, the media is changing rapidly trying to keep up. The Chris Sander's affair shows us how even the media, and the authorities can lose control over the message the public receives.

I've written about this topic a couple of times on this thread. Here's the page containing my other thoughts on the subject.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Correct me if I am wrong, but the hotspot doesn't move at all. The North american continental plate moves in a southwesterly direction. So it slides over the top of the hotspot.

I'm still wondering why they say is tectonic and are not related to magma moving. If it is tectonic, then I would presume they are talking about fault lines? Problem for me is that when I put a map over known fault lines over the "swarm" map then, at least as far as I can see, the swarm is outside any known fault line. Might be wrong, but if so, please let me know.






Sorry if the picture just show up as link.
I'm not really familiar with this site yet.

reply to post by Spypants


you are absolutely correct...my mistake. So would this indicate little movement in the NA plate for the last 640K years?

Could an explosion be a trigger for additional drift?

Wouldn't that be NUTS, the supervolcano would just be the beginning and the plate rapidly starts moving westward and suddenly the drive from LA to Vegas is about 30 minutes, over impossibly high mountains!


Now I'm just getting silly. But it does stand to reason that if the NA Plate, in relation to the hot spot, has not moved much in the last 640K years, the rate of drift is by no means constant, and something sets it drifting.