Whats going on at yellowstone?

reply to post by pantangele


hum - If it were in just one location, I would have to agree with you. It is on almost all stations within and around the park though. And - Yes, what a ride

I checked the Utah area too and can see it there also

see UTC 12:34 or local 05:34

www.quake.utah.edu...

and here at both 12:34 UTC & 17:30

www.quake.utah.edu...

you got me really curious Anmarie!

Casing

Those wave like lines are teleseisms.

I emailed Jake Lowenstern about them and this was his reply:

"Earlier one is a teleseism from the M6.6 in Chile.

6.6 2010/03/05 11:47:10 OFFSHORE BIO-BIO, CHILE

You'll notice that the mainshock was recorded at 12:00 on YMR, about 13 minutes after the event. The surface waves are visible 34 minutes later as the wavy lines.

I'd guess that the next set of lines around 1740 are due to the 6.5 in Indonesia. YFT also shows them well. In fact, you can see the waves come through after a 2nd trip around the world.

Jake Lowenstern, USGS"

reply to post by jvz123


I'm skeptical of His reply. There have been many quakes in Chile and none of them have sent a signal as we are getting today or yesterday for that matter.

lol below -

[edit on 5-3-2010 by Anmarie96]

YMV is looking a little active today-

www.isthisthingon.org...

Hopefully the singing of the lake is from the ice finally "thawing".

reply to post by Anmarie96


Actually, we had a pretty strong signal from the 6.3 yesterday.

And if you look up what those waves actually are, they are teleseisms.

Also, the fact that you can check what he said and it's true.

[edit on 5-3-2010 by jvz123]

reply to post by jvz123


I am sorry, I don't mean to be argumentative so forgive me if it comes off that way - but here you go.

Here is a link quake.utah.edu... . Take a look - all week is on the top of the page by date - please take a look and see if you can find any of the unununun looking lines that we see today at 5:30 & 10:30 +/- in any other day to go along with all the other quakes in Chile. If you can find Waldo, please let me know and I will apologize profusely for wasting anyone's time. :-)

reply to post by Anmarie96


I never said I saw those lines any other day, but on the 8.8 they're there and they lasted a pretty damn long time.

Neither you or I can actually explain what's happening, but I'm going to go ahead and agree with the head of USGS for Yellowstone on this one, as he points out specific times that you can LOOK AT and see what he's talking about.

Your paranoia is clearly clouding your judgment.

Also to add in what Casing pointed out, they show up on seismos in Utah, which gives more weight to what Jake Lowenstern said. These aren't Yellowstone specific signatures.

As well, depth and magnitude plays a large role in how the signals can look. A 6.0 and 6.6, for example, are a pretty large difference in terms of magnitude.
[edit on 5-3-2010 by jvz123]

[edit on 5-3-2010 by jvz123]

reply to post by jvz123


No, you are definitely wrong with the paranoid statement - Paranoid would definitely not be a word that describes me.

The Utah issue - Wasatch Fault - That's interesting. I'll have to explore that.

Okay in response to some of the above and all of below - I've done some reseach and have come to the conclusion that you a happy little camper.

[edit on 5-3-2010 by Anmarie96]

And for the books, Thank you for tring to find out what we were looking at.

[edit on 5-3-2010 by Anmarie96]

reply to post by Anmarie96


Yes, I'm sure paranoia would be wrong.

I have taken a look at some of these signals. Not sure if they are the ones we are talking about, but you can see Chile signatures in some definitely. Having said that I shall be loading another sound tomorrow once I have checked if it is one of these or not.

Take a look at these

It would seem that the microvolt settings play a great part in whether these are recognisable. (See comment about Utah too)

PS I am not taking sides!!

When it comes to Yellowstone then I firmly believe that there are two -2- distinct areas we should be concerned about. Noris and Yellowstone lake. More specifically Mary Bay area. And let us not forget Teton. What's going on there surprises everyone.

[edit on 6/3/2010 by Roald]

reply to post by Roald

Well something is happening now very close to your concern. Look
at YUF
www.quake.utah.edu...
and B206
www.iris.washington.edu...

B206 appears to be sitting practically on top of the quakes, thus
the very short duration and high amplitude.

What do you think?

reply to post by EngTech36

I have a bit problem understanding those data because B206 are located close to Electric Peak in a borehole at 110.5 W - 44.7 N. But the location of YUF I understand is Upper Falls?

I saw it has been a M 1.5, close to Riddle Lake on Tuesday, March 2, 2010 23:07:24 UTC at a depth of 2.00 km (1.24 mi)

Edited due to wrong name of mountain.


[edit on 6/3/2010 by Roald]

reply to post by EngTech36


I have replied to this in Quake Watch 2010.

Perhaps we could keep the Yellowstone ones in Yellowstone and the rest in QW2010?

reply to post by EngTech36


And replying to Anmarie96 as well.

Sound 1 2000Hx file (20x speed) Strange how the cut off is quite clean, yet this does not seem to be mechanical. (1.7Mb)

Sound 2 2000Hx file (20x speed) Again clean cut off. (5.9Mb)

Sound 3 2000Hx file (20x speed) Clean stop again, but then as SWMBO says if a rock rolls down a hill it goes bump, bump bump and then nothing. Quake at the end. (5Mb)

I am certainly not convinced these are mechanical BUT why only at certain times and why the sudden stop?




[edit on 6/3/2010 by PuterMan]

reply to post by PuterMan


I have finally located to a place I could pull up your downloads since I left work last night - as to the the quakes around the world affecting the yellowstone seismo's - Of Course - those deplicted with arrows and locations were not the's one's I was speaking of above as you know - as you have recorded the proper one's that I was speaking of. Thank you very much for that!!!!

Now as far as the audio's - they are just increadible and humbling. - You might want to patten that.

When a rock falls into a pool of magma or water - what sound would it make :-) - I would imagine it would rumble down the fracture and then, that would be it, no more sound. - I will have to think on this one

[edit on 6-3-2010 by Anmarie96]

Puterman, question for you or anyone one else that can answer this. From your sound conversions. With regard to the no sound at the beginning/initial jolt of the quake and then sound coming after a few moments - is this with all quakes or just the ones you have posted?

[edit on 6-3-2010 by Anmarie96]

Oh - And - How the heck do you do all these things -

[edit on 6-3-2010 by Anmarie96]

reply to post by PuterMan

Thank you very much for the sounds. It will be interesting to
make comparisons of such files. The amplitude numbers I
mentioned are related to the ground motion. Even though
the numbers are so large I don't think it was a very big earthquake.
I think they were large at B206 because the quake was very close
to that instrument. This I judged because the S - P time was very
short, about 1/6 of a second. (Keeping in mind that I am not
an expert and am just learning.)

Thanks again for putting up those sound files.

Hmm it looks like everything is calming down now. The sun has no sunspots on it! Very low solar activity, no full moon, look like we're going to get a few weeks of quietness (hopefully). It's about time too. Was starting to get worried there for a while!

Could the sound from B206 be falling rock or something like that? Just asking since B206 seems to be located in a borehole, on a very fractured Electric Peak.

BDW. there is a web cam on that mountain. Electric Peak Yellowstone Web Cam

[edit on 7/3/2010 by Roald]