Isn't there something wrong? How does a 8.9 quake turn in to a 9.0?

How does an 8.9 quake turn in to a 9.0 quake?

Did you know a 9.0 quake would mean it should of been 10x stronger than a 8.9?

This is totally off. Just because an 8.9 is next to a 9.0 does not mean the 9.0 is going to be as weak as a 8.9 ...

Does this strike anybody? hello?

reply to post by PaR3v


From what I gather, it is posted from a preliminary review of the data received, and given an initial estimate on strength and then later it is analyzed in depth for a more accurate assessment of strength taking into acount more variables, such as depth, energy dispersal, are, P/S Waves etc etc etc. I don;t know the technical detail, but that is my basic understanding.

Take the chile quake for example. That was much larger than the Haiti quake, but caused less destruction. it's all about how the Haarp beam, I mean energy is dispersed.

it is quite normal to see USGS upgrade or downgrade magnitudes.

Check me on this... but i believe the way the system is set up, a 9.0 is 10x greater than an 8.0.

It was originally reported as a 9.0, the reduced to 8.9, not the other way around. Either way, it takes geologist a fair amount of time to collect all necessary data which feeds into the official magnitude. Initial reports of magnitude reading for significant quakes are subject to change.

I believe this is a description of the current scale used: link

But it's known that a previous magnitude number would mean the next one would be 10x stronger... right?

But it's known that a previous magnitude number would mean the next one would be 10x stronger... right?

An earthquake turns into anything the USGS says it turns into....they can turn a 1.0 fart into a 6.8 quake with tsunami.....I would never trust anything that has any ties to any government...

Of the quakes I know about tyhis has happened every time. The preliminary reading is like 6.7 and a feew days later it is revised to a 6.8. I think what you are seeing is a preliminary report based on one set of data. After the fact the data is measured from many different places and revised, usually upwards. It's not a conspiracy. It's not a deception. It is simply refining your data to be more precise.

reply to post by PaR3v


No it doesn't because the first preliminary reports are not all the information..the 8.9 was what came out as a number they knew it'd be around 8.9 unti lthey got all information from all seismic readers..which they then could do a total on.hence it being upgraded to a 9.0..kinda the basics actually.

Just like with Tornados a quake is scaled including the amount of damage it causes. Like an F5 won't be one if it only messes up a corn field

reply to post by Nebulous1973


I remember when the Japan Quake first happened, it was first reported at a 7.9, then upgraded to a 8.4 or something, then 8.8. then 8.9 then 9.0. So i'm sure it's just refining your research. So many siesmographs to collect data from and so much data having to go into it to make the correct assetment.

A 9.0 is 100x stronger than a 8.0.

And yes a 9.0 is 10x stronger than an 8.9.


And the Japan quake started as a 7.9, then it was 2 7.9's then it was an 8.9, then a couple days later it was again upgraded to 9.0.

I don't think there is a conspracy here. While a 9.0 is 10x more than an 8.9, you would not be able to tell the difference it you were standing the same distance from either.

The others have covered the "preliminary report" bit, which explains why the 8.9 was upgraded to a 9.0 (following several other upgrades, as mentioned).

But, no one seems to understand the scale that's used to measure earthquakes - the Richter scale. It's a(n indirect) measure of the amount of energy released. And it's a logarithmic scale. That means that each integer jump, from 1.0 to 2.0, from 2.0 to 3.0, and so on, represents 10 times the energy. Here's why:

10^1 = 10
10^2 = 100
10^3 = 1000
10^4 = 10000

The exponents correspond to the magnitude. A magnitude 2 is 10 times as strong as a magnitude 1 because 100/10 = 10. Likewise, a magnitude 3 is 10 times stronger than a magnitude 2, because 1000/100 = 10... and 10000/1000 = 10, as well. Each jump by 1 represents 10 times the energy.

Each jump by 0.1 represents 1.26 times the energy (10^0.1). Or 2 times the energy, depending on how you measure your energy.

That's how the Richter scale works.

After that they did the energy estimation. That is really just an estimation anyway, and it comes to 9.0-9.1 for moment magnitude. Besides, it is just their estimation of what they think it was based on the energy released as they calculate it.

The official numbers they give change a lot and the worst is for older quakes. You will look up some quake from 300 years ago and they just say "magnitude 8.5" or whatever, when that is just an estimate and scales and measuring didn't even happen then.

They have as much as 1.9 divergence for big quakes like Venezuela 1812 from 7.7 - 9.6. 9.6 is the most plausible number but they don't want to list it because it sounds bad and scary, etc. Same with New Madrid 1811-12 anywhere from 7.2-8.9 they will list, when it is more like 9.6.

And they often change the numbers and fudge them. The 2004 Indonesia quake is 9.1-9.3 and the 1960 Chile quake is 9.5-9.6. Depending on who does a calculation they come up with different numbers. For the old historical quakes that happened before measurements, most of the USGS listings are nonsense to be honest.

Originally posted by CLPrime
The others have covered the "preliminary report" bit, which explains why the 8.9 was upgraded to a 9.0 (following several other upgrades, as mentioned).

But, no one seems to understand the scale that's used to measure earthquakes - the Richter scale. It's a(n indirect) measure of the amount of energy released. And it's a logarithmic scale. That means that each integer jump, from 1.0 to 2.0, from 2.0 to 3.0, and so on, represents 10 times the energy. Here's why:

10^1 = 10
10^2 = 100
10^3 = 1000
10^4 = 10000

The exponents correspond to the magnitude. A magnitude 2 is 10 times as strong as a magnitude 1 because 100/10 = 10. Likewise, a magnitude 3 is 10 times stronger than a magnitude 2, because 1000/100 = 10... and 10000/1000 = 10, as well. Each jump by 1 represents 10 times the energy.

Each jump by 0.1 represents 1.26 times the energy (10^0.1). Or 2 times the energy, depending on how you measure your energy.

That's how the Richter scale works.

edit on 28-3-2011 by CLPrime because: (no reason given)

It should actually be more like 3.375 under moment magnitude for each.

reply to post by Red Cloak


...which is different than the Richter scale. And, I should note, the Moment Magnitude scale is used for medium-to-high magnitudes, which the Japanese quake certainly qualifies for.

Cheers to the OP for trying to resolve their cognitive dissonance. This earthquake was never reported below an 8.7 in Japan, and was officially revised to a 9.0 on the 13th in Japan, see here english.kyodonews.jp... and here english.kyodonews.jp... . It was only reported as a 7.9 by USGS. So we have some important questions. How long was the 7.9 meme allowed to propagate in the news cycle? Till after the evening news, when everyone\'s initial shock had settled in and the dominant storyline/meme established? Is USGS really that pathetic that they underestimate something by a factor of 100? Aren\'t all the earthquake monitors tied in to a central computer bank so everyone is seeing the same information? It has been alleged that the 8.9 meme was established as a more psychologically palatable number, since the true number of 9.0-9.1 would definitely cause people to ask questions. So now, two weeks later, after everyone is preoccupied with boner inducing tomahawk explosions, the actual true number of the quake is revised. The OP is right to ask questions, as we all should.

Some videos asking the same questions as the OP:
www.youtube.com...
www.youtube.com...
Peace.

reply to post by iamconcerned


Yes it was. It was initially reported at like a 8.4 or 8.5 when I first saw it where they were reporting it.

Could you find me a link for the 8.4 or 8.5 webpirate? Not knocking ya but I searched the web ether for a bit to try to find what Japan announced the strength at, I found nothing except the link to the revision on the 13th to 9.0, which is still something. If you could pinpoint a Japanese source from that day, on the 11th, with a link, that would be great. I still think 7.9 and 8.5 are a bit apart as well, but I will suspend judgment if you can find us a link. Thx.