New Activity at Mt. Rainier Confirmed to Be Seismic (...or ICE?), Right here on ATS!

I love the analogy too and nicely explains why the hydrothermal route is still sticking in my head.

I just keep picturing all these other 'vents' opening up and releasing either steam or hot water, thereby creating all the increasing multiplets. At what point though, would this be evidenced on the surface or in other measurable ways? If there was enough melt to induce these quakes, would there not be a lahar eventually or at least increased run-off? Or would the sub-freezing weather and tons of new snow stifle some of the affect? A further pluggin of the plug, in a way, delaying the results?

Yes, yes, that is just pure speculation but I don't think it's too crazy.

TA....get on it. Very cool you got a new tool. Good luck with it, I know I would be beyond my abilities. GEE is challenging enough!!

reply to post by westcoast


Just getting this tool set installed was a challenge. Requires some pretty good computer knowledge. Configuring it however, is a whole other ballgame. And assuming you can get beyond those two things (very hard), understanding it is the final frontier. Kinda like handing your Ferrari keys to a 2 year-old.

From what I am seeing so far, some of these events are seismic, according to spectral. But those are few and far between. The vast majority don't have much frequency content above 10 Hz. Glacier moves slightly, mountain vibrates and sends the waves to the seismos. Or as has been postulated, the glacier may have a huge rock embedded in it that scrapes the side of the mountain every time it fidgets.

I mean really, they have offered up good explanations. The big question in my mind is to what extent the glacier itself may be attenuating these waves. See explanation above of the other problems with the glacier fracturing. According to PNSN, there are no GPS or Seismic stations on the ice itself.

But I am already seeing some other issues potentially with the monitoring strategy. The Short Period stations can only give us back response to 18 Hz. And the Broadband stations are too far away to pick up most of these events. So we have a frequency response coverage gap. And therefore I question how accurately it can be determined they are ice quakes, because discernment of the higher frequencies at a distance is problematic. The ice, and fissures/crevices could still be attenuating the events to such a degree that they appear to contain very little high frequencies at all. If it weren't for this possibility, I would have given up a long time ago with this.

And so I have been trying to find more info on the propagation of seismic waves in ice. And what I am particularly interested in, is a breakdown of frequency ranges and distance propagation of that frequency range in ice. I am trying to determine if the frequency range of 10-25 Hz is much more highly attenuated because of the ice. Can't find answers. Help, people.

ETA: And now looks like STAR has bit the dust (or the ice ) again, just now.

I really wish I could be of help. I have been following along in the shadows trying to keep up the best I can.

@TA this is the best I could do. Google Search The very first result is a 321 page report that you might find of interest. You have probably already seen it, but if not happy reading. IT IS WAY OVER MY HEAD!

@everyone else - Keep up the great work. I love to learn here at the free school of ATS.

reply to post by westcoast


If you do a search on Rainier here on ats you will find a lot.

one of the images of what it eventually builds up to
Hopefully that still works Turned out I still had a few of these on my photobucket acct.

As for the big quakes, not here but other places. Rainier starts doing this same thing and it builds and builds to the point it was even picked up on the news. It builds and builds like its going to do something then bam we have a HUGE earthquake somewhere in the world and the activity goes back down only to build back up again though not as much before the big aftershocks that followed. Every single major earthquake in the past 10 years (that I personally know of) has been preceded with Rainier singing and a solar flair. You can search it all right here on ATS.

Originally posted by mrsdudara
reply to post by westcoast

 

If you do a search on Rainier here on ats you will find a lot.

one of the images of what it eventually builds up to
Hopefully that still works

Turned out I still had a few of these on my photobucket acct.

As for the big quakes, not here but other places. Rainier starts doing this same thing and it builds and builds to the point it was even picked up on the news. It builds and builds like its going to do something then bam we have a HUGE earthquake somewhere in the world and the activity goes back down only to build back up again though not as much before the big aftershocks that followed. Every single major earthquake in the past 10 years (that I personally know of) has been preceded with Rainier singing and a solar flair. You can search it all right here on ATS.

Oh no you didnt. . . WestCoast is one of the most respected earthquake researchers and members of ATS. Trust me, she knows "how to do a search here on ats". And I guarantee, the majority of earthquake posts would be hers.

reply to post by amongus


Thanks Amongus.. (need an icon for blushing) There's actually several that know more than I do, but I am learning from them!!

As to this post...I actually find it kinda interesting. It's funny, because my first thought was "Oh man, are they gonna tell me that was from my own post!!??" hehehehe.....yes, i have posted a lot of webi shots from the cascades. I am curious as to what station this was and when. I have seen helens like that before, one of the stations is very low gain and in a windy spot. As TA mentioned (I think) a day or two ago, there near 100mph winds up at Rainier with this last storm so they are also suseptible to that influence.

I myself have NOT noticed a pattern with Rainier and other, larger quakes. Typically, when you see a seismo like the above posted it either means there is a major storm brewing or a full-fledge eruption, hence the need for some info regarding it's source. I don't really have time right now to dive into that theory but would certainly look through, say, someone elses post/thread about it.

@TA....more questions lead to more questions, eh? I just saw that there was nice burble of some sort up there a few hours back, seen best on RCS. What interests me most, is that it seems to then set off another repeating quake series, following the bigger pattern but in smaller form. blah...hard to explain. I will take a screen shot and show you. BRB.

ETA: Okay, here it is (thumbnail, click to enlarge). See what I mean?


" target='_blank' class='tabOff'/>

reply to post by amongus


Oh loose the attitude. I wasnt disrespecting her. She asked a question I gave an answer. Sorry if you didnt like it. Most of the data I was refering to and that pic I posted was during the 4 1/2 years we were studing this stuff before she joined. It got our notice during the time St. Helens was acting up in '04. For years we did what you all are doing now. Contacted this person and that, kept logs, kept tract of events on SOHO, the works. Watched Rainier go from looking like it had developed a heart beat to looking like it was going to blow enough times to notice a pattern. And yes I talked to real live scientists who also took note of the pattern too. Most of us dont participate on here anymore. I just happened to see Rainier show back up and thought I would offer some of what we learned back then.

Originally posted by westcoast
reply to post by amongus

 

I myself have NOT noticed a pattern with Rainier and other, larger quakes. Typically, when you see a seismo like the above posted it either means there is a major storm brewing or a full-fledge eruption, hence the need for some info regarding it's source. I don't really have time right now to dive into that theory but would certainly look through, say, someone elses post/thread about it.

Prior to the December 26, 2004 earthquake and tsunami Rainier held that intensity on most of its recorders for a solid month. after the quake it went down only to go back for a couple weeks until the 8. aftershock. It continued to follow that pattern through the rest of the aftershocks. One of the threads on this was something about Cascades and Rainier. It will take some sifting though the thread is long. If you are up for it. I am sorry I do not have the time to help more. That was a long time ago and I now have a full time job and 3 kids to juggle. Leaves little time for satisfing my curiosity. With any luck this is not following habit and there will be no big plate shifting any time soon. Have fun

reply to post by westcoast


Well, I am happy to be able to report to you that your circled blob there at RCS contains predominate center frequency amplitude at 11 Hz and 22.5 Hz. It's characteristics are not seismic.

I may only be a 2-year old at this, but 2-year olds can still figure out where to put the keys in the Ferrari.

reply to post by TrueAmerican

It's characteristics are not seismic

That much is obvious just by looking at it

So what is it? Well I don't know since that is the darndest signature I have ever seen on a seismo. It is not seismic, or ice and my best guess is solar. It certainly has the look of flare interference with the transmission. It also could be harmonic tremor See the link to the sound below.



Compare to the ice bumping before that i put up.



RSCHarmonic.WAV

Originally posted by PuterMan
reply to post by TrueAmerican

 

It's characteristics are not seismic

That much is obvious just by looking at it

Well yes, that's true, to people accustomed to viewing these things. I knew chances are it was not seismic the second I saw it too. But the very nature of this thread, and the problems associated with monitoring events occurring under an icecap, is requiring that we go beyond mere wave signatures, and get into frequency analysis for further understanding. I am not at liberty to share what I have acquired yet. There are issues with that, that could potentially betray a favor to me, and open up a whole new can of worms that we really just don't need, (and they don't need either) frankly. The deal was that I am at the mercy of the tool set, and I would not bother them with all kinds of questions, issues, and what have you.

GEE is gonna work just fine for most. Considering what I have learned so far with this, I am not prepared to spend a single minute trying to help other people get involved with this even if I could share. It's just too darn complicated, and I barely understand it yet myself. I may make an exception in your case, but we gotta talk first. And it may be useless to you anyway. Your system may not be strong enough. Darnit, PM, when are you gonna get setup with a rig and skype???!!! We could do so much more together.

But suffice it to say that after spending nearly every waking moment with this, and a lot of effort in building and configuring it since the second I got it, I am able literally with one click now to monitor the entire world. And that's just for starters.

ETA: And besides, clearly your program is achieving what you need it to do anyway, so you really don't even need this.

Just now seeing your added info. This edit thing continues to get me. Around ATS you gotta read once for an initial post, and then check back for edits.

At center of 11 Hz predominant, come on now, you know that is not HT. And especially not at Rainier. That plot is not consistent with HT, not in frequency content or character.

reply to post by TrueAmerican


Did you note the higher harmonics? This has all the hallmarks of an harmonic wave. It still may be solar induced but I have never seen one like this other than on the Mt St Helens spectrums.

This needs to be asked of the PNSN westcoast. They need to look at this. I know it does not look like El Hiero but actually that was volcanic tremor not harmonic tremor.

reply to post by TrueAmerican


Be careful about confining the frequency to under 5Hz. It is not always. MSH had many higher frequencies in it.

ETA:

Sustained harmonic tremor signals were recorded by the seismographs of the German Neumayer Base seismological network in western Dronning Maud Land, Antarctica. These tremor episodes, lasting up to 16 hours, were recorded up to 820 kilometers from the source. Their spectra show narrow peaks with fundamental frequencies ranging from 0.5 to 6 hertz, more than 30 integer harmonic overtones, and frequency gliding, resembling volcanic tremor. Frequency‐wave number analysis suggested a moving source, which was recognized as iceberg B-09A traveling along the coast of eastern Antarctica. The most probable tremor sources are fluid-flow‐induced vibrations inside the iceberg's tunnel/crevasse systems.

www.sciencemag.org...

Originally posted by PuterMan
reply to post by TrueAmerican

 

Be careful about confining the frequency to under 5Hz. It is not always. MSH had many higher frequencies in it.

Yes, but along with those higher frequencies, low frequencies were also present. That ain't HT, PM, no way.

reply to post by TrueAmerican


Then tell me what it is? Did you listen to it? That is only 10x speed by the way.

Originally posted by PuterMan
reply to post by TrueAmerican

 

Then tell me what it is? Did you listen to it? That is only 10x speed by the way.

Yes I did listen to it. And btw, that's a better speed than 100x.

Hell if I know. But since when have you heard the whale hallmark with a center frequency of 11 Hz? At even 6 or 7 Hz I might consider it, but not at 11 Hz.

I'm not picking sides in this battle, but I've been reading for the past 24 hours off and on (post to follow, once I get my notes straight), and found this during my research.
Source
(a warning when clicking on the source link--you'll need to scroll more than half way down the page to turn off the "volcano sounds" that play automatically when the page loads)

Doesn't this look similar to the "harmonic" spectrogram in question? My example is from an underwater eruption, though, so it may not be applicable. Just trying to be helpful.

ETA: Yeah, I see now, the one from Rainier doesn't have the low base frequency. Where as, my underwater example has a 3Hz base and multiple harmonic overtones up to 60 Hz.

Back to the kiddie poo...

Eer, "pool"

reply to post by TrueAmerican


Well I don't know either, but maybe it is solar. We have had some very strong incoming.

Erebus harmonic tremor by the way
erebus.nmt.edu...

This event shows a monochromatic initation at 9 Hz with a slight downward gliding, followed by a very stable harmonic part with a fundamental frequency near 2.0 Hz

Originally posted by PuterMan

This event shows a monochromatic initation at 9 Hz with a slight downward gliding, followed by a very stable harmonic part with a fundamental frequency near 2.0 Hz

edit on 24/1/2012 by PuterMan because: (no reason given)

And I rest my case. 2 Hz.