Since I found qbasic I was able to find the error in my TB version. There's still something minor amiss as the answers are a few minutes apart but not enough to matter.
I checked all the mag 6+ quakes in 2104, looking for any cases where a quake happened 2 hours before moonset (+/- 10 minutes).
There were 167 quakes and no hits.
I can run this for any location, size range or time range if you think it would help, just let me know.
(12-12-2015, 04:49 AM)Roger Hunter Wrote: Hi Duffy;
Since I found qbasic I was able to find the error in my TB version. There's still something minor amiss as the answers are a few minutes apart but not enough to matter.
I checked all the mag 6+ quakes in 2104, looking for any cases where a quake happened 2 hours before moonset (+/- 10 minutes).
There were 167 quakes and no hits.
I can run this for any location, size range or time range if you think it would help, just let me know.
Roger
Today I found all quakes in Oklahoma and part of Texas that were mag 2 to 5, from 2014 to 2015.
Running those thru my program I found 42 hits out of 4711 quakes
Appreciate you taking the time to test my theory, 42 hits out of 4711 does sound quite menial. I personally thought it was quite good odds, considering I tried the predictions on a small part of the formula I am working on. I'm not computer literate, so I can only work out the basics, and was hoping someone more knowledgeable would be able to fill in the gaps. I understand if you want to put this to rest, coming up to a busy time with Xmas and all, so I thought I'd list what I presently have and maybe, in the New Year, you could give them the once over with your computer program!.
What follows is based on observations of anomalies recorded on my monitors, there is a high probability of misinterpretation of the data, and misdirected theorising.
As the Moon orbits the Earth, it is pre-seeded and followed by contact periods which I have described as first and last contact points, relative to weak structural anomalies on the Earth's surface. The contact periods relate to 2 hours and 3 hours ahead of the Moon, 2 hours and 3 hours behind the Moon. If I take Oklahoma as an example, that would relate to 2 and 3 hours before / after said anomalies, ( the times are exact to the hour stated ). The discrepancy in minutes, relates to the time it takes for the lunar disc to rise or set, changes to the length of day at a given location, dependant on latitude relative to the Moon, and position of the Sun relative to both location and Moon (weather it's pre-seeding or following).
The reference to Luna disk rise and set time, relates to how long it takes from the top of the Luna disk to breaching the plane of the horizon at Moonrise, untill the bottom of the disc sits on the horizon, and similarly at Moon-set.
A few minutes or seconds doesn't seem very relevant, but when you factor in the minutes of change to the length of day, dependant on the time of year, the time it takes for the solar disc to breach the plane at Sunrise or Sunset (which is also dependent on distance of time between the Sun and Moon from the perspective of Earth's surface), and weather the Sun breaches the plane before or after the Moon. The tricky part is working out were you have to add or subtract the different elements.
This also seems to be the case with the Sun, except the contact periods appear to be 3 and 4 hours before and aft of said anomalies. The only explanation I came up with for this, was to take the observed dimensions of the Sun and Moon (30 arc minutes respectively) add together, convert to minutes of time (1 hour) and apply this to the Solar terminator at a given latitude. This obviously alters due to the orbital distances of Sun, Moon and Earth, which means it's easier to calculate at solstice times because the orbits are in transition, so the times don't change as significantly as other times of the year.
There are three other points that complicate matters further, firstly ... the data on my monitors seems to imply contact periods from the Sun and Moon are having the same effect when their on the opposite of the Earth, except in reverse, or a mirror image if you will, so with reference to Oklahoma, the Sun and Moon are now transiting from the West!!
Secondly ... there are only short windows of opportunity to determine Solar or Luna contacts (mostly around first and last quarter Moon) because pre and post full Moon positions will also interact with the Sun on the opposite side of the Earth."
Lastly ... during pre and post new Moon periods, Solar and Luna contacts interact and it becomes difficult to determine ,were, when or which element to add or subtract ... I was working on this when I decided to try predicting on first Luna contact over Oklahoma. I came across a plausible scenario which seems to fit one possible outcome, weather it repeats is subject to time .... on 4th Dec a small quake occurred in Oklahoma at 17:31-32 UT, 2 hours before Moon-set at 19:33, another one occurred at 22:17, 1 hour before sunset at 23:17, If there's anything in what I've said, then it would seem to suggest that the 23:17 event was linked to the Sun. But if you link it to the Moon, it would be 2 hours after Moon set, plus 44 minutes .. if you add the diurnal motion of the moon, 49 minutes and subtract the Luna breach time (as the moon is now well below the horizon) it pretty much comes out at the 23:17 event time. The diurnal motion time gap could be the point were Solar and Luna influences meet,,, after that, the calculations become indeterminate because of overlapping contacts.
I don't know if you think any of this is meaningful, or this theory has been covered in the past (several times I expect), but there are aspects here that seem to correlate with data I'm currently receiving, perhaps you could run selected parts of this on your computer sometime after New Year, and see if it raises the odds!!. I should add that this isn't just related to rise and set times, only seems that way with Oklahoma at present because of shorter daylight hours, might be a different outcome during summer (mostly for the benefit of others).
Appreciate you taking the time to test my theory, 42 hits out of 4711 does sound quite menial. I personally thought it was quite good odds, considering I tried the predictions on a small part of the formula I am working on. I'm not computer literate, so I can only work out the basics, and was hoping someone more knowledgeable would be able to fill in the gaps. I understand if you want to put this to rest, coming up to a busy time with Xmas and all, so I thought I'd list what I presently have and maybe, in the New Year, you could give them the once over with your computer program!.
What follows is based on observations of anomalies recorded on my monitors, there is a high probability of misinterpretation of the data, and misdirected theorising.
As the Moon orbits the Earth, it is pre-seeded and followed by contact periods which I have described as first and last contact points, relative to weak structural anomalies on the Earth's surface. The contact periods relate to 2 hours and 3 hours ahead of the Moon, 2 hours and 3 hours behind the Moon. If I take Oklahoma as an example, that would relate to 2 and 3 hours before / after said anomalies, ( the times are exact to the hour stated ). The discrepancy in minutes, relates to the time it takes for the lunar disc to rise or set, changes to the length of day at a given location, dependant on latitude relative to the Moon, and position of the Sun relative to both location and Moon (weather it's pre-seeding or following).
The reference to Luna disk rise and set time, relates to how long it takes from the top of the Luna disk to breaching the plane of the horizon at Moonrise, untill the bottom of the disc sits on the horizon, and similarly at Moon-set.
A few minutes or seconds doesn't seem very relevant, but when you factor in the minutes of change to the length of day, dependant on the time of year, the time it takes for the solar disc to breach the plane at Sunrise or Sunset (which is also dependent on distance of time between the Sun and Moon from the perspective of Earth's surface), and weather the Sun breaches the plane before or after the Moon. The tricky part is working out were you have to add or subtract the different elements.
This also seems to be the case with the Sun, except the contact periods appear to be 3 and 4 hours before and aft of said anomalies. The only explanation I came up with for this, was to take the observed dimensions of the Sun and Moon (30 arc minutes respectively) add together, convert to minutes of time (1 hour) and apply this to the Solar terminator at a given latitude. This obviously alters due to the orbital distances of Sun, Moon and Earth, which means it's easier to calculate at solstice times because the orbits are in transition, so the times don't change as significantly as other times of the year.
There are three other points that complicate matters further, firstly ... the data on my monitors seems to imply contact periods from the Sun and Moon are having the same effect when their on the opposite of the Earth, except in reverse, or a mirror image if you will, so with reference to Oklahoma, the Sun and Moon are now transiting from the West!!
Secondly ... there are only short windows of opportunity to determine Solar or Luna contacts (mostly around first and last quarter Moon) because pre and post full Moon positions will also interact with the Sun on the opposite side of the Earth."
Lastly ... during pre and post new Moon periods, Solar and Luna contacts interact and it becomes difficult to determine ,were, when or which element to add or subtract ... I was working on this when I decided to try predicting on first Luna contact over Oklahoma. I came across a plausible scenario which seems to fit one possible outcome, weather it repeats is subject to time .... on 4th Dec a small quake occurred in Oklahoma at 17:31-32 UT, 2 hours before Moon-set at 19:33, another one occurred at 22:17, 1 hour before sunset at 23:17, If there's anything in what I've said, then it would seem to suggest that the 23:17 event was linked to the Sun. But if you link it to the Moon, it would be 2 hours after Moon set, plus 44 minutes .. if you add the diurnal motion of the moon, 49 minutes and subtract the Luna breach time (as the moon is now well below the horizon) it pretty much comes out at the 23:17 event time. The diurnal motion time gap could be the point were Solar and Luna influences meet,,, after that, the calculations become indeterminate because of overlapping contacts.
I don't know if you think any of this is meaningful, or this theory has been covered in the past (several times I expect), but there are aspects here that seem to correlate with data I'm currently receiving, perhaps you could run selected parts of this on your computer sometime after New Year, and see if it raises the odds!!. I should add that this isn't just related to rise and set times, only seems that way with Oklahoma at present because of shorter daylight hours, might be a different outcome during summer (mostly for the benefit of others).
Thanks Roger,
Duffy,
Duffy;
No worries, I do this for mental exercise and welcome new challenges.
But I'm curious as to why you think any of this matters; why should these configurations have any effect on quakes or your instruments?
I'm happy to test whatever you come up with (if I can) but I'll need clear concise definitions to work with.
I think it would take a lot of time to explain this in a more concise manner, so I've decided to show you how I was trying to predict Earthquakes in Oklahoma. I usually re-work the maths and refine the combinations into a better scientific format, but I was short of time today so you will have to excuse the crude and simplistic presentation. I am listing abbreviations to help understand, and some calculation may be off by a couple of minutes because time didn't allow calculating for angle and daylight hours. The absence of seconds of time, does make a difference in the long run, but I decided to round every thing off to the nearest minute to save confusion. As I said, It needs a lot of re-working, but I think you'll get the general idea.
I set myself a target of trying to calculate all Earthquakes posted on the EMSC lastquake site between the hours of 10:00 - 15:00 ut, the idea was to try and link my calculations with solar and lunar motion relative to Earthquake events, using Sun and Moon rise/set times, and the times listed in abbreviations.
Abbreviations,
MR moonrise
MS moon-set
SR sunrise
SS sunset
D diurnal time = 49m
LD lunar disc = 4m
SD solar disc = 5m
r/s rise/set refers to 2x lunar or solar disc
1,2,3 refer to hours
M4.8 Chile 10:04 UT ......... Moonrise 12:45 UT ..... MR - 2 - D + LD r/s = 10:04 UT
M2.6 Greece 10:04 ........... Moonrise 07:56 UT ..... MR + 2 + LD r/s = 10:04 UT
M2.5 Crete 10:06 UT ......... Moonrise 07:30 UT ...... MR + 2 + D - LD r/s - SD = 10:07 UT
M2.8 Crete 10:38 UT ......... Moonrise 07:38 UT ...... MR + 3 = 10:38 UT
M2.5 Greece 10:47 UT ....... Moonrise 07:28 UT ...... MR + 3 + LD r/s + SD r/s = 10:46 UT
M4.6 Molucca Sea 10:57 UT ... Moon-set 12:02 UT ...... MS - 2 + D + LD r/s = 10:59 UT
M2.2 Greece 11:38 UT .......... Moonrise 07:56 UT ....... MR + 3 + D - LD r/s = 11:37 UT
M2.3 Chile 12:01 UT .............. Moonrise 12:47 UT ....... MR - 1 + LD r/s + SD = 12:01 UT
M3.0 Texas 12:35 UT ............. Moonrise 15:46 UT ....... MR - 3 - SD r/s = 12:36 UT
M4.8 Tonga 13:02 UT ............ Sunrise 16:47 UT ...... SR - 3 - D + LD = 13:02 UT
M3.4 Columbia 13:25 UT ....... Moonrise 13:36 UT ...... MR - 2 - SD r/s + 2 = 13:26 UT
M3.0 Chile 13:30 UT .............. Moonrise 12:48 UT ....... MR - 2 - LD r/s + D = 13:29 UT
M4.5 Afghanistan 13:45 UT .... Sunset 12:07 UT ...... SS - 3 + D - SD r/s + 3 = 13:46 UT
M2.5 Northern CA 13:51 UT .... Moonrise 17:48 UT ...... MR - 3 - D - LD r/s = 13:51 UT
M2.1 Greece 14:29 UT ............ Moon-set 18:25 UT ...... MS - 3 - D - LD r/s = 14:28 UT
M2.2 Greece 14:41 UT ............. Moon-set 18:32 UT ....... MS - 3 - D = 14:43 UT
M3.1 Turkey 15:04 UT ............. Moon-set 16:55 UT ....... MS - 2 + SD/LD = 15:04 UT
M3.3 Greece 15:06 UT ............. Sunset 15:16 UT ........... SS - 3 - SD r/s + 3 = 15:06 UT
I omitted four quakes because, Iran 10:44 UT, Greece 13:01 UT and Chile 15:11 UT are lunar noon quakes which take a lot longer to calculate, and Hawaii 10:19 UT is a mirror quake, which would take the time of three lunar noon quakes to calculate.
It seems simplistic Roger, when you only have to use three small numbers combined with Sun and Moon times!, problem is , no combination is the same from week to week, you have to keep changing them in relation to the orbits of the Sun, Moon and Earth. One thing's for sure, If you think this is a credible formula, it would certainly gain favour for a Sun/Moon correlation with Earthquakes.
OH! nearly forgot one
M2.6 Oklahoma 18:15 UT ..........Moonrise 15:58 UT ........ MR + 3 - D + SD =
I think it would take a lot of time to explain this in a more concise manner, so I've decided to show you how I was trying to predict Earthquakes in Oklahoma. I usually re-work the maths and refine the combinations into a better scientific format, but I was short of time today so you will have to excuse the crude and simplistic presentation. I am listing abbreviations to help understand, and some calculation may be off by a couple of minutes because time didn't allow calculating for angle and daylight hours. The absence of seconds of time, does make a difference in the long run, but I decided to round every thing off to the nearest minute to save confusion. As I said, It needs a lot of re-working, but I think you'll get the general idea.
I set myself a target of trying to calculate all Earthquakes posted on the EMSC lastquake site between the hours of 10:00 - 15:00 ut, the idea was to try and link my calculations with solar and lunar motion relative to Earthquake events, using Sun and Moon rise/set times, and the times listed in abbreviations.
Abbreviations,
MR moonrise
MS moon-set
SR sunrise
SS sunset
D diurnal time = 49m
LD lunar disc = 4m
SD solar disc = 5m
r/s rise/set refers to 2x lunar or solar disc
1,2,3 refer to hours
M4.8 Chile 10:04 UT ......... Moonrise 12:45 UT ..... MR - 2 - D + LD r/s = 10:04 UT
M2.6 Greece 10:04 ........... Moonrise 07:56 UT ..... MR + 2 + LD r/s = 10:04 UT
M2.5 Crete 10:06 UT ......... Moonrise 07:30 UT ...... MR + 2 + D - LD r/s - SD = 10:07 UT
M2.8 Crete 10:38 UT ......... Moonrise 07:38 UT ...... MR + 3 = 10:38 UT
M2.5 Greece 10:47 UT ....... Moonrise 07:28 UT ...... MR + 3 + LD r/s + SD r/s = 10:46 UT
M4.6 Molucca Sea 10:57 UT ... Moon-set 12:02 UT ...... MS - 2 + D + LD r/s = 10:59 UT
M2.2 Greece 11:38 UT .......... Moonrise 07:56 UT ....... MR + 3 + D - LD r/s = 11:37 UT
M2.3 Chile 12:01 UT .............. Moonrise 12:47 UT ....... MR - 1 + LD r/s + SD = 12:01 UT
M3.0 Texas 12:35 UT ............. Moonrise 15:46 UT ....... MR - 3 - SD r/s = 12:36 UT
M4.8 Tonga 13:02 UT ............ Sunrise 16:47 UT ...... SR - 3 - D + LD = 13:02 UT
M3.4 Columbia 13:25 UT ....... Moonrise 13:36 UT ...... MR - 2 - SD r/s + 2 = 13:26 UT
M3.0 Chile 13:30 UT .............. Moonrise 12:48 UT ....... MR - 2 - LD r/s + D = 13:29 UT
M4.5 Afghanistan 13:45 UT .... Sunset 12:07 UT ...... SS - 3 + D - SD r/s + 3 = 13:46 UT
M2.5 Northern CA 13:51 UT .... Moonrise 17:48 UT ...... MR - 3 - D - LD r/s = 13:51 UT
M2.1 Greece 14:29 UT ............ Moon-set 18:25 UT ...... MS - 3 - D - LD r/s = 14:28 UT
M2.2 Greece 14:41 UT ............. Moon-set 18:32 UT ....... MS - 3 - D = 14:43 UT
M3.1 Turkey 15:04 UT ............. Moon-set 16:55 UT ....... MS - 2 + SD/LD = 15:04 UT
M3.3 Greece 15:06 UT ............. Sunset 15:16 UT ........... SS - 3 - SD r/s + 3 = 15:06 UT
I omitted four quakes because, Iran 10:44 UT, Greece 13:01 UT and Chile 15:11 UT are lunar noon quakes which take a lot longer to calculate, and Hawaii 10:19 UT is a mirror quake, which would take the time of three lunar noon quakes to calculate.
It seems simplistic Roger, when you only have to use three small numbers combined with Sun and Moon times!, problem is , no combination is the same from week to week, you have to keep changing them in relation to the orbits of the Sun, Moon and Earth. One thing's for sure, If you think this is a credible formula, it would certainly gain favour for a Sun/Moon correlation with Earthquakes.
OH! nearly forgot one
M2.6 Oklahoma 18:15 UT ..........Moonrise 15:58 UT ........ MR + 3 - D + SD =
Duffy,
Hi Duffy;
That's essentially what I was doing but with entirely different results. I'll check your quakes with my program as soon as I get some time.
My problem now it that the motor in my car destroyed itself and I have to find another car asap.
Solar and lunar triggering of quakes has been covered on this site at length. You seem to have lapsed into pseudo science, rather than good amateur science. And, a pet peeve: what you are writing is not a "theory": it is speculation. Yes, most scientists and the public mis-use "Theory": it should be reserved for well established things; like Plate Tectonics, or evolution. That CO2 makes it warmer is not a theory either; it is a fact.
It is too bad that Brian is only rarely able to post. You should consider following his guidance. He is a good amateur scientist who knows a lot about earthquakes.
(12-31-2015, 11:16 AM)Island Chris Wrote: Hi Duffy,
Solar and lunar triggering of quakes has been covered on this site at length. You seem to have lapsed into pseudo science, rather than good amateur science. And, a pet peeve: what you are writing is not a "theory": it is speculation. Yes, most scientists and the public mis-use "Theory": it should be reserved for well established things; like Plate Tectonics, or evolution. That CO2 makes it warmer is not a theory either; it is a fact.
It is too bad that Brian is only rarely able to post. You should consider following his guidance. He is a good amateur scientist who knows a lot about earthquakes.
Chris
My advice, since I can't interact more often, is to follow the scientific method:
1> make observation
2> formulate hypothesis
3> make predictions
4> test predictions/perform experiment
5> develop theory
Wash, rinse, repeat. It's a never ending process.
Duffy, you already have part of the method. You have observations, a hypothesis, and are making predictions. But there is a sort of unwritten step in between steps 4 and 5 - you have to analyze the data and make sure it's valid. This is the hard part. Roger has helped with his analysis of some of your posted ideas against the historical record. That his results do not support your ideas IS NOT a failure. It just means you need to adjust your hypothesis to fit Roger's information into your hypothesis. A hypothesis (or even a theory) is not a static thing. It must change in the face of new data. Just be willing to go where the data leads you to, even if it's exactly the opposite of your original hypothesis.
I wish I could post more often to give more feedback on your ideas.
Don't give up, and please keep posting. Even if you find that you observations have nothing to do with earthquakes you will have learned much, and that is always a good reward.
Logout 
Portal 
Forum
Search
Members
Help 
