[Duffy]

(03-02-2015, 12:11 PM)Island Chris Wrote: Hi Duffy

I've tried to keep up with your posts, but originally skipped your long ones with lots of graphs because I was working on a proposal. Then, yesterday and just now, I tried to read that double post but the graphics are not showing:

http://www.earthwaves.org/forum/showthre...e=threaded

I just get "" etc.
I just tried it with Firefox also, same thing.

The graphics showed up when originally posted. It is likely something with my settings. But, not worth doing anything about unless this is not showing for anyone (e.g., for Brian and Roger).

It might be useful to have some criteria for an earthquake signal, and then graph these against M6+ quake occurrence (date along horizontal axis, both signals and quake by magnitude on vertical axis). I imagine that this would not be easy or not possible, if it is a bit of a complicated art form to choose signals. If you, or Brian, or Roger do such a graph, best to do a new thread, as this one is getting too long.

Another 15 cm of snow last night; we have lass than half of what Boston has, but we are catching up.

Chris

Hi Chris;

Nice to finally meet you,

Unfortunately, in your absence, I may have rocked the boat a little, so the images have probably fallen overboard. I've relegated myself to the dugout (think you guys call it the sin bin) untill I've had the chance to familiarise myself with Earthwaves as a whole.

A graph would be the way to go if a criteria or standard could be found to establish, what is a 6 or a 7, the problem is the quakes themselves dont appear to stick to a recognizable format. For instance, out of half a dozen images of signals for mag 6+ quakes, you may get 4 with distinctive similarities, the other 2 however, may be off the chart.

I have started a graph of sorts in my office, and a world map with markers etc, but I think the real trick here is visual pattern recognition with the images. Every few months, I place them around the kitchen floor like a roulette table, catagorise them by similarity, and its amazing how close the magnitude differences pan out at.

For this to work though, you have to have sufficiant samples to work with, I recorded a new, unfarmiliar signal at 10:15 UT last Friday morning, (27th) I knew it was definately a sub-terranian EM, and the only thing I could link it to was the mag 7 Flores Sea quake at 13:45 UT. The problem here though is the depth, 552 km, so at the moment this is highly unlikely, but in the future, if I record similar signals, linked to quakes of similar magnitude and depth, well, wouldn't that be something.

I'm rigging up a dual 24/7 monitoring system at the moment, and a couple of experiments that are costing the Earth (pardon the punn), so hopefully I'll have more images to play around with soon.

I've been a bit busy on Earthwaves the past few weeks, and hadn't realised how little attention my family and my astronomy was receiving, so I'm sticking to time/date/ mag predictions at the moment, If I don't take mother-in-law to a fancy restaurant at least once a month, there's no living under this roof .

Did you say snow!, We Brits were wondering when you guys across the pond are going to send some our way, strange temperatures are really confusing the wild life here. By coincidence, my cousin in New York city sent me some pictures of how Central park looked this morning (not as good as your's).

Think I'll go and do some more farmiliarising now, noticed there was a store round here somewhere, might wait untill Black Friday to buy anything though .

Nice talking to you.

Duffy;