CHART B DATA

Remember that the charts shown below will change as new versions are stored on my Web site.

The Chart A data shown below represent EM Signals that have been averaged over a 90 Time Window. The top 2 lines are 15 and 45 day Time Windows.

The Chart B data also shown below represent data lines for recent individual EM Signals and earthquakes.

The Chart B data now show the latitude, longitude, and depth of the earthquake. Before they showed only the longitude. But as will be explained, earthquake depth appears to be quite important to the EM Signal generation processes.

This is a “Learn as you go” type of project. And I myself am just overwhelmed with trying to interpret all of these data. Discoveries are being made almost on a daily basis now that my computer programs have been updated so that they can easily display the data.

CHART A ACCURACY

The averaged Chart A data lines match fairly well with the times when our most powerful earthquakes are occurring. Some of the time they also match the earthquake’s longitude. There are a variety of reasons for the fact that the longitudes often don’t match. One possibility is that the theory behind the computer programs is not totally valid. However, there are so many good data associated with the programs at times that it looks like it is not really a theory problem.

A second reason is that there are perhaps a dozen major variables associated with the programs. They include the locations of the sun and the moon in the sky along with the locations of ocean tide and Solid Earth Tide crests and troughs. Those variables are just first approximations. And changing them and doing the calculations again changes the line peak shapes.

The variables could be optimized and in some cases even replaced. For example, I don’t really know how important the ocean tide data are. Perhaps Solid Earth Tide data would be adequate. However, that optimization would require much more computing power than I have available at the moment. It is something that would have to be done by a major research organization or a government agency.

CHART B DATA

One of the things that was learned relatively recently is that the earthquake depth appears to play a major role in whether or not strong or even low intensity EM Signals will be generated. And that matches other theories. It is believed that the EM Signals are often associated with solar storm energy. And that means that the energy has to travel down into the ground, change forms, and then get back out into the atmosphere so that the signals can travel around the world. And as anyone who has taken a course in physics knows, that energy transportation process is probably more efficient for cases where the energy does not have to travel too far through rock layers. They could be considered insulators of sorts.

So, in many cases depth might be more important or even much more important than earthquake magnitude as far as EM Signal generation is concerned.

EM # indicates the strength of the EM Signal. They go from 1 to 9 with 9 being the strongest I can detect.

The signal on line 10 is a 6, fairly high intensity. And it appears to match the Mexico earthquake on line 7 better than the much more powerful Peru earthquake on line 8. The Mexico earthquake depth was reported as 10 km. The one in Peru was 40 km. And that could be the reason that the line 7 signal looked more like the Mexico earthquake line.

And there are other variables such as the north – south or east – west orientation of the fault zone, distance to the EM Signal detection location, the nature of the rock in the fault zone, the proximity of the fault zone to large bodies of water such as oceans, and on and on.

Lines 73, 74, and 75 were a major surprise. The 74 and 75 EM Signal lines look like they both matched the line 73 PNG earthquake. And it is possible that both signals were pointing to the approach of that earthquake. The signals were detected within a few hours of one another. And I cannot recall seeing any cases before where both signals detected during a short period of time might have been linked with the same earthquake.

So, there is a lot to learn. However, when human lives are threatened, saying that “There is a lot to learn” is not a legitimate excuse for doing nothing. World governments and various research groups need to make use of whatever data are available. And that isn’t happening.

http://www.freewebs.com/eq-forecasting/Data.html