A successful World Series “NO EARTHQUAKE” prediction
Posted by EQF on October 27, 2002 at 20:54:52:

This is most of the (slightly modified) text of a report which I posted a short time ago to a number of Internet Newsgroups including sci.geo.earthquakes.

A SUCCESSFUL WORLD SERIES “NO EARTHQUAKE” PREDICTION

NEWSGROUP READERS IN EARTHQUAKE PRONE AREAS:
Please send copies of this report to your local professional sports teams, news services, and earthquake forecasting researchers.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. The destructive October 17, 1989 San Francisco area earthquake
2. A successful World Series “No Earthquake” prediction
3. “Earthquake” forecasts versus “No Earthquake” forecasts
4. The “Lack Of The Right Type Of Data” problem
5. How to solve that “Technology Wall” problem

1. THE DESTRUCTIVE OCTOBER 17, 1989 SAN FRANCISCO AREA EARTHQUAKE

On that day a 7.1 magnitude earthquake in the San Francisco, California area reportedly claimed some 60 lives, injured another 4000 people, and seriously disrupted the professional baseball World Series.

Financial losses associated with the earthquake were estimated to be in the range of 5 to 6 BILLION DOLLARS. And some of that loss was undoubtedly due to the disruption of those baseball games. In this report I am going to propose what sports teams located in earthquake prone areas might do in order to reduce the likelihood that they will suffer earthquake related financial losses like that in the future. It could be that one of their best options would be to try to get a certain type of earthquake forecasting computer program developed.

2. A SUCCESSFUL WORLD SERIES “NO EARTHQUAKE” PREDICTION

For a number of years now I have been running an earthquake forecasting program during my free time. It involves sending forecasts for destructive earthquakes for free to governments and disaster mitigation groups around the world. One measure of the success of the program is the fact that shortly after it was determined that the professional baseball World Series games would be played this year by two California teams news service personnel contacted me in order to get my opinion regarding the likelihood that another powerful earthquake might disrupt the games.

I ran some tests on my earthquake precursor data and told them that none of the signals that I work with suggested to me that an earthquake powerful enough to disrupt those games might be about to occur in the California area. And I said that I would contact other earthquake forecasters to see what they thought about a possible earthquake and then pass along any important looking information.

At this time I am not certain what my news service contacts did with the information that I gave them. But they do circulate reports to hundreds of other news service groups around the world. And it is possible that my forecast information resulted in the circulation of the following Reuters news report (you will need to reconstruct its Internet address). My own data were not referred to in that report.

Quirks predict California quake
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/nm/20021019/od_uk_nm/oukoe_life_quake_1

World Series game # 7 ended a few minutes ago (the Angels won the series). And as predicted the series was not interrupted this year by any disruptive earthquakes.

3. “EARTHQUAKE” FORECASTS VERSUS “NO EARTHQUAKE” FORECASTS

For several reasons that will be discussed here and for other reasons it appears to me that it is much easier to tell when an earthquake is not going to occur than it is to tell when there will be one. And this is information which could be quite important to earthquake forecasting groups around the world. I have not seen any evidence that any of them are aware of what is happening here. Remember, this is theory information at this time.

Basically, if there are no warning signals being generated then you can say with a fair amount of confidence that there is not going to be an earthquake. However, for the following reasons and others, when signals are being generated it is not possible to say with that same amount of confidence that that an earthquake is about to occur:

a. Sun And Moon Related Earthquake Triggering Windows

Occurrence times for many earthquakes and some of their precursor signals are strongly linked both directly and indirectly with the positions of the sun and the moon in the sky relative to one another and relative to the earthquake fault zone. When the sun and the moon are in the right positions, if enough strain has been stored in the fault zone that an earthquake is about ready to occur there then it can enter into a type of unstable condition and an earthquake may be triggered. Or, warning signals may instead be generated. And as the sun and moon shift positions relative to one another the fault zone may regain a temporary type of stability. The earthquake may then occur some multiple of about 7 days from the time that the warning signals were generated. Those are the times when the sun and moon are once again in an alignment which favors earthquake triggering.

b. “False Alarm” Type Warning Signals Which Result From Interactions Between Earthquake Fault Zones

This subject matter appears to me to be tremendously complex. And what is being discussed here is a highly simplified picture of what might be taking place. If accurate this could be the single most important reason that earthquake forecasters around the world have over the centuries had such a difficult time with generating accurate forecasts.

My theories and perhaps those of some other researchers presently propose that a number of different types of interactions between earthquake fault zones which can be thousands of miles distance from one another often cause “false alarm” type warning signals to be generated. As a result, warning signals detected near one fault zone will in some cases correctly indicate that a 6.0 magnitude earthquake is about to occur there. In other cases, for a hypothetical example, only a 4.0 magnitude earthquake will occur. But interactions between that first fault zone and a second, distant one where an 8.0 magnitude earthquake is about to occur will cause the warning signals detected near the first one to look like they are for a 6.0 magnitude earthquake.

As a consequence of those two problems it can be difficult for many earthquake forecasters including myself to tell exactly when an expected earthquake will occur and how powerful it will be when it does occur.

4. THE “LACK OF THE RIGHT TYPE OF DATA” PROBLEM

Earthquake forecasters around the world including myself have now run into a “Technology Wall” which results from our inability to generate data which can help us deal with both of those problems and produce better earthquake forecasts. And I recommend that professional sports teams owners (or any other interested parties) help us get past that Technology Wall by having a certain type of earthquake forecasting data generation computer program created. Because of its expected complexity it might have to be developed by a government agency or a major university research group.

Researchers keep trying to link earthquake triggering times and earthquake precursor generation times with things such as the locations of ocean tide and Solid Earth Tide crests and troughs. However, my data indicate to me that earthquake and precursor occurrence times are often actually linked with the times when fault zones are bent, stretched, and compressed in a certain manner. Those times may be the same as the times when there is an ocean tide crest or trough in some area for example. But that is not always the case. And for that reason researchers’ attempts to established clear links between earthquake triggering and ocean tide levels etc. have consistently failed.

As far as I can tell, at the moment, no person, research group, or government anywhere on Earth has the ability to generate the types of crucially important data which are needed to tell how earthquake fault zones around the world are being bent etc. at a given point in time. And that represents an important Technology Wall which is blocking many researchers’ efforts. I myself presently generate those types of data by using indirect procedures which have serious accuracy and reproducibility limitations.

5. HOW TO SOLVE THAT “TECHNOLOGY WALL” PROBLEM

I believe that a computer program can be created which will generate those crucially important types of data. And it should not be that difficult. But someone has to get the effort started. And I am not aware of any governments or research groups around the world which are moving in that direction.

Sports teams spend astronomical amounts of money on player salaries and stadium maintenance every year. And at any time teams which are located in areas threatened by earthquakes could have their sports event plans disrupted by an unexpected earthquake with a resultant tremendous financial loss. It is possible that that proposed computer program might not help solve that problem. But considering its relatively small development costs versus the large financial loss which a sports team can suffer when an unexpected earthquake occurs in their area I am proposing that it would be well worth the cost to them to get the program developed and see if it does help. The alternative could be for them to continue doing business in such a manner that unexpected problems such as destructive earthquakes might at times determine if sporting events such as the World Series will result in the sports team owners making a profit or suffering a staggering financial loss.

ADDITIONAL COMMENTS:

A. Some technical information regarding this subject matter can be found towards the end of the following research report:

Earthquake Triggering, Precursors, and Sensitivity
http://www.freewebz.com/eq-forecasting/128.html

B. The information in this report represents expressions of personal opinion.


Follow Ups:
     ● Let's Set The Facts Straight - Petra Challus  22:44:35 - 10/27/2002  (17174)  (0)
     ● Re: A successful World Series “NO EARTHQUAKE” prediction - Lowell  22:10:28 - 10/27/2002  (17173)  (1)
        ● Re: A successful World Series “NO EARTHQUAKE” prediction - EQF  12:08:17 - 10/28/2002  (17179)  (0)