Hi Gents,

Ok, I've been reading the AGU abstracts submitted and am already formulating my schedule and of course the question factory is working. Perhaps you can answer a simple question.

Are aftershocks important in studying effects of earthquakes? For an example, let us say there is a 7.0 quake which has no aftershocks and is deep within the Earth, then there is say our Parkfield quake which provides a thousand aftershocks, give or take a 1000. Would one learn more about an earthquake fault if it has no aftershocks or many aftershocks?

Then the next question arises. Parkfield has its main epicentral quake and then we have aftershock quakes going away from that point, north and south. Do those aftershocks have any effect on future main shocks, north or south of this epicentral quake?

And a note in passing: John, I see you and Susan are on the schedule together, which is great! It will keep Don and I from running from one meeting room to the next to see both of you, like we did last time between seeing Musson and Johnson. Do you think there's any chance of them serving coffee to members who aren't presenters, this time?

I swear sometimes it feels like one is running a marathon to get something to drink between meetings. The coffee is at the far end of the center and the meeting rooms are at the other and its tough. I guess I should start my walking program again before I attend so I'll be in better shape. LOL

Petra