|
|
|
|
| 1964 |
Cathryn, while there would be one depth for the hypocenter, the part that broke first, there is a huge area that broke in that quake and it would be all kinds of depths, including the surface on some secondary faults (I think). I don't know what the bottom edge depth was in 1964 (the deepest part that failed as a brittle (elastic) fault. Follow Ups: ● Re: 1964 - Cathryn 16:50:24 - 7/9/2006 (39237) (0) ● Re: 1964 - Glen 16:07:34 - 7/9/2006 (39236) (2) ● Re: 1964 - chris in suburbia 06:24:30 - 7/10/2006 (39248) (1) ● Re: 1964 - Canie 11:20:54 - 7/10/2006 (39254) (1) ● Re: 1964 - Glen 13:00:42 - 7/10/2006 (39259) (1) ● gaps, 1946 - chris in suburbia 14:58:00 - 7/10/2006 (39262) (2) ● Scotch Cap, Unimak - Glen 22:17:21 - 7/11/2006 (39270) (2) ● Re: Scotch Cap, Unimak - Jane 03:53:27 - 7/12/2006 (39279) (2) ● Re: Scotch Cap, Unimak - Glen 13:03:47 - 7/12/2006 (39294) (0) ● Re: Scotch Cap, Unimak - Cathryn 06:26:30 - 7/12/2006 (39285) (1) ● Re: Scotch Cap, Unimak - Jane 17:54:33 - 7/12/2006 (39297) (0) ● Re: Scotch Cap, Unimak - Cathryn 02:08:11 - 7/12/2006 (39276) (0) ● The past is the past - Cathryn 01:52:52 - 7/11/2006 (39264) (0) ● Re: 1964 - Cathryn 17:10:58 - 7/9/2006 (39238) (0) |
|
|
|
|
