|
SCNC link |
Glen, I was deliberately guessing the probablity would drop off, so 1 in 200 rather than 1 in 100. While you may be correct that the probability after a single quake would drop off faster, here we have a swarm. I have no idea what the drop off should be: I'm guessing. Some snooty seismologist (not John V.) was "put off" by me guessing for Sumatra a couple of years ago...hey, this is a hobby and I am semi-anonymous...trying to get concepts and ideas across. The link is to a different part of scsn than what Canie linked to. Note that the intensities for the M5s already have been VI near the epicenters. It looks like a few small quakes have occured in the last 24 hours just north of the border, scattered around...not sure if that represents any increase over the background of the week before...we'll watch how this develops or dies out over the next week. Follow Ups: ● Re: SCNC link - Cathryn 11:07:29 - 2/12/2008 (73310) (1) ● Re: SCNC link - Mike Williams in Arroyo Grande 11:31:51 - 2/12/2008 (73311) (2) ● No certainty at all...except... - Glen 19:15:40 - 2/12/2008 (73323) (0) ● probability - heartland chris 11:41:46 - 2/12/2008 (73313) (3) ● omori law = inverse time - John Vidale 15:58:45 - 2/12/2008 (73319) (1) ● Re: omori law = inverse time - Glen 17:11:00 - 2/12/2008 (73320) (1) ● swarms - John Vidale 18:30:05 - 2/12/2008 (73321) (1) ● Got it.... - Glen 19:02:37 - 2/12/2008 (73322) (1) ● mid-March would be good - John Vidale 19:17:30 - 2/12/2008 (73324) (1) ● We will all tune in----thanx, n/t - Glen 21:43:34 - 2/12/2008 (73326) (0) ● Re: probability - Canie 12:36:23 - 2/12/2008 (73315) (0) ● Re: probability - Roger Hunter 12:18:22 - 2/12/2008 (73314) (1) ● Re: probability - Cathryn 19:49:48 - 2/12/2008 (73325) (0) |
|