The Monday morning talk was by John Fletcher on what I call the Baja quake, but has spome other complicated name...el major or something like that etc.
He showed a video interview of a person who lived right by the fault, north of the epicenter. He hear a roar and then a dust line like a truck running very fast north to south...which is the wrong direction for an earthquake that started to the south of the location Fletcher takes this seriously, as would I, which would require something like the quake rupturing south to north deep, and then the shallow part rupturing back to the south, or just a second part of the quake being triggered in the north.

The other thing that was interesting, and which could easily apply to the near shore faults offshore of Long Beach to San Diego, and even into Metro Los Angeles: the earthquake in outcrop is on a fault that is closer to horizonantal to vertical; is "low angle" = gently dipping. It was mixed right-lateral and normal slip, and is a rare quake because the mountains are on the down-dropped block and the basin is on the upthrown side (the 1892 (?) Laguna Salada fault quake scarps are donwdropped nearby in the correct direction). So, in 2010 the mountains went down.

But, I suggested to John that I would assume there there would have been plenty of local seismometers put out soon after the quake and that I would be surprised if they do not have precise relocations of aftershocks, which should define the fault. I, (and others) think it possible that the earthquake would have been on a steep fault at depth, ruptured upwards and laterally and diverted off onto a gentle, more horizontal fault, close to the surface.

Fletcher pointed out that is it turns out to be a gently-dipping fault, it would be the first known earthquake of its type historically.

Chris