Earthquake Breakthroughs Update – September 13, 2012

Ground Tilt Sensors (continued)
EM Signal Discovery

At some time in the next week I am planning to widely circulate E-mail and Newsgroup reports that will discuss the information in this present post.

GROUND TILT SENSORS (Continuted)

The Web page for Dr. Pavel Kalenda’s data has been updated with information that was discussed (by me at least) in bulletin board notes that were posted here in the past.

http://www.freewebs.com/eq-forecasting/Research-PK.html

The Web page now briefly outlines theories discussed in his new book for:

--- Why tectonic plates move relative to one another

--- Why continents grow in size over the ages

--- Why earthquakes occur

It also displays most of the charts that were present on the Web page in the previous update. One of them can be seen on the bottom of this present posting.

Once again, it is my opinion that Pavel’s ground tilt sensor data represent a type of breakthrough for earthquake researchers and forecasters around the world. They can provide information regarding the times when tectonic plates are storing strain energy before powerful earthquakes occur around the world. And that information can be useful for earthquake forecasting and also to enable researchers to “calibrate” their own earthquake and forecasting data relative to the ground tilt sensor data.

EM SIGNAL DISCOVERY

The answer might have finally been found to one of the oldest and most important questions that I have had over the years regarding the EM Signals that I work with.

QUESTION

It has been observed for years that EM Signals detected before destructive earthquakes occurring around the world such as a 5.5 magnitude ones are often stronger that signals detected before many much more powerful earthquakes such as 7.5 magnitude ones.

How is that possible?

Quite a few theories have been proposed to explain that. One of the ones that looked like it might be the best of the group proposed that the Earth’s geomagnetic energy field energy was interacting with lengthy metal objects such as telephone wires and water pipes, and perhaps even ground water in the area around a city where the earthquake was getting ready to occur. And those interactions were making it possible for the actual signals that I work with to be generated.

One attractive feature of that theory was that it explained why the signals could be stronger before earthquakes that were about to occur near a populated area rather than one out in the country or out in the ocean. However, the weak point in the theory was the fact that the signals were strong before some earthquakes that occurred near population areas that probably do not have extensive networks of power lines and water pipes.

The likely answer that now looks obvious and should have been discovered years ago (I never said I was a genius) was finally determined after the recent destructive earthquakes in China.

2 + 2 finally equaled 4 and the light bulb lit.

ANSWER

The most destructive earthquakes are not necessarily the most powerful ones but rather ones that occur at shallow depths. Deep earthquakes, even very powerful ones, are often not destructive even when they are inland. The energy reaching the populated area above the fault zone is too weak to cause any damage. Or the earthquake waves do not have the right type of waveform to cause the most damage.

My theories have for years proposed that these EM Signals usually do not involve energy that got started in the fault zone itself but rather geomagnetic energy field energy that can often be associated with a solar storm. That geomagnetic field energy then interacts with the fault zone and causes the EM Signals that I work with to be generated.

This latest theory proposes that the EM Signals are stronger before the destructive earthquakes because they are fairly often near the surface. And that would maximize the interaction between the fault zone and the Earth’s geomagnetic energy field. The energy does not have to travel very far through rock layers that would probably be regarded as being more like resistors than conductors.

The geomagnetic energy would be less able to travel great distances into the Earth’s crust and interact with a fault zone there that was going to have a more powerful earthquake.

It could be that the shallow earthquakes also contain more water per cubic unit area of fault zone rock. And that would probably help increase the conductivity of the fault zone and make the geomagnetic energy field – fault zone interactions even more efficient.

This is an important discovery if it is valid. That is because it helps explain why EM Signal strength is not always directly linked with earthquake magnitude.

USING PAVEL’S GROUND TILT SENSOR DATA TO HELP CALIBRATE OTHER DATA

The chart below compares line peaks on Pavel’s charts with line peak groups on one of my own charts. That type of comparison can enable me to adjust the many variables in my own forecasting computer program so that the charts they generate match what is actually taking place in the ground. Without those data from Pavel the only thing I can do is try to optimize those variables by comparing my charts with the times when powerful earthquakes occur. And with only those earthquake data it can be difficult to explain why chart line groups appear and disappear at times when there are no powerful earthquakes occurring to show what caused the line peak shift.

The problem now is getting more chart data from Pavel so that I can do more of those comparisons. He stays busy and also disappears now and then to visit his sensor systems.

These are personal opinions.

• Some of Pavel's Data