Hi All:

Funny you should mention that Roger as I had recently thought of a similar sceanario where you'd be the right guy....

Anyway, I believe I do have the following items:
a) A new theory (well I haven't seen it anywhere though I have seen de facto statements and pieces of the theory...but in the wrong context).
b) Lots of research backing me up....dozens and dozens of supporting observations from scientific journals....
c) Identified but too costly data sets needed to fortify the theory and bring it into accepted standards for scientific acceptance.
d) A limited set of predictions indicating the following:
- Upwards of 50 % or higher success in predicting earthquakes short term in Magnitude ranges of less than Mag 4
- Above average ability to identify high magnitude events especially when other indicators are used
e) Predictions as cited in d) but which exclude far-field triggering actions. Read as "even better results possible" when incorporating these aspects.
f) A detailed study plan which if funded could probably deliver a rough prototype software system which could deliver the same level of performance (possibly and assuming the follow-on data analysis yields identical or even better results / quantification of the processes) in 3-6 months time.
g) The promise of new vitality and multiple threaded pursuits as people hear about this and realize those sub-sections which require more polishing and follow-up to better refine the prediction confidences and provide further validation.
h) The prospect of protecting a city through the process of "Active Control / Steering of Large Magnitude Earthquakes"

This is just a partial list of what I believe I have.

I also have started to write a 14 chapter book on the subject...but have been diverted by other things and of course by my day job.

My slow-to-reveal tendency is because I want to deliver hard core scientific proof and success as part of introducing this theory...so that's part of the motivation. The other is that I'm trying to recoup some of my investment in time, purchasing textbooks, other books, data CD's, etc, etc.

So in some ways, I'm time and resource constrained.

In watching and tracking some of Don's Predictions I had assumed that Don had discovered what I think I have discovered...but when he said that he's using something sort of similar to far-field triggering I have figured out that he may not know all of what I know...and I'm inferring that I know what all is involved in executing these (Don's) aspects (though he does have Petra's database as an extra input no doubt...but then again Petra is nice enough to post as well).

Anyway, my plan was to continue working my day job, come home and work some spare time hours on this book, data collection, and analysis, etc in actually at least 4 data areas.... As you can see accomplishing all this on my own is do-able but at the rate that I'm running into obstacles it will probably take into March '02 to get to the point of having the book available. Also, paying for fancy data-sets may have to wait for somebody who has the pocketbook and time and inclination.

Obviously, at that point, Don could get a copy and read it and in addition, some prototype software would also be available. The outcomes for predicting some quakes with the highest known success rate of anybody Ever would then result....

So...you can see where I am ....

It appears that I might have a theory and info. that will help Don with the magnitude aspects. While I'm pondering whether to change my course of action...maybe I will "shadow" Don's predictions in the meantime and put my input in on expected Magnitude levels....

Anyway, I will try to post a summary of the predictions I have made which will give a better idea about my success rate....then you can decide how far off the beam (or lucky) I might be....

Too bad there's no funding for this type of thing...you'd think the billions of dollars in assets in LA, CA alone would "cough up" 4 or 5 man-years to get this information on it's way to making a difference ...(which I believe it will but on a much slower schedule....)

True enough ... a large team ...once given this theory and specific study plan...could execute it at high speed...perhaps delivering a fully operational and with known (i.e. well quantified confidences /statistics) capability system in say
6 months with me as the "Hammer man/critical path only" study director or in 12 months with anybody else directing.

Anyway, I'll try and shadow Don's prediction with "adjustments" while also continuing down my path...slow as it seems sometimes....

Roger, I'll be seriously pondering your offer
...since if this theory pans out (and so far it's looking good) the sooner the better....

Finally, I hope I didn't get anybody too excited as yet...I'd much rather have the "bullet proof" data in hand before making these statements but Don's request for help has me thinking about this differently. I do have some data and if any body is interested I will post the success / fail summary (which allows significance testing).