Petra-why aren't you at a cookout somewhere? At least I had lunch on the beach in SOCAL (I'm not in suburbia until June 6). The latest plots right on the San Andreas fault right outside the Golden Gate-a M3.4, has been reviewed by seismologist, an hour or 2 ago. Something is going on-California is really active. And, the mainstream (Hi John) don't understand at all why there should be flareups like this-static stress or P and S waves are not triggering distant M3s from M4s. Lowell has been saying for a long time that a M7 can trigger across the earth, though. Of course, we don't understand it either, although some of us think we do. Some of us may be on the right track, however (not me, I just dabble). Actually, we need 3 ringmaps, and, Hello Roger, are you there-can we have all the other quakes plotted on each as you did before? We need Algeria, Honshu, and Halmahera. I have a little problem with calling on solar activity-The M4s in California and the M6.8 in Algeria occured while the Xray flux was really low (no flares), and it has been quiet for a while. The Kp (magnetic field) was acting up a little, but nothing unusual for the last few weeks. today, there was the first M class flare in a while (unless I missed one Weds or Thurs while away from the net). But, It is a M1 or M2, with 1/10 the X-ray flux of a X1 or X2. But, part of the reason I watch this page is that I agree with Lowell, and think that these quakes are somehow related.

Now, to make some of you nervous. The san Andreas Fault off the Golden Gate bridge and on north has a very low conditional probability for a large earthquake in the 30 years after this was last calculated (I may not have seen the most recent one). This is by the same people who gave Parkfield an extremely high probability. I have said before that they should increase the probability on the very low probability segments because they don't know as much as they think they know. It has been 97 years since the last big quake on the northern San Andreas. I'm not sure how fast its slipping there-surely slower than in the south-maybe 1 or 1 1/s cm/yr. So 1 or 1 1/2 m of slip has accumulated. Assuming all the elastic strain (am I using the right term?) was released in 1906, there is now enough for a quake the size of Loma Prieta. I have no reason to think that one is coming, though. There are also the faults in the east Bay......But, that is Don's neck of the woods.....

Don-do you have a link to the latest on conditional probability of large ruptures in the next 30 years for different segments of the SAF?

Chris