|
Re: distance, not aftershock, no tsunami |
This should probably be started as a new thread... but.. As to why no Tsunami.. you said in another post: Two focal mechanisms were available on the USGS-NEIC site long before the broadcast and both show this to be a rather flat thrust earthquake. For a tsunami to be generated, a volume of the ocean needs to be displaced - via land movement or ?? Or enough to cause the wave to start - movement of the water... It appears that there just wasn't this type of motion or displacement - no landslides, and no steeper thrust... just my ponderings... Canie Follow Ups: ● flat thrust, no tsunami - chris in suburbia 08:37:39 - 3/29/2005 (25425) (1) ● no really up on this - John Vidale 21:35:29 - 3/29/2005 (25448) (0) |
|