Re: JOB and Petra evaluation
Posted by heartland chris on January 31, 2008 at 08:55:49:

Roger, for California predictions I would think that catalogues would be complete down to M3.0 these days. Most of Petra's predictions used to be for California...has that changed? Also, you say that her significance has lowered...but you did not say whether there was anything left...although you did say that the 137 prediction on her website were below chance.

Then there is the problem of whether or not you spent enough time on Petra's website ahead of time (before quakes) to have a feel for whether predictions have been changed. may not be a problem for Petra, but could for people you don't know....

Working on converting some fault representations from two-way-travel time to depth today: the seismic reflection data we use to map offshore faults is acoustic data with the equivalent of the P wave....what a convoluted procedure we are using to convert: related to the fact that in the area we are mapping there is 1.7 km of seafloor relief, and complicated structure, and very little in the way of velocity information.
Chris


Follow Ups:
     ● Re: JOB and Petra evaluation - PennyB  12:06:42 - 1/31/2008  (73230)  (1)
        ● Re: JOB and Petra evaluation - Canie  19:08:21 - 1/31/2008  (73233)  (1)
           ● Horse faults - heartland chris  20:51:44 - 1/31/2008  (73234)  (1)
              ● Re: Horse faults - Roger Hunter  21:23:29 - 1/31/2008  (73239)  (1)
                 ● Re: Horse faults - Canie  11:48:49 - 2/1/2008  (73246)  (1)
                    ● Re: Horse faults - PennyB  17:08:30 - 2/1/2008  (73249)  (1)
                       ● Re: Horse faults - heartland chris  10:30:26 - 2/2/2008  (73258)  (0)