Re: M9.1
Posted by Skywise on March 12, 2011 at 19:12:47:

Ah...did not notice the CMT magnitude.

Of course, it will take time to determine this exactly. For one, the wave train from such large quakes is very long, and gets muddled with immediate aftershocks. It takes time to sort it all out.

Hmmm...just had a thought... I wonder what the cumulative moment release graphed would look like, starting with the foreshocks. I could probably do that one myself with the catalog data.

Another curiosity, there is a finite fault model for the main shock. I haven't looked to see if there are for the 7.2 foreshock or any of the others. But I was thinking, it would be interesting to do a finite fault model movie showing how all the quakes break the fault plane. Might be a lot of work, though.

Brian


Follow Ups:
     ● Re: M9.1 - heartland chris  08:07:51 - 3/13/2011  (78300)  (1)
        ● M9 distant vs. M5 close - heartland chris  18:44:12 - 3/13/2011  (78313)  (1)
           ● Re: M9 distant vs. M5 close - Skywise  20:01:32 - 3/13/2011  (78314)  (1)
              ● Re: M9 distant vs. M5 close - Beth  13:12:05 - 3/14/2011  (78342)  (1)
                 ● Re: M9 distant vs. M5 close - Skywise  13:18:44 - 3/14/2011  (78345)  (1)
                    ● Re: M9 distant vs. M5 close - Roger Hunter  14:18:16 - 3/14/2011  (78348)  (0)