Earthquake prediction

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search
This article needs additional citations for verification.
Please help improve this article by adding reliable references. Unsourced material may be challenged
and removed. (January 2008)

Seismic hazard map of the San Francisco Bay Area, showing the probability of a major
earthquake occurring by 2032
An earthquake prediction is a prediction that an earthquake of a specific magnitude will occur
in a particular place at a particular time (or ranges thereof). Despite considerable research efforts
by seismologists, scientifically reproducible predictions cannot yet be made to a specific day or
month.[1] However, for well-understood faults seismic hazard assessment maps can estimate the
probability that an earthquake of a given size will affect a given location over a certain number
of years.[2] The overall ability to predict earthquakes either on an individual basis or on a
statistical basis remains remote.[3]
Once an earthquake has already begun, early warning devices can provide a few seconds'
warning before major shaking arrives at a given location. This technology takes advantage of the
different speeds of propagation of the various types of vibrations produced. Aftershocks are also
likely after a major quake, and are commonly planned for in earthquake disaster response
protocols.[4]
Experts do advise general earthquake preparedness, especially in areas known to experience
frequent or large quakes, to prevent injury, death, and property damage if a quake occurs with or
without warning.
•

[edit] Prediction techniques

In the effort to predict earthquakes people have tried to associate an impending earthquake with
such varied phenomena as seismicity patterns, electromagnetic fields (seismo-electromagnetics),
ground movement, weather conditions and unusual clouds, radon or hydrogen gas content of soil
or ground water, water level in wells, animal behavior, and the phases of the moon.[5]
Many pseudoscientific theories and predictions are made, which scientific practitioners find
problematic.[6] The natural randomness of earthquakes and frequent activity in certain areas can
be used to make "predictions" which may generate unwarranted credibility. These generally
leave certain details unspecified, increasing the probability that the vague prediction criteria will
be met, and ignore quakes that were not predicted.[7] Rudolf Falb's "lunisolar flood theory" is a
typical example from the late 19th century.
[edit] Evaluation of prediction theories
Official earthquake prediction evaluation councils have been established in California (the
California Earthquake Prediction Evaluation Council) and the federal government in the United
States (the National Earthquake Prediction Evaluation Council), but have yet to endorse any
method of predicting quakes as reliable.[1]
Scientific evaluations of prediction claims look for the following elements in a claim:[1]
• A specific location or area
• A specific span of time
• A specific magnitude range
• A specific probability of occurrence
Attribution to a plausible physical mechanism lends credibility, and suggests a means for future
improvement. Reproducibility and statistical analysis are used to distinguish predictions which
come true due to random chance (of which a certain number are expected) versus those that have
more useful predictive capability, and to validate models of long-term probability. Such models
are difficult to test or validate because large earthquakes are so rare, and because earthquake
activity is naturally clustered in space and time. "Predictions" which are made only after the fact
are common but generally discounted.
[edit] Radon
Emission of radon as a quake precursor was studied in the 1970s and 80s with no reliable results
and continued to be dismissed by most seismologists until recently. However, after the 2009
L'Aquila earthquake, which was preceded by an Italian laboratory technician's predictions of an
impending major earthquake, some in the scientific community expressed renewed interest in
radon as a quake precursor. In December 2009, the technician, Giampaolo Giuliani, presented his
research to the American Geophysical Union in San Francisco and was later invited by the
American Geophysical Union to participate in developing a worldwide seismic early warning
system.[8]
Further information: Radon#Scientific
[edit] The VAN method
Main article: VAN method
VAN is a method of earthquake prediction proposed by Professors Varotsos, Alexopoulos and
Nomicos in the 1980s; it was named after the researchers' initials. The method is based on the
detection of "seismic electric signals" (SES) via a telemetric network of conductive metal rods
inserted in the ground. The method stems from theoretical predictions by P. Varotsos, a solid-
state physicist at the National and Capodistrian University of Athens.[9][10] It is continually refined
as to the manner of identifying SES from within the abundant electric noise the VAN sensors are
picking up. Researchers have claimed to be able to predict earthquakes of magnitude larger than
5, within 100 km of epicentral location, within 0.7 units of magnitude and in a 2-hour to 11-day
time window.
[edit] Foreshock predictions
Foreshocks are medium-sized earthquakes that precede major quakes.
An increase in foreshock activity[1] (combined with purported indications like ground water
levels and strange animal behavior) enabled the successful evacuation of a million people one
day before the February 4, 1975 M7.3 Haicheng earthquake[11] by the China State Seismological
Bureau.
While 50% of major earthquakes are preceded by foreshocks, only about 5-10% of small
earthquakes turn out to be foreshocks, leading to many false warnings.[1][2][12]
[edit] Pattern theories
In November 2005 (November 11 issue) the journal Physical Review Letters, published by the
American Physical Society, published an article by researchers from Israel and Germany that say
that there is a way to predict when the next earthquake will hit.
Prof. Shlomo Havlin's from Bar-Ilan University in Israel, in collaboration with Prof. Armin
Bunde, of the Justus-Liebig University in Giessen, Germany, and Bar-Ilan University graduate
student Valerie Livina used the "scaling" approach from physics to develop a mathematical
function to characterize earthquakes of a wide range of magnitudes to learn from smaller
magnitude earthquakes about larger magnitude earthquakes. The team's findings reveal that the
recurrence of earthquakes is strongly dependent on the recurrence times of previous earthquakes.
[citation needed]

This memory effect not only provides a clue to understanding the observed clustering of
earthquakes, but also suggests that delays in earthquake occurrences, as seen today in Tokyo and
in San Francisco, are a natural phenomenon.[citation needed]
[edit] Fractoluminescence
One possible method for predicting earthquakes, although it has not yet been applied, is
fractoluminescence. Studies at the Chugoku National Industrial Research Institute by Yoshizo
Kawaguchi have shown that upon fracturing, silica releases red and blue light for a period of
about 100 milliseconds. Kawaguchi attributed this to the relaxation of the free bonds and
unstable oxygen atoms that are left when the silicon oxygen bonds have broken due to the
stresses within the rock.[13]
[edit] Satellite observations
[edit] Demeter microsatellite
The "Detection of Electro-Magnetic Emissions Transmitted from Earthquake Regions" satellite,
constructed by CNES, has made observations which show strong correlations between certain
types of low frequency electromagnetic activity and the most seismically active zones on the
Earth, and have shown a sharp signal in the ionospheric electron density and temperature near
southern Japan seven days before a 7.1 magnitude occurred there (on August 29 and September
5, 2004, respectively).[14]
[edit] QuakeSat nanosatellite
Quakesat is an earth observation nanosatellite based on 3 CubeSats. It was designed to be a
proof-of-concept for collecting extremely low frequency earthquake precursor signals from
space. The primary instrument is a magnetometer housed in a 2 foot (0.6 m) telescoping boom.
[edit] The ESPERIA Project
ESPERIA is an equatorial space mission mainly concerned with detecting any tectonic and
preseismic related signals. More in general, it has been proposed for defining the near-Earth
electromagnetic, plasma, and particle environment, and for studying perturbations and
instabilities in the ionosphere-magnetosphere transition region. To study earthquake preparation
processes and anthropogenic impacts in the Earth's surface, a phase A study has been realized for
the Italian Space Agency.[15]
[edit] Early warning
An earthquake warning system is a system of accelerometers, communication, computers, and
alarms that is devised for regional notification of a substantial earthquake while it is in progress.
Japan, Taiwan and Mexico all have earthquake early-warning systems.
[edit] Magnitude problem
In a paper in the journal Nature, Richard Allen of the University of California claims that the
distinction between small and large earthquakes can be made from the very first seconds of
seismic energy recorded by seismometers, though other scientists are not convinced.[16] If correct
this may make earthquake early warning (as distinct from prediction) more powerful. Earthquake
early warning provides an alarm that strong shaking is due soon to arrive, and the more quickly
that the magnitude of an earthquake can be estimated, the more useful is the early warning.
However, earthquake early warning can still be effective without the ability to infer the
magnitude of an earthquake in its initial second or two.
[edit] Animal early warning
Animal behavior reports are often ambiguous and not consistently observed. In folklore, some
animals have been identified as being more able to predict earthquakes than others, especially
dogs, cats, chickens, horses, toads and other smaller animals.
It has been postulated that the reported animal behavior before an earthquake is simply their
response to an increase in low-frequency electromagnetic signals.[citation needed] The University of
Colorado has demonstrated that electromagnetic activity can be generated by the fracturing of
crystalline rock. Such activity occurs in fault lines before earthquakes. According to one study,
electromagnetic sensors yield statistically valid results in predicting earthquakes.[17]
In Italy, findings from 2009 suggest that toads are able to detect pre-seismic cues.[18]
[edit] Tidal forces
There are two flavors of tidal stressing that have been claimed to generate enhanced rates of
earthquakes - diurnal and biweekly tides. The diurnal correlations would arise from more
earthquakes only during the hours when the tidal stress is pushing in an encouraging direction, in
contrast, biweekly effects would be based on earthquakes occurring during the days when the
sinusoidal stressing oscillations are largest. The former, as most easily observed in the twice-
daily rise and fall of the ocean tides, have occasionally been shown to influence earthquakes
(e.g.,[19], this paper shows there may be some weak tidal triggering of shallow, oceanic thrust-
faulting earthquakes). The latter, which arises from the periodic alignment of the Sun and Moon,
has often been claimed in the popular press to incubate earthquakes (sometimes termed the
"syzygy" effect) and occasionally for small datasets in the scientific literature (e.g.,[20]), but
generally such effects do not appear in careful studies of large datasets.

Tidal forces are magnified during and after an eclipse. The solar tide is approximately a third of
the lunar tide. When the sun and moon are in alignment these tidal forces are combined.
A paper published in Taiwan, by the Department of Astronomy, Beijing Normal University,
found a significant relationship to tidal forces and earthquakes in China and Taiwan. The paper
considers the relationship between 21 major earthquakes (Ms ≥ 7.0) in land and the offshore area
of Taiwan island in the 20th century and the variance ratio of the lunar-solar tidal force. The
result indicates that the time of these earthquakes is closely related to the variance ratio of the
lunar-solar tidal force, and therefore that the tidal force possibly plays an important role in
triggering earthquakes. [21] The conclusion is this method may be used to help forecast
earthquakes by studying the lunar perigee.
Syzygy, which is not given much credence in the scientific community, is motivated by the
observation that, historically, there have been some great earthquakes whose timing coincides
with tidal forces near their maximum. For maximum tidal force, three factors must coincide:
first, when the moon (in its elliptical orbit) is closest to the earth; second, when it is within a day
or two of a new moon (so that the tidal forces of the moon and sun are acting in concert); and
third, when the earth (in its elliptical orbit) is at or near its closest distance to the sun.
Shallow earthquakes near mid-ocean ridges, volcanic earthquakes, and episodic tremor and slip
have also been observed to sometimes correlate with the diurnal tides, with enhanced activity
correlating with times that faults are unclamped.
[edit] History of prediction attempts
[edit] China
After a series of foreshocks, the Chinese government was able to successfully evacuate much of
the populace before the 1975 Haicheng earthquake. However, the Chinese government failed to
predict the July 28, 1976 M7.8 Tangshan earthquake, which put Chinese earthquake prediction
research in doubt for several years.
In the late 1990s, there were over thirty false alarms unofficially announced in China,[22] but the
Chinese government claimed successful prediction of the November 29, 1999, M5.4 Gushan-
Pianling Earthquake in Haicheng city and Xiuyan city, Liaoning Province.[23]
[edit] Japan
In the 1970s and 1980s, the Japanese government embarked on a major earthquake preparedness
campaign, which some criticized as emphasizing prediction too much over mitigation.[24] It failed
to result in a prediction of the Great Hanshin earthquake which devastated the city of Kobe in
1995.
[edit] Failed Lima prediction
An earthquake predicted by a scientist at the U.S. Bureau of Mines to occur on June 28, 1981, in
Lima, Peru, failed to materialize. Despite being dismissed by the U.S. National Earthquake
Prediction Evaluation Council, the prediction caused popular fear and many left the city.[25]
[edit] Failed Parkfield earthquake prediction
Main article: Parkfield earthquake
Based on a history of regularly spaced earthquakes in the early 20th century, the USGS in 1985
began an experiment based on the predictions and published papers of Allan Lindh and W.H.
Bakun of the USGS and T.V. McEvilly of the University of California at Berkeley. The goal was
to predict a 6.0 magnitude earthquake near Parkfield, California.[26]
"Bakun and Lindh summarized the state of the art in the Parkfield Prediction Experiment, and
predicted that a moderate-size earthquake would occur at Parkfield between 1985 and 1993.
Their prediction was unusual both in its precision (as to location, time and magnitude) and high
degree of confidence (95% within the 9-year window). Bakun and Lindh (1985) also suggested
that the predicted earthquake could produce extended rupture of the San Andreas fault to the
southeast, possibly growing to magnitude 6.5 to 7.0."[27]
Media attention focused on the prediction and the experiment. 122,000 pamphlets were mailed to
residents of the Parkfield area, entitled "The Parkfield Earthquake Prediction."[28] Despite the
prediction, such an earthquake did not occur until after the end of the prediction window, in
2004.[1]
[edit] Loma Prieta prediction
From 1968 to 1988 scientists in California mapped seismic activity on a cross section of the fault
lines. They identified a "seismic gap" in the Loma Prieta area from various features of the
regional seismicity. They therefore concluded that Loma Prieta was due for an earthquake.[citation
needed]
Smaller quakes several months beforehand were treated as possible foreshocks, but the
warnings had expired by the date of the moment magnitude 6.9 quake, on 17 October 1989.[1]
Further information: 1989 Loma Prieta earthquake
[edit] Failed New Madrid prediction by Iben Browning
In 1989 Iben Browning predicted a major earthquake in the New Madrid fault zone of southern
Missouri and specified December 2 or 3, 1990, as the most likely days. This prediction was
reported on extensively in the media and lead to great community concern. No earthquake
occurred on those days or thereafter.
[edit] Jim Berkland
Jim Berkland claims to have predicted the Loma Prieta quake,[29] but the mainstream scientific
community does not endorse his techniques as repeatable, attributing his success with this quake
partly to random chance.
[edit] Failed SoCal prediction
In early 2004, a group of scientists at the University of California, Los Angeles, led by Dr.
Vladimir Keilis-Borok, predicted that a quake similar in strength to the San Simeon earthquake
of 2003 would occur in a 12,000 square mile (31,100 km) area of Southern California by
September of that year. The odds were given as 50/50.
In April 2004, the California Earthquake Prediction Evaluation Council (CEPEC) evaluated
Keilis-Borok's prediction and reported to the California State Office of Emergency Services.[30]
CEPEC concluded that the "uncertainty along with the large geographic area included in the
prediction (about 12,400 square miles) leads (us) to conclude that the results do not at this time
warrant any special policy actions in California.” The predicted time window came and went
with no significant earthquake.
[edit] L'Aquila controversy
Giampaolo Giuliani claims to have predicted the 2009 L'Aquila earthquake. He was reported to
Italian police for "causing fear" but he was acquitted [31]. His prediction was dismissed by
scientists and politicians as a fluke.[32]
[edit] See also
• Forecasting
• Earthquake engineering
 • Earthquake storm
• Earthquake weather
• Geoforecasting
• Plate tectonics
• Convergent boundary
• Pacific Ring of Fire
• Alpide belt
[edit] References
1. ^ a b c d e f g Earthquake Prediction. Ruth Ludwin, U.S. Geological Survey.
2. ^ a b Expert: Earthquakes Hard To Predict. All Things Considered, 6 Apr 2009.
3. ^ L. Knopoff, Earthquake Prediction: The Scientific Challenge, Proceedings of the National
Academy of Sciences, 1999 ISBN 0309058376 page 3720
4. ^ Scientist Says Aftershocks Impossible to Predict. All Things Considered, 21 May 2008.
5. ^ Earthquake prediction: Gone and back again 7 Apr 2009, Earth magazine. (confirmation of
partial list)
6. ^ [1]
7. ^ THE CHARLATAN GAME. Matthew A. Mabey, Assistant Professor of Geology, Brigham
Young University.
8. ^ The Guardian : 5 April 2010 : The Man Who Predicted an Earthquake Retrieved 6 April 2010
9. ^ P. Varotsos, K. Alexopoulos, K. Nomicos and M. Lazaridou (1986). "Earthquake prediction
and electric signals". Nature (322): 120.
10.^ P. Varotsos and K. Alexopoulos (1987). "Physical properties of the variations in the electric
field of the earth preceding earthquakes, III". Tectonophysics (136): 335–339.
11.^ Glenn Richard (2001). "Earthquake Prediction: Haicheng, China - 1975". Earth Science
Educational Resource Center.
http://www.eserc.stonybrook.edu/wise/HSfall2001/QuakePrediction.html. Retrieved 2006-10-22.
Course notes for a workshop held at the Mineral Physics Institute at the Stony Brook University.
12.^ Can Scientists Predict When Quakes Will Strike?
13.^ Yoshizo Kawaguchi (April 6, 1998). "Charged Particle Emission and Luminescence upon
Bending Fracture of Granite". Jpn. J. Appl. Phys. 37: 3495–3499. doi:10.1143/JJAP.37.3495.
http://jjap.ipap.jp/link?JJAP/37/3495/. Retrieved 2008-10-13.
14.^ "Satellite défilant du CNES (France)". http://lettres-histoire.ac-rouen.fr/histgeo/demeter.htm.
Retrieved 2006-10-22. (French)
15.^ http://www.springerlink.com/content/g2v4612216741003/
16.^ Rachel Abercrombie (November 9, 2005). "The start of something big?". Nature: 171.
http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v438/n7065/index.html. Retrieved 2006-10-22.
17.^ T. Bleier and F. Freund (December 2005). "Earthquake [earthquake warning systems"].
Spectrum, IEEE 42 (12): 22–27. doi:10.1109/MSPEC.2005.1549778.
http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpl/freeabs_all.jsp?arnumber=1549778. Retrieved 2006-10-22.
 18.^ Toads can 'predict earthquakes' and seismic activity, BBC Earth News, March 31, 2010.
Retrieved on March 31, 2010.
19.^ E. S. Cochran and J. E. Vidale and S. Tanaka (2004). "Earth tides can trigger shallow thrust
fault earthquakes". Science (Science) 306 (5699): 1164–1166. doi:10.1126/science.1103961.
PMID 15498971. http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/306/5699/1164?
maxtoshow=&HITS=10&hits=10&RESULTFORMAT=&fulltext=Earth+tides+can+trigger+shal
low+thrust&searchid=1&FIRSTINDEX=0&resourcetype=HWCIT.
20.^ John H. Glaser; Bryan, Charles; Xu, Huifang; Gao, Huizhen (May 2003). "Tidal correlations of
seismicity". Geology: Online Forum - Breathing of the seafloor (The Geological Society of
America) 31: e3. doi:10.1130/0091-7613(2003)031<0387:NGRAMT>2.0.CO;2.
http://www.gsajournals.org/i0091-7613-31-6-e3.html.
21.^ Juan Zhao, Yanben Han and Zhian Li (June 2000). "Variation of Lunar-Solar Tidal Force and
Earthquakes in Taiwan Island of China". Earth, Moon, and Planets (Springer Netherlands) 88 (3 /
June, 2000): 123–129. doi:10.1023/A:1016571114719.
http://www.springerlink.com/content/y8r15x9n9qrn8upq/.
22.^ http://www.nature.com/nature/debates/earthquake/
23.^ "海城岫岩地震预测准确 (Roughly: Prediction of Youyan, Haicheng Earthquake was
precise)". People's Daily. December 6, 1999.
http://web.peopledaily.com.cn/rmrb/199912/06/newfiles/col_19991206001042_jryw.html.
Retrieved 2006-10-22. (Chinese)
24.^ What Ever Happened to Earthquake Prediction? by Christopher Scholz. March 1997.
25.^ http://www.earthmagazine.org/earth/article/1fe-7d9-4-7
26.^ Official Press Release of Parkfield Earthquake Prediction
27.^ http://earthquake.usgs.gov/research/parkfield/scibasis.php
28.^ http://earthquake.usgs.gov/research/parkfield/statuspolicy.php
29.^ CEPEC Keeps Eye On Earthquake Predictions
30.^ California Earthquake Prediction Evaluation Council (March 2002). "Report to the Director,
Governor's Office of Emergency Services" (PDF).
http://www.conservation.ca.gov/index/CEPEC_KB_Report_030204.pdf. Retrieved 2006-10-22.
31.^ http://www.repubblica.it/ultimora/24ore/TERREMOTO-GIULIANI-PROSCIOLTO-DA-
PROCURATO-ALLARME/news-dettaglio/3743013
32.^ "Row over Italian quake 'forecast'". BBC News. April 6, 2009.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/7986585.stm. Retrieved May 1, 2010.

[edit] Further reading

• Yan Y. Kagan (1997). "Special section-assessment of schemes for earthquake prediction; Are
earthquakes predictable?". Geophys. J. Int. 131: 505–525.
http://moho.ess.ucla.edu/~kagan/GJI_1997.pdf.

[edit] External links

• Nature magazine - extensive debate on whether earthquake prediction is a realistic
scientific goal
• Earthquake Prediction Topics U.S. Geological Survey
 • Earthquake forecasting techniques and more research on the study of electromagnetic
fields
• Studies on Tide-Forming Forces and Earthquakes were published in 1967 and 1968 by
Elsevier, but the U.S. Geological Survey: Common Myths About Earthquakes contradicts
this study.
• Plan for quake 'warning system' (BBC News)
• Shaky Forecasts (Science News)
• Panayiotis Varotsos, VAN earthquake prediction method
• How Storms Can Trigger Earthquakes
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earthquake_prediction"
Categories: Earthquake and seismic risk mitigation | Prediction | Earthquakes
Hidden categories: Articles needing additional references from January 2008 | All articles
needing additional references | All articles with unsourced statements | Articles with unsourced
statements from July 2010 | Articles with unsourced statements from April 2010 | Articles with
unsourced statements from April 2009
Personal tools
• New features
• Log in / create account
Namespaces
• Article
• Discussion
Variants
Views
• Read
• Edit
• View history
Actions
Search
Top of Form
Special:Search

Search

Bottom of Form
Navigation
• Main page
• Contents
• Featured content
• Current events
• Random article
Interaction
• About Wikipedia
• Community portal
• Recent changes
• Contact Wikipedia
• Donate to Wikipedia
• Help
Toolbox
• What links here
• Related changes
• Upload file
• Special pages
• Permanent link
• Cite this page
Print/export
• Create a book
• Download as PDF
• Printable version
Languages
• Deutsch
• Ελληνικά
• Esperanto
• 日本語
• Tagalog
• 中文
• This page was last modified on 3 September 2010 at 15:42.
• Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License;
additional terms may apply. See Terms of Use for details.
Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit
organization.
• Contact us
• Privacy policy
• About Wikipedia
• Disclaimers

•
•