More tsunamis for the morbidly curious:
https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Megatsunami
Record stands at 524m high.
Video of tsunami in Japan
51–60 of 70 posts
Re: Video of tsunami in Japan
#52Opera displays a Blank Page, Chrome attempts to play the video with no controls and Firefox tries do download the mp4 file. What on earth is going on here? EDIT: it was just taking too damn long. Could be my connection, though.
Transcoded to Flash video. I'll keep it up unless my host has a problem about copyright... http://deathbycomputers.co.uk/crapandstuff/1605260179420_262...
Why not transcode to WebM?
Re: Video of tsunami in Japan
#53And somehow we think we are masters of the planet. When nature's true forces come to bear there isn't much we have ever built that stands in the way. Here's to wishing all those that survived a speedy recovery and my condolences to those who know people who didn't make it.
To be fair, theres nothing of nature's that stands in nature's way. It ruins it's own shit too. It's all entropy right?
Can't find the source from months back, but, us humans were constantly trying to stop all forest fires in near-populated area's, which were needed (by nature) to clear area's for other vegetation which can't grow in certain over abundances of tree species.
Re: Video of tsunami in Japan
#54More tsunamis for the morbidly curious: https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Megatsunami Record stands at 524m high.
Just to be clear, a megatsunami is not usually caused by earthquakes, but rather other events and are very rare.
Normal tsunami: https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Tsunami
Re: Video of tsunami in Japan
#55I remember when I was really little my dad telling me that water was so much scarier than fire because it can't be stopped... Looks like proof.
Re: Video of tsunami in Japan
#56I wonder how do insurance companies survive such natural disasters?
Re: Video of tsunami in Japan
#57What is the possibility that the guy driving the car at the beginning outraced the tsunami?
Re: Video of tsunami in Japan
#58I wonder if an artificial tsunami of the same scale can be achieved my setting off a nuclear bomb underwater? This seems to be more damaging (infrastructure-wise) than a direct nuke hit.
According to wikipedia scale an 8.8 magnitude earthquake has approximately the same energy release as a 288 megaton nuke. Since the largest nuclear bomb ever was 100 megaton and a 35km radius for the zone of total destruction, direct bombing is almost certainly more damaging.
I (morbidly) wonder if it would be possible to set off a tsunami with just the explosion, without necessarily the ground movement. It would seem to me that a lot of the earthquake's energy release would go into shaking the ground.
Anyway, the story of that bomb is interesting too: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tsar_Bomba
Re: Video of tsunami in Japan
#59Earlier quoted context omitted.
According to wikipedia scale an 8.8 magnitude earthquake has approximately the same energy release as a 288 megaton nuke. Since the largest nuclear bomb ever was 100 megaton and a 35km radius for the zone of total destruction, direct bombing is almost certainly more damaging.
I (morbidly) wonder if it would be possible to set off a tsunami with just the explosion, without necessarily the ground movement. It would seem to me that a lot of the earthquake's energy release would go into shaking the ground. Anyway, the story of that bomb is interesting too: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tsar_Bomba
You could, perhaps, trigger an underwater quake by bombing a fault zone with a large enough nuke (or sequence them as to compound the shock)
Re: Video of tsunami in Japan
#60I wonder if an artificial tsunami of the same scale can be achieved my setting off a nuclear bomb underwater? This seems to be more damaging (infrastructure-wise) than a direct nuke hit.
According to wikipedia scale an 8.8 magnitude earthquake has approximately the same energy release as a 288 megaton nuke. Since the largest nuclear bomb ever was 100 megaton and a 35km radius for the zone of total destruction, direct bombing is almost certainly more damaging.
Can you post the link? The USGS says 25,000 nukes would be needed to match the power of a 9.0 earthquake.