Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Surges of cosmic radiation from space directly linked to earthquakes

earth.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 246 posts

Re: Surges of cosmic radiation from space directly linked to earthquakes

#31

Post by heyjamesknight »

jjtheblunt wrote: post #19
idlewords wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The idea is loopy because the energy that reaches the earth from even a massive solar flare is orders of magnitude less than the energy released by a major earthquake, and that is orders of magnitudes less than the energies that drive the dynamo in the Earth's core. It's possible for a falling leaf to hit a mountain in just such a way that it dislodges a boulder balanced on top, but you need to tell a pretty compelli…

when people say "orders of magnitude" do they always mean base 10? (i'm thinking of how decibels are a log scale sort of thing wrt power, where "orders of magnitude" used as a cliche probably does not mean what it would be read as.)

I usually interpret it as "scales geometrically and not arithmetically".

Re: Surges of cosmic radiation from space directly linked to earthquakes

#32

Post by fractallyte »

phreeza wrote: post #17

In other news, the number of sociology graduates strongly correlates with the number of non-commercial space launches in a given year! https://www.tylervigen.com/spurious-correlations In all seriousness though, it is pretty easy to find such correlations and I would take them with a huge grain of salt. For example there was a long-running theory that sunspots had a causal relationship to influenza epidemics, which tu…

"Probably"

It's in that sliver of doubt that the big scientific discoveries lie...

Re: Surges of cosmic radiation from space directly linked to earthquakes

#33

Post by AnotherGoodName »

idlewords wrote: post #16
olivermarks wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why is 'sunspot activity driving changes in the Earth's dynamo that then kick off earthquakes' a loopy idea? We are hours away from coronal mass ejection catastrophe right now as solar cycle 20 builds in intensity. It seems reasonable to me that the complex relationship between the moon's gravitational pull and massive sun activity could affect our tiny little planet

The idea is loopy because the energy that reaches the earth from even a massive solar flare is orders of magnitude less than the energy released by a major earthquake, and that is orders of magnitudes less than the energies that drive the dynamo in the Earth's core. It's possible for a falling leaf to hit a mountain in just such a way that it dislodges a boulder balanced on top, but you need to tell a pretty compelli…

In fact i hypothesise they've inverted cause and effect.

Tectonic movements absolutely have the energy to move the earths magnetic field and the magnetic field blocks cosmic radiation. Something that moves the magnetic field would allow more cosmic radiation

There's only a handful of detectors outside of earths magnetic field. Orbiting satellites are even within its field of influence. Comparing this data to the measure of cosmic radiation from a deep space probe would be interesting to rule out that it's the earth movement increasing detected radiation and not the reverse

They may have simply discovered that tectonic movement changes how much cosmic radiation reaches our detectors.

Re: Surges of cosmic radiation from space directly linked to earthquakes

#34

Post by MobiusHorizons »

jjtheblunt wrote: post #19
idlewords wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The idea is loopy because the energy that reaches the earth from even a massive solar flare is orders of magnitude less than the energy released by a major earthquake, and that is orders of magnitudes less than the energies that drive the dynamo in the Earth's core. It's possible for a falling leaf to hit a mountain in just such a way that it dislodges a boulder balanced on top, but you need to tell a pretty compelli…

when people say "orders of magnitude" do they always mean base 10? (i'm thinking of how decibels are a log scale sort of thing wrt power, where "orders of magnitude" used as a cliche probably does not mean what it would be read as.)

The wikipedia article was actually pretty interesting on this point. They suggest that 10 is commonly used, but other bases may be contextually relevant.

> An order of magnitude is an approximation of the logarithm of a value relative to some contextually understood reference value, usually 10

I guess you could think of it like a _really_ low precision float or something.

1: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Order_of_magnitude

Re: Surges of cosmic radiation from space directly linked to earthquakes

#35

Post by CodeWriter23 »

idlewords wrote: post #16
olivermarks wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why is 'sunspot activity driving changes in the Earth's dynamo that then kick off earthquakes' a loopy idea? We are hours away from coronal mass ejection catastrophe right now as solar cycle 20 builds in intensity. It seems reasonable to me that the complex relationship between the moon's gravitational pull and massive sun activity could affect our tiny little planet

The idea is loopy because the energy that reaches the earth from even a massive solar flare is orders of magnitude less than the energy released by a major earthquake, and that is orders of magnitudes less than the energies that drive the dynamo in the Earth's core. It's possible for a falling leaf to hit a mountain in just such a way that it dislodges a boulder balanced on top, but you need to tell a pretty compelli…

Consider how an atomic bomb requires relatively little energy input compared to what is released. Combined with how very little practical observation we have of what's really going on in the Earth's core. It is certainly possible some phenomena is in play with Earthquakes.

Re: Surges of cosmic radiation from space directly linked to earthquakes

#36

Post by jjtheblunt »

MobiusHorizons wrote: post #34
jjtheblunt wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

when people say "orders of magnitude" do they always mean base 10? (i'm thinking of how decibels are a log scale sort of thing wrt power, where "orders of magnitude" used as a cliche probably does not mean what it would be read as.)

The wikipedia article was actually pretty interesting on this point. They suggest that 10 is commonly used, but other bases may be contextually relevant. > An order of magnitude is an approximation of the logarithm of a value relative to some contextually understood reference value, usually 10 I guess you could think of it like a _really_ low precision float or something. 1: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Order_of_mag…

I suspect the phrase is a cliche often used to sound scientific and sometimes by folks unaware, like how description of growth as “exponential” is a cliche used by non-mathematical discussion.

Re: Surges of cosmic radiation from space directly linked to earthquakes

#37

Post by hammock »

ozgung wrote: post #15
athenot wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe not control but the ability to have an advance warning would be a huge gain in terms of public safety.

“There may or may not be an earthquake somewhere in the world, including oceans, in 15 days” is not a very useful warning though, if not harmful.

It would be better than anything else we have at the moment

Re: Surges of cosmic radiation from space directly linked to earthquakes

#38

Post by aaomidi »

29athrowaway wrote: post #13

Unrolling tape produces x-rays. Is the radiation causing earthquakes or it is caused by earthquakes (due to some unknown phenomenon?)

Well there’s a 15 day delay between them so, I think it’s be harder to have the opposite :D

Re: Surges of cosmic radiation from space directly linked to earthquakes

#39

Post by phoenixstrike »

idlewords wrote: post #6

The key claim in the paper ( https://arxiv.org/pdf/2204.12310.pdf ) is that there are detectable changes in cosmic ray activity around 15 days before major seismic events. One posited mechanism is that stuff happens deep in the earth that affects the magnetic field first, and then kicks off some big earthquake. But they don't rule out loopier ideas (like sunspot activity driving changes in the Earth's dynamo that the…

This is good research.

>One thing that troubles me in the paper is that the researchers appear to have gone looking for precursor patterns in an ad hoc way, with no physical theory in mind, just trying different binning techniques and delays until they got a signal.

There is nothing wrong with this. In fact this is how most science is done. This is pure experiment - try things and see what comes up.

You're conflating this step with step three of the general way things have traditionally been done in physics:

1. An experiment shows a previously unexplained phenomena.

2. A theory is made to explain the results and predict the results of a future experiment.

3. A future experiment is undertaken with this theory in mind, to see if it has predictive power. If the predictions are correct, it is a good theory.

Your comment is referring to step three. The experiment in the paper is step one.

Re: Surges of cosmic radiation from space directly linked to earthquakes

#40

Post by AnotherGoodName »

amelius wrote: post #5

> He emphasizes that the Earth’s magnetic field, a result of eddy currents in our planet’s liquid core, alters the trajectory of primary cosmic radiation’s charged particles. > Therefore, any substantial earthquakes linked to disturbances in the Earth’s dynamo flows would alter the magnetic field, thus impacting the path of primary cosmic radiation. The fallout of these alterations would be apparent in the changes in…

Well a confounding variable would be that we already know tectonic movements change the magnetic field.

In fact that's the thing that triggers alarms for me here. Haven't they just found that we detect more cosmic rays when there's tectonic movement?

Cosmic rays are influenced by the magnetic field and the magnetic field is influenced by tectonic movement. Why are they pushing the line that cosmic rays cause earthquakes when there's a reasonable and testable alternative - we detect more cosmic rays when there's tectonic movement.

Post reply on HN