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

81–90 of 246 posts

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

#81

Post by zackees »

vanderZwan wrote: post #70
zackees wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

“Fringe scientists” have been saying that cosmic and solar particles have been causing earthquakes for a long time. It seems counter intuitive but an analogy is very simple: A 15 mph breeze will do almost nothing to push a person, but will exert tremendous force on a sail of sufficient size. Earth, in this analogy, is a really big sail.

The counter-argument is equally simple: a sail is a surface. The earth is a sphere. A sphere made of solid rock the size of a sail will be even less moved by a 15 mph breeze than this hypothetical person.

We aren't talking about the earth being blown off course though, just that there is a large amount of energy that was previously unaccounted for and that this energy is large enough to trigger an earth quake at vulnerable parts.

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

#82

Post by detrites »

dylan604 wrote: post #51
hammock wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

Personally, I prefer waiting for all of the animals to seek higher ground as my seismic activity indicator.

Seems figuring out what it is they're doing and duplicating it would be a straightforward thing to do. Surely there's a research group working on it?

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

#83

Post by dekhn »

busyant wrote: post #79
dekhn wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

it's quite common in medical research, even highly quantitative work. And I've seen it in every field I've worked in, which spans biology, physics, chemistry, typically with a quantitative bent. I once had an advisor edit my draft over night and submit it as a paper with a bunch of juiced up numbers that weren't true, but made sense to the advisor even if the underlying scripts I ran didn't support it. I complained t…

> I once had an advisor edit my draft over night and submit it as a paper with a bunch of juiced up numbers that weren't true, I'm stating the obvious here, but that is not a good advisor in any sense. It must have been difficult to leave, but it would be the only reasonable response.

Well, if I'd wanted a career in science and didn't have ethics, then they would have been a good advisor because they knew exactly how to ride their wave of falsehood to a professorship at Berkeley.

It wasn't hard to leave, I just contacted another professor at berkeley and joined their lab the next day. The new advisor, while fairly dull, was methodic and pedantic and the idea of faking or juicing results would probably never have occured to him.

In short, in science if you're not a super-genius, it can be hard to compete with the super-geniuses and the cheaters. I found it easier to move to computer engineering than stay in science.

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

#84

Post by mikewarot »

vanderZwan wrote: post #70
zackees wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

“Fringe scientists” have been saying that cosmic and solar particles have been causing earthquakes for a long time. It seems counter intuitive but an analogy is very simple: A 15 mph breeze will do almost nothing to push a person, but will exert tremendous force on a sail of sufficient size. Earth, in this analogy, is a really big sail.

The counter-argument is equally simple: a sail is a surface. The earth is a sphere. A sphere made of solid rock the size of a sail will be even less moved by a 15 mph breeze than this hypothetical person.

>The earth is a sphere. A sphere made of solid rock [...]

The earth is NOT a solid rock. It's a very thin layer of rock, floating on top of a pool of magma, itself floating in space. The rock itself flows on all sorts of time scales as well.

A sphere will be forced by the wind, almost the same amount as any other object, regardless of its density or weight.

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

#85

Post by gus_massa »

hammock wrote: post #37
ozgung wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

“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

From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_earthquakes_2021%E2%80... there were 44 earthquakes with a magnitude >= 7.0 in the last 2.5 years. That is one every 17 days. The GP is almost correct: There is a high chance [1] of an earthquake somewhere in the world, including oceans, in 17 days.

[1] If you want to be fancy with probabilities, 64% of at least one earthquake. In some 17 days periods you will get no earthquake and in others you will get more than one earthquake. In average you will get one.

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

#86

Post by dotnet00 »

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.

If the magnitude of the quake can be estimated from it, it can be somewhat useful for response agencies in earthquake and tsunami prone areas to make sure their ducks are in a row. Kind of like how storm season tends to make people make sure their emergency supplies are in order, even if their area doesn't tend to get hit by big storms.

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

#87

Post by dotnet00 »

jjk166 wrote: post #56
CodeWriter23 wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Atomic bombs don't simply assemble themselves naturally though.

Not exactly atomic bombs, but we do have evidence of naturally occurring, self sustaining nuclear reactors having operated for potentially hundreds of thousands of years in Earth's past (https://www.wikiwand.com/en/Natural_nuclear_fission_reactor)

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

#88

Post by blibble »

mikewarot wrote: post #84
vanderZwan wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The counter-argument is equally simple: a sail is a surface. The earth is a sphere. A sphere made of solid rock the size of a sail will be even less moved by a 15 mph breeze than this hypothetical person.

>The earth is a sphere. A sphere made of solid rock [...] The earth is NOT a solid rock. It's a very thin layer of rock, floating on top of a pool of magma, itself floating in space. The rock itself flows on all sorts of time scales as well. A sphere will be forced by the wind, almost the same amount as any other object, regardless of its density or weight.

> It's a very thin layer of rock, floating on top of a pool of magma

it's not a pool of magma, the mantle is basically solid

(except on very large timescales)

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

#89

Post by formerly_proven »

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…

> 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 ... just trying different binning techniques and delays until they got a signal.

That's just p-hacking.

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

#90

Post by refibrillator »

Our understanding of the relationship between sun and earth has barely begun to sprout.

Popular discourse tends to be dominated by Newtonian ideas, as if earth was simply a rock in empty space orbiting a massive fireball called the sun. We landed on the surface of the moon by using such approximations. But they fail to explain many observations that modern technology has opened our eyes to.

For example, the coronal heating problem [1]. Possibly one of the greatest unanswered questions in astrophysics. Why does the temperature of the sun’s atmosphere increase as you get further away from the surface? We still don’t know exactly. But we have some hints.

Voyager 1 revealed to us that the dynamics of the heliosphere are much more complex than we imagined [2].

And we have observed that the sun emits a powerful electromagnetic field, which is intimately connected to a variety of spectacular phenomena here on earth. Like the northern lights, aka auroras [3]. Or massive electrical discharges in thunderstorms which reach into the highest layers of Earth’s atmosphere [4].

So I implore you to consider, why wouldn’t earthquakes be explained by solar dynamics? If not completely, at least partially.

It seems we may be on the cusp of realizing that our solar system - and perhaps our entire galaxy - is connected through electromagnetism. Entirely new fields like “space weather” and “plasma cosmology” are rising up from the depths of ideation and research. What a time to be alive.

[1] https://www.nasa.gov/feature/goddard/2018/nasa-s-parker-sola...

[2] https://www.nasa.gov/vision/universe/solarsystem/voyager-092...

[3] https://www.nasa.gov/feature/goddard/2016/nasa-s-themis-sees...

[4] https://umbra.nascom.nasa.gov/spd/sprites.html

Post reply on HN