Live data from Hacker News

Earthquake in Japan yesterday may have shifted land 1.3 meters

www3.nhk.or.jp

21–30 of 87 posts

Re: Earthquake in Japan yesterday may have shifted land 1.3 meters

#21
post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's even harder than harvesting lightnings.

I'm not sure about that. Drill some holes, pump some water, and geothermal power straight to the grid can be done. Harvesting lighting would require innumerable towers and even would require some trickery to get it hooked up to our power grids.

That’s not kinetic earthquake energy, though.

I think in an apples-to-apples comparison, you would need to attach some kind of device to absorb the kinetic energy from the fault.

Re: Earthquake in Japan yesterday may have shifted land 1.3 meters

#22

How property rights work when land shifts?

In California, you file an action in court and they will redraw the property lines in a fair manner, allowing everyone affected to have a say in what counts as "fair".

https://law.justia.com/codes/california/2009/ccp/751.50-751....

Re: Earthquake in Japan yesterday may have shifted land 1.3 meters

#23
post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's even harder than harvesting lightnings.

I'm not sure about that. Drill some holes, pump some water, and geothermal power straight to the grid can be done. Harvesting lighting would require innumerable towers and even would require some trickery to get it hooked up to our power grids.

Or one clock tower and a flux capacitor...

Re: Earthquake in Japan yesterday may have shifted land 1.3 meters

#24

This is a very sad example of land movement and it's a tragedy that people have died in the aftermath and recovery effort. But it's also an important reminder that our super accurate GPS measurements are not 100% reliable over time. The earth moves. Either in jumps like this or fairly constantly if it's somewhere like Australia [0] 0 - https://www.nytimes.com/2016/09/24/world/what-in-the-world/a...

> reminder that our super accurate GPS measurements are not 100% reliable Lockheed solved this with their super sensitive Magnetic Field ' GPS ' device - which they claim if for having 'GPS' accuracy for aircraft and ships nearly 100% based on the localized magnetic signature of the earth - but we all know these are actually built for subterranian/submarine environs where space based GPS no cut it. Can't navigate Aga…

How is this solved?

The surface of the earth just shifted in a highly non-linear and non-uniform way. Places are not at the same coordinates or at the same distances from each other they were last week.

Re: Earthquake in Japan yesterday may have shifted land 1.3 meters

#25

How property rights work when land shifts?

An example for Alaska.

https://storymaps.arcgis.com/stories/662519e4406946faa6e655d...

> Land within the Refuge that is tidally influenced up to the mean high-tide level, is managed by the Alaska Department of Fish and Game (ADF&G) for its unique recreational and wildlife values. As post-glacial rebound lifts the outer edges of the Refuge beyond the reach of the tides, the Refuge boundary shrinks. --->>> When glacial rebound lifts this new land above the high tide line, landowners adjacent to the Refuge can go through a legal process to claim this new land as a part of their property. And on the wiki page for post-glacial rebound, Finland has an example: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post-glacial_rebound#Legal_imp...

> In areas where the rising of land is seen, it is necessary to define the exact limits of property. In Finland, the "new land" is legally the property of the owner of the water area, not any land owners on the shore. Therefore, if the owner of the land wishes to build a pier over the "new land", they need the permission of the owner of the (former) water area. The landowner of the shore may redeem the new land at market price.

Re: Earthquake in Japan yesterday may have shifted land 1.3 meters

#26

How property rights work when land shifts?

As I understand it (at least in the US), your land rights are based off of relative measurements from a static (to the land) point. They often look like medallions on the ground, anchored in place by fairly sizable stakes to ensure they don't easily move. The positions of those medallions... not as sure, but I imagine they are in turn positioned according to other static points. If the land cracks, well, I have no id…

Reminds me of this marker story: "Belgian farmer accidentally moves French border" [1]

[1] https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-56978344

Re: Earthquake in Japan yesterday may have shifted land 1.3 meters

#27

This is a very sad example of land movement and it's a tragedy that people have died in the aftermath and recovery effort. But it's also an important reminder that our super accurate GPS measurements are not 100% reliable over time. The earth moves. Either in jumps like this or fairly constantly if it's somewhere like Australia [0] 0 - https://www.nytimes.com/2016/09/24/world/what-in-the-world/a...

> But it's also an important reminder that our super accurate GPS measurements are not 100% reliable over time. The earth moves.

This is IMO an odd statement. Land moves, and we can measure that movement extremely precisely. If software was more competent, we would record positions in four dimensions: space and time, relative to a well defined coordinate system. And we could map a position at one time to a position at another time, with excellent accuracy.

As far as I can tell, the only real limitations are a lack of standards and a lack of software support. I don’t think any common CAD or GIS system has any particular support. Heck, QGIS will happily complain that WGS84 isn’t good for high precision, and I can even tell whether this is a genuinely meaningful statement.

Re: Earthquake in Japan yesterday may have shifted land 1.3 meters

#28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> reminder that our super accurate GPS measurements are not 100% reliable Lockheed solved this with their super sensitive Magnetic Field ' GPS ' device - which they claim if for having 'GPS' accuracy for aircraft and ships nearly 100% based on the localized magnetic signature of the earth - but we all know these are actually built for subterranian/submarine environs where space based GPS no cut it. Can't navigate Aga…

How is this solved? The surface of the earth just shifted in a highly non-linear and non-uniform way. Places are not at the same coordinates or at the same distances from each other they were last week.

Read the link. The quantum magnetic locator doesnt use GPS satellites, so the "our GPS is not 100% accurate" is solved by the magnetic quantum thing... its just not available on _your_ smartphone.

Re-read my post, I believe that the real use of Lockheeds Quantum GPS is for subterranian and submarine navigation more than it is for aircraft - hoever, if we can map the magnetosphere of other planets, say, mars, then this could be a non-satellite-dependant GPS for any body in space where we know the magnetic signature based on probes... although said probes could also double as GPS satellites for the planet they are probing should we add such equipment, it would seem.

Re: Earthquake in Japan yesterday may have shifted land 1.3 meters

#29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not sure about that. Drill some holes, pump some water, and geothermal power straight to the grid can be done. Harvesting lighting would require innumerable towers and even would require some trickery to get it hooked up to our power grids.

That’s not kinetic earthquake energy, though. I think in an apples-to-apples comparison, you would need to attach some kind of device to absorb the kinetic energy from the fault.

A building-sized piezo crystal?

Re: Earthquake in Japan yesterday may have shifted land 1.3 meters

#30

Australia updated its latitude and longitude somewhat recently because of continental drift: > The Geocentric Datum of Australia, the country’s local coordinate system, was last updated in 1994, and Australia is now about 1.5m further north-north-east (or, to give the metric used in a BBC infographic: about the height of a kangaroo). * https://www.theguardian.com/science/2016/aug/03/mind-the-gap... * https://www.ga.g…

Australia’s geocentric datum is pretty boring, because Australia’s tectonics are pretty boring. We just don’t get large earthquakes. So the GDA94 → GDA2020 update is actually pretty minor.

If my understanding is correct, the 1.8m difference sometimes talked of between ITRF92 and GDA94 by 2020 is actually irrelevant so long as you do proper projection of your coordinates, which you should, but some things don’t—and so tweaking your reference point from time to time to compensate is pragmatic (in part because it lets people skip deformation models where a metre or so of accuracy is adequate, so temper my “should”). The GDA94 → GDA2020 update is more about certain changes in ITRF1992 → ITRF2014 (~9cm changes in ellipsoidal heights), and local crust deformations. Mass updating from GDA94 to GDA2020 is an easy reprojection.

In saying GDA94 is actually fine as far as continental drift is concerned: the thing most people don’t realise is that all of these coordinate systems are actually time-dependent transformations: they’ve got forecast continental drift baked in. So later datum updates just need to record what actually happened, if it was different enough (which it will be in places).

Now real earthquakes—they make things much more interesting. I like what https://www.linz.govt.nz/guidance/geodetic-system/coordinate... says:

> Some earthquakes, such as those of the Canterbury earthquake sequence starting in 2010, have caused metres of movement. Where this has happened we have updated the coordinates rather than simply include the movement in the deformation model. This is necessary as otherwise the coordinates will not be accurate enough for many applications. The deformation model still includes the earthquake deformation, but it is applied in reverse to transform coordinates for dates before the earthquake.

The deformation model page https://www.linz.govt.nz/guidance/geodetic-system/coordinate...> is also rather interesting, giving details of when they’ve released new deformation models, including both forward and reverse patches due to earthquakes, and it’s messy. I haven’t thought too deeply about the reverse patching technique (this isn’t a domain I work in) but I don’t think I like it (though it may be pragmatic) because it messes with epoch-era NZGD2000 points, seems to undermine the purpose of a datum unless you have recorded the coordinate times as well (rather than merely transforming to the epoch, which has now been spoiled). Did have a fun chat with a telecommunications field worker that I happened to meet when I was in New Zealand in 2021, who had a lot of interesting experience after the 2016 Kaikoura earthquake. Lots of stuff I’m not used to thinking about, coming from boring old Australia.

Post reply on HN