Posted on 07/18/2016 7:49:56 PM PDT by BenLurkin
This is a total fantasy.
Everyone knows when a whole bunch of dogs start barking at the same time earthquakes happen.
Not so. They are caused by climate change.
Jim Berkland, please pick up the white courtesy geophone...
ping
Sounds like an engineering nightmare.
If gravity between large heavenly bodies has anything to do with it..
Who ya gonna call? GHostbusters? :-)
Quakes have been around 2.0 but they are patterning like a zipper.
Similar depth and one seems to trip off two others.
This is a different pattern than I’ve been seeing during the last year.
Probably nothing but I do think it is interesting to watch.
If we start seeing a growing quantity or intensity, this would be a change from the norm.
I have a theory that very large quake tend to de-stablize the Ring of Fire.
We have seen Great Quakes in the last 10 years in all of the key areas around the Ring of Fire with the exception of the west coast of the USA/Canada
For 5 years I’ve been casually monitoring quake activity in the Pacific and actually predicted a very large one in Kamchatka about 3 years ago.
Oh, sure, laugh if you will.
Everyone knows Global WarmingTM is caused by human activity, (specifically by selfish Americans), and that if we all don't cut all electricity to our homes, destroy our evil SUV's and quit exhaling that Erf destroying C02 , we're all going to die!
Do you really want to die because of your poor life choices?!
Hmmmm. I'll have to think about that. 😀😀😄
The tidal force of a nearby object is proportional to the inverse CUBE of its distance times the mass of the object. This happens to be the density of the object times the cube of the ratio of its diameter to its distance.
But the apparent diameter in the sky of this object is simply the ratio of its diameter to its distance, so the tidal force is proportional to its density times the cube of its apparent diameter.
( This is my own observation, BTW. )
Thus, since the sun and moon have about the same apparent diameter ( nearly exactly, in fact ) the lesser tidal force of the sun is a demonstration of its lesser ( average ) density.
Also, with the density of the other planets being the same or somewhat less than the moon, it follows that their tidal influence is limited by the cube of their apparent diameters, making this influence in each case very much less than the tidal influence of the moon or sun. You do the math!
LOL, some of these earthquake, hurricane, earth-destroying comet threads just drive me nuts. :-)
The moon being full has nothing to do with it’s gravity....it doesn’t change.
Agreed.
I can do the math.
I have the density part down to a tee.
Well, how about the apparent diameter part? I'm on tenterhooks.
Apparent diameter? Those bodies have a round shape like me.
But you don’t want to see my moon.
bookmark
This is, in other words, the angular diameter of the object as it appears in the sky, expressed in radians. The apparent diameter of the sun and the moon is about 1/100, meaning that they are each distant from the earth by about 100 of their own diameters ( rule of thumb. )
The Moon being Full means it is on the opposite side of the Earth from The Sun, so it is like the Sun pulling one of your arms, and the Moon is pulling your other arm and they are trying to split you in two.
I believe the reference is to the alignment of the sun and the moon, which occurs at “full” and “new” moons. These correspond to “spring tides” as opposed to “neap tides”, which occur at the first and third quarter moon.
I think this is all very tenuous reasoning, but it does make some kind of sense that the response, in the form of an earthquake, would occur at the maximum of the presumed influence, i.e. at “spring tide”.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.