Replies

was searching for something else but read your post on the magnetic field. There have been many quakes in oklahoma, do the seismologists take into account the geological make up of the crust where the quakes occur? Fracking is being blamed of course

"There have been many quakes in oklahoma, do the seismologists take into account the geological make up of the crust where the quakes occur? Fracking is being blamed of course"

Yes, they do. Faults are one example. They also consider materials.

I've only had an interest in specific bits of geological knowledge because of related technical work (drilling, construction and the like) and tend to read a little more at times.

With my lack of comprehensive education in mind, it doesn't seem that using liquid pressure to separate rock in one instance in a very localized spot would be likely to cause an earthquake. One might point to drilling exactly into a fault and inadvertently lubricating it with liquid pressure, but what would the chance of that happening?

My guess is an unusual bit of extra outer core movement--not the crust or inner core but the outer magnetic core of iron, nickel, etc., below the crust. There might also be faults or magma boils deeper in the crust that are not as apparent with contemporary technology used from our surface.

But then my guess does not come from a foundation of greater knowledge found in others. On the other hand, though, some others might be a little reluctant to speculate publicly much on some possible effects of a magnetic field flip (panic, opportunism, etc.).

By the way, some who are much more educated are guessing that the north magnetic pole might, after reaching some particular point in its travel, move around 50 degrees within one year. Maybe we’ll see, if the deviation continues to accelerate enough. Hard to tell, though, since the NOAA revised a list of previously derived data, and the other more well known labs are not issuing much news for the general public.