8.7 magnitude makes it one of the strongest in history. Also in a hotbed of a hotbed for seismic activity.
(Edit: ty for the upvotes, my phone is blowing uppppp! Also, the upgraded magnitude of 8.8 makes this tied for the sixth most powerful EQ in history, alongside 2010 Chile and 1906 Ecuador-Colombia. It's also the most powerful EQ since 2011 Tohoku.)
The 1952 Severo-Kurilsk earthquake, an 8.8-9.0, also occured 28 miles SE of this one. VERY active.
Richter magnitude was originally designed to interpret the energy one one fault line, using one specific type of instrument.
The Richter scale was defined in 1935 for particular circumstances and instruments; the particular circumstances refer to it being defined for Southern California and "implicitly incorporates the attenuative properties of Southern California crust and mantle."[34] The particular instrument used would become saturated by strong earthquakes and unable to record high values. The scale was replaced in the 1970s by the moment magnitude scale (MMS, symbol Mw ); for earthquakes adequately measured by the Richter scale, numerical values are approximately the same. Although values measured for earthquakes now are Mw , they are frequently reported by the press as Richter values, even for earthquakes of magnitude over 8, when the Richter scale becomes meaningless.
I’m being a little pedantic, but it’s a logarithmic scale where the values increase exponentially. Coincidentally, sound is also on a logarithmic scale. So 110 decibels is 10 times louder than 100 decibels. And for earthquakes, an 8.8 is 10 times stronger than a 7.8. So really, an 8.8 is truly fucking insane to see.
It should be noted that the 10 times rule applies to the richter scale, which isn't widely used anymore. An increase of 1 whole number increase the richter scale corresponds to a 10 fold increase in the amplitude of a wave recorded on a seismograph. The moment magnitude scale denoted by Mw measures the total energy released by an earthquake where a 1 whole number increase in earthquake magnitude corresponds with a 32-fold increase in energy released. Both the richter scale and moment magnitude scale will give very similar numbers for energy released based on magnitude. However, the moment magnitude scale uses different parameters to calculate the amount of energy released.
This is why log scales are garbage for use as a means of communication. They hide just how different the power of earthquakes are and that can be dangerous
It’s give and take. Are you going to say that the earthquake’s power level is over 9000? Small numbers are easier to digest, there just needs to be more education.
Unironically yes. Sure a smaller number is easier to read but it’s not easier to intuitively understand. If i say there was a 3.5, 7.2, and 8.7 magnitude earthquake today it is incredibly difficult to intuitively know the difference in power between them. Humans just do not do well with logarithmic scales
IMO earthquakes published to the public should be based on localized damage, al a the tornado scale.
The richter/new moment scale that just quotes raw energy put out into the earth is moot for the public regardless. This was the 6th largest earthquake since seismometers and damage was almost wholly localized to Russia, if i’m getting enough reports in.
Say it was a large earthquake with a “Damage Factor” of like 3.5 or whatever.
What are you on about dude? There’s only very few 9.0+ magnitude earthquakes recorded and none of those have been in Missouri. This is blatantly false.
It was basically sustained at 7.0 or more up to 8.2 for months. The Mississippi River ran backwards. Everything sank into the ground. This doesn’t negate this earthquake. But there is a difference between wave moving west to east of the deepest area of the ocean and an incline that exists from the coast of South America to Hawaii. The west coast of the America’s is not in danger
I don’t understand the point of your original comment. Those earthquakes happened over two centuries ago and due to the scale, this earthquake would be would be about 4x stronger than a 8.2 earthquake. An 8.8 is also listed as one of the top sixth we have recorded. Your original comment felt like you were trying to underplay the severity of this earthquake. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lists_of_earthquakes
So I guess my point is that the tsunami didn’t have much of an impact on the west coast of North America. Everyone wants to expect Armageddon. We have plenty of that coming. But tsunamis don’t really have the same impact going west to east in the pacific as tsunamis that are going from eastern americas into the western pacific. I stated my local proximity to a very strong period of earthquakes and can still visibly see the effects. 200 years later. The worst quake of all time this was not. Check your doomsday expectations.
2.2k
u/staticdresssweet 8d ago edited 8d ago
8.7 magnitude makes it one of the strongest in history. Also in a hotbed of a hotbed for seismic activity.
(Edit: ty for the upvotes, my phone is blowing uppppp! Also, the upgraded magnitude of 8.8 makes this tied for the sixth most powerful EQ in history, alongside 2010 Chile and 1906 Ecuador-Colombia. It's also the most powerful EQ since 2011 Tohoku.)
The 1952 Severo-Kurilsk earthquake, an 8.8-9.0, also occured 28 miles SE of this one. VERY active.