(N.Morgan) As Chile is trying to recover from the latest earthquakes there, experts warns this wasn’t the big earthquake they were expecting and warns of a bigger quake on the horizon. While Tuesday’s earthquake in Chile was large by any measure, seismologists remain concerned it could have been a foreshock. Experts cannot predict when the quake will occur, only that it will.
Tell me why Chile had a stronger earthquake than Japan and Japan got slapped hard with a mega tsunami whereas Chile did not really see much in terms of a tsunami?
John
probably because japans earthquake was in the sea and a larger more destructive tsunami would have occurred whereas this one seems to have happened on land therefore pushing the water away from Chile…its simple ripples in the pond effect, the ripples on the pond are much smaller when the rock is thrown on the ground (probably no even visible to the naked eye but still there as a vibration) than when it is thrown in the water (which would produce huge ripples compared to the other way)
Tsunamis are not perfectly understood. It could be that a few things make the difference:
1) Location. The topography of that portion of the sea floor could have contained or minimized wave energy.
2) Amount of lift. The portion of crust that thrust upward could have been relatively small.
3) Energy. The Japanese event was nearly 10x stronger, but not all big quakes produce big tsunami (see next).
4) Speed. Depending on the circumstances, a weaker, slow-frequency shake can produce stronger, taller tsunami than bigger, fast frequency quakes.
Awesome.
Tell me why Chile had a stronger earthquake than Japan and Japan got slapped hard with a mega tsunami whereas Chile did not really see much in terms of a tsunami?
probably because japans earthquake was in the sea and a larger more destructive tsunami would have occurred whereas this one seems to have happened on land therefore pushing the water away from Chile…its simple ripples in the pond effect, the ripples on the pond are much smaller when the rock is thrown on the ground (probably no even visible to the naked eye but still there as a vibration) than when it is thrown in the water (which would produce huge ripples compared to the other way)
@Mike Rotchurts. That epicenter map is incorrect. The center was at sea, though not far off the coast.
Tsunamis are not perfectly understood. It could be that a few things make the difference:
1) Location. The topography of that portion of the sea floor could have contained or minimized wave energy.
2) Amount of lift. The portion of crust that thrust upward could have been relatively small.
3) Energy. The Japanese event was nearly 10x stronger, but not all big quakes produce big tsunami (see next).
4) Speed. Depending on the circumstances, a weaker, slow-frequency shake can produce stronger, taller tsunami than bigger, fast frequency quakes.