XPost: sci.geo.geology, van.general, sci.geo.earthquakes   
   From: into@oblivion.nothing.com   
      
   Paul in Houston TX  wrote in news:jgl21v$g3h$1@dont-   
   email.me:   
      
   > David Dalton wrote:   
   >> In article ,   
   >>  Paul in Houston TX  wrote:   
   >>   
   >>> David Dalton wrote:   
   >>>> Could the recent magnitude 5.7 earthquake off the BC coast   
   >>>> be a foreshock to a larger earthquake?   
   >>> No.   
   >>   
   >> Why not?   Is it not located on a major fault or   
   >> plate boundary?   
   >>   
   > I suppose it is possible.   
   > However, a 5.7 is a pretty good stress reliever.   
      
   Compared to what?   
      
   Each point in magnitude is ~32x increase in energy, therefore   
   it would take 32 magnitude 5.7 quakes to equal the same energy   
   as a 6.7 quake. If you want to relieve the stress of a 7.7   
   quake, you'd need 1000 of these 5.7 quakes.   
      
   Cascadia has the potential of a magnitude 9. Let's make it   
   easy and say we need to relieve the 'stress' of a mag 8.7.   
   How many of these 5.7's do we need? Yep, about 32 thousand!!!   
      
   The point here is that this 5.7 didn't do diddly squat to reduce   
   the chances of a larger quake in the future.   
      
   Brian   
   --   
   http://www.skywise711.com - Lasers, Seismology, Astronomy, Skepticism   
   Sed quis custodiet ipsos Custodes?   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)