- #1
- 8,142
- 1,755
I am posting this only to bring to your attention what is likely a coincidence, but possibly interesting.
https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=6004
https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=6004
TOKYO, Sept. 26 — Three powerful earthquakes, one of them of potentially historic magnitude, struck Hokkaido in northern Japan early Friday morning, causing major structural damage, NBC News reported. The quakes injured more than 240 people and generated a 7-foot-high tsunami off the coast of Hokkaido. Tsunami advisories were issued for much of the Pacific region, including Japan, Russia and the Philippines.
Based on what?Originally posted by Ivan Seeking
The chance of coincidental success appears to be about 1:600 in this case.
The earthquake research establishment has largely ignored the warning.
Forecasting quakes is generally considered to be impossible with current technology, and Kushida's method of using anomalies in the VHF range of radio waves to predict the timing and intensity of tremors has not gained many believers in the scientific community.
Originally posted by russ_watters
Based on what?
Predicting earthquakes in Japan is like predicting snow in Utah or fog in England: not very difficult if you don't have to be too specific about it.
The earthquake research establishment has largely ignored the warning.
Forecasting quakes is generally considered to be impossible with current technology, and Kushida's method of using anomalies in the VHF range of radio waves to predict the timing and intensity of tremors has not gained many believers in the scientific community.
From your post it still isn't clear how you calculated that probability. Its really not that hard. From your numbers, the magnitude 5.5 earthquake was off by 200x from the predicted magnitude 7.0. Then multiply that by the frequency of magnitude 5.5 earthquakes in Tokyo (if I had to guess, I'd guess one or two a year). That would make the odds at best 1:200,000 of being that close on picking a day and a magnitude.Originally posted by Ivan Seeking
This estimate is based on data from the USGS. There have been 9 quakes in excess of 7.0 in Japan since 1891. Please see the linked thread in the S&D forum.
https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=6004
Originally posted by russ_watters
From your post it still isn't clear how you calculated that probability. Its really not that hard. From your numbers, the magnitude 5.5 earthquake was off by 200x from the predicted magnitude 7.0. Then multiply that by the frequency of magnitude 5.5 earthquakes in Tokyo (if I had to guess, I'd guess one or two a year). That would make the odds at best 1:200,000 of being that close on picking a day and a magnitude.
Originally posted by FZ+
Do we have any details on the theoretical background of his predictions?
Astronomers have been observing meteors using the back scattering (*1) of VHF radio waves beyond the range of sight. It was noticed that such observation detects specific temporal changes (preseismic anomalies) before the occurrence of an earthquake. The level of the temporal changes is proportional to the scale of the expected earthquake, and the time lag preceding the seismic activity varies depending on the type of earthquake. Our systematic observation continued since 1995 revealed the followings: (1) the region covered by radio monitoring is defined by the location and output power of each VHF transmission station; and (2) the anomalies detected by radio monitoring provide the basis for estimating the location, scale, and time of future earthquakes despite a certain degree of uncertainty. This document is based on the report "On a Possibility of Earthquake Forecast by Radio Observation in the VHF Band, 1998, Y. KUSHIDA and R. KUSHIDA, RIKEN Review, No. 19, p. 152-160," supplemented with new information from recent observation work.
Magnitude 5.4 WESTERN HONSHU, JAPAN
2003 September 24 20:56:54 UTC
Preliminary Earthquake Report
U.S. Geological Survey, National Earthquake Information Center
World Data Center for Seismology, Denver
Magnitude 5.4
Date-Time Wednesday, September 24, 2003 at 20:56:54 (UTC) - Coordinated Universal Time
Thursday, September 25, 2003 at 05:56:54 AM local time at epicenter
Time of Earthquake in other Time Zones
Location 35.37N 135.21E
Depth 370.2 kilometers
Region WESTERN HONSHU, JAPAN
Reference 80 km (50 miles) NNW of Osaka, Honshu, Japan
95 km (60 miles) E of Tottori, Honshu, Japan
120 km (75 miles) SW of Fukui, Honshu, Japan
415 km (255 miles) W of TOKYO, Japan
Location Quality Error estimate: horizontal +/- 6.9 km; depth fixed by location program
Location Quality
Parameters Nst=125, Nph=131, Dmin=300.0 km, Rmss=0.82 sec, Erho=6.9 km, Erzz=0 km, Gp=71.4 degrees
Source USGS NEIC (WDCS-D)
TIME [ 1400-035 ] [ JWS01/02P/D-001 ] [ Poster ]
AN INDEPENDENT EVALUATION OF THE WEST PACIFIC SHORT-TERM EARTHQUAKE FORECAST
Vladimir G. KOSSOBOKOV(IIEPT&MG, Russian Acad. Sci.; IPG de Paris)
Using the literal measure of territory in square km one may overestimate statistical significance of the obtained results by equalizing the areas of high and low seismic activity, at the extreme, areas where earthquake happen and do not happen. We suggest a natural null-hypothesis, i.e.,seismic roulette, which accounts for heterogeneity in spatial distribution of earthquakes for an assessment of the efficiency of an earthquake prediction algorithm and demonstrate how to apply it. Specifically, given the trek-record of the real-time earthquake probabilistic forecasts (http://scec.ess.ucla.edu/~ykagan/predictions_index.html; [Broken] Kagan and Jackson, 2000. Probabilistic forecasting of earthquakes, Geophys. J. Int., 143, 438-453), we analyze the predictions arising from setting a threshold probability or a threshold probability ratio. In either case, the effectiveness of prediction came out to be hardly better than random guessing. The conclusion holds even when evident aftershocks are included into statistic of successes.
So in effect, it appears to be an empirical observation, based on statistical correlations? I think I understand the doubt that was placed on his predictions... Hmm, it very interesting, but I think we should wait for more results before we can decide there is something in his method.Originally posted by Ivan Seeking
I couldn't find his website the first time I looked. It popped right up this time.
http://www.jpinfo.ne.jp/yatsu/yochi/egaku/ [Broken]
This appears to be the critical part of it. Would it be possible to cut out the meteor/radio bit and just directly measure for this to validate his hypothesis? And if this was the case in this earthquake, can this form part of a general method for all earthquakes? (Some rocks may respond like this, but could this just be a lucky break?)During the earthquake preparatory process, a change in mechanical stress caused by microcracks may alter electric charges on and near the Earth's surface.
Ah, but the question was what about his other predictions? Regardless of odds (since odds are tough, I'll let that line go) if he's made thousands of predictions and this is the only one that was even close, that would call his theory into question.Originally posted by Ivan Seeking
This is the information on the quake near Tokyo that was first associated with his prediction.
Originally posted by russ_watters
Ah, but the question was what about his other predictions? Regardless of odds (since odds are tough, I'll let that line go) if he's made thousands of predictions and this is the only one that was even close, that would call his theory into question.
Or maybe none. People tend to jump on the first prediction and if that's wrong they forget the person even existed. Pretty soon, 600 people have made predictions and lo and behold (with 1:600 odds), one gets a hit. EVERYONE predicts earthquakes. Hell, I have a bunch I'm predicting. I won't tell you when or where though - you have to buy my book.Originally posted by Ivan Seeking
True. I assumed [bad thing to do] that since his prediction caused such an uproar, he has not made too many false predictions in the past.
Originally posted by russ_watters
Or maybe none. People tend to jump on the first prediction and if that's wrong they forget the person even existed. Pretty soon, 600 people have made predictions and lo and behold (with 1:600 odds), one gets a hit. EVERYONE predicts earthquakes. Hell, I have a bunch I'm predicting. I won't tell you when or where though - you have to buy my book.
Originally posted by Nereid
To repeat what I said elsewhere, Did this guy make public, ahead of time, ALL his predictions? If so, we can assess his track record, by making sure we match (or not) his predictions against actual earthquakes, and vice versa.
Originally posted by zoobyshoe
Ivan,
You are giving the man credit for having gotten the magnitude right, but the time and location off somewhat. From the article you linked in the other thread the man himself is claiming the reverse, that he got the time and location right (The tokyo quake) but the magnitude off:
"But on Saturday, the city shook as a tremor measuring just 5.5 struck. The only injuries were caused when a wall at a Buddhist temple collapsed; seven people received minor bruises.
This week, Mr Kushida was claiming he had got it right. `The earthquake has already happened as I predicted,' he said from his observatory, arguing that his prediction was within the acceptable margin for error."
He is claiming that a 5.5 when he predicted >7 is "within the acceptable margin for error". As you demonstrated in the other thread however you chose to look at it, the difference between a 5.5 and a 7 is either large, or enormous.
So it bothers me that he is so cavalier about the aspect of his prediction that was so far off as to be outside any really accepable margin for error in my view. As far as the magnitude goes he was plainly wrong.
I think it's important to reiterate that he, himself, is not claiming success by adopting the Hokkaido quakes.
-Zooby
I agree. The prospect of knowing when a quake is going to occur because of definite, measurable signals it sends out shortly ahead of time would be priceless. I would definitely like to see more people around the world trying it, both to see homework much there is to it, and if there is anything, to refine it.Originally posted by Ivan Seeking
Hopefully his method will get the attention needed to sort this out.
zooby: He is claiming that a 5.5 when he predicted >7 is "within the acceptable margin for error" . As you demonstrated in the other thread however you chose to look at it, the difference between a 5.5 and a 7 is either large, or enormous.
Now let's see ... if he predicted 5.5, and the observed was >7, and this is "within the acceptable margin for error", does it follow that he could claim a <4 magnitude quake validated his work? And how frequently do earthquakes of mag <4 to >7 occur in that part of Japan?Ivan: Like I said, the mag 7 and 8 are what got my attention. The odds are still the odds.
Originally posted by Nereid
Now let's see ... if he predicted 5.5, and the observed was >7, and this is "within the acceptable margin for error", does it follow that he could claim a <4 magnitude quake validated his work? And how frequently do earthquakes of mag <4 to >7 occur in that part of Japan?
I think the odds just got rather shorter.
Astronomers use various methods, such as studying changes in the Earth's rotation and monitoring patterns in the moon's orbit, to make predictions about potential earthquakes. They also analyze data from satellite imaging and ground-based sensors.
Astronomers cannot accurately predict the exact date and time of an earthquake. They can only give a general estimate based on their research and data analysis. The predicted Tokyo earthquake could occur within a certain time frame, but it is impossible to determine an exact date.
Astronomers use various factors, such as the magnitude and location of previous earthquakes, to estimate the severity of a predicted earthquake. However, it is challenging to accurately determine the exact severity of an earthquake before it occurs.
No, astronomers cannot prevent an earthquake from occurring. While they can make predictions, it is not within their capabilities to stop natural disasters from happening.
It is essential for people to follow the safety guidelines provided by local authorities and be prepared for potential earthquakes. This includes having an emergency plan in place, preparing an emergency kit, and being aware of evacuation routes and shelter locations.