Does maximum earthquake size depend on focal depth?

被引:0
|
作者
Frohlich, C [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Texas, Inst Geophys, Austin, TX 78759 USA
关键词
D O I
暂无
中图分类号
P3 [地球物理学]; P59 [地球化学];
学科分类号
0708 ; 070902 ;
摘要
While the Gutenberg-Richter "law" (GR) with b-value of 1.0 is an inexact description of the earthquake frequency-magnitude distribution, it does provide a convenient statistical basis for identifying when the largest earthquakes in a catalog are either anomalously large or anomalously small. When the largest earthquakes are as predicted by the GR distribution, it is inappropriate to infer that the largest historically known earthquake is the largest possible. Only when the largest observed earthquakes are significantly smaller than predicted can we infer that the largest possible earthquakes have occurred. Analysis of the global historical catalog demonstrates that at nearly all depths, the largest deep and intermediate earthquakes have sizes close to those predicted by a GR distribution with b of 1.0. Only between about 300 to 450 km and beneath 600 km are the largest known earthquakes somewhat larger than predicted. However, when geographically isolatable subgroups within catalogs are considered separately, largest earthquakes that are either anomalously large or small are quite common. Often this is because individual regions have b-values much different than 1.0; alternatively, sometimes there appear to be physical constraints limiting the size of the largest possible earthquake. As examples illustrating these assertions, this article evaluates two subgroups-deep-focus earthquakes occurring beneath Spain and intermediate-depth earthquakes in the Bucaramanga, Colombia, "nest.".
引用
收藏
页码:329 / 336
页数:8
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] Does the inheritance of differences in general size depend upon general or special size factors?
    Castle, WE
    PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 1924, 10 : 19 - 22
  • [22] DOES PERCEPTUAL ADAPTATION TO TELESTEREOSCOPICALLY ENHANCED DEPTH DEPEND ON THE RECALIBRATION OF BINOCULAR DISPARITY
    FISHER, SK
    EBENHOLTZ, SM
    PERCEPTION & PSYCHOPHYSICS, 1986, 40 (02): : 101 - 109
  • [23] FOCAL DEPTH INFORMATION FROM THE SH BODY WAVE SPECTRUM OF A DEEP EARTHQUAKE
    MANTOVANI, E
    GASPERINI, P
    PURE AND APPLIED GEOPHYSICS, 1980, 118 (06) : 1234 - 1247
  • [24] Focal Mechanism and Focal Depth of the May 22,2016 MS4.6 Earthquake in Chaoyang,Liaoning
    Zhao Xing
    Zhang Fan
    Han Xiaoming
    Wang Shubo
    Wei Jianmin
    Earthquake Research Advances, 2018, (01) : 100 - 112
  • [25] DOES POST-LUMBAR PUNCTURE SYNDROME DEPEND ON NEEDLE SIZE
    MERLO, A
    MORANT, R
    KETZ, E
    GERIG, HJ
    SENN, HJ
    SCHWEIZERISCHE MEDIZINISCHE WOCHENSCHRIFT, 1989, 119 (49) : 1781 - 1786
  • [26] Does reaction time depend upon perceived or retinal stimulus size?
    Sperandio, I.
    Savazzi, S.
    Marzi, C. A.
    Gregory, R.
    PERCEPTION, 2008, 37 : 14 - 14
  • [27] Determination of focal depth by two waveformbased methods: A case study for the 2008 Panzhihua earthquake
    Wang, Zhenjie
    Chong, Jiajun
    Ni, Sidao
    Romanowicz, Barbara
    EARTHQUAKE SCIENCE, 2011, 24 (04) : 321 - 328
  • [28] Focal Depth Determination of the 2014 Yutian MS7.3 Earthquake Sequence,Xinjiang
    Song Xiuqing
    Miao Fajun
    Liu Shuangqing
    Chen Xiangjun
    Wang Jun
    Zhu Yuanqing
    Earthquake Research Advances, 2014, 28 (04) : 448 - 461
  • [29] Focal depth of the Hawke's Bay earthquake of February 2-3, 1931
    Hayes, RC
    NATURE, 1936, 138 : 126 - 127
  • [30] Earthquake Focal Mechanisms and Stress Field for the Intermediate-Depth Cauca Cluster, Colombia
    Chang, Y.
    Warren, L. M.
    Zhu, L.
    Prieto, G. A.
    JOURNAL OF GEOPHYSICAL RESEARCH-SOLID EARTH, 2019, 124 (01) : 822 - 836