Display:
Strong earthquake hits southwest China

An earthquake measuring 7.5 rocked China's Sichuan province on Monday, less than 100 kilometres from the provincial capital of Chengdu, the U.S. Geological Survey said on its website.

It was not immediately clear if there were any casualties or damage from the tremor, which the USGS earlier put at 7.8.

The tremor, centred 92 kilometres northwest of Chengdu, was felt as far away as Beijing and Shanghai and the Thai capital Bangkok, where office buildings swayed with the impact.

Google news search gives quite a list of recent earthquakes: Tokyo (with aftershocks), Taiwan,  Iran, Kazachstan,  Mississippi, Missouri,  Guam, Alaska,   California,  Nevada, Mexico... all in the last 2-3 weeks, some in series. Besides, we have the volcano in Chile, tornadoes in US, and of course, Myanmar. Is mother nature awakening and learning how to kick us?

by das monde on Mon May 12th, 2008 at 04:52:35 AM EST
[ Parent ]
You can't be serious with your last sentence... China's quake is most likely to be correlated to escape tectonics from collision of the Indian plate.

There was an idea floated a few years ago that big earthquakes could trigger other earthquakes at the other side of a tectonic plate, with a 1-1.5 year delay as slow speed vibrations resonated through the affected tectonic plates to the other end. Not being a seismologist, I've no idea where that idea presently stands.

by Nomad on Mon May 12th, 2008 at 05:24:50 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Would you say that it is unthinkable that the Earth system could perceive and follow various stresses, and have simple but effective reactions to it? All those chains of feedbacks, be it of various greenhouse gases and temperature, or connected tectonic faults, must have occurred only randomly or by inevitabilities of physical interactions, and in no way they could have organized themselves through re-occurring circumstances on variously large and local scales?

What if the Earth system is more complex than a reptile brain? Couldn't it be then comparably functional as well?

by das monde on Mon May 12th, 2008 at 05:47:21 AM EST
[ Parent ]
At which point do you ascribe intentionality to a complex system?

When the capital development of a country becomes a by-product of the activities of a casino, the job is likely to be ill-done. — John M. Keynes
by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Mon May 12th, 2008 at 05:55:39 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Teleonomy is related to past effects instead of present purpose.

First I would start to talk about functionality arising in the Form of a simple "reaction" to special circumstances. On the most primitive level, you have direct physical causation satisfying this Form. Then you have rigid "self-enforcing" chains of physical events forming that "automatically react" following the From; those chains that better enforce their own existence (say, because their interesting effects fit better into diverse longer such chains) would tend to persist and occur more frequently. Gradually, the Form becomes identifiable as "perception/reaction" cycle. Brain neurons are of the same Form! Event patterns would network themselves, with ever more meaningful functionality, etc.

by das monde on Mon May 12th, 2008 at 06:38:12 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Are you up to writing a diary on the difference between teleology and teleonomy?

When the capital development of a country becomes a by-product of the activities of a casino, the job is likely to be ill-done. — John M. Keynes
by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Mon May 12th, 2008 at 06:55:32 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Ok, I'll be posting soon (in a couple of weeks) parts of my hobby work on evolution, Darwinian selfishness, critical and teleonomic systems, Gaia and such. Writing goes much slower than I expected, and I am pretty satisfied that arguments get only better with lazy pondering.

At the moment, I would not explain teleonomy particularly better than the Wikipedia link above and its references.

by das monde on Mon May 12th, 2008 at 11:10:07 PM EST
[ Parent ]
das monde:
What if the Earth system is more complex than a reptile brain? Couldn't it be then comparably functional as well?

No. Because the structures are completely different. And there's been no evidence to date at all that the Earth is anything other than a physical system, which has been frozen, attacked by space by debris, left to cook on a high heat and is currently in a semi-stable transition state.

An intentional Earth would look everso slightly different, I think.

Suggesting that the Earth is having earthquakes because we've been bad says a lot more about how narrative logic works than it does about the Earth.

by ThatBritGuy (thatbritguy (at) googlemail.com) on Mon May 12th, 2008 at 07:05:44 AM EST
[ Parent ]
The biosphere is an entirely different animal, though.

When the capital development of a country becomes a by-product of the activities of a casino, the job is likely to be ill-done. — John M. Keynes
by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Mon May 12th, 2008 at 07:33:17 AM EST
[ Parent ]
The rate of tectonic faulting is not correlated to changing concentrations of greenhouse gasses; atmospheric greenhouse gasses concentrations are correlated to the rate of tectonic activity - no need to switch cause and effect. Changes in surface temperature of which global warming speaks are irrelevant for geological processes.

It is simply a matter of scale. Earth's processes do not respond to surface changes linked to global warming because these changes are irrelevant to the scales whereupon earth's processes operate. Surface changes are way, way behind the comma of the physical laws and the material properties that govern tectonic processes involved in generating earthquakes/volcanic activity; they do not matter, period. And hence earth processes do not physically or chemically respond to them, let alone reorganise as result to them.

It's the earth's more sensitive host on the surface, the biosphere, that does respond. Because humans, in our eye-blink of time, are not used to a sudden increase in rates of earth activity, it doesn't make us special, nor does it allow us to assign anthropomorphological features to the earth.

by Nomad on Mon May 12th, 2008 at 08:49:31 AM EST
[ Parent ]
It's a good counter-argument. But now enter self-organized criticality, or "living" on the edge of chaos bifurcations. Wouldn't these special boundary conditions possibly set themselves up to bridge physical phenomena of different scales?

What if the tectonic system (which is probably more ancient than biological life, and is just as unique to Earth for what we know), being more slow and clumsy by orders of magnitude, is set on a critical level within own parameters, and hereby teleonomically ready to receive a signal from the atmosphere or whatever, a signal to let an overhauling hell loose? It would be just another instance of consequential reaction to a special condition...

by das monde on Mon May 12th, 2008 at 11:06:14 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Earthquakes are known to be highly correlated (that's why you have pre- and after-shocks and why low seismicity means both lower frequency and lower intensity.
Earthquakes are one of the most interesting phenomena whose every aspect displays fractal statistics and whose dynamics is possibly chaotic...

...

While multifractality of the earthquake process is confirmed in every way...



When the capital development of a country becomes a by-product of the activities of a casino, the job is likely to be ill-done. — John M. Keynes
by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Mon May 12th, 2008 at 05:44:53 AM EST
[ Parent ]
It has been understood that a fracture network is a self-organising system capable to operate at all scales (micro, meso, macro).
by Nomad on Mon May 12th, 2008 at 09:11:50 AM EST
[ Parent ]
But, moreover, probabilistic intuition trained on "regular" memoryless processes such as the Poisson process is misleading, which is where the "anomalous number of recent earthquakes" argument is coming from.

When the capital development of a country becomes a by-product of the activities of a casino, the job is likely to be ill-done. — John M. Keynes
by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Mon May 12th, 2008 at 09:16:43 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Oh, and a fracture is understood as a network and not a single fault?

When the capital development of a country becomes a by-product of the activities of a casino, the job is likely to be ill-done. — John M. Keynes
by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Mon May 12th, 2008 at 09:17:32 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Technically, a fracture is a fracture; a fault is a fracture which has undergone (tectonic) movement. Both can occur at all scales. However, a fracture network at the micro scale has the potential to develop into a fault at the meso/macro scale. Faults organize them in networks - fault zones - fractally identical to a network of micro fractures or micro faults.

One fracture is just a fracture; a single fault is derived from a network of micro/meso fractures.

by Nomad on Mon May 12th, 2008 at 09:39:03 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Display:
Login
. Make a new account
. Reset password
Occasional Series