In the early 1980's  I visited the dominion radio astronomy observatory in 
Canada.    I observed a bunker like structure and asked my host what it 
contained, he advised me that it housed a special seismograph that would only 
be of use in the event of a large earth quake.

Sent from my iPod

On 2012-04-28, at 3:53 PM, Brooke Clarke <[email protected]> wrote:

> Hi Tom:
> 
> They do use two different seismometers at each location, a large movement and 
> a sensitive.
> http://www.prc68.com/I/Seismometer.shtml
> 
> Have Fun,
> 
> Brooke Clarke
> http://www.PRC68.com
> http://www.end2partygovernment.com/Clarke4Congress.html
> 
> 
> Tom Van Baak wrote:
>> Brooke,
>> 
>> Right, an overloaded accelerometer is a problem -- if you have
>> only one or a few of them.
>> 
>> But the beauty of using cellular sites is that you have hundreds
>> or thousands of them across populated areas; so it's no problem
>> if the a bunch of sensors near the epicenter overload. A clipped
>> signal is not worthless; at least you know something big happened
>> there; you can rely on slightly more distant cell tower sensors to
>> get readings a few seconds later that are less clipped or not clipped
>> at all. (There's another solution I heard about -- using smartphones
>> as a tiered network of synchronized accelerometers).
>> 
>> A high rate GPS solution sounds really cool to me but I bet its also
>> far more expensive.
>> 
>> Related to that, are there any seismometer experts on the list? I've
>> always wondered why they don't augment the extremely sensitive
>> detectors with less sensitive detectors? Of course a really good
>> detector will overload; so just co-locate cheap detectors that are 40
>> and 80 dB less sensitive. That way you get a clean signal no matter
>> how close or far the epicenter is from the detector.
>> 
>> /tvb
>> 
>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Brooke Clarke" <[email protected]>
>> To: "Tom Van Baak" <[email protected]>; "Discussion of precise time and 
>> frequency measurement" <[email protected]>
>> Sent: Saturday, April 28, 2012 2:49 PM
>> Subject: Re: [time-nuts] GPS, USGS Early Earthquake Warning
>> 
>> 
>>> Hi Tom:
>>> 
>>> The USGS talk was the first time I'd heard about the need to look at an 
>>> earthquake as happening along some length of fault line.  For the big quake 
>>> in Japan the forecast software assumed a point source for the quake and 
>>> that cause them to under estimate the magnitude and get other things wrong. 
>>>  GPS is part of the solution to get better results.
>>> 
>>> In the S. CA example he showed a 180 mile long rupture of the San Andreas 
>>> fault.  At 2 miles a second the quake would last about 90 seconds.
>>> Accelerometers that are not right on top of the fault will be overloaded 
>>> with signals coming from each location where there's a fracture and so the 
>>> data will be nearly impossible to untangle in a short time frame.  But a 
>>> GPS receiver will show a DC displacement that unambiguous.
>>> 
>>> Have Fun,
>>> 
>>> Brooke Clarke
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> time-nuts mailing list -- [email protected]
>> To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
>> and follow the instructions there.
>> 
>> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> time-nuts mailing list -- [email protected]
> To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
> and follow the instructions there.

_______________________________________________
time-nuts mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
and follow the instructions there.

Reply via email to