Talk:2010 Eureka earthquake

'nother quake

Another earthquake in the same area offshore Eureka occurred today at 12:20 p.m. PST. [1][2] Should this coverage go into its own article or should it be an add-on of this current article? Create a Pineapple (talk) 02:16, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

I think a short mention in this article would be best. The 6.5 was strongly felt and caused damage/injuries, whereas the 5.9 was located slightly further offshore resulting in no significant shaking. Plus, they are bound to be related in some way given their occurrence in such a short space in time. RapidR (talk) 13:08, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

By short space in time, both the Eureka earthquakes were nearly one month apart. IMO I doubt that they would be related to each other, especially considering this latest quake was not an aftershock of the January earthquake. Create a Pineapple (talk) 22:44, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

In terms of how often quakes of M~6 occur in the region, a month is a very short gap. These are the largest quakes to hit the offshore Northern California area since June 2005, and the largest in the immediate area since March 2000. I'd say there is a good chance the 5.9 was triggered by the 6.5 through the transfer of stress from one fault to another. The general talk in the media is that there may have been some triggering involved. [3] [4] RapidR (talk) 00:53, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

Last I heard on the news, the Earthquake Society (Not sure of the actual name <_<) The California seismology center, or whatever, have declared the 5.9 (originally thought to be 6.0) to be an aftershock of the 6.5 last month. All I know is I'm not liking living in Eureka right now. 75.37.40.184 (talk) 22:40, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

Duration

Isn't duration a basic element of knowledge about an earthquake? I can't find a reference from Google that says how long this earthquake lasted. I'll give somebody a barnstar if they can find this fact. Xaxafrad (talk) 07:16, 1 December 2012 (UTC)

Unfortunately "duration" is different at different places; no one "duration" is considered official by USGS, nor are any published on their pages of summary of earthquake information.[5] The reason for this is that the earthquake occurs inside the earth. The ripples which extend outward from the original breaking point expand like those in still water when a drop hits the surface. As the several different kinds of ripples (earthquake waves) extend outward from the original focus point, they slow as different geo-materials are encountered. Thus, they may appear to last for a different amount of time to different observers in even slightly different places. Trying to measure duration from seismograph recordings doesn't work for the same reason; the durations are different based on where the attempt to time them is made. Estimates of duration from observers vary widely due to excitement and various methods of measuring time. Efforts to quantify duration are therefore not very accurate and are not widely used although a formal system of classification and calculation exists.[6] Ellin Beltz (talk) 18:11, 2 December 2012 (UTC)

Yea, you can't really measure duration, at least when the epicenter is in the water, as no one was at the epicenter. Where I was, it lasted 15-20 seconds, with small aftershocks occuring for ~5-15 minutes after that, but some people I know across town only felt it for a few seconds. 99.162.156.148 (talk) 10:57, 20 July 2013 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on 2010 Eureka earthquake. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-eureka-quake10-2010jan10%2C0%2C4204701.story
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=%2Fc%2Fa%2F2010%2F01%2F09%2FBALS1BG3RV.DTL&tsp=1
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090909212640/http://earthquake.usgs.gov/regional/states/events/1992_04_25_26.php to http://earthquake.usgs.gov/regional/states/events/1992_04_25_26.php

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:11, 22 May 2017 (UTC)