RF-Seismograph picked up the M6.5 from Idaho at 23:52 UTC

Sure it isn't a copy?

RRK

 

In other words, nothing is perfect. Except the leap year, already, we've been duped!

RRK

 

I would encourage the investigators to determine if there are statistical correlations or other statistical evidence among these ionospheric anomalies and Earthquakes. That way one can determine if the Hypothesis is on solid ground or another direction needs to be taken.

I wouldn't be so dismissive as here is but a small sampling of research on this phenomena: (The first paper has statistical correlations computed for the Taiwan 2016 Earthquake, see sections 3.2.2 to 3.3.3).

[Shin-itiro Goto, Ryoma Uchida , Kiyoshi Igarashi , Chia-Hung Chen , Minghui Kao , and Ken Umeno, Pre-seismic ionospheric anomalies detected before the 2016 Taiwan earthquake, Advanced Earth and Space Sciences, May 2017, 1-15.

[Vitaly P. Kim1, Valery V. Hegai1†, Jann Yenq Liu2, Kwangsun Ryu3, Jong-Kyun Chung4italy P. Kim1, Valery V. Hegai1†, Jann Yenq Liu2, Kwangsun Ryu3, Jong-Kyun Chung; Time-Varying Seismogenic Coulomb Electric Fields as a Probable Source for Pre-Earthquake Variation in the Ionospheric F2-Layer

[Jin, S.; Occhipinti, G.; Jin, R. GNSS ionospheric seismology: Recent observation evidences and characteristics. Earth-Sci. Rev. 2015, 147, 54–64.

[Pulinets, S.; Davidenko, D. Ionospheric Precursors of Earthquakes and Global Electric Circuit. Adv. Space Res. 2014, 53, 709–723. [CrossRef]

[Pulinets, S.A.; Boyarchuk, K.A. Ionospheric Precursors of Earthquakes; Springer: Berlin, Germany, 2004.

[Donnelly(1976)] Donnelly, R.F. (1976), Empirical models of solar flare X-ray and EUV emission for use in studying their E and F region effects, J. Geophys. Res., 81, 4745–4753.

[Freund(2003)] Freund, F. (2003), Rocks that crackle and sparkle and glow: strange pre-earthquake phenomena, Journal of Scientific Exploration , 17, 37–71.

[Freund(2013)] Freund, F. (2013), Earthquake forewarning – A multidisciplinary challenge from the ground up to space, Acta Geophys., 61, 775–807, doi:10.2478/s11600-009-0066-x.

[He and Heki(2017)] He, L., and K. Heki (2017), Ionospheric anomalies immediately before Mw7.0-8.0 earthquakes, J. Geophys. Res. Space Physics. . 122, doi:10.1002/2017JA024012.

[Heki(2011)] Heki, K.(2011), Ionospheric electron enhancement preceding the 2011 Tohoku-Oki earthquake, J. Geophys. Res. Lett., 38, L17312, doi:10.1029/2011GL047908.

[Heki and Enomoto(2015)] Heki, K., and Y. Enomoto (2015), Mw dependence of the preseismic ionospheric electron enhancements, J. Geophys. Res. Space Physics, 120, 70006-7020, doi:10.1002/2015JA021353.

[Hunsucker (1982)] Hunsucker, R (1982), Atmospheric gravity waves generated in the high latitude ionosphere: a review, Rev. Geophys., 20, 293–315. 14 [Igarashi et al.(1994)]

Igarashi, K., S. Kainuma, I. Nishimuta, S. Okamoto, H. Kuroiwa, T. Tanaka, and T. Ogawa (1994), Ionospheric and atmospheric disturbances around Japan caused by the eruption of Mount Pinatubo on 15 June 1991, J. Atoms. Terr. Phys., 56, 1227–1234.

[Iwata and Umeno(2016)] Iwata, T., and K. Umeno (2016), Correlation analysis for preseisimic total electron content anomalies around the 2011 Tohoku-Oki earthquake, J. Geophys. Res. Space Physics, 121, 8969-8984, doi:10.1002/2016JA023036.

[Iwata and Umeno(2017)] Iwata, T., and K. Umeno (2017), Preseismic ionospheric anomalies detected before the 2016 Kumamoto earthquake, J. Geophys. Res. Space Physics., 122, 3602-3616, doi:10.1002/2017JA023921.

[Kelly et al.(2017)] Kelly, M.C., W.E. Swartz, and K. Heki (2017). Apparent ionospheric total electron content variations prior to major earthquakes due to electric fields created by tectonic stresses. J. Geophys. Res. Space Physics., 122, doi:10.1002/2016JA023601.

[Liu et al(2000)] Liu, J.Y., T.I. Chen, S.A. Pulinets, Y.B. Tsai, and Y.J. Chuo, (2000), Seismoionospheric signatures prior to M≥ 6.0 Taiwan earthquakes, Geophysical Research Letters, 27, 3113–3116.

[Ogawa et al.(2012)] Ogawa, T., N. Nishitani, T. Tsugawa, and K. Shiokawa (2012), Giant ionospheric disturbance observed with the SuperDARN Hokkaido HF radar and GPS network after the 2011 Tohoku earthquake. Earth Planet Space, 64, 1295–1307.

[Otsuka et al.(2011)] Otsuka, Y., N. Kotake, K. Shiokawa, T. Ogawa, T. Tsugawa, and A Saito (2011), Statistical study of medium-scale traveling ionospheric disturbances observed with a GPS receiver network in Japan, in Aeronomy of the Earths Atmosphere and Ionosphere, I AGA Spec. Sopron Book Ser. , vol. 2, pp. 291299, Springer, Netherlands, doi:10.1007978-94-007-0326-1 21.

[Otsuka et al.(2002)] Otsuka, Y., T. Ogawa, A. Saito, T. Tsugawa, S. Fukao, and S. Miyazaki, A(2002), New technique for mapping of total electron content using GPS network in Japan, Earth Planet Space, 54, 63–70.

[Oyama et al.(2008)] Oyama, K.-I., K. Kakinami, J.Y. Liu, M. Kamogawa, and T. Kodama (2008), Reduction of electron temperature in low-latitude ionosphere at 600 km before and after large earthquakes. J. Geophys. Res., 113, A11317.


Pheel

 

See post above.

You can download the first paper and then comment on the results of the research.


Pheel

 

Its all them QRP' Rz...

Ever notice that the Qso's with guys running legal limit are longer, more meaningful, educational, and counter
Global Cooling by just being Warmer?

RRK

RRK

 

My theory is that earthquakes are effected by RF, I am still searching for the exact frequency.

SELF is the national organization conducting a search presently.

SELF is a non profit group but was slow to gain any real data due to these small elf like creatures with dark eyes
And Grey skin scaring most of the scientists away...

The one scientist who interviewed one of the Grey dudes got this message :



RRK

 

You misread. I have never made any comment on the scientific possibility of any connection between earthquakes and RF propagation. My comments are regarding the OP"s complete lack of any scientific rigor and flogging of anecdotal observation as fact without any basis.

 

Remember when everyone made fun of Columbus when he proposed that the world was round???

 

Columbus didn't sit in his bathtub and claim he proved it by looking at an orange.

 

Except that never happened, it was well known the planet was round for a long time before his day.

 

So, I need to be grounded.

I will bury an antenna, tomorrow.

RRK

 

We use quartz for every bartender measure,
that's how it arrived into radios and time keepers and even computers, ect...

Bat's + human consumption = Covid 19
Quartz + Covid 19 + No toilet paper = stress
Stress squared + RF XYZ ÷F X TIME = earthquakes

NOW, I SEE A PATTERN HERE.

Ancient Aliens are not going to like this...

RRK

 

Now,

Where does Einstein =M squares fit in, next to my jar of domino's?

RRK

 

"4. Conclusions

We have provided an explanation for STEC variations preceding large earthquakes. Since the variations begin simultaneously over a wide geographic area and are not propagating, they must be triggered by a large-scale electric field. In our model, some mechanism such as conductivity changes, tribo-electricity or piezoelectricity [Breiner, 1964], creates and maintains charge separation, the most important moment being a dipole. The necessary electric field at the base of the ionosphere need only be 1 mV/m. Using the known properties of upward field mapping and the theory of red sprites, this corresponds to a 200 mV/m field near the surface. A field of this magnitude is quite small, and it is easy to imagine such a field being generated by the stresses of an earthquake buildup, particularly since we know that corresponding magnetic fields, 10 times greater than required and produced prior to seismic shocks, have already been found. These magnetic fields were detected 40 min before the Loma Prieta event, as reported by Fraser-Smith et al. [1990].

More importantly, we show that there is a reaction to the earthquake buildup that was seen simultaneously over the length of Japan 45–50 min before this major earthquake. This means that the effect must be tied to the Earth, not to a propagating wave in the thermosphere. Propagating waves are seen very often, as described in Kelley [2009]. In fact, referring to Figure 1, one can see quite easily that there were disturbances moving north to south well prior to the event, whereas the disturbances just prior to the event were seen Figure 8. Schematic showing lift and lowering of the ionosphere with an electric field sign change. In fact, referring to Figure 1, one can see quite easily that there were disturbances moving north to south well prior to the event, whereas the disturbances just prior to the event were seen simultaneously at all latitudes in this format. In principle, the epicenter could be predicted from the effects of the sign change in the dipole field on either side of the source. In this case, there were no stations east of the epicenter to look for this effect.

The societal impact of earthquakes is enormous, and we believe that a significant research program is justified to prove or disprove whether a warning system for imminent earthquakes could be developed. A realtime correlation of STEC fluctuations should be explored as part of this effort."

From a research paper by Kelly et. al., and readable by non-scientists (emphasis mine):

https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1002/2016JA023601


Pheel