Interesting connection between solar activity, propagation and earthquakes

Discussion in 'Amateur Radio News' started by VE7DXW, Oct 9, 2019.

ad: L-HROutlet
ad: l-rl
ad: Left-3
ad: Left-2
ad: L-MFJ
ad: HRDLLC-2
ad: MessiPaoloni-1
ad: abrind-2
  1. VE7DXW

    VE7DXW Ham Member QRZ Page

    Hi Everybody;

    We just came across a very interesting correlation between solar activity and earthquakes here on earth and found a paper on it too. As the sun moves though the solar minimum the RF-Seismograph with the help of USGS have been detecting fewer and smaller earthquakes. Since the USGS uses mechanical means to detect and records quakes, the propagation (or the lack thereof) cannot be a factor. The RF-Seismograph is still detecting the quakes at a success rate of 70% by looking at the USGS database and investigating the changes that these – even smaller quakes at the scale between M4.5 and M5.9 - create in the ionosphere. What is really amazing is, that the RF background noise is still very easily disturbed by even these small quakes and poor propagation conditions.

    The RF-Seismograph is putting out a daily report now comparing earthquakes with USGS monitored earthquakes with the intensity level of M4.5 to M5.9. All these reports are available on , the RF-Seismograph IO group. To receive a daily report please sign up for the MDSRadio group.

    Here is a sample: The graph below is our new tool that we have developed to easily match ionic disturbances with the USGS earthquake catalog. It will be released shortly. The non labeled peaks are minute quakes at the level below M4.5.

    The paper Influences of Solar Cycles on Earthquakes can be downloaded from here:

    All the best and 73. Your comments are welcome.

    Alex - VE7DXW
    K7GYB, YB1IM, VE6DAC and 4 others like this.
  2. G3SEA

    G3SEA Ham Member QRZ Page

    That IS Interesting ! :cool:

    VE7DXW likes this.
  3. TA1MEL

    TA1MEL QRZ Member

    Interesting topic, thanks...
    VE7DXW likes this.
  4. AF4RK

    AF4RK Ham Member QRZ Page

    Serious research. This is the causal mechanism proposed by the paper
    There was a clear decrease in earthquakes for the two grand solar minima examined and an increase in the number of earthquakes for the last half of the 20th cen-tury. This increase in solar events, called the Modern Maxima, coincided with the intensification of earth-quake events in several plates. More data is needed re-garding the variations of disturbances in the ionosphere caused by these variations (solar storms) in the solar cycles and the variation concerning the dynamic pres-sure. Dynamic pressure (Dp) affects the flux transfer from the dayside to night side, and the depending of the tectonic ground is important. Dynamic pressure is a function of speed and density of the solar wind. Satel-lites detect electromagnetic disturbances in the iono-sphere and in regions such as the South Atlantic anomaly. It is possible that these disturbances affect the ground under that region.

    Solar wind speed which causes more dynamic pres-sure on Earth’s magnetosphere is the physical mecha-nism which increases the number of earthquakes.

    KK4NSF, VE7DXW and HB9TIS like this.
  5. AA7VA

    AA7VA XML Subscriber QRZ Page

    This recalls to my mind the causal observance that solar activity is directly related to the various planets alignments causing tidal effects in the solar outer shells and thereby solar activity. This also parallels the idea that earthquakes are also partially affected by tidal effects on this planet, primarily by our own moon, but to a lesser degree by the near (read as gravitational 'heavy' to us) planets in conjunction with the suns position in our somewhat eccentric orbit. They all seem to be correlated to a degree that makes this theory reasonable. Fascinating indeed.
    Thank you for posting this Alex!
    VE7DXW and HB9TIS like this.
  6. KK4NSF

    KK4NSF Ham Member QRZ Page

    that IS fascinating! Thanks for posting it.

    On a similar note, the National Solar Observatory noticed a correlation between the Observed Solar Activity, and Surface Temperatures on Earth. The two show a strong correlation even on new charts up until 1980 or so when they diverge. Oddly, the current NASA methodology is to use adjusted data rather than raw data going back to the 1980's..... which makes comparing new temp data to old data rather problematic. However, the NSO does have the data available for study if anyone wants to look at it:

    It also looks odd that the Temps c1950 precede the increased solar activity.... with ~10 year lag. It would seem to me that the Solar Radiation would increase first... but not being a statistician or solar scientist, I can't say why the graph looks like it does.

    W4TGA, VE7DXW and HB9TIS like this.
  7. N0TZU

    N0TZU Platinum Subscriber Platinum Subscriber QRZ Page

    Again? You keep putting out this debunked theory, and showing your data with not even a cursory statistical analysis to back up your observations.

    The paper you cite has a lot of problems, even to the casual technical reader like me. Just for starters, their Figure 3 shows a correlation coefficient of only 0.319!! This is not even a good correlation, let alone evidence of causation. No wonder it wasn't published in a reputable journal.

    SciRes Literature (the publisher of the paper above in 2011) is on the list of predatory journals kept here: Just like "news" outlets, not all paper publishers are reputable (and some are downright fraudulent and meant to sway public opinion.)

    Here's what the USGS says about the topic in 2018:

    "...the USGS Geomagnetism Program has investigated published claims that geomagnetic and ionospheric signals associated with the earthquake process were measured prior to earthquake occurrence. So far, we have concluded that reported precursory signals are either bad data or the reported signals are part of normal global magnetic field variation that is unrelated to earthquakes."​

    And here is a list of papers and abstracts in VERY reputable geophysical papers to back up the statement.
    K4AGO, AK5B, N4DJT and 6 others like this.
  8. VE7DXW

    VE7DXW Ham Member QRZ Page

    Hi Bob and Everyone;

    Thanks for posting your objections... The USGS does a lot of very good work! It is a very powerful organization with a lot of old and outdated methodology too. They are not interested in other more efficient technology to take over their jobs... they are well supported by and enabling the powerful oil and gas companies to destroy our planet. They want keep the status quo and the fear of earthquakes just the way it is. It secures their funding in future endeavors!

    We have more important things to discuss here. It would be appreciated if you stick to the topic! We are not talking about precursors of earthquakes, we are talking about the effect of earthquakes on the ionosphere and the fact that there might be another long period of no sunspots, which would also mean reduced earthquakes.

    Thank you for your cooperation!

    All the best;

    Last edited: Oct 10, 2019
  9. N0TZU

    N0TZU Platinum Subscriber Platinum Subscriber QRZ Page

    Oh my.

    Despite being advised to do so by me and others many times here on these forums, you don't perform even a simple statistical analysis of your data, nor read the reputable research. Instead you now cast aspersions on those who disagree with you as being outdated, or being paid off by someone, or just biased because of their job. That's a classic argument of a con man. (I don't believe you are conning anyone for profit, rather I believe you are misguided).

    For the record I have no interest or relationship to the oil and gas industry, nor am I associated in any way with the USGS, or anything related to earthquakes. However, I strongly dislike pseudoscience and call it out when I see it.
    K7RA, K4AGO, AK5B and 4 others like this.
  10. VE7DXW

    VE7DXW Ham Member QRZ Page

    Hi Bob;

    Your post does not reflect anything I posted... where do you get the:

    Are you in the pay of the oil and gas companies? Are you a registered lobbyist? If not, you need to get registered!

    I believe you are the con man and you are putting words into my mouth...

Share This Page