General discussion

More on the Japan quake.

"Instruments saw Japan quake lurch

Japan's 11 March mega-quake shifted the ocean floor sideways by more than 20m (65ft), according one instrument placed on the seabed off the nation's coast. This direct measurement exceeds the displacement suggested by some models built only from data gathered on land. The figure was recorded by the Japan Coast Guard which maintains underwater geodetic equipment along the fault responsible for the giant tremor."

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-13457182

Quakezilla? Nope- it's real life. Shocked
Discussion is locked
Follow
Reply to: More on the Japan quake.
PLEASE NOTE: Do not post advertisements, offensive materials, profanity, or personal attacks. Please remember to be considerate of other members. If you are new to the CNET Forums, please read our CNET Forums FAQ. All submitted content is subject to our Terms of Use.
Reporting: More on the Japan quake.
This post has been flagged and will be reviewed by our staff. Thank you for helping us maintain CNET's great community.
Sorry, there was a problem flagging this post. Please try again now or at a later time.
If you believe this post is offensive or violates the CNET Forums' Usage policies, you can report it below (this will not automatically remove the post). Once reported, our moderators will be notified and the post will be reviewed.
Comments
- Collapse -
That just raised a question in my mind ...

65 FEET?
I think my GPS maps are going to need an update.

- Collapse -
No wonder it was so big

It must have been centuries since it moved. Sad

Diana

- Collapse -
The first reports said the island moved 8 feet

I thought that was a lot. 65 feet in one jolt, that's almost impossible to imagine.

There's no way I'd ever live anywhere in that part of the world. The earth is just too unstable over there.

- Collapse -
To all: I was astonished, enough to post it as a new link.

Josh, correct about the 8 feet. It was the sea floor that moved much more, as the sensor readouts show- with a large vertical component too. 65 feet from a dead start would have been deadly all by itself, on land. Like the secondary collisions in an auto accident.

And my earlier post from Reuters re insurance shows that the risk is still there in Japan, and now the risk folks are looking to more urban areas for future big ones.

CNET Forums