The Baja Quake

Hi All. The Baja quake wasn't really a surprise. Petra, I and a few others have been waiting for it. We knew it was going to occur, or that there was a good chance that it would occur, we just didn't know the when.

The Baja quake is a little unusual. It was a pure normal quake meaning the first motion was down. The closest fault to this quake is the Laguna Salada fault which is the southern most segment of the Elsinore fault. This fault is a right lateral strike slip fault. You don't get normal quakes on strike slip faults so either the fault has been misidentified or the “moment tensor solution” is incorrect. I would love to see other “moment tensor solutions” but so far there haven't been any.

It appears most of the energy from the quake has gone to the north as there are very few quakes to the south of the epicenter. I also have some doubts about the quakes being aftershocks. From the faults that appear to have been affected by the quake they appear to be triggered quakes. I know a lot of seismologists are not going to agree with me, but that is okay. There are a lot of seismologists I don't agree with. It is something I have gotten use to. One nice thing about our difference is that we can share them over a cup or cups of coffee and not shout at one another, call one another names, or put one another down. We also have some good laughs. In other words we have a good time disagreeing and agreeing with one another.

The faults affected appear to be the Laguna Salada fault, Elsinore fault, the San Jacjnto fault, San Andreas fault and the Superstition Mountain section of the Elsinore fault for an area of activity 183 miles long by 112 miles wide with most of the activity in the center of the pattern associated with the Elsinore fault. This by no means rules out any of the other faults to have a major quake of which any ones guess is as good as another.

If the main event is indeed a normal quake then the Eastern California Shear Zone/Walker Lane Belt could be in for some activity which could be attention getting. That is something were just going to have to wait and see.

The other odd thing about this quake is that there is very little activity south of the epicenter. This could mean that the rupture was mainly to the north with most of the energy going to the north. That could account for why there are so many quakes north of the main event.

As you can see from the map the quakes are quite spread out. Some of the larger quakes date back to around 1934, but the majority of them are from the latest event. You can use the ANSS map to map your own quake map, which I'm sure will not look anything like this one. I never count the number of quakes, but do look for where they cluster at. This will give you an idea as to the weak areas. Also lines of quakes could identify the location of a fault if the fault isn't already known to the there.

Another thing I found interesting is that there is the main event with a small gap between in and the beginning of the Laguna Salada fault. Of course that gap could be gone by morning. It could also mean that what ever caused the quake was so large that it was destroyed to the point that no quake could occur there.

Quakes are marvelous. What you learn from one may not apply to any other quake that occurs. They always keep you guessing.

Could this quake trigger a larger quake further to the north? It most certainly could. It could do it tomorrow, next week, or next year or longer. It could trigger it on a fault everyone is looking at, or a fault no one thought of.

To give you a rough idea what were working on and looking at click on the link and look at Lowell's blog. It won't tell you what it is were working on and using, but it will give you a rough idea. It could be a site you may want to keep tabs on. Most of it is general information, but there are times specials come out. Research has been on going for more then 10 years. Some of you may recall I said 2010 could be a rough year. Lowell's blog will tell you why. Give Petra time to get it posted. We have had very little sleep in the last 48 hours or more and that can make the brain a little fuzzy.

Could it trigger a quake in the Bay Area? It could, but there other factors that could trigger the quake. Those will be present on 04/14/2010 however the probability is only 26%. However we expect Southern California will go before the Bay Area does. As to the when. That is the $64.00 question. Take Care...Don

http://quakecentralforecasting.com/index.html

https://2img.net/h/i5.photobucket.com/albums/y151/Quakemeister/3BajaQuake72M2010-04-05.jpg?t=1270507325

Don in Hollister wrote:Hi All. The Baja quake wasn't really a surprise. Petra, I and a few others have been waiting for it. We knew it was going to occur, or that there was a good chance that it would occur, we just didn't know the when.

The Baja quake is a little unusual. It was a pure normal quake meaning the first motion was down. The closest fault to this quake is the Laguna Salada fault which is the southern most segment of the Elsinore fault. This fault is a right lateral strike slip fault. You don't get normal quakes on strike slip faults so either the fault has been misidentified or the “moment tensor solution” is incorrect. I would love to see other “moment tensor solutions” but so far there haven't been any.

It appears most of the energy from the quake has gone to the north as there are very few quakes to the south of the epicenter. I also have some doubts about the quakes being aftershocks. From the faults that appear to have been affected by the quake they appear to be triggered quakes. I know a lot of seismologists are not going to agree with me, but that is okay. There are a lot of seismologists I don't agree with. It is something I have gotten use to. One nice thing about our difference is that we can share them over a cup or cups of coffee and not shout at one another, call one another names, or put one another down. We also have some good laughs. In other words we have a good time disagreeing and agreeing with one another.

The faults affected appear to be the Laguna Salada fault, Elsinore fault, the San Jacjnto fault, San Andreas fault and the Superstition Mountain section of the Elsinore fault for an area of activity 183 miles long by 112 miles wide with most of the activity in the center of the pattern associated with the Elsinore fault. This by no means rules out any of the other faults to have a major quake of which any ones guess is as good as another.

If the main event is indeed a normal quake then the Eastern California Shear Zone/Walker Lane Belt could be in for some activity which could be attention getting. That is something were just going to have to wait and see.

The other odd thing about this quake is that there is very little activity south of the epicenter. This could mean that the rupture was mainly to the north with most of the energy going to the north. That could account for why there are so many quakes north of the main event.

As you can see from the map the quakes are quite spread out. Some of the larger quakes date back to around 1934, but the majority of them are from the latest event. You can use the ANSS map to map your own quake map, which I'm sure will not look anything like this one. I never count the number of quakes, but do look for where they cluster at. This will give you an idea as to the weak areas. Also lines of quakes could identify the location of a fault if the fault isn't already known to the there.

Another thing I found interesting is that there is the main event with a small gap between in and the beginning of the Laguna Salada fault. Of course that gap could be gone by morning. It could also mean that what ever caused the quake was so large that it was destroyed to the point that no quake could occur there.

Quakes are marvelous. What you learn from one may not apply to any other quake that occurs. They always keep you guessing.

Could this quake trigger a larger quake further to the north? It most certainly could. It could do it tomorrow, next week, or next year or longer. It could trigger it on a fault everyone is looking at, or a fault no one thought of.

To give you a rough idea what were working on and looking at click on the link and look at Lowell's blog. It won't tell you what it is were working on and using, but it will give you a rough idea. It could be a site you may want to keep tabs on. Most of it is general information, but there are times specials come out. Research has been on going for more then 10 years. Some of you may recall I said 2010 could be a rough year. Lowell's blog will tell you why. Give Petra time to get it posted. We have had very little sleep in the last 48 hours or more and that can make the brain a little fuzzy.

Could it trigger a quake in the Bay Area? It could, but there other factors that could trigger the quake. Those will be present on 04/14/2010 however the probability is only 26%. However we expect Southern California will go before the Bay Area does. As to the when. That is the $64.00 question. Take Care...Don

http://quakecentralforecasting.com/index.html

https://2img.net/h/i5.photobucket.com/albums/y151/Quakemeister/3BajaQuake72M2010-04-05.jpg?t=1270507325

Don,

You listed the Elsinore fault. Didn't the Pico Rivera quake that was a 4.1 or thereabouts happen on that fault line? I thought I remembered someone saying that. Could that have been a foreshock of what was to happen in Baja or is there too much distance in those two events? Just curious.

Thank you so much for your information and more importantly your insight. Say hello to Petra for me.

Hi Calibabe. So we both know what were talking about give me the date and the location of the quake you're referring to. Latitude/Longitude would be preferred. Take Care...Don

Thank you Don you answered some of my questions and as usual are a wealth of information
I was wondering about the Bay area earlier as to a previous conversation we had here
https://boppinalong.forumotion.com/earthwatchers-f5/far-field-aftershock-map-for-chile-88m-quake-t339.htm

Hi Don!

Glad to see your post!

I read both your page and Lowell's page this morning. I found them both very informative. Thank for the links!

I noticed the recent Bay Area activity along the Calaveras fault, and thot about the Rogers Creek and dismissed it for now. (maybe too soon, reflecting again)

However, after reading Lowell, I thot I'd better rethink and refocus. I still think we need to see something in LA hit before forecasting the next moderate bay area jolt. However, noting the pattern was fascinating.

Thank you for looking at the aftershock pattern, I thot it was so peculiar, and it's nice to see that I'm not alone. I also noticed the northern migration almost had a hammer pattern which is a very powerful loosening tool in engineering applications. You can use a wrench to loosen and pull with all your might and get nothing, BUT add a hammer tap the wrench lightly and voila! I think we will see a moderate to major quake in the LA area in the next three months because of this action. I also noticed that the moment tensor didn't correspond to what we were looking at and that parallel faults were kinda quiet.

I have to admit, my cerebral wheels have been spinning watching the lava light patterns of aftershocks, contemplating what we are looking at.

I also wanted to thank Lowell for staying on top of the solar contribution to the geomagnetic fields, with all of the solar quietness lately, I have to admit I've not spent the time I used too for reviewing this. I am going to have to start watching again!

I am going to have to visit your site much more, was a good read!

--M

Hi All. I learned a valuable lesson yesterday and that was don't thrust the first”moment tensor solution” that comes out. Wait for someone real live person to check it. The first one for the Baja quake said it was a normal quake, but after a person checked it it became a strike slip quake. That accounts for why most of the energy from the quake went northwest. That has put a load on the faults in Southern California, but it could also loosen some of the faults up and that can cause a quake and it could be a big quake. There appears to have been some quakes triggered in the Eastern California Shear Zone/Walker Lane Belt, but have no idea as to the over all affect it had on the zone.

I suppose one day we will find out, but then we still won't know. Sure would be nice if we could look down into the faults and see what's going on. Then again maybe we wouldn't like what we saw. I'm pretty sure I wouldn't and if that is the case then why in the hell am I trying to predict where the next major quake is going to strike and when. Maybe it's because I know it can't be done with any degree of accuracy. See, I learned something in trying to predict quakes for the last 47 years. These to whom it may concern predictions don't save lives. Never have and never will. Still there are people who make them, they claim hits, but a couple 1000s people still die. I wonder if they are applauding the person who made the prediction? Gives a real comforting feeling to the loved ones left behind.

I had a 6 or 7 year old boy die in my arms. I can still see his face with a little blood coming from his mouth and nose. I can still see the faint smile on his face as he reached up to touch my face. He didn't make it. I heard a scream, a scream that only a mother can make when she has lost her child. She came running to me, but the father stopped her. He came to me and told me that was his son. I heard him yet I didn't hear him. He then gently touched my hand and again said that is my son. I loosened my grip and he took the child to his mother. She sat there in the street brushing the hair away from his face, wiping the blood off and arraigning his clothes so he looked neat. The father came back to me and said thank you for not letting him die alone, thank you for caring. I was a 28 year old man, but I cried like a baby. That was in 1964 and I still see it as if it was just a couple of minutes ago. See that, be a part of that and maybe you will have a little understanding for the contempt I have for some of these so called earthquake predictors. I wish each and everyone of you could experience what I did. Don

Sorry you had to experience that Don....But We have to start somewhere, perhaps predicting doesnt save lives today ...because its still such an inexact science but you and many others are forerunners your work isnt for naught.
It just takes discovering that one right puzzel piece that will break things open and change everything we think we know.
Thats the prize you need to hang on to, it may not happen in your life time or mine but years from now it may help save a differnt 6 year old boy.

Don in Hollister wrote:Hi Calibabe. So we both know what were talking about give me the date and the location of the quake you're referring to. Latitude/Longitude would be preferred. Take Care...Don

The Pico Rivera quake was on March 16, 2010 at 0404hrs. I don't have the latitude and longitude for the quake itself, but the lat/long for Pico Rivera itself is 33°59′20″N 118°5′21″W / 33.98889°N 118.08917°W. I hope that helps.

I also read your post regarding the loss of that 6 yr old boy. I can understand when you say that you can see his face. Those of us who have been in emergency medicine for any length of time, have the same experiences. No amount of training can prepare you for that.

Your on going work is in a way a tribute to that child and could one day benefit many children from such a fate.

Take care

Hi Calibabe. The quake was about 180 miles away. To far to be a foreshock. Take Care...Don

Don in Hollister wrote:Hi All. The Baja quake wasn't really a surprise.
This fault is a right lateral strike slip fault. You don't get normal quakes on strike slip faults so either the fault has been misidentified or the “moment tensor solution” is incorrect. I would love to see other “moment tensor solutions” but so far there haven't been any.

Another thing I found interesting is that there is the main event with a small gap between in and the beginning of the Laguna Salada fault. Of course that gap could be gone by morning. It could also mean that what ever caused the quake was so large that it was destroyed to the point that no quake could occur there.

Could this quake trigger a larger quake further to the north? It most certainly could.

Thanks for posting, Don. The "aftershocks" are alarming. It seems like they COULD trigger others. Your explanation of your thoughts was careful and thought-provoking. I was thinking it was a wonder to have info from such a measured perspective. Thanks again.