1. Forum
  2. Usenet
  3. SCI.ELECTRONICS.DESIGN

  • Re: Balanced boulders on San Andreas fault suggest the 'Big One' won't

    From John Larkin@21:1/5 to bloggs.fredbloggs.fred@gmail.com on Wed Dec 27 10:00:40 2023
    On Tue, 26 Dec 2023 12:54:24 -0800 (PST), Fred Bloggs <bloggs.fredbloggs.fred@gmail.com> wrote:

    'Currently, earthquake risk models are mainly based on extrapolations from limited historical timescale and ground motion recordings from past quakes. But fortunately, a different group of sentinels have witnessed and captured data from these temblors
    for much longer than humans: rocks.'

    Very clever research.

    Not sure this will be all that much of a cost savings. If the earthquake research indicates an upper limit of L, the structural engineers will want to build out to withstand 2xL. So a new design standard will call out a 37.5% reduction in design
    strength.

    https://www.msn.com/en-us/weather/topstories/balanced-boulders-on-san-andreas-fault-suggest-the-big-one-won-t-be-as-destructive-as-once-thought/ar-AA1m3GEY

    Wiki article on the ubiquitous beryllium-10:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beryllium-10

    So how does beryllium-10 concentration vary inversely with solar activity? Aa probably knows...

    The Big One will take out the coast of Washington and Oregon and BC.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Bill Sloman@21:1/5 to All on Mon Jan 1 02:23:17 2024
    On 28/12/2023 5:48 am, whit3rd wrote:
    On Wednesday, December 27, 2023 at 10:22:28 AM UTC-8, a a wrote:

    Fred, don't be silly

    H2O vapour is No.1 Greenhouse Gas #GHG

    ... but it's EXCESS greenhouse gas that causes climate change, and there's no excess situation regarding atmospheric water; it cycles back to
    the oceans relatively rapidly. Uptake of CO2 into minerals has a rate mismatch to human CO2 generated from minerals that may
    be susceptible to correction.

    Water cycling isn't any kind of remedy that we ought to be concerned with.

    The 'No. 1' designation is arbitrary and capricious. It's silly, a a, to insist
    on such a frivolity.

    A a is worse than silly. He's uncomprehending.

    He actually right to to claim that water vapour is the most important greenhouse gas, but since atmospheric levels of water vapour equilibrate
    within about three weeks, there's no point in worrying about them.

    CO2 levels takes a lot longer to settle down - roughly 800 years - and
    more CO2 in the air means that ocean surface temperatures are higher and
    the equilibrium level of water vapour in the atmosphere is higher and
    adds a bit more warming to the basic CO2 driven effect, It's a positive feedback, if not big enough to run away.

    --
    Bill Sloman, Sydney

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)