Slashdot Mirror


Earthquakes Detectable From Space by GPS

Iphtashu Fitz writes "Research sponsored mainly by the European Space Agency has demonstrated that earthquakes generate acoustic signals, almost like a huge loudspeaker, that can be detected from space. According to an ABC News Science/Technology article, geophysicist Juliette Artru came up with the concept while working on her doctorate degree. By monitoring an array of GPS receivers located throughout California she was able to determine that a massive 7.9 earthquake in Alaska last year resulted in the constillation of GPS satellites generating a mesaurable amount of interference. According to Artru, "A displacement of one millimeter on the ground can cause a displacement of 100 meters in the ionosphere," so a tiny pressure wave created by an earthquake can undergo huge amplification by the time it reaches the ionosphere. The resulting shockwave causes a tiny but very distinct pattern of interference in the GPS signals broadcast by the satellites."

25 comments

  1. This is great! by phraktyl · · Score: 2, Funny

    I for one have had a hard time in the past detecting the ground shaking under me here on the surface of the earth, what with the dishes rattling off the shelves and pictures falling off the walls and all. Now there is a way to know for certain!

    --
    Karma: Marginal (mostly due to the border around the website)
    1. Re:This is great! by GTRacer · · Score: 1
      Not only that, but now we can know with 10-meter accuracy where the epicenter is!

      No more wondering if this is really the worst of it! No more guessing who's getting rocked the hardest! No more letting your neighbor claim bragging rights to hosting the epicenter in his pool when clearly the center is in YOUR yard, give or take a few feet!

      GTRacer
      - Unless we're at war, and then you're stuck with 100M accuracy ;)

      --
      Defending IP by destroying access to it? That makes sense, RIAA/MPAA. Go to the corner until you can play nice!
  2. Detect nuke tests? by orthogonal · · Score: 1

    "A displacement of one millimeter on the ground can cause a displacement of 100 meters in the ionosphere,"

    So presumably the same technique can be used to detect stealthed underground nuclear bomb tests as well.

    Next question: do arrays of GPS devices exist in India, Pkistan, and China? If not, could they be put in place easily and stealthily, as by airdrops of a number of small GPS receivers designed to transmit results to another sattelite?

    1. Re:Detect nuke tests? by DAldredge · · Score: 2, Funny

      Underground nuke test can already be detected. They use a new device called a seismograph.

      That is one of the ways the US/USSR/China monitored each others tests

    2. Re:Detect nuke tests? by Iphtashu+Fitz · · Score: 1

      Actually I don't think the location of the GPS receivers is all that important, other than the fact that they're located somewhere other than the event that occurs. I would guess that they need to remain stationary in order to detect the fact that the signals from the GPS satellites have fluctuated. I suppose you might need a group of receivers somewhere in the eastern hemisphere so that they're receiving signals from the satellites that are over the geographic area you're interested in (the ones most likely to be affected by this pressure wave) but they wouldn't necessarially have to be located in the countries you're interested in. A bunch of receivers in places like Australia, Japan, Hawaii, Russia, throughout Europe, etc. would probably be sufficient.

    3. Re:Detect nuke tests? by borroff · · Score: 1

      I believe the military already has an air deployable acoustic monitor with built-in GPS locator called the ADAS.

    4. Re:Detect nuke tests? by Iphtashu+Fitz · · Score: 1

      Interesting. I just found references to the acronym ADAS: "Airborne Data Automation System". Don't know if this is what you're referring to but it sounds like it could be. Google doesn't show much other than some links to the acronym & definition on some military websites.

    5. Re:Detect nuke tests? by Carnildo · · Score: 1

      Underground nuke test can already be detected. They use a new device called a seismograph.

      Not always. Pakistan's nuclear tests were right on the edge of what the US network can detect; in fact, some of the tests were not noticed until after Pakistan announced that they had occurred, and researchers went back through the records.

      In general, seismographs can detect a nuclear explosion of half a kiloton yield or larger.

      --
      "They redundantly repeated themselves over and over again incessantly without end ad infinitum" -- ibid.
    6. Re:Detect nuke tests? by ccpoodle · · Score: 1

      I did not think the original post made clear whether interference means small positioning errors or difficulty getting any readings from some of the GPS receivers. Also is an array 3 receivers or 300 or something in-between? If the data is from a satellite that is changing altitude one meter per second, due to shock waves from the earthquake we should expect plus or minus one meter errors due to dopler shift of the satellite signal, if for no other reason. I presume data is typically from a GPS satellite over Southern Alaska, or The Yukon for receivers in Northern California. Is it typical for a GPS receiver to compare data form three satellites per reading? I should think-under ground nuclear tests would produce shock waves, similar to weak small area earthquakes, so systen noise and coronal mass ejections from the sun may mask nuclear tests unless very high yield. Neil

    7. Re:Detect nuke tests? by op00to · · Score: 1

      ... Right on the edge? The vibrations from an earthquake routinely echo around the Earth. There is no "edge".

  3. Re:Bull shit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    The article doesn't claim that at all. The write-up here on Slashdot is kind of stupid. They aren't "detectable from space" at all. They are detected in the travel of radio waves from space to earth. The detection happens on earth.

    Anyway, while your comment is lame and you clearly didn't read the article, it's not bad for a first post. BTW, buy a subscription to slashdot, you can read the article and still get first post. I've taken five minutes to write a good post and still made first post.

  4. So here in So Cal... by eamonman · · Score: 2, Funny

    we don't care about an earthquake unless it's big enough to disrupt my car's Nav system while stuck in traffic on the 405.

    --
    0- Eamonman Proud member of DNRC
  5. Re:Bull shit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The write-up here on Slashdot is kind of stupid

    What's stupid about it? It looks like a pretty accurate summary to me.

    They aren't "detectable from space" at all. They are detected in the travel of radio waves from space to earth. The detection happens on earth.

    A matter of semantics. What is being detected is interference up in the ionosphere. It's only being detected by analyzing radio signals on earth. You might as well be claiming that all the data collected by the various rovers to Mars was actually collected here on Earth since this is where the radio equipment that ultimately received the data is located.

    It wouldn't surprise me if the GPS satellite constillation could be modified to detect these sorts of things entirely from space. They simply monitor each others signals themselves and report back any anomolies that fit into the interference pattern that this geologist discovered.

    BTW, buy a subscription to slashdot, you can read the article and still get first post. I've taken five minutes to write a good post and still made first post.

    What are you, a shill for /. ??? I certianly wouldn't waste my money on a website where people like you first lambaste others who actually post interesting articles and then in the same breath try to convince people to subscribe. If I was a betting man I'd lay odds that you're involved with /. and actually make money from their subscriptions.

  6. Re:Bull shit by Iphtashu+Fitz · · Score: 0

    Thanks a lot for being such a childish jerk. What's wrong, Mr. Anonymous Coward, afraid to call me lame and stupid and actually admit to who you are? And then you have the gall to suggest that I actually subscribe to slashdot? Why should I if idiots like you are going to bash me for submitting interesting articles? The only reason I can guess is that you'd be getting that money (at least some of it), which really makes you all the more pathetic. First you have to bash people then you beg them for their money. Next time try being a man and don't post anonymously.

  7. Further info: by Saint+Aardvark · · Score: 2, Informative
    Juliette Artru's homepage has further information on her research. Particularly interesting is the application of this technique to tsunamis: "This observation opens exciting perspectives for the study of tsunamis, not only for early warning purposes but also to characterize their propagation in the ocean."

    A paper of hers from 2001 presents information on the Mount Pinatubo eruption. An abstract of the paper discussed in the ABC story is also available.

  8. LIGHTEN UP by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Wow, you call me childish? That's quite a temper-tantrum you threw there, sporto. GO apologize to your mother right now.

  9. Do it with bistatic shortwave? by G4from128k · · Score: 3, Interesting

    If small ground motions propagate to large amplitude acoustic effects in the ionosphere, then the effects should be detectable with shortwave radio. A bistatic transmitter-receiver pair would be configured to bounce its signal off some part of the ionosphere. Acoustic vibrations in that layer should create detectable distortion in the shortwave signals. It may not be as exciting as GPS, but it may enable detection of ionospheric disturbances over inaccessible parts of the planet by locating the bistatic pair on either side of the region.

    --
    Two wrongs don't make a right, but three lefts do.
  10. Re:Bull $#|t by RobertB-DC · · Score: 1

    Cool, a flame war! Can I join in?

    Thanks a lot for being such a childish jerk. What's wrong, Mr. Anonymous Coward, afraid to call me lame and stupid and actually admit to who you are?

    AC attacks are pretty lame, aren't they. But here's the strange part:

    And then you have the gall to suggest that I actually subscribe to slashdot?

    An AC says you should subscribe? That's a laugh.

    Why should I if idiots like you are going to bash me for submitting interesting articles?

    Dude, if your article was boring, the AC wouldn't have bothered to bait you.
    1) Troll
    2) Bite
    3) ???
    4) Profit!

    The only reason I can guess is that you'd be getting that money (at least some of it), which really makes you all the more pathetic. First you have to bash people then you beg them for their money.

    Are you suggesting that CmdrTaco's krew is posting AC just to harass you into subscribing? I think you've gone over the edge on this one. If they had time to putz around like that, Slashdot would be little more than "CmdrTaco's Blog."

    Next time try being a man and don't post anonymously.

    Don't be a fool! There's enough men (and overgrown boys) on Slashdot already. Next time, I want the AC to try being a chick!

    --
    Stressed? Me? Of course not. Stress is what a rubber band feels before it breaks, silly.
  11. eek... by M-G · · Score: 2, Informative

    from the article: ...the displacement sends out an acoustic signal, or radio wave, that moves up through the atmosphere.

    Uh, is it an acoustic wave, or a radio wave? There is a difference.

    From the post: resulted in the constillation of GPS satellites generating a mesaurable amount of interference.

    The constellation of GPS satellites did not generate any interference. Rather the effect of the wave on the ionosphere caused interference in the RF signals from the GPS sats.

    1. Re:eek... by mike3411 · · Score: 1

      yeah the acumacy of wordage only in an article not in his post very good isnt.

      it's quite hard to read sometimes, and as you've pointed out, often blatently wrong. i have not RTFA, but that quote makes me inclined not to bother :/

      --
      Mod me down, and I will become more powerful than you can possibly imagine!
  12. old news by SuperBanana · · Score: 1
    By monitoring an array of GPS receivers located throughout California she was able to determine that a massive 7.9 earthquake in Alaska last year resulted in the constillation of GPS satellites generating a mesaurable amount of interference.

    Unless this is a new technique, GPS has been used for years by geologists looking for earthquakes and crust movement(and I don't mean the lojack in grandma's blueberry pie).

  13. A step sideways, but not forward. by quinkin · · Score: 1
    Firstly, I think some of the "acoustic" vs "radio" waves confusion will have been caused by a cross reference to the ELF schumann resonances - a far more (IMO) useful quake research technique.

    This discovery (the only really interesting bit is a way to detect the perturbations using existing equipment) is well and good for post-event quake analysis, but is of limited use for prediction and harm minimisation.

    It is well known that ELF waves are detected in a crescendo that peaks (and dissapears) 48 to 72 hours before a geological event of sufficient magnitude.

    The University of Queensland in Brisbane Australia had just developed the most accurate system of earthquake modelling and prediction in the world (using data from 50+ sensor stations) at the point they had their budget cut and all but 2 (IIRC) stations junked.

    So once again the penny pinchers get to dictate the worlds scientific and cultural achievments - secure in their complete and comfortable ignorance.

    Q.

    --
    Insert Signature Here
  14. New field of physics. by digitalchinky · · Score: 1

    Does this mean one might construct an algorithm to determine which of these 'female' specimines is more likely to be infact genuinely screaming out their makers name as they procreate.