Quake-Catcher Aims to be Largest Distributed Seismometer Network

Nature is reporting that a new distributed computing application is looking to monitor earthquake data using the accelerometer in many computing devices. In the long run, "Quake-Catcher" will hopefully be fast enough to give warning before major earthquakes. "If it works, it will be the cheapest seismic network on the planet and could operate in any country. It wouldn't be as sensitive as traditional networks of seismometers, but Lawrence says that's not the point. 'If you have only two sensors in an area, you have to have a perfect system. If you have 15 sensors in a system it [can] be less perfect. One hundred, one thousand, ten thousand -- your need for the system to be perfect becomes much smaller,' he says. 'That's really our approach -- just to have massive numbers.'"

Comments

Re:Accelerometers

[Harmonious Botch]

The aggregate would be reliable, not the individual data.

Hope is not a plan

[westlake]

In the long run, "Quake-Catcher" will hopefully be fast enough to give warning before major earthquakes.

and the scientific basis for prediction is what, exactly?

a meaningful prediction has to be precise in location and in time.

time is the enemy:

the thirty second warning is little better than "duck and cover" if it cannot be communicated effectively.

Re:Hope is not a plan

[Animats]

the thirty second warning is little better than "duck and cover" if it cannot be communicated effectively.

Actually, a 30 second warning is quite useful, but not to humans. There are such warning systems in California. When the warning system trips, elevators stop at the nearest floor, subways and BART trains stop, gas valves at schools and mobile home parks close, and some hazardous processes shut down.

But the data from that comes from fixed seismic stations, not somebody's random accelerometer.

Re:Great vaporware application

[MrNaz]

Personally, I think this is a dud idea.

1,000 laptop accelerometers cannot do what a single seismic sensor can, because they are orders of magnitude less sensitive. You can't take 1,000 sensors, add the data together, and say it is 1,000 times more effective than a single device. If the sensor granularity is not sufficient to detect what you are trying to detect, then one or one million will not be able to detect your subject. It'd be like using one cheap VGA webam to try to photograph surface topography on Pluto, and when that didn't work, trying the same thing by using 1,000 cheap VGA webcams together.

Stupid.

Re:Great vaporware application

[MrNaz]

Not relevant.

Lucky Imaging uses multiple high accuracy devices that are accurate enough to capture the granularity required, but are otherwise limited by extraneous transient factors. By using multiple devices the chance of achieving an optimum reading vis a vis those extraneous factors is maximised. This situational opportunism is why it is called "Lucky Imaging", and it cannot be applied to the scenario where the device itself is not capable of making the reading necessary, even under optimum conditions.

Also, I'm not entirely sure how you thought that my example of a "cheap VGA webcam" was applicable to observatory quality low light CCDs mounted in an assembly the size of a shipping container.