Slashdot Mirror


The Largest Recorded Tsunami Was 50 Years Ago

An anonymous reader writes "July marks the 50th anniversary of the world's largest tsunami — a 1,720-foot-tall wave in Lituya Bay, Alaska. It was triggered by a chain reaction of events that began with a magnitude 7.7 earthquake on the Fairweather Fault, which dislodged a rock fall of 40 million cubic yards, that fell 3,000 feet and splashed into the northwest end of Lituya Bay to generate the wave. This article includes survivor accounts, maps, a satellite image, and photos taken right after the event." To be fair, eyewitness accounts put the height of the wave as it came toward their boats at perhaps 100 feet. The tsunami scoured the land of vegetation and soil to a height of 1,720 feet above sea level, however.

20 of 323 comments (clear)

  1. Feet and yards? by Squapper · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I live in the 21:st century, you insensitive clod!

    1. Re:Feet and yards? by Eddi3 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      In all seriousness, this happened in the US, so I'd say it's only fitting that the units of measure are ones that Americans use.

    2. Re:Feet and yards? by jedie · · Score: 4, Informative

      from TFA

      "The force of the wave removed all trees and vegetation from elevations as high as 1720 feet (524 meters) above sea level. This is the highest wave that has ever been known."

      --
      "The majority is always sane, Louis." -- Nessus
      http://slashdot.jp
    3. Re:Feet and yards? by Eddi3 · · Score: 4, Informative

      5,280 feet.

    4. Re:Feet and yards? by steveo777 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I'm an American and I would so much rather see everything in Metric. I think the main reason this is in the old, crappy system is not because it's written 'for us' or whatever, but because of the year it happened. Though I would think that the guys collecting the data would use metric anyway...

      --
      This sig isn't original enough, it's time to come up with something witty...
    5. Re:Feet and yards? by Thelasko · · Score: 4, Interesting

      We tried, we even have the metric conversion act of 1975. There are simply too many people who resist change and can't do the math in their head. I understand the difficulties with Fahrenheit to Celsius, but it isn't hard to multiply a pound by 2.2. You can even round it to 2 if you had to.

      I used to work in a factory that was owned by a German company, but located in the US. If I would give a drawing labeled in milimeters to our machinists they would balk at it, and I would have to go back and convert it to inches. We had a visiting machinist from Germany and I accidentally gave him a drawing in milimeters to use with our mill which was in inches. Realizing my mistake I offered to correct the drawing. He simply asked what the conversion was. I told him 25.4 mm/in and he came back a little while later with a perfectly machined part.

      --
      One of our competitors trademarked the term "hypothesis". From now on, we will call them "boneheaded ideas".
    6. Re:Feet and yards? by radio4fan · · Score: 5, Informative

      I blame women. No woman wants to go from weighing 95 units to weighing 209 units.

      Great theory, but there are 2.2lbs in a kilo, not 2.2kg in a lb.

      So a 95lb woman weighs about 43kg, not 209kg.

    7. Re:Feet and yards? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      "There is nothing inherently superior about the metric system."

      Of course there is. It uses powers of ten, which is easy math, it's trivial to relate volume-mass-distance measures (1cm^3=1mL water=1g, 1m^3 of water = 1000kg = 1 tonne), it doesn't have half a dozen wacky variations on the same damn unit (it was 5 ounces: would that be the International avoirdupois ounce, the International troy ounce, the Apothocaries' ounce, the Dutch metric ounce, the Maria Theresa ounce, or, wait, is it possible you mean one of the 3 variations of fluid ounces?). It's the same messy story for "pounds", "gallons", and so on. If you're lucky there are only 2 common versions.

      I mean, yes, you're right, it's just a matter of convention and units are always interconvertable, but to say there isn't anything inherently superior about the metric system is nuts. What's convenient about remembering that miles have 5280 feet? Oh, wait, just to be clear I meant an international mile, not the U.S. survey mile (5280 survey feet) or international nautical mile (about 6076 feet). (AAAAAUGH!)

      Have you ever noticed that virtually ALL Imperial units are now defined in terms of the metric system? An inch isn't an inch anymore, it's 2.54 centimetres exactly. There's a reason for that -- because the metric system isn't built on a shifting sand of dozens of different archaic national standards and conventions for their usage.

      The only thing better about the Imperial system is a metric buttload of inertia in people's brains and the convenience of powers-of-two fractions for some measures. But you can use powers-of-two fractions to express things in metric too if you want.

      If you like the Imperial systems please stick with one of them, but you'll never convince me that the metric system is merely on par, especially for anything scientific.

    8. Re:Feet and yards? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Actually the point is that 36430 meters are exactly 36.43 kilometers. The conversion never involves calculations which negatively affect the precision in base ten. If people in the US used a base 2, 12 or 60 number system and a matching unit system, it would make sense, but the imperial unit system is neither advantageous in a different number system nor consistent within itself. It's a relic from an era when measurements didn't have to be exact and estimates were more important than calculations.

  2. Re:Units by gEvil+(beta) · · Score: 5, Funny

    This is a science article, right? Use SI units, kdawson.

    This is kdawson we're talking about. We should be thankful he gave us any sort of units at all.

    --
    This guy's the limit!
  3. Base ten by sjbe · · Score: 5, Insightful

    There is nothing inherently superior about the metric system.

    Sure there is. Ease of unit conversion and ease of communication with the REST OF THE FREAKING WORLD. We live in a global economy - we should start acting like it.

    Why does dividing by 10 matter so much, anyway? Because you have 10 fingers?

    Because we use a base 10 counting system for most calculations. Having a measurement system that is highly compatible with the numeral system most humans use makes sense.

    Really, we should be trying to move to a system of measure that is base 2.

    Really? Go ahead and tell your mother you came 1011 miles to see her - I'm sure she'll be impressed.

    1. Re:Base ten by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      we should all be using the same language, and cursing out those heathens who refuse to abandon the language that they're used to. Yet we're not...

      Genau meine Rede. Wir sollten einfach alle weiter unsere eigenen Einheiten verwenden und unsere eigene Sprache sprechen. Es macht nämlich zu viel Arbeit, das alles neu zu lernen, nur um mit anderen Menschen kommunizieren zu können und um willkürliche Umrechnungsfaktoren unnötig zu machen. Solche Anstrengungen sind wirklich zu viel verlangt, und bisher hat auch niemand diese Mühen auf sich genommen. Das ist leicht daran erkennbar, in wie vielen verschiedenen Sprachen alleine in diesem Forum Kommentare geschrieben werden. Wer Sarkasmus findet, darf ihn behalten.

  4. Re:50 years ago? by smitty97 · · Score: 4, Funny

    There may have been one earlier, but the Hall of Records was mysteriously washed away 100 years ago.

    --
    mod me funny
  5. Similar tsnumai will devastate Eastern Seaboard by xannik · · Score: 4, Informative

    This type of tsunami is the exact same as what is predicted will ultimately wipe out most of the Eastern Seaboard. It will make Katrina and even the tsunami that hit in the Indian Ocean look like a cake walk. http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2004/aug/10/science.spain

    --

    Go Illini!!!
  6. Current day photos? by Azghoul · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The photos from the following day are impressive, but I'd like to compare it to what it looks like today: How much has been able to regrow in relatively cold climate in 50 years?

  7. Re:"To be fair" ot "To be correct"? by srmalloy · · Score: 5, Insightful

    A tsunami may be only a few feet higher than average sea level as it crosses oceans, but when the mass of water piles up as it reaches shore, the runup can go hundreds of feet above sea level. If you're standing on the slope at a height of 800 feet above sea level, and the tsunami starts, which is more 'real' about the height of the tsunami -- the hundred-foot height of the wave in the open water of the bay, or that the runup is going to scour the ground clean almost a thousand feet farther up the slope than where you're standing?

  8. Metric bah by jimbolauski · · Score: 5, Funny

    You go ahead and pay $4 for a liter and I'll pay $4 for a gallon, that fact alone is reason enough to stick with US measurements.

    --
    Knowledge = Power
    P= W/t
    t=Money
    Money = Work/Knowledge so the less you know the more you make
    1. Re:Metric bah by gnuman99 · · Score: 4, Informative

      1 liter is a volume of 10cm x 10cm x 10cm.

  9. Re:The eye witness account... by Drogo007 · · Score: 4, Informative

    If you look at the map of the damage, the 1725 figure comes from the slope directly opposite where the honking huge chunk of rock fell 3000' feet to land in the water - which probably displaced all the water straight up and over the spur where the 1725 figure was recorded and then damage along the rest of the bay was more in line with the 100' figure.

  10. Our language is base ten by AlpineR · · Score: 5, Insightful

    "Grandma, I walked eleven miles to see you."

    The funny thing about non base-10 number systems is that our language can't say them without spelling them out. The old joke about "There are 10 kinds of people in the world..." isn't very funny if you say it aloud or in your head: "There are two kinds of people in the world" or "There are one zero kinds of people in the world".

    So I believe it's our language, not our fingers, that makes base ten feel natural. If we had grown up accustomed to counting "one two three ten eleven twelve thirteen twenty twenty-one twenty-two twenty-three thirty" then base four would feel natural. The characters "2506" would look as strange as hexadecimal and be as impossible to pronounce without spelling or conversion.

    By the way, isn't the term "base 10" devoid of meaning? If our system were base four, then "base 10" would mean "base four" since the characters "10" in base four mean "4" in base ten. Whatever base you use, "10" is your way of writing the value of that base.

    Back to the tsunami, it's disappointing to hear that the water was 290 fathoms high only very near it's source (the landslide). That's like saying "Your mama's so fat she jumped in the Pacific and made a tsunami a billion nanometers high."