Slashdot Mirror


How a 'Seismic Cloak' Could Slow Down an Earthquake

Daniel_Stuckey writes "The United States is currently gripped in a bout of earthquake mania, following a series of significant tremors in the West. And any time Yellowstone, LA, or San Francisco shakes, people start to wonder if it's a sign of The Big One to come. Yet even after decades of research, earthquake prediction remains notoriously hard, and not every building in quake-prone areas has an earthquake-resistant design. What if, instead of quaking in our boots, we could stop quakes in their tracks? Theoretically, it's not a crazy idea. Earthquakes propagate in waves, and if noise-canceling headphones have taught us anything, it's that waves can be absorbed, reflected, or canceled out. Today, a paper published in Physical Review Letters suggests how that might be done. It's the result of French research into the use of metamaterials—broadly, materials with properties not found in nature—to modify seismic waves, like a seismic cloaking device."

17 of 101 comments (clear)

  1. Interesting .... by King_TJ · · Score: 5, Interesting

    For some reason, this article made me think of that story about Tesla and his "oscillator" experiment:

    http://www.angelfire.com/scifi...

    I wonder if, rather than relying on these "metametals" in special soil, one could station units similar to these at strategic locations along fault lines, designed to pick up an earthquake's resonant frequency and generate a corresponding one tuned to cancel it out?

    1. Re:Interesting .... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      The difficulty in wave cancellation is that you have to work with the interference patterns. Unless the source and countersignal are in exactly the same location, the interference will lead to both flat regions and double-amplitude regions. Noise-cancelling headphones work by exploiting a chokepoint where the signal strength involved is low enough that the constructive interference will be miniscule and in (for the numbers involved) harmless locations.

      If you can't artificially dampen the quake, the next most viable method would be to surround vulnerable locations with possible countersignal generators and turn on those that would interfere favorably for the protected area. This may have dramatic and destructive side-effects elsewhere...

    2. Re:Interesting .... by CanHasDIY · · Score: 3, Informative

      If you can't artificially dampen the quake, the next most viable method would be to surround vulnerable locations with possible countersignal generators and turn on those that would interfere favorably for the protected area. This may have dramatic and destructive side-effects elsewhere...

      Like how 2 raindrops in a puddle can cancel the waves of a third in the middle, but send waves of their own radiating outward from their own epicenters.

      --
      An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
    3. Re:Interesting .... by mikael · · Score: 2

      Given the magnitude of energy involved (every level on the Richter scale is 10x the one below itI think it would be easier to build floating cities like Buckminster suggested. Build a skyscraper frame using a hollow superstructure, get enough sealed air in the superstructure and you actually end up with a structure that will actually float in the air due to differences in air density.

      --
      Vintage computer adverts: http://www.vintageadbrowser.com/computers-and-software-ads
    4. Re:Interesting .... by Dahamma · · Score: 2

      California's 'Next Big One' may have nothing to do with the San Andreas fault.

      Any "big one" in California will have something to do with the San Andreas fault. We pretty much shrug off at 5+ quakes, those are just minor annoyances caused by offshoots of the San Andreas ;) When we talk "big one" we're talking 7+, and whether it's directly caused by the San Andreas or another related fault, the energy for that is almost definitely coming from the movements of the Pacific and North American plates...

  2. Re:Weaponize by Z00L00K · · Score: 4, Insightful

    If you use waves to cancel out the quake I see two problems.
    1. The amount of energy needed to cancel it out.
    2. The risk that it may actually result in a worse situation somewhere else, possibly trigger an unexpected quake instead.

    --
    If builders built buildings the way programmers wrote programs, then the first woodpecker would destroy civilization.
  3. Banana shaped by egcagrac0 · · Score: 2

    Is the seismic cloak made of sheep's bladders?

  4. Two questions. by westlake · · Score: 2

    I wonder if one could station units similar to these at strategic locations along fault lines, designed to pick up an earthquake's resonant frequency and generate a corresponding one tuned to cancel it out?

    What are the power requirements? How many stations do you need to do the job?

    1. Re:Two questions. by jellomizer · · Score: 2

      Enough to move a Continental plate.

      --
      If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
    2. Re:Two questions. by CanHasDIY · · Score: 2

      your statement sums up the tea party.
      The government is spending money on stuff I don't understand, therefore waste.

      Then explain it.

      If, after you've explained the topic in an understandable and non-biased manner, the person in question maintains their previous mentality, then it's appropriate to be a dick about it.

      But not before. "Catch more flies with honey," and whatnot.

      --
      An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
  5. hello, StereoCentral? by swschrad · · Score: 2

    I'd like to order ten thousand amplifiers and about 20,000 kick-ass bass cabinets... oh, and one microphone and phase inverter...

    --
    if this is supposed to be a new economy, how come they still want my old fashioned money?
  6. What nonsense. by funwithBSD · · Score: 5, Funny

    Everyone knows earthquakes are particles not waves!

    --
    Never answer an anonymous letter. - Yogi Berra
  7. Re:Weaponize by St.Creed · · Score: 2

    What they do, as I gather from the article, is that they drill holes in specific patterns around installations. The pattern then absorbs seismic waves and turns them into sound and heat at the focal points of the waves. No idea how much heat or sound, but in general it's an improvement over having the building destroyed.

    --
    Therefore, by the (faulty) logic you're using, you're just a cow with a keyboard - osu-neko (2604)
  8. Re:Weaponize by ArcadeMan · · Score: 2

    There's also a small chance of creating an unexpected doom.

  9. From reading the actual article, this could work by ShooterNeo · · Score: 4, Interesting

    The primary problem with this concept is that you have to know very precisely the composition of the ground where you install this barrier. Another problem is that environmental changes - soil moisture, temperature, are going to affect the material properties somewhat (but maybe not enough to matter).

    Essentially, extremely low frequency waves that trash buildings don't perceive the ground as atomic, the waves act over their wavelength, which is very long, and so if you put things into the ground, it changes the material properties. Carefully drilled holes apparently can change the properties in dramatic ways. The word "cloak" is sexy, but the more interesting bit mentioned at the end of the paper was the prospect of building a bandstop damper with the low corner at 0 Hz.

    It doesn't do you much good if your earthquake prevention device reflects the energy somewhere else dependent on the epicenter, and it also doesn't do you much good if it doesn't block enough frequencies to stop it from trashing your buildings. A bandstop filter would operate over a broad enough band to attenuate all the frequencies, and it wouldn't reflect energy to other buildings (which could have obvious liability concerns.) Imagine a plaintiff's attorney showing a standing wave pattern of destruction emanating from a field of holes drilled by the defendant's firm.

    The other satisfying nature of this tech is that it's proactive. Instead of building structures that will probably collapse if a magnitude 8 happens anyway, you go out there and build armor that will stop the earthquake entirely. Also, a field of holes and concrete and various pertubations, all buried, is a lot less ugly than the structural changes needed to reinforce a building against a major earthquake.

    It would be expensive to do the detailed surveys and compute the solution, but it would create more high education jobs, and it's probably worth doing.

  10. Bose QuakeGaurd® by l0ungeb0y · · Score: 2

    Protect your home and family from deadly earthquakes with Bose's Patented QuakeGaurd® Home Audio system that instantly detects earthquakes and sends seismic-neutralizing audio waves through our fashionable and amazing hi-def speaker that fits conveniantly on any book case, desk or night stand. When not fending off quakes, it plays CDs and even works with your grandchildren's iPhone to play those new fangled MP3s kids love so much these days. Order now and get a complementary pair of stylish Bose AudioWave Earbuds that work with any Walkman or portable CD player.

  11. Slashdot unusable at work by SimonInOz · · Score: 2

    If you start putting stupid autoplay on stories, they cannot be read at work. And Slashdot will die.

    What the heck is wrong with you guys?

    --
    "Cats like plain crisps"