This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Quake (natural phenomenon) article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||
|
The sunquake is listed as having magnitude 11.4, while the San Francisco earthquakes had magnitude 7.9. Magnitude 11.4 is about 126,000 times more powerful than magnitude 7.9 not 40,000 as claimed in the article. 49.145.109.75 ( talk) 03:30, 30 August 2018 (UTC)
Having different names for earthquakes on different planets (eg, marsquake) is insane. They should all be called earthquakes. Earthquake contains the word 'earth' but this should be irrelevant to its definition. Earthquake contains the world 'earth' because the word originated from the planet earth, which is where humans originated. And so planet Earth was the place where earthquakes were first observed and named. However, these same geological symptoms do occur on other planets, and hence do not need to be assigned a new name. Instead making up a new word for an earthquake on Mars, why not just call it 'an earthquake on mars'. Its like having a different word for the 'atmosphere' for every planet, instead of just using the word 'atmosphere'. (eg, like saying: Mars doesnt have an atmosphere, it has a marsosphere) Ok, the atmospheric composition for each planet is different, but you can still refer to them all as 'atmosphere'. Same thing = same word. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.146.204.91 ( talk) 20:07, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
The introductory definition for Quake was previously substandard, so I expanded and modified it based on my own knowledge of the topic. The reference I linked to is the USGS earthquakes general information page, which refers to a number of articles about the phenomenon of earthquakes in particular, but the principles apply equally well to other celestial bodies, with the exception of starquakes. If somebody can link to a more appropriate reference, please do so. Peter b ( talk) 21:45, 5 April 2012 (UTC)
The article claims the starquake detected on December 27, 2004 from the ultracompact stellar corpse SGR 1806-20 was energy equivalent to a magnitude 32 quake. My reading of the reference given does not make it clear that the magnitude 32 quake referred to SGR 1806-20, or to large starquakes in theory. A calculation of mine (based on 1E40 Joules and the formula log10(Energy-in-joules)=1.5*Magnitude+4.8) came up with the energy equivalent of a 23.5 magnitude quake. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kdpw ( talk • contribs) 23:09, 20 September 2019 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Quake (natural phenomenon) article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||
|
The sunquake is listed as having magnitude 11.4, while the San Francisco earthquakes had magnitude 7.9. Magnitude 11.4 is about 126,000 times more powerful than magnitude 7.9 not 40,000 as claimed in the article. 49.145.109.75 ( talk) 03:30, 30 August 2018 (UTC)
Having different names for earthquakes on different planets (eg, marsquake) is insane. They should all be called earthquakes. Earthquake contains the word 'earth' but this should be irrelevant to its definition. Earthquake contains the world 'earth' because the word originated from the planet earth, which is where humans originated. And so planet Earth was the place where earthquakes were first observed and named. However, these same geological symptoms do occur on other planets, and hence do not need to be assigned a new name. Instead making up a new word for an earthquake on Mars, why not just call it 'an earthquake on mars'. Its like having a different word for the 'atmosphere' for every planet, instead of just using the word 'atmosphere'. (eg, like saying: Mars doesnt have an atmosphere, it has a marsosphere) Ok, the atmospheric composition for each planet is different, but you can still refer to them all as 'atmosphere'. Same thing = same word. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.146.204.91 ( talk) 20:07, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
The introductory definition for Quake was previously substandard, so I expanded and modified it based on my own knowledge of the topic. The reference I linked to is the USGS earthquakes general information page, which refers to a number of articles about the phenomenon of earthquakes in particular, but the principles apply equally well to other celestial bodies, with the exception of starquakes. If somebody can link to a more appropriate reference, please do so. Peter b ( talk) 21:45, 5 April 2012 (UTC)
The article claims the starquake detected on December 27, 2004 from the ultracompact stellar corpse SGR 1806-20 was energy equivalent to a magnitude 32 quake. My reading of the reference given does not make it clear that the magnitude 32 quake referred to SGR 1806-20, or to large starquakes in theory. A calculation of mine (based on 1E40 Joules and the formula log10(Energy-in-joules)=1.5*Magnitude+4.8) came up with the energy equivalent of a 23.5 magnitude quake. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kdpw ( talk • contribs) 23:09, 20 September 2019 (UTC)