I do not have a time for long blog post about this at the moment. But here is a short overview of earthquake activity in Öræfajökull volcano.
Since the year 1991 there have been total of three earthquake swarms (with the one in last week) in Öræfajökull volcano. The two earthquake swarms where in the year December 2005 and in September 2008. Total of 70 or so earthquakes have taken place in this earthquake swarms. But only 30 or so earthquakes in the main crater of Öræfajökull volcano.
Earthquake activity in Öræfajökull volcano between the year 1991 and to 2011. Copyright of this image belongs to Icelandic Met Office.
Earthquakes inside the main crater of Öræfajökull volcano from the year 1991 to 2011. Copyright of this image belongs to Icelandic Met Office.
All pictures are from here.
Currently the earthquake activity in Öræfajökull volcano is quite low. So I am not expecting anything for a long, long time now. The reason why earthquakes are taking place might be new magma. But this also might be due the glacier and pressure changes on the rock because of that. But I find the later idea less likely then the first one. But it hard to know for sure at the moment what actually is the real case now.
I will write outside of the context of this blogpost.
I think it is fair that I have my say after being fairly well attacked by the blogger in here.
I am a bit chocked to find all of this after my brief going away to celebrate my fourtieth birthday. So I will rebut.
Jón, you have totally and utterly misunderstood the scientific process I am saddened to say.
You do not like my theory, fine. You do not need to. But you can shout that I am wrong all you like. I might be actually. But there the issue is how you say I am wrong. You have not even tried tried so far to prove me wrong.
I have set up the observable facts. Facts that actually support your claim that SISZ is giving the power to the process I described. We have actually given about a quarter of a million proven facts, cathegorized them, and then I theorized about them.
The theory I set the basis for follows all the rules of good science. It would be stupid of me to not follow them, I after all hold a ph.d. in Physics in the field of Wave-propagation theory, I also hold a master in the theory of science. Scientifically I know what I am doing. Something that you will one day recognize when you start studies at master level or above at a recognized university. I do not say this to belittle you, I am just making a comment here that you have missunderstood the 4 basic tenements of good science.
1. Observation of reallity.
2. Theoretisation.
3. Prediction. The theory must make a unique prediction that is fallable (possible to prove wrong over time).
4. It must be fallible and falsifiable. I must be possible to prove it wrong, either mathematicly, logically or by experimentation. It is not necessary for the same scientist that made the theory to set up an experiment to prove or disprove, but it is considered good behavior to set up an example as such. And so I did.
My theory is bloody good science. It follows all those 4 tenements. It still may be wrong though. But to say it is wrong you need to do a few things that you have not. Here is what you need to do if you are going to produce good science Jón.
1. Prove that the observations are wrong, falsified, or misinterpreted. (No you have not done this).
2. Prove that either logic or mathematics are flawed in such a way that the theory falls. Nope, you haven’t even tried sofar.
3. Prove that the theorys prediction has fallen. You haven’t even noticed this requirement sofar.
4. You are welcome to try to prove me wrong.
Will I be angry if you prove me wrong (ranting is not proof Jón)? No, not in the least. Because if you prove me wrong, you have proved that at least half of what we know about geology and tectonics in that region is wrong. And you have also then proven that one of paths to understanding Hekla was a dead end, thusly saving time and resources for the future.
Jón, accusing me of bad science is unworthy and far below you. I know it hurts to be proven to be wrong, and you have been proven wrong on all counts. You are wrong even if my theory is in the future proven wrong.
Second thing, you are right now actually getting in the way of understanding Icelands unarguably most dangerous volcano, and by trying to hinder science in this way, you might actually cause real harm for real people.
My intention for writing this down is that I know that sometimes some if Icelands real volcnologists read this page, and they have something you do not. The resources to actually test the theory over time.
Take a deep breath and relax Jón. I have been young and gotten overly excited in discussions that I just wanted to win. Poppin’ a vein is not worth it, nature will sooner or later prove me wrong if I am wrong. And that is the best part with science. If you are wrong, you will be hit over the head by nature.
i beleave you are right until proven wrong i like this site but something happen that shouldn’t have. Carl i like the way you thank don’t ever change.
I am too old and stubborn for that 😉
Things happen in life, it is normal when “knowledge” is superceeded with new “knowledge”.
I would say that it is mostly my fault, because somewhere I didn’t succeed in explaining myself sufficiently to Jón. And at a forum like this you do not have the luxury of sitting down over a cup of coffee and discuss it through untill concensus is achieved.
I don’t mind really. I just wanted to make a point since I had been away for personal time the last few days.
To be fair Carl, you can’t call your theory good science till it is proven to be correct…All science that has not been properly proven is mere speculation…I won’t say bad science though.
You have a point here. If it is proven, it would be a vallid theory.
But the odd thing is that we have a lot of good scientific theories that has been proven wrong. Newtonian mechanics is proven to be wrong, and still we use them on a daily basis. Why? Because they followed all of the rules of good scientific work. They where testable, predicitive and falsifiable. And they stood the test of time untill Einstein kicked Newton in the arse with a theory that was even more basic and at the same time explained even more.
I would also like to say, that in the entirety of physical science, only 2 theories are believed to be correct. Very few theories are thusly proven. We believe (not know) that the theories of relativity is correct, and we believe that the Feynman path-integer solution is correct. All other theories are just considered to be provisory.
Good science is just an expression if it has been done correctly or not, it does not say if it is right or wrong.
Most non-scientist makes the error in believing that things are really provable. Even if my theory is tested experimentally and reallity is in accordance with it, I can still have a faulty theory like Newton. It can still explain what happens, but be superceded by a theory that is more basic and explains more in a different way.
I would be surprised if that happens, even if reallity behaves as I have theorized.
It would be good science for instance to find some feature in the same area that I have not explained, add that and make a new theory that explains the same thing AND some new things while retaining testabillity and being possible to prove wrong.
John: Good science does not depend on whether the theory is right or wrong (like Carl already said). Goodness of science depends on how it follows the scientific process, e.g. how the theory is constructed and how it is presented. Does it explain something? Does it predict something? Is it testable, i.e. can it be verified or falsified? One of my former professors stated: “You do not need to be a good scientist to make good experiments, but you do need to be a good scientist to explain what went wrong in the bad experiments!”
Carl: Einstein did not kill Newtonian mechanics, nor did he prove it wrong. Einstein only found the limits of applicability (only within classical speeds) for the Newtonian mechanics. The same with QED, it did not kill classical chemistry, they are just applicable in different length scales.
Also, your impression of very few physical theories being “proven” is vey odd. But I also admit, that it might depend on your definition of a valid proof. Actually, relativity of the most accurately tested theories ever. Also QED invented by Mr. Feynman has been tested pretty thoroughly, and proven accurate to 10-12 decimals. I define a valid proof being e.g. an experiment, that agrees with the theory well enough to rule out other factors (e.g. experimental errors, competing theories, etc.). I guess for you this is only supporting, not proving, right?
@Jack:
You are right, I used sloppy languages.
I should have written tested in such a way that these two theories are likely to be viable models of parts of how the universe works.
To return to Newton. The model is usable as a model of the universse, especialy as a working tool, in among fields as trajectory calculation for instance. But at the basic core (the analogous modeling) Newton misunderstood some fundamental issues like for instance the observers influence on observed data, thusly the theory is found to be wanting, ie. incorrect. So Newtonian physics became superseded as The Theory, but not as a mathematical tool. You see my point?
In other words, Einstein found the limits of applicability for Newtonian mechanics, not only mathematically but also in a more fundamental way. So, you’re correct.
Carl, I do not mean to be picky. It is just sometimes very important to know what you’re talking about… If it is not evident from the text, I feel a need to make a statement as a check if you know what you’re talking about. In most cases it seems you indeed know! ;o)
@Jack:
It is nice that someone tells me when I do not make sense 🙂
The same here!
@ Carl please contact me d.wbarnes@btinternet.com. I have some information for you. Thank you.
Answered privately.
Please be advised. This answer is going to be technical and complex. If you want to continue to discuss this issue. Please do so here and nowhere else. To answer here, press “reply” below Carl answer or the answer you want to answer. Note that this might not work on replays from mobile phone web page.
First the basic about the SISZ.
The South Icelandic Seismic Zone is a result of plate tectonics. It belongs it existence because of the new rift zone being formed in Iceland. That rift zone being named NVZ and EVZ. But it also is because of the old rift zone named WVZ. The plate tectonics that drive Iceland apart are the same that created the SISZ. Sine the formation of the NVZ and EVZ creates strain on the crust between the rift zones. But SISZ is on east-west plane with N-S earthquakes.
By that it did create the SISZ as we call it today. This has happened before. But that fault zone is now called WISZ (I think!). But that fault zone was inactive at least until the new volcano zone on Snæfellsnes. But that might have re-activated this old earthquake zone that once was between the extinct Snæfellsnes Rift zone and today WVZ.
Now that we have established what SISZ is and how it works we can move forward.
Ref. List for this section.
http://hraun.vedur.is/ja/skyrslur/June17and21_2000/index.html
http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2010AGUFM.T33B2253B (abstract only)
http://hraun.vedur.is/ja/prepared/SouthIcelandEarthq2000/node3.html
Now the wave propagation and transfer of energy over normal rock.
Wave is just when a energy is transferred into other form. For instance a earthquake is nothing more then a energy release of a rock when it breaks. Normal rock is also able to store huge amount of energy over long period of time. When this energy is released a earthquake happens.
The basic rule about wave is that shorter waves travel less distance then longer waves the travel. For that reason it is possible to record a earthquake (a large one) on the other side of the planet few minutes after it has happened.
This release of energy is not transfer of energy. But that is a different process in it self. Wave do not carry energy that is stored for build up. At least not this types of waves that can store energy.
There for it is clear that this is not a factor in eruptions in Hekla volcano or Hengill volcano.
Earthquake activity in Hekla volcano.
Hekla volcano is normally quiet volcano when it comes to earthquakes. But it is known that a eruption or a earthquake on SISZ have started a eruption (few documented cases in history) in Hekla volcano. But the earthquakes in question have almost been really close to Hekla volcano and might well be part of the eruption progress in Hekla volcano, even if this has not been documented in recent years.
Hekla volcano has its existence to a process on the EVZ to the south, this progress is ongoing and has been for the past few million years and is not over for the next few million years. This is a process that is going to require it’s own amount of earthquakes and volcano eruptions. The current south most end of EVZ are the Vestmanneyjar volcano. Currently south of them there are no-known volcanoes that I know of or have been documented.
The Hengill volcano.
The Hengill volcano is a complex volcano. But for the most part it is a standard volcano that is on a rift zone. It has it share of earthquakes, that most of the time do not have any effect on the SISZ that is in the mix and even cross over part of Hengill volcano. During the earthquake swarm in the year 1997 to 1999 when several Mb5.0 earthquakes took place, no change did take place in the SISZ during this events. Earthquake activity at that time remained the same. But it is believed that magma intrusion (cryptodome?) was responsible for the earthquake swarm in Hengill volcano at that time.
The progress of SISZ and long term evolution.
The SISZ is going to be around for a long time to come. At least until a new rift zone forms and new earthquake zone appears between them at least. From what I understand SISZ is moving south with time (I didn’t find any study on this yet). This may well be true, as there are inactive older fault north of current SISZ that are several million years older then current SISZ.
Why there is no energy transfer between volcanoes over SISZ
There is a good reason Carl why your idea does not work. Since I have explained what data I use to reject your idea and what I base my rejection on. This answer is a fully detailed answer on why I reject your idea in this matter.
As I sad above. Rock stores energy for a long term and releases it by breaking and creating a earthquake. A rock or a fault zone that rocks are in do not transfer energy over it. They store it. What is more important is the fact that what drives the SISZ to build up energy is also responsible for keeping Hengill volcano active, this also goes for Hekla volcano.
The forces in question here are slow moving and do not transfer energy between volcanoes. The forces in question charge the volcanoes with there own energy. But the force here in question is the mantle below Iceland and the hot spot under Iceland. This system drives the earthquakes and volcano activity in this area and has done so for a real long time. Any type of energy transfer is not needed in this system between volcanoes. Among the facts is that it does not support it. There is also the fact energy does not needed to be transferred between volcanoes. The volcano system in Iceland has more then enough energy in store for both volcanoes for a long time to come (at least ~2 million years. But then the volcanoes go extinct).
It is quite easy to think that what you did see in the data was real. But it not. It does not fit the settings that is in place and has never done so. This is not a question about “if” or “how”. The idea defaults on it’s own flags. This is a none workable idea and flawed from the start. This was quite easy to see when it was viewed and looked at.
Sources for this part.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wave_propagation
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phase_velocity
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Group_velocity
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seismic_wave
http://www.geo.mtu.edu/UPSeis/waves.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Huygens%E2%80%93Fresnel_principle
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wave#Amplitude_and_modulation
http://www.norvol.hi.is/~rikke/Arnadottir_et_al_GRL03.pdf
http://bssaonline.org/cgi/content/abstract/67/1/187 (abstract only)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Work_%28thermodynamics%29
http://hera.wdcb.ru/tols/tecton/method/biblio/paleo/Bergerat_Iceland_00.pdf
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0040195107003782
http://www.norvol.hi.is/~thora/pub_pdf/2001GL013332.pdf
Nice of you Jón to write this answer. Now you have studied it enough for me to be able to discern where I should have explained better.
First of all, regarding SISZ I am in totall agrement with you and the rest of the scientific community. I should probably have written that SISZ is the basis of the energy I was talking about.
I was talking about a finite peace of the way the energy moved. I should perhaps have started at SISZ for clarity. Easy to be whise in hind-sight.
Quotation-marks: Jóns comment from above for clarity.
“Wave is just when a energy is transferred into other form.” No, a wave is a function of the movement of energy. You might think of it as a sign of the movement of energy. A wave on the ocean is just a visible sign of the movement of the collected energy from the wind in the water. The water itself does not move (more than a little up and down), the same water molecule does not travell across the ocean, individuell molecules interacts and ‘pass the energy unit along’ from each other. A wave-function is the basis of most forms of energy transfer, from electricity, tectonic to gravitetic waves. Do you agree Jón?
“This release of energy is not transfer of energy” No, but you do need a release of energy as a beginning for transfer of energy.
“Wave do not carry energy that is stored for build up.”
I think we here have the center of our misunderstanding Jón. I never said that a wave stores energy beyond its duration of time and movement. A wave is only holding energy while it is a wave, and the wave has a starting point (in this case a quake) and a finnish point (where the energy either has disipated through friction, defraction, or through hitting an area that is sonically dead. When a wave hits a sonically dead area it is subjected to nearly instantenous collaps due to incumbent friction. This is what happens when a sound wave hits a dampening material, for instance your sofa.
When the wave finnishes at such a place the wave-carried energy is released into the media, and it is the media that stores the energy. In this case the media is the ductile material inside of Hekla proper. Think of Hekla here as being a battery, but in a very loose sense of the word. A better term is that Hekla is a capacitor able to release the energy at a later time.
About Hekla, I agree with every word you have written. I also agree with every word about Hengill. But, please not that I was not talking about Hengill the Volcano, I was talking about the Sprungur area south of Hengill, and the progression of sprungur from south of Hengill towards Hekla. I want to be very clear on this. I do not think Hengill the Volcano has any connection at all with Hekla.
I will now rephrase myself in one sentence.
My theory is about how the SISZ transfers energy via the eastern part of the Sprungur progression from west to east towards Hekla, and that this transfer of energy is over time working as a measurable trigger factor for Hekla. An I stipulated that if my theory is correct, it would be easy to just count the cumulative seismic moment over the 3 last bands of quakes. Again, we are talking about SISZ energy transferred to Hekla, exactly as you said Jón. This is the limit of what I was talking about. Any other connection, energy-whise, mechanical, or magmatic is not included in my theory. Do you follow me at this point Jón?
“Why there is no energy transfer between volcanoes over SISZ”
There is no energy transfer from Volcanos over SISZ. My theory is about HOW energy is transferred from the triple junction of the SISZ and the area where Hekla is. It would still be vallid (if my theory is correct that is) even if neither Hengill, nor Hekla was even existing.
“A rock or a fault zone that rocks are in do not transfer energy over it.” This is wrong, if you where correct you could not detect an earth-quake at all. What you are detecting is after all energy-waves moving. Since you can detect earth-quakes sonic wave energy it is proven that I am correct on this. You yourself prove this every day.
“What is more important is the fact that what drives the SISZ to build up energy is also responsible for keeping Hengill volcano active, this also goes for Hekla volcano.”
Yes, and that is what I said, I just detailed it more then before.
Jón, I think what you are missing, is that I am not talking about magma, I am not talking about dykes, chambers, and all the other things that make up a volcano.
I was talking about a very small detail, or small I do not know… But still.
I was talking about how and where the energy of earthquakes go in this limited area. And how they indicate the continous builld up of strain in the “surface” (please think loosely about the word surface here) that in the end starts the massive borehole transient as the mountain is ripped open.
Jón, in everything you wrote about the volcanos above you are correct as far as I know, but you think I was saying much more than I did. And you missed a bit on the physics side (but that is actually beside the point) about waves. But that is very understandable, I have studied physics on and off for more than 20 years in this particular field and I still get confused (but on another level entirely).
I know you have decided that I am wrong, your prerogative.
I would though like to challenge you since I know you are a very bright guy. Instead of you trying to prove that what I did not say is wrong, you instead try to go the other way.
Answer these questions for me.
1. Would it be beneficial for the prediction of an eruption if you could count the cumulative seismic moment in the area I described in the same way as you do for Grimsvötn propper?
2. What do you think is the triggering mechanism of the strain that opens Hekla that is recorded by the borehole strainmeters before every eruption?
3. (I here guess you wrote the initial earthquake as an answer to 2) What is the trigger then of that earthquake?
No, you did not actually disprove me.
Hekla volcano is not able to store energy from SISZ. As it might not belong to SISZ in the first place. The interaction between Hekla volcano and SISZ might just due to stress changes in the rock around Hekla volcano after a eruption. But that change is what might be creating the earthquakes after a eruption in Hekla volcano.
This is however not proven for sure at the moment (that I know of).
The forces that make up Hekla volcano are also greater then the forces that make up SISZ. So energy cannot travel into Hekla volcano. Same goes for Hengill volcano. But energy also does not travel outwards from Hekla volcano or Hengill volcano either. It is builds up there and stays there.
In this case you have forces that are stronger then SISZ (as they actually make it). But SISZ is not a individual part that is due because of the both rift zones. As I did mention above.
It is those forces that build up seismic strain in this area. It is not the volcanoes pr. se. But rather the whole rift zone that is at work here.
Earthquake waves are result of energy release. They are not energy source them self. As you say your self. But I was a bit mistaken in the replay above (it’s been a long day for me).
There are many types of energy (in different form). What you are taking about is a static build up and transfer of energy that does not happen in the crust of the Earth. Anywhere from what I gather.
There is not transfer of energy between volcanoes. It does not happen, as the volcanoes them self are just a end release to a lot larger process in Iceland. That is why your idea does not hold up to the facts.
If you want to find the source of all this energy in Iceland. You have to look into the core of the Earth. But that is the source of all this.
Now we are close!
For the rest, this is why argument is good, as you talk (or in this case write) you get closer and closer to understanding each other.
SISZ or to be more exact, the South Icelandic Seismic Zone (please correct me if I wrote it wrongly) is if I am correct cause by the individuall movement of the MAR and influenced by the hot-spot. And again, if I am mistaken here, please correct me. Or feel free to fill it out accordingly.
And if I am correct in the above is caused by the largest force on earth. So, saying that Hekla and Hengill has a higher energy potential is not fully correct. Yes, the energy-value per volume-unit can be higher, but not higher in total since they are caused by it.
“Hekla volcano is not able to store energy from SISZ. As it might not belong to SISZ in the first place. The interaction between Hekla volcano and SISZ might just due to stress changes in the rock around Hekla volcano after a eruption. But that change is what might be creating the earthquakes after a eruption in Hekla volcano.”
This is very interesting. We can see that energy is existing in the area from the Sprungur area (Lets drop Hengill since I am not talking about the volcano shall we?). How do we know that there is energy there? Well, we see about a quarter of a million earthquakes happening there over 15 years. Thats a lot of energy. That energy comes from the triple-junction in the MAR as that spreads and moves creating tremendous pressure.
I have not seen you argue about ductile/brittle material, so I guess that you agree about that part. Ductile material is sonically working as a dampener, and any quake energy however it travells, will be released there as friction and through that process turn into heat. But what happens with energy hitting the not so ductile area above the ductile material?
My theory here is that it is stored as mountain rock strain over time (remember we are talking about a decade here). This strain does exist and is proven, but not in a volcano. It does happen though in mines. The largest recorded rock-strain is in the Kiruna iron ore mine, recorded at 1300 metres of depth. The reasons for this strain are multiple, but it is proven that the repeated explosions (equivalent to earth-quakes) increases this strain.
My hypothesize is that the energy is stored, as heat in the ductile/magmatic area under Hekla (this is governed by laws of physics and is not a problem to prove), but the part of it being stored above the ductile area is harder to prove, much harder. Only way to prove this is long-term measurements. Here I can absolutly be wrong.
The last part of your paragraph is really good. First of all, you are correct here about the connection. The only difference between what you are saying and that what I am saying is that your connection is working both ways. That is the heart of our difference. As the connection exists after the eruptions, it must exist before. And as it is releasing tension after it must accumulate tension before. This is the Newtonian law of “any action, must have an equal and oposite reaction”. That physical law is true in both directions.
So if “The interaction between Hekla volcano and SISZ might just due to stress changes in the rock around Hekla volcano after a eruption. But that change is what might be creating the earthquakes after a eruption in Hekla volcano.” is true, than the reverse order is also true according to the laws of physics. Think about it and you will see that I am either correct, or the laws of physics wrong. (and this one even I agree with) 🙂
“It is those forces that build up seismic strain in this area. It is not the volcanoes pr. se. But rather the whole rift zone that is at work here.”
Yes, my point exactly! Now we are getting there!
“What you are taking about is a static build up and transfer of energy that does not happen in the crust of the Earth.”
Actually, we see this happening every day in many forms. One is when tectonics push up the Alps. The alps can be seen as a storage device of tectonic pressure.
Jón, as I have tried to say for a while. I think we have been talking around each other. Reason for this being that you mainly use expressions and concepts from volcanology, seismology and tectonics, while I use my “language” which is theoretical physics.
The fact is that both Hekla and Hengill volcano are drifting out of the active zone. Hengill volcano is going to go first I think. As the EVZ is newer and younger by several million years.
But in the end, Hekla is going to drift out of the magma source that feeds it. This has happened before as there are older extinct volcanoes in this area already.
But it does not change the fact that SISZ is not transferring energy to Hekla or Hengill volcano.
You are absolutly correct that they will drift away sooner of later. But my guess is that Hekla will go first since Hengill is spot over the triple junction. I would guess that the triple junction will function for quite some time longer. But the eruptions will probably move focus for Hengill as they have done before.
Actually Jón, we just had one of those pesky quake at sprungur area (Selfoss) followed emediatly by a transient at Hekla (Burfell).
http://en.vedur.is/earthquakes-and-volcanism/earthquakes/hengill/
http://hraun.vedur.is/ja/hekla/borholu_thensla.html
The cause/effect here is mounting in circumstantial evidence (Inferences RonF) by the day. Time/causal effect chains are there.
Jón, it would be good if you thought about what is causing them.
With emediatly I mean about 15 minutes later. They seem to be spaced with 10 to 15 minutes every time.
And not all quakes cause a transient. They need to be eastwards of the main sprungur-band, above 0,7 and I think at sufficient depth. I haven’t seen any if the quake is less than 3km deep.
Carl, You are a very good guy.
It was fair indeed that You reacted here. Then I just didn’t believe that Jon came again, after many of us congratulated for ending this trip. But finally it seems to have been good as this last exchange should really have clarified Your point and a lot of physical basics even for non academics. Just amazing that after such a “fight” we see that the problem lies in the fact that some really didn’t get the basics of the relation between energy and waves – not talking about transfer. You have my respect for Your explanations and patience. Gentleman-like.
To anyone, here’s my opinion and thus worth only what a single insignificant men’s opinion can be, clearly formulated: You’re only showing how limited You are if You carry on arguing about physics, especially in matters of waves, with Carl. Learn from him, ask questions, but please stop thinking You know anything more or better. It gets senseless, even stupid. I can’t believe it. Stay on the ground, have a proper education, on this basis think and make theories and then come back playing. Stop it for our nerves and brains sake. Please. Please.
@GeoLoco You don’t need a capital Y every time you type ‘you’ ‘your’ etc.
@scuj1: thank you, will remember that.
I understand both Jon and Carl sides. And as a man of science too, I must say that we have to be open to Jon theory, even if the theoretical and published theories go apparently against Carl theory. Because this is a field that we understand quite poorly. So, while I think it is unlikely that Hekla is triggered by Hengill, I remain open to that possibility. But I understand Jon, when he says, that according to present knowledge, that link seems not possible.
It is sad that we cannot prove/discard Carl theory, because data in earthquakes goes only so recently back. We have seen faint links between Askja and Krafla following Krafla eruption, and we have seen other possible links between Grimsvotn and Bardarbunga, in 1996 and in 2011. But these are neighbor volcanoes within the same volcanic zone.
While Hekla and Hengill are in 2 different regions, in between there is a whole lot of parallel fissures and faults, that run parallel to both (which is where I presently live). This is not a big distance, maybe about 70km apart, but it is different volcanic systems that do not cross. We humans, think 70km is geologically a lot, but on the scale of the planet, or even Iceland, that is relatively small.
And now, I could speculate something wild. We have seen Grimsvotn erupting often (but Bardarbunga sleeping for long). It might be that the Bardarbunga magma is feeding into and escaping through Grimsvotn. This is easy to prove/discard by analysing the eruptions of 1996 and 2011 for Bardarbunga magma signatures. Maybe someone could check that.
In the same light, but assuming a much more crazy link, what if Hengill magma is also escaping into Hekla. Yes, I know this sounds very crazy (especially because I live between both volcanoes!). It is an extraordinary claim to which I don’t have any extraordinary evidence.
“And as a man of science too, I must say that we have to be open to Jon theory, even if the theoretical and published theories go apparently against Carl theory” Obviously I meant the other way, I switch names. But I don’t mean nothing against neither Jón or Carl!
Actually, we are only one eruptive cycle away from proving me right or wrong.
We have the complete data from the last eruption and onwards. Now we only need the upcoming eruption (whenever that will be) and then another run-up period and eruption. So if Hekla keaps up with the statistics for the last 40 years we just have to wait another ten years… 🙂
About the magma, here I and Jón are in total agreement, no magma connection as far as we know today. But, it would be cool though 🙂
And Caveat, I was not talking about a connection between Hengill and Hekla. I was talking about a seismic energy connection from the MAR tripple junction/Sprungur area and Hekla. Quite different 🙂
Actually, we are one eruptive cycle away from SUPPORTING your theory, not proving it. Frankly, I think you may be on to something with your observations, but not necessarily your theory. The energy from these quakes, no matter how huge, is only a drop in the bucket. I would suggest that a change in strain or pressure, rather than energy. It could also be that changes in Hekla cause stresses in the nearby crust, resulting in approximately similar amounts of movement in the fracture zone between each eruption.
Hello Matt!
You are absolutely right, supported, not proved. 🙂
Thing is that I am talking on a meta-level. I am saying energy as a meta-denominator for any form of energy. Strain and pressure and soforth are variants of energy in the “delivered” form.
And the accumulated energy over time is not a bucket drop. They are a quarter of a million of bucket drops equaling the Trinity-test, but divided over a time period of years.
If we then do a simple division of power for every band according to the spread of power over volume we will get the 3 750 000KG TNT divided by 1048 equals 3 578 KG TNT.
So the sum of the energy release from the Sprungur area hitting Hekla is 3,5 tons of TNT. Or a single 3,6M earthquake at Hekla proper.
Initial figures is an averaged estimate.
As I have said, I can be wrong in the theory part. But the I am not wrong on observation-part.
@Carl, mainly. But anyone with the intestinal fortitude to try and wrap their noodle around it might like it.
Visualizing Stress and Visualizing Strain have some tutorial material that can sort of help… if you are into that sort of thing.
http://www.geology.sdsu.edu/visualstructure/
Thank you Lurking!
Lurking: Any interest / time to make a depth plot?
Of?
I’m kind of hankering to go after Irene. I haven’t had a hurricane worth looking at for over three years.
Öraefajökull quakes, depth vs. time?
Not a lot to plot, but okay
http://i55.tinypic.com/2s9d4d5.png
(quakes in 2011)
Plan View… a bit wider range. The volcano is the triangle.
http://i55.tinypic.com/fnsfwo.png
Don’t you have any data from 2003?
Yeah, but I didn’t know you wanted it back that far until after I did the plot. Been keeping up with Irene (got friends in Ne Jersey and New York).
Let me get some coffee and my head cleared out and I’ll get to it. (the data is in the big file).
Do you want the data limited to just the area of the volcano (as in the graph) or would you like a larger chunk-o-dirt?
… and, how far back in time… 1995 at the earliest.
Could you chunk’o’dirtya in a bit towards the dead zone while you are at it?
We have been talking about “The Dead Almighty Zone” for a while, but I have never seen a plot of how dead it is.
Or perhaps it would be better with a separate plot for The DAZ.
Well, I can do the dead zone separately when I have the file open. Please tell my how you want it rendered. Plan view? And… what specific boundaries would you like?
(I’m not entirely sure where the dead zone is)
Still not a lot of quakes, but here is the plot, slightly larger, back to the beginning of the set.
http://i52.tinypic.com/35ktmrc.png
For Carl – Please desig the boundary for the dead zone.
Thank you! IT did not tell much, however…
And a perspective view of that same data set.
http://i52.tinypic.com/5alwt0.png
Two things strike me as interesting with the Öraefajökull quakes when I see them over time like this.
1. That it was totally dead over there untill 2003. What happened then that changed things?
2. This is probably nothing, but the “action” seems to be oriented slightly towards the ocean. We have seen minute signs of this trend with Katla, the area around Selfoss (Grimsness, Hengill), Reykjaness/Krisuvik. First of all CAVEAT: There is not connection between these areas and volcanos, none at all, except that they are all on Iceland). It might just be figment of my imagination though. But it is interesting if the activity for some reason is trending down towards the ocean for some reason. But here I am probably just seeing ghosts.
I agree with you Jón, it will take a long time for this volcano to get anywhere at the current rate of action. Sad that I can’t find a closer GPS than HOFN. But there is no sign on that one for a GPS increase other than normal rise and movement. But it is far away from Öraefajökull.
http://hraun.vedur.is/ja/englishweb/gps/cts/vat.html
Check out the webcams, both Hekla and Katla. WOW, what a beautiful view 😀
MMMMM! Christina ,thank you for this alert. How beautiful.. I love watching the clouds like that over Katla.
Back to Öraefajökull. and being very much a worrier and practical, I do hope this volcano goes back to sleep as it is so near the main road it will cause huge havoc if it erupted!
The cliffs by the road always look dark and forbidding though.
http://www.vegagerdin.is/umferd-og-faerd/vefmyndavelar/lomagnupur_
My son took an amazing photo of them with an Iceland pony in the foreground. he enlarged it and it’s now on his living room wall.
For some reason that link didn’t work for me here is another one
http://www.vegagerdin.is/umferd-og-faerd/vefmyndavelar/sudurland
Öraefajökull is on the first picture of the series. Lomagnupur
Does anyone know the water-depth at the entrance of Jökulsarlón?
Sooner or later the amount of icebergs stuch at the opening will reduce, and it would be fun to sail into the “lake” itself, but I would need 2,3meter or 8 feet minimum to get through…
Beautifull weather though in Iceland, But not from this angle (Dellukoti)…
http://www.heklubyggd.is/vedur/cam_1.jpg
This depends on the tide. And of course on your boat, it has to fit under the bridge. It can be fun, yes, but it is also dangerous, if you get to close to the big ice. I did a tour once, when the side of a 20m high iceberg collapsed and fell into the lagoon. This was pretty impressive, although we were a few hundret meters away.
Crap, forgot the bridge…
No way I can get a 50 fot ketch under the bridge with 2 jolly masts sticking up. And anchorage in that part of the world is not an option, so I can’t ride in with the life-boat.
Good idea, bad planning:)
I am slowly getting some sort of travelling plan together for the Icelandic part of my trip around the worlds both north passages.
Since we are talking about Jökulsárlon, there will be a firework in the lagoon this saturday which should be visible on the Mila webcam. As far as I know it starts around 23h icelandic time (UTC).
Is it just me or is MET having problems?
They are re-calculating quakes that are stated as 99,0s wildly. I just saw a 0,1 go into a 1,6 and back within half an hour. This is the quake in question.
Thursday
25.08.2011 16:13:38 63.541 -19.106 0.1 km 0.2 99.0 4.3 km S of Hábunga
Have also noticed that. The event is one of these repeating quakes (every 4-6 hours) south of Katla. The magnitudes ML based on amplitude (velocity) and distance are usually 1.0 to 1.4 and the calculated M, I think it is a kind of moment magnitude but I am not sure, is about one order less.
The version that made it into the SIL list is
63.54145 -19.10624 0.136 km
M= 0.16 / ML= 1.08
Before we have a eruption here on this blog over science and theories 🙂
i would like to pick your brains 😉
I have been thinking about ways to monitor and possibly have a forecast for earthquakes and eruptions that are not based on speculations based on history but something more reliable,
For some reason animals seem to be able to know in advance when someting is about to happen, for example, the Puffins decided not to nest in Westman islands 2010 and 2011, everywhere else they behave normaly, for example in Grimsey island in the N-E of Iceland they have taken the island over, everything but the port area.
Everything is normal in the Westfjords also, Westman islands is the biggest nesting ground for Puffins in the world, so this is a bit odd.
If there was a way to find out what it is that animals sense that makes them react, then we might be able to mesure it somehow.
Electro conductivity is a much better way then animals.
Any given rock has a electric conductivity index according to its content of various elements.
If you lead electricty through a rock and then apply pressure the electrical conductivity will change as the pressure builds up.
So in theory you could drill two holes, attach electrical cables and lead a continuous current through the rock in between and get an exact reading of the changes in pressure.
But that was in theory, water would cause havoc, and there are also other factors. For instance cilicic compounds create electricity when pressurized enough and that would give false reads, and so on, and soforth…
It is said that animals feel oncoming lightning, but once I saw a sheep happily walk onto a fallen 700KVolt powerline without feeling it. I’ve seen a dog sleep through an earthquake at mag 4,2.
The sheep? Well, it exploded. I guess if you had a big heard, a power main-trunk, and a few thousand years, evolution would make the sheep sensitive to high current…
My point being, it is ulra-hard to predict an earth-quake with any precision whatever system you are using. I might be wrong, but I think it is easier to predict volcanos than large quakes.
Earthquakes are easy. If stuff starts jumping off the wall, odds are you are gonna be in an earthquake.
You might though be at a Pink Floyd concert…
I doubt that the puffins would sense Katla activity from that far into the future, but I might be wrong, so I keep myself open to the possibility that the puffins sense a near eruption of Katla.
But my best guess would be for two things: first, climate warming, which is happening in Iceland, and so puffins migrate northwards. This is a theory, not a proven fact. And I don’t think the birds would really mind a few degrees more. This theory can be proven or discard by looking at the puffin population close to Reykjavik, which to my knowledge has not reduced. So this leads me thinking that climate change is not the reason behind the “disappearance” of the puffins from the Westman Islands.
Second option, and probably the most likely one, could be that the puffins did not like the ash from Eyjafjallajokull and Grimsvotn and so decide to nest in other places. Because there is really a lot of ash in that area. To prove/discard this theory, one should see what happened with the puffins back in summer 1973, when there was an eruption in the Westman Islands. I think this is what has happened. I also don’t like nesting over ash. And just by feeling the daily earthquakes thin Katla, I wouldn’t nest over the Westman Islands (I actually felt the two 2.3 earthquakes there last Saturday).
I really liked your ash-theory. There is probably an ornitologist somewhere with data since time immemorial about puffin migrations that one could just run against ash rich eruptions.
Regarding global warming and animals and birds dying out. I think most of them will adapt fairly quickly or move on. But a few will die or diminish in population while others take over the slack. I am seeing animals on a daily basis now that did not exist where I live when I was a child. And as far as I know, without any animals disapearing. Sofar as it has gotten warmer (and here it is a large and quite noticable improvement…) the fauna and flora has diversified a lot in just my 40 years.
Indeed a warmer climate (if with increased precipitation) can lead to more biodiversity. But the loss of biodiversity nowadays I mainly driven by habitat destruction (we humans doing roads, houses, cities, industries, farms). And climate change can only become unstable if we change the balance through extreme ways, like huge deforestation and huge pumping of different gases. And we do it everyday, not in a single shot like a volcano.
I speak as a Portuguese, that in case of Portugal we have sadly seen a great disappearance of animals, since I was a kid. The climate became warmer (and rains much more irregular) but the worse was the dramatic habitat destruction and also huge problem with deforestation, farming followed by desertification, forest fires that destroy native forest of which invasive trees then occupy the space (and allow no diversity on it).
I went really offtopic. Going back to Oraefajokull, I don’t worry with it. There has been swarms in the past, and nothing happened after. This volcano had plinian eruptions in 1362 and 1727 that had major earthquakes before, some were even destructive.
Katla, I also believe, that will have major earthquakes (like a 4 or 5) before any major eruption.
My worry goes only to Hamarinn. Because we have seen some activity with tremor and inflation. But I read that before Laki, there were also major earthquakes. So, I guess that if a fissure forms in Hamarinn, there is going to be some bigger earthquakes there too. But rules never apply 100% to Icelandic volcanoes.
Maybe only migrating birds can sense this, its believed that many types of birds use the magnetic field to navigate.
http://www.lifeslittlemysteries.com/how-do-birds-navigate-0430/
Maybe earth movement and pressure affects the magnetic field and the birds pick this up.
I suppose the ash theory is not unlikely, this is probably not a element that attracts Puffins, but on the other hand, they make their nests in holes in the ground, so one would expect that to work for the Puffins, not that i am a expert on Puffins 🙂
http://biology.about.com/od/animalbehavior/a/aa123104a.htm
If there is a way to measure changes to the magnetic field it would be interesting to see if earthquakes and eruptions, magma movement and pressure changes influence the magnetic field.
Looks like a beautiful, peaceful day in Iceland. By the way, where do you folks keep your trees? ………..just askin.
That was a very sweet question.
Iceland has very few trees, so they do not keep them anywhere. But as to why there are no trees I do not have a good answer. I though am suspicious of the icelandic sheep… 🙂
I seem to remember, there was quite a lot of dwarf birch amongst the lava fields in sheltered hollows where a micro-climate had developed – a bit like the gryke flora on limestone pavements, but that was 1966!! Shame to say, haven’t been back YET!
Is th Hekla dalek on the wonk or is it my impression?
In the northern Islands of the UK there are few trees. Ones that do grow are shrubby and small. This is because of the exposure to strong winds most of the year. There is a great deal of salt carried by the winds on the coastal plains where the best soils are deposited The soils are probably thin and in the center of Iceland, soils will probably be acidic with the added complexity of being volcanic and at also the elevation will be high. The harsh long cold winters are also not conducive to strong tree growth there may be Tundra like vegetation in central Iceland and on the hills due to perma frost. hence plants will not be able to develop deep root systems
If sheep and other animals are allowed to graze they will eat any young saplings as the grasses in this type of climate and soil conditions are really only good for rough grazing and a juicy sapling would be relished!
There probably are small mini trees such as Myrtle, juniper, willow and birch. I would like to go and study this further as botany is my speciality
“I though am suspicious of the Icelandic sheep”
If the suspicions went the other way, I would be concerned.
I think you should be… Why otherwise would they appreciate to rapidly hit my posterior with their skulls when I am not looking?
Evil zombie-sheeps…. Grumble!
In Akureyri… 🙂
Why there are no trees? Type of soil, “age” of soil, climate conditions… And I like Carl’s suspicion about the sheep…
Or for the creationists: maybe Your interstellar power forgot Iceland the day it made the trees… Or Iceland was planned for the devils creation attempts like dinosaurs… Just a shame they got stuck in the underground on their way to there…
Let’s go to the facts. Iceland was 30-40% forested during the settlement (even in the now desert highlands). This was the common birch forest. So it was actually a quite pleasant landscape. Now it is 1-2% of total country area, but it was 0.5% a few decades ago. A great effort to plant trees is ongoing.
Why do the trees disappear then?
The settlers and their grand grand children, used the trees to build houses and make fires, and use sheep on the soil. So this, coupled with the harsh Icelandic climate and erosion, made the survival of new trees seedlings very difficult, being eaten by the sheep, if not blown by wind before. The big trees were cut or died naturally. As the forest disappeared, this gave way to tundra or desert.
This has not happened in Sweden or Norway, because the area is much bigger, and so if new seedlings don’t grow here, other will survive a little bit further. There were much more trees, less sheep per area, and less erosion. But not in Iceland, which is a small island, with more sheep than humans, and strong winter winds plus dramatic volcanism (= bigger erosion).
Survival of seedlings was complicate but in some places (where sheep never went, like in Thorsmork) big forests remained. Just check them, they are really beautiful and have survived dozens of Katla and Eyjafjallajokull eruptions, just next to them! The sheep never went there!
First of all, wait a minute here… You are portuguese and live in Iceland? Or am I just confused?
Secondly… I knew the sheeps where involved somehow… 🙂
Yes, it’s a kind of sacrifice, the warm loving native living in the cold polar climate, its pretty cool. And tonight it’s actually pretty cold.
2.5ºC at this moment, and I am half way between the coast and the highlands, I can’t believe how cold it gets in Iceland in August. it’s going to drop below zero tonight! its such a dark sky!
Oh! Thank you Irpsit. That was most interesting. Volcanic soils are very fertile but because of the climate, tree growth will be slow. Sheep have been the cause of lost woodland on our northern hills too. In Scotland there are some lovely ancient forests which grow to quite high altitudes but the trees are very stunted compared to lowland trees further south.
I think everyone has seen trees growing on coasts that are shaped by the prevailing winds. Salt is a real problem too on coastal areas with high winds frequently.
On previous trips to Iceland i have been told that Iceland once did have trees, then the Vikings came along… There are trees in many places in Iceland, Porsmork, Dimmuborgir (has some), Hallormsstadarskogur, etc. Many times i have heard: ‘it is easy to find your way out from the Icelandic forests – just stand up’.
Nearly didn’t see the trees through the mosquitos at Dimmuborgir… 🙂
I fully agree! You basically eat mosquitos whether you like it or not. And those mosquitos also suicide themselves into your ears and lungs. Not real mosquitos anyways, they don’t bite you.
@Irpsit
“Not real mosquitos anyways, they don’t bite you.”
Err… what are they then? We used to chase the mosquitoes in the game room with the pool que, trying to bop them on the head as they made their way across the floor like a low flying B-52.
Upwards of 4 to 5 cm wingspan.
Lurking, those are mosquitos, full and proper. Just of a sub-species that do not bite humans. We have them in abundance…
In swedish the name for the 4cm ones are Harskrank. Mosquitos exist in a lot of versions, but only 27 varieties in Scandinavia will feed upon you.
In the U.K we call them Crane Flies, although most will call them “Daddy Long Legs” (which annoys me as they are spiders not flies).
@Irpsit: In what time span would You expect this major earthquakes?
I have no idea!
@Carl
While we all try to maintain a certain level of scientific discipline in establishing what is “fact”, “fiction” or “we don’t know”, it’s always amusing to ponder how folklore and anecdotal evidence can sometimes fuel scientific discussion…so please allow me to postulate:
Regarding anomolous animal behavior prior to seismic events, I agree with your electro-conductivity comment, which if I interpret correctly, somewhat blends with Dr. Persinger’s hotely debated TST theory. Assuming a fluctuating current flows (pulsed D.C. will do) immediately prior to an earthquake (“conductivity” does not mean current is acutally flowing of course, just the efficiency of a material to conduct electricity) , then an EMF field must be created. I think the EMF, which could be potentially broadcast over large distances, is what is sensed by animals (see Persinger’s “God Helmet” experiments). Since the EMF field would travel at the speed of light, and earthquake waves much slower, an EMF field could be “sensed” well in advance of P-S wave arrival.
Working from the old children’s trick of cracking a Wintergreen Lifesaver in the dark to see a “spark” (actually a brief miniature plasma ball), micro-fracturing of certain types of rock (granitic?) prior to full failure (an earthquake) are thought to produce bursts of current and (maybe resulting EMF) hours or maybe days ahead of quake? Unfortunately, not all earthquakes occur in zones of high-conductivity crust, so the electro-conductivity theory could only apply to very specific locations, so to say earthquakes per se can be predicted by animals would be incorrect. A better statement would be that animals may be able to “sense” certain types of rock as it starts fracturing… whether or not an earthquake actually occurs.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Persinger
Funny that you should mention Stanley Korens God Helmat.
It is probably the worlds leading examply of what is not to be considered as good science.
Persingers theories was not predictive in the ordinary sense of it, and when we tried to repeat the experiment it quite simply did not work. When this was published Persinger said that the experiment was flawed, but has sofar not explained how it was suposed to be flawed, even though the experiment was aproved beforehand by Persinger.
The debunking articles are published in both Nature and Neuroscience Letters.
Persinger and his Koren Helmet aside, you absolutly correct in your description of how rock fracturing produces electromagnetic fields. Odd coincidence, electromagnetic fields propagate with C over media as a wave-function (sorry, couldn’t shut up about that). 🙂
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/God_helmet
Granqvist, P; Fredrikson, M; Unge, P; Hagenfeldt, A; Valind, S; Larhammar, D; Larsson, M (2005). “Sensed presence and mystical experiences are predicted by suggestibility, not by the application of transcranial weak complex magnetic fields”. Neuroscience Letters 379 (1): 1–6.
Interesting observation: in the Sumatran 9.0 earthquake and Tsunami that caused widespread devastation, the tribal population of the Andaman islands were largely spared as all the birds and animals took flight quite some hours before the tsunami hit, which in the islanders folklore meant that they should head for the hills, which they did. This meant that almost none of the islanders were killed (unlike so many other places, very sadly).
To me this means that there is some evidence that animals must sense some change in the earth that we cannot and secondly that they must have an innate, instinctive response to flee – which in turn means that large tsunamis/ natural events must have been a relatively frequent occurrence in evolutionary history for animals to respond this way. It is also interesting that the islanders folklore persisted, as this has not been a frequent event in our recorded history (as opposed to geological history)
All in all – there has to be something in it, somewhere – so good luck in your hunt!
Before Merapi erupted, the apes living on the mountain came down one or two days before the eruption started.
Perhaps humans have some vestigial aspects of this sense too (when people gain a sense of foreboding that ‘something’ is about to happen), but choose to disregard it and rationalise their feelings, so that we no longer respond to the triggers? If science can determine what the animals sense then we could test for it, and test human responses to any identified triggers in a clinical setting; at the moment you can only ask inhabitants about ‘feelings’ after the event so its impossible to carry out any kind of scientific study that doesn’t have bias in it.
It seems in most cases for land animals, it is the low-frequency tremor. Humans are notably insensitive to it.
There have been many attempts at researching if animals can “predict” earthquakes . There are huge problems with setting up observations and recording to prove or disprove this idea.
Firstly which animals? How to observe them 24/7 for maybe years. Earthquakes don’t happen regularly in exactly the same place. If animals can sense quakes what is it they “feel” Magnetic changes? CO2 Gas emission?.
This is an interesting link that certainly describes the difficulties of this research.
http://www.uni-due.de/geology/research/ants_earthquakes.shtml
As everyone seems to be obsessed about bad science at the moment, I’ll throw some anecdotal information in here with regards to animals… 😉
I was reading a thread about the Earthquake in Virginia the other day, and the later aftershocks. Some guy mentioned that his cats had gone loopy (darting around the house, hissing) before the aftershocks but not before the main quake. I suspect that they had, in the time between the main quake and the aftershocks, realised what an oncoming quake felt like. Do cats have sufficient cognition to learn in that way? I’ve certainly known plenty dogs that become scared of balloons after biting in to one…
But as you say, studying natural animal behaviour is difficult enough at the best of times, let alone when you are trying to add unpredictable (to us!) earthquakes into the mix!
Dunno if it was me, but I mentioned a cat – quake story that sort of matches this.
The cats belong to a friend in Long Island New York. Yes it was an aftershock where the cat freaked out. The behavior was at the time of the aftershock in Virginia. The behavior was atypical and it wasn’t that the cat was hissing, it was fleeing. Like something was after it. And to add to the oddity, the other two cats slept through it.
As for the main shock, there was no report of odd behavior because he was at work and had no visual contact with his cats at the time. Though he did have contact with humans behaving oddly about the quake.
If it’s not the same story, never mind.
It certainly sounds like a similar tale, but this guy was at home all day so it must be different. I find it interesting that animals can (perhaps) learn from a single bad experience. And I want to know what they know!
I am sure if dogs have conditioned learning (Pavlov’s Dogs research) Then I am pretty sure cats will have too.
Cats have been used in similar experiments to discover how learning works.
http://allpsych.com/psychology101/conditioning.html
So although the time between earthquakes was short and the cat had only experienced the one earthquake(to our knowledge) I guess the cat learned when you feel whatever it is a cat senses first it knew the ground may start shaking
Animals are definitely not Dumb!
PS My Husband has slept through earthquakes and violent thunderstorms!!!
Ha! That just proves that we men are bad at noticing things in general! 🙂
Very impressive debate going on here. I’m sure Thomas Kuhn would be impressed as well and concur with me that this is all grist for the mill of science..rigorous debate and challenges while sticking to the rules. I would only add the the word “fact” be replace with “HWI” (Highly Weighted Inferences) 🙂 It has a humbling afffect.
Someday when I can crank up this ole noodle, I willl aspire to try to even understand all the articulation in this debate as it would prove to be very educational, which I why I love this blog and the passion that runs thru the mileu
Haha, well I agree with should not use the word Fact or Proven so freely.
After all, only parts of formal logics and small parts of math is proven. The rest are just theories waiting to be dis-proven.
Very good point indeed.
Theories never are facts. Facts are the observations upon which a theory is founded, tested and subject to falsification.
Just for the fun of it.
Quake down towards Selfoss:
http://en.vedur.is/earthquakes-and-volcanism/earthquakes/hengill/
Followed by a transient:
http://hraun.vedur.is/ja/hekla/borholu_thensla.html
Effect following cause again. One thing I wish I knew was more clearly how powerfull a quake needs be, what depth, and what the area-limitors are. But this would be take some time to correlate.
Do you have any idea on possible patterns happening in SISZ that lead to earthquakes in Hestfjall (north of Selfoss, epicenter of 2008 quake). I have seen earthquakes happening here after they start in other regions of the SISZ.
Good Science:
Fact 1: Quake at Selfoss (21:08:07 ?) is seemingly followed by a borehole strain transient (time?) at Burfell near Hekla.
Just make a dossier and add up all your facts. Once you have a sufficient statistical body of evidence to show which quakes are followed by transients , you can make correlations between the energy released by quakes and the timing and size of Burfell transients. If you get P=1, then there is unquestionably a connection, i.e. correlation is causation. Also, you get a fair dossier of energies and energy transfer, if it obeys the square law attenuation etc.
Now it is time to transform your hypothesis and formulate it as your Grand Theory of …
Happy Carl? Jón? 🙂
I have them since january…
What I am waiting for is to have a large enough set of data to see how strong they need to be, geographical limitors and such.
I am slowly getting there… 🙂
I thought you might have. Problem is you never said or showed us… 😉
Actually I did, but that was before I asked Lurking to make that “Plot of Doom”.
But I am kind of waiting for the N=100 or more mark.
One of these days I will put it all together, but not yet. The main reason actually being the N=100…
(For those not statistically inclined) N=100 is the required statistical minimum for anything to have enough instances to be considered to have at least a minimum degree of credibility.
The information about the Öraefajökull volcano at the beginning of the blog is (also)very interesting! Such a long sleep after explosive eruptions in the past.
So, after all that has been said today, could somebody who is familiar with geology, magma behviour, seismic measurements and statistics stand up and tell how big the chance is that the ongoing activity will lead to an eruption in the “near” future?
Thank you.
Hard to say since we do not have any good GPS data. But the activity is most likely far away from enough vigorous for an eruption to happen in the near future.
If I should give a guess it would be an absolute minimum of a decade away, probably a lot longer.
That is good to hear. But it must be very exciting to follow the further happenings from now on.
Would the activity of the last years be a good enough reason for Iceland to place GPS instruments on the Öræfajökull now?
I think they should, but there are more places that need a GPS and SIL-stations too. Sadly it comes down into money in the end.
Iceland is not a heavilly populated country with a lot of people in it, so there is not a large tax-base for things like this.
It would be a bit different if Iceland was a member of the EU, then we would pick up the tab, but alas the Icelanders do not really want to be “gobbled” up by the EU.
Was iceland built by the same kind of process in play at Axial Seamount? After watching the dive it is easy to understand why an island would be a house of cards.
For us that are geographically challenged, where is that?
Sorry, off the coast of Oregon. Live stream last 3 days of a 900 km data cable and a Trip into a recently erupted (3 months ago without being noticed until 1 month ago) caldera filled with black smokers and tube worms.
“data cable inspection”
Axial seamount is on the Juan de Fuca ridge/rise… a spreading center between the Juan de Fuca microplate and the Pacific plate. The Juan de Fuca, the Explorer, and the Gorda microplates are all that is left of the ancient Farallon plate that slipped under the west coast about 20+ mya.
(Just an FYI to frame the geologic scenario.)
(also the Rivera and Cocos microplates down near Central America were part of the Farallon… but they are not at play up near Axial)
Heres the link
http://interactiveoceans.washington.edu/visions11/live
Hi all, I love reading the debates here and all the amazing content that gets uploaded in these discussions! I was recently in Iceland and amongst other things I spent days up hengill volcano and at the new fissure / craters on the ridge at thorsmork (fim… ?) Anyway, I was taken with the majesty of the Hengill volcano complex and the sheer amount of geothermal activity on display everywhere around there. 2 things for those that may know..? Is Hengill actually right in the middle of the mid-Atlantic ridge rift zone, & in which location are the edges of the plates defined in this area? 2. Do you think Hengill could erupt anytime soon, and given the presence of sub-terranean water there, might there be an almighy bang if she does blow?? Anyway, thanks! James, Edinburgh
Hengill inflated a few years ago, so it could perhaps erupt. But I think it need more influx before it will erupt. So yes I think it can erupt in about a decade.
It is sitting on the spot where the MAR runs up through Reykjaness and divides at the tripple junction.
I hope it would not be an explosive eruption. That would be horrible for Iceland. I guess it would still be bad even if it was a peacefull hawaiian eruption.
Hengill looks like a small volcano to me. Its only 700m high. That’s not a lot. Hekla is 1500m, Katla 1400m, Eyjafjallajokull 1600m, Grimsvotn 1600m, Bardarbunga 2000m.
It is also not large sized at its base. Much smaller compared to Hekla, Katla or even Eyjafjallajokull. It also doesn’t have a caldera or big crater. It is a fissure.
Yes, it is the largest volcano in the vicinity of Reykjavík, quite dangerous location, and much larger than the ones around Krisuvík or Reykjanes. But still smaller compared to Prestahnukur. However Hengill has released half the size of Laki in lava in past eruptions. That is massive. I guess these eruptions at Hengill occur over a quite long range in kms (like Laki). And that is why Hengill looks deceivingly small. Just like mount Laki.
@ Irpsit.
I like your posts. You describe the land so well that those of us who cannot visit get a very good image in our minds as to the Topography of Iceland. I can read contour maps but much is missing on them such as the fissures you mention.
Hengill sounds a fascinating place. However, I too hope that the area remains asleep and does not wake up. You also describe some excellent facts. Your posts are appreciated and read well here.
Irpsit, Hengill is large. But it is not the same type of Volcano as Katla and Hekla and the rest. It is mainly erupting though fissures resulting in large lava-floods and lava-plains. And the “central volcano” as such becomes low due to the very viscours hawaiian type lava.
With a 2-5 degree gradient as at some shield volcanoes, you’d hardly notice how big such a mountain really is.
Theistareykjarbunga is an absolutly massive shield volcano, and you will hardly see it on the horizon line due to the modest gradient of the slope. 🙂
I wouldn’t describe Hengill as a shield volcano with small slopes. The volcano has built up quite a mountain south of Reykjavik. And I would’t call it small.
Next one OJ “due” 2092 (probably not sooner, give or take a few percentages).
Puffins need food, this was/is lacking in Vestmanneyjar area.
Animals hear the P wave as it travels the surface, then we usually notice only the S-wave “as the EQ”. Birds scramble, horses run, even cows and sheep react. Hearing is one of them 11 senses. Raised on a farm. I know.
Yes, sheep ate them small trees, them larger ones cut for fire and coal making – and middle ages were cold – less tree growth; this increased the size of the glaciers too, and so probably did size of them glacial floods from our volcanos (eruptions then were not really that large, creating wrong impression due on/for next eruptions?) but the so-called “global warming” today is just a natural thing (return to the norm) and there is nothing we can can do to stop them. Not polluting is sensible thing, global warming or not.
Did splendid trip today (oops, yesterday) around Þingvellir and picked up lots of Blueberries on them east side slpes – also observing them cracks there and imaging them mighty earthquakes happening when these huge cracks came into beeing. Heard about when Hengill magma chamber filled in ca. 1995 to 1997 period, it apparently created lots of harmonic tremoring but the IMO equipment was not able of detection then properly.
EQ data prior year 1995 does exist – at least on paper! Huge amount of paper rolls from old seismometers is likely stored in IMO library, I guess, possibly even from before 1947 eruption. It is just them older “formats”, paper is bad for feeding of PC or MACs but could be digitized and converted to usuful data (using some intelligent program of reading the ink)..
… ah, everything is relatively quiet now.
Could not send reply Carl. No Matter. I am pleased the UK kept her £ Pound. But we will not go so off topic.
I think the Old Norse Gods are teasing us with little quakes all over.
@ yet another Lurker. You said
“paper is bad for feeding of PC or MACs but could be digitized and converted to usuful data (using some intelligent program of reading the ink).”.
Recently The UK Met Office enlisted the help of people on line to transcribe old ship’s logs into a program they had set up. They got many volunteers like myself who understood the Log entries and could accurately do just a little data entry a day for a few weeks.
I wonder if the IMO have thought of getting some interested volunteers to do similar with the old records.
I am sure there are a few willing helpers on these blogs.
Dear Iceoland, make my day a litllebit more exciting today please 🙂 I have a boring day here now…
Is it just me or is it unbelievably calm today?
A few rain-drops hitting the Dalek of Búrfell, Katla is continuing to produce the smallest earthquakes ever detected, no tremoring to get exited over. Not even a single flying sheep to be suspicious about.
And as usual, there is absolutly no eruption at all at Thingmuli… 🙂
Exactly… And u know what Carl, there is NO volcanic activity in Norway today, what so ever.. Shocked? 😛 No, but all serious, it is silent before the storm, right? 😛
I have always been suspicious of Hardangervidda… To much people on “tur” for it not to erupt… 🙂
Problem is as always with Iceland to know which storm it is silent before.
@east americans:
I hope that all of you will be okay and safe as the storm hits. A hurricane is not a nice experience, something I learned to hard way with Mike. Stay safe!
But Carl, a couple of months ago, it was all over the Norwegian newspapers that someone thoght Hekla was gonna erupt very soon, and then Katla have them earthquake swarms, so I kinda forgot about Hekla a litllebit.. But why did they say that she was gonna erupt soon? What was it based on?
It was just some journalist that actually noticed that Hekla is almost always 30 minutes from an eruption. He/She had probably read up a bit on Hekla and decided that he/she had something to write.
Problem was just that they (if I remember correctly) quoted this blog in the article and hell was loose.
I reallity, yes Hekla is ready to erupt, but she has been ready for five years now, and she may jolly well wait a few more years. But statistically she is going to blow sometime between decembar and may.
@Carl: I guess with “statistically she is going to blow sometime between decembar and may” you mean the 95% confidence intervall of your model?
Katla is though a volcano that I do not believe in much… At least not yet.
Here is a guess at a list of the ten upcoming eruptions in Iceland.
1. Hekla
2. Grimsvötn
3. Hekla
4. Askja
5 Grimsvötn
6. Grimsvötn
7. Hekla
8. Krafla
9. Hengill
10 Grimsvötn
And thing is, I think that Hekla and Grimsvötn is underrepresented in that list, and notice that I did not even bother to put in Katla for the next 50 or so years…
Still absolutly no eruption at Thingmuli, whatever you may have heard, there is not truth about any alleged signs of an eruption there… 🙂
@Chris:
It was a lower number than that… (Sitting on a another computer today)
But on principles yes, I meant that according to the modell in question it would be the highest likelyhood for an eruption to occur would be during that time period.
Depending on how you look at it, Hekla is always pretty close to being inside the 2SD realm of the average repose time.
Using listed eruptions back to 1104 AD as the basis for the distribution, as soon as Hekla finishes an eruption, it is already two and half years inside of the 2SD window.
If you use all eruptions back to 800 AD, it crossed inside the 1SD boundary two years after an eruption.
http://i54.tinypic.com/dh4dq9.png
For the transients: This is not a prediction and should not be used as such
@Lurking:
Yepp, and one should remember that it has erupted serially to, ie.that even if it is erupted it can just re-erupt.
Transient-caveat: It is fun how one can get hooked on words. When I read your caveat for the “occasional visitor” I had a hell of a time understanding the sentence. I was trying to understand why you believed Heklas transients had developed intelligence! 🙂 Silly me…
It’s OK It is a Holiday Weekend here in the UK It is also Friday. I will be very busy. Christina and Carl be patient ,things always happen when I am at my busiest cooking for the family and unable to get to my PC until it is all Finished….or is that rule just applicable to Etna?
What is the name of the Holliday and what is it about (chance to learn something here) 🙂
Carl it is called August Bank Holiday Monday. It gave the workers in the old days their last day off work before Christmas. Here in England we have less National Holidays than any other country. We do not even have a day off for our National Saint St. George:(
Ahhhha, I understand 🙂 So Hekla will most likley not erupt this year… But is there any other Volcanoes that can erupt this year? Do u personally think there will be another eruption in 2011?
I would not be very surprised if Hekla jumped the gun. But for the rest? Hm…
Askja perhaps could do something, but the likeliest candidate would probably be the area out in Reykjaneshryggur around Geirfugladrängur, nice subaquatic volcano there. But still that is low level probabillity options.
Now we will soon start to see the signs of the next eruption. Even Grimsvötn started to show signs at least half a year before erupting.
If we remove Hekla out of the equation I would say less then 10 percent of another eruption this year.
Remember that Icelandic average is every 5 years…
Yeah, but them statistics are not right now, are they? 😛 Iceland had one in 2010 and one in 2011 😛
Btw Carl, where are u from?
Thing with statistics is the always omited words “over time”… So if you count for a few hundred years you will start to get one every five years statistically speaking.
Northern Sweden.
Or more or less often. We know, that there are some periods that are more active, while others are less active. The last years weren’t very active.
Aha, got it 😛
Så du forstår når jeg skriver på norsk ? 😛
Jag förstår alldeles utmärkt när du skriver på norska. Kommer du från nord, syd eller mitt Norge?
Nothing to worry about, we are just discussing world domination and the absolutley not erupting Thingmuli 🙂
Haha, det er bra 😛 Jeg kommer fra en liten by sørøst i Norge som heter Fredrikstad 🙂 Ca 10mil fra Oslo 😀
You weren’t supposed to say that, that was our secret.. 😛
Jag har aldrig varit i Fredrikstad, bara i Bergen och Oslo. 🙂
They will never know the truth 😉
I can understand a little Norwegian . Christina you come from Fredrikstad. My step son and baby grandson lives near there, in Sarpsborg.
@Carl
Carl! Var medveten. Hemligheten är inte säker.
Hemligheten är alltid säker hos de som har å, ä och ö tillgängliga… 🙂
How come you know Swedish?
We are still not discussing world domination and Thingmuli is absolutely not having a phreatic eruption.
Ååå, du burde dra hit engang.. Er kjempe fint her 🙂
Men nå+ må jeg dra å hente barn i barnehagen, så får jeg se om jeg får noe tid til overs i kveld til å sjekke innom her… Kos deg masse, og kryss fingrene for at ingenting skjer mens jeg er borte 🙂
No, maybe we will take over the world, and maybe not 😛
i must admit, that the google translation for swedish and norwegian are pretty good : )
i must admit, i think we will have a calm friday evening. Enjoy the weekend : )
Question: What is the difference between Iceland and the Great Rift Valley? In terms of volcanism and seismicity. Which is more dangerous? Why?
The great rift valley is far more dangerous. This is because there are many more people living there, in close proximity to the volcanoes, and there is no early warning system in place.
Neither is likely to produce massive earthquakes, but damaging ones can still occur. Iceland has building codes. Most of Africa doesn’t.
Iceland volcanoes tend to be more explosive than rift valley volcanoes, but that doesn’t mean rift valley volcanoes aren’t dangerous. Plus, rift valley volcanoes can put out as much SO2 as Icleandic ones, and they’re in a better position for it to be transported in the atmosphere and thus have global climate effects.
Norway’s only Volcano, Berenberg, is very clear today which is unusual. You can almost see the top.
http://www.jan-mayen.no/webcamera2.htm
This is a fascinating Island. Most unusual and Iceland’s little sister.
@ Carl
Förutsatt damerna har avslutat chattig dig!
If Jon will excuse the OT as well!
As you are a physicist, can you explain this, ‘cos I’ve wondered about it for a while – why is the area of sky on the inside of a rainbow (ie in the concave arc) lighter in colour than that on the outside? Or is it an optical illusion as other people I’ve commented to reply? This was very clear on the Gullfos cam earlier!
If you let another physicist to try it… It was my topic in my first-year seminar lecture.
No, it is not an illusion, it is a physical fact, that it should be darker outside the rainbow than inside (given the background is even). The second rainbow will also be outside the primary one. The band between them carries the name “Alexander’s Belt”.
I do not try to explain it myself here as it is fairly hard without proper illustrations. But I checked the Wiki article on this, and it’s pretty well written actually. Read it giving occasional glances on the photos attached.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rainbow
Go with Jack, I have never even thought about rainbows more than that they are being pretty…
Back to chatting with the Ladies.. 🙂
@ alan c: This should help. http://www.atoptics.co.uk/rainbows/primary.htm
Answer in one!! thanks
Jon & Carl,
I read your discussion, and I’m standing & applauding for it!
However, a few points:
First, every time Jon sees a quake in SISZ on his helicorder, there’s energy transfer from SISZ to his equipment, i.e. energy transfer across the faults. A fault does not prevent energy transfer, although it generally attenuates it.
Second, any medium under load, pressure, strain or stress carries energy more efficiently than the same medium under no load. SISZ has at least three kinds of loads affecting it: Pressure from below (Iceland plume), strain from MAR movement, and also strain from every single fault, fracture and crack. So, SISZ is constantly under external and internal mechanical load, i.e. under strain, that enhances its ability to carry waves, also across faults (along the MAR).
Third, stress or strain itself can carry energy away. You do not need quakes or waves to carry energy away. Weaves and quakes provide a mean for a dynamic energy transfer (a transient), but stress carries energy away statically, i.e. steadily or slowly. And again, this mode goes efficiently across faults, too! And typically long distances. There’s even a proof for this in Arnadottir’s paper (see figs 3. and 4.). The June 17 quake increased strain in the location that quaked on June 21. And in Turkey it has been shown that major earthquakes affect strain over 1000 km away from the epicenter, causing new quakes there later.
Carl did not actually mention (if I understood & remember it correctly), that wave energy is transferred from SISZ to Hekla. I think he actually first said as a presumption, that Hekla is already filled & ready to erupt. In this situation, the overall strain of rock around Hekla is already high (thus also enhancing energy transfer via waves). In fact it may not need anything else than a suitably small kick to exceed “the limit”, thus causing Hekla to burst.
Earthquakes in SISZ do transfer energy to Hekla area, otherwise Jon would not see SISZ quakes in his helicorder. But I think (and I think Carl meant to say this, too), the real “guilty one” is the transient transfer of newly-developed strain, that is carried along with the quake’s S-waves.
Remember, Hekla must be already loaded, or otherwise we’ll just see a strain transient. If the quake was strong enough to give Hekla that small kick of extra strain needed to exceed the limit, then that kick is the one that is strong enough to cause Hekla to burst.
So, it is not the energy transfer itself, but the transient transfer of strain.
I do not know, whether this exactly was the idea Carl had in his mind, but looking at my text above, it seems we now have a prediction “device” for Hekla. Collecting historical data on SISZ quakes and related Hekla strain transients, we should be able to estimate (more than ½-2 hours beforehand), if Hekla is ready to erupt (after the next proper kick) or not.
I hope I do not spoil Jon’s & Carl’s show…
Err… that’s spooky.
My August 26, 2011 at 20:45 response and graphic in this thread sort of points to what you are saying in:
“that Hekla is already filled & ready to erupt. In this situation, the overall strain of rock around Hekla is already high (thus also enhancing energy transfer via waves). In fact it may not need anything else than a suitably small kick to exceed “the limit”, thus causing Hekla to burst.”
Mainly from the point that based on the Normal distribution curves for the repose periods, that as soon as Hekla finishes an eruption it has already crossed within the one or two SD region for the average repose period. Depending on how far back in the historical data that you look at.
I had been wondering about that for some time. See, Hekla’s normal curves go back past “year zero” and it bugged me to no end.
Thank you for writing so very clearly a lot of things that I muddled up for my self and everyone else.
As a whise man once said, “To write clearly, is the sign of true wisdom”. Albert Einstein.
@Jack:
I replied up above to our discussion about Newton…
And here is an odd one.
Hekla is having a transient
http://hraun.vedur.is/ja/hekla/borholu_thensla.html
Without having had a Sprungur quake first.
http://en.vedur.is/earthquakes-and-volcanism/earthquakes/
I thought I should be the one to point out this since it is a bit problematic visavi my theory.
First of all, this transient is in positive values and the normal are negative. Ie, the normal transient is the mountain trying to open up, and this was one where the mountain contracted. And secondly there was a distinct tremoring episode that corresponded with the inverted transient.
http://hraun.vedur.is/ja/hekla/oroi_sau.html
This is just speculation, but I think this was caused by a rapid small influx of magma.
@Carl, I noticed, but average is still very low, about ~ -170. Some days ago there was very strong one, some 3e-5ish.. (forgot to save image). What “size” (or time period this goes on over for) are we perhaps waiting for?
It is almost impossible for me to speculate on that, more than saying that the really large ones that are the 3e-5ish, are close to values for the initial transient before 2000 eruption (1 tenth of the energy) and that they where not present untill recently. The first run of transients I detected where much smaller and have changed over time.
I would still say that they are coming faster and harder. I stick to my prognosis, even though it is just a mathematical modell built on a heck of a lot of asssumptions. So sometime between december and may at the going rate of increase. But, this is a mathematical/statistical guess that is basically a sum over history.
@Carl. Thank you, althou they vary in “strength” (and duaration) this appear to happen almost or most days now. I am still digesting (and reading on linked stuff).
It is only natural that they vary in strength and duration.
But the last transient was reversed and probably had nothing to do with the process I tried to describe. This should be noted is a quite serious flaw in my theory that I cannot describe it well when the reversed transients happen. Sigh…
Please read, digest and ponder since I know you are good at coming up with questions and ideas.
I have been wanting to comment on several things, however, Jon – when your computer failed, mine died a few hours later. (Harmonic failures?) So I finally had an excuse to buy a new HP laptop. Here are my accumulated comments.
No matter what maths or measurements used or observations made, natural phenomena behaviors are unpredictable. You can’t shove a round volcano into an inverse square hole, so to speak.
I am wondering if the magneto-telluric readings (recently used to produce the most accurate and surprising images of the Yellowstone plume) could be used to dissipate some mysteries of Iceland’s plumbing although the cost would no doubt be prohibitive at this time for Iceland.
As far as the postulation of various theories, my eyes glaze over and I pretty much doze while reading the formulas, equations and stuff that make my eyes water. I would rather read facts than hurt my brain. Ergo, gina’s post of Aug. 23 @ 20:57 very simply states the crux of the matter and did not hurt my brain, (TY gina), i.e., the bedrock of central and eastern U.S. is older and more rigid than the western U.S., transferring energy much more efficiently and, therefore, further. I live in the ‘burbs of Detroit, Michigan, and have felt four quakes here, all have felt stronger than the ones I experienced while literally sitting on top of faults in Los Angeles in the ’70s even though they were located quite far from Detroit. (Geez, am I that old?)
@Cali-Karen – trees in Iceland probably went the way of forests on Easter Island, hopefully without the cannibalism that ensued.
Thanks for listening. I “almost” couldn’t wait to get home from a lovely Lake Huron mini vacation to post!! I always go in August, then I am frustrated by the cold weather at the beach resort where I like to stay. I had to turn the furnace on to thaw out my five-year-old grandson last night.
I appreciate the opportunity to be part of the Icelandic volcano community that Jon has created.
In closing, we should all be reminded that a blog (weblog) is basically a personal online journal. As such, Jon should be shown the respect he deserves on his blog.
“As such, Jon should be shown the respect he deserves on his blog”
No problem with that, but one caveat; Respect is earned, not deserved.
I will make no further comments along these lines. Suffice it to say, I would not suffer disrespect in My House.
And you should not.
But when you step out on the street and start speaking and talking in public, you are bound by the responses to the demeanor of your speech.
‘Nuff said.
The question is, would you respect your guests, or would you do your utmost to dishonour them?
This is a question that depends on how one sees it in relationship with honour, and the answer might well leave one without a House to call ones own.
Carl, you are a man with a lot of ideas and much to say. Have you considered setting up your own blog?
Thank you!
I will give two reasons why I do not blog.
1. I do not have the stamina for it, because to run a blog you need to keap it up for a long time.
2. Even though I have taken a pause in life, I know that I will start doing something sooner or later, and then I will not have the time.
Minor earthquakes really close to my geophone in Heklubyggð.
I was noticing that, and at the same time it was a tremor spike on all SIL-stations around the Laki/Veidivötn area.
What are your thoughts?
The Vatnsfell SIL station is extreamly noise SIL station. Those two earthquakes where size ML0.0 to ML0.2, the second earthquake was ML0.4 and up to ML0.8. But that is just a guess of mine.
Do you have a direction of them?
No. But the fault plane was N-S. So they did happen in SISZ I think.
Well, I think Myrdalsjökull is out of the questions since there are so many SILs there. They would easily have picked it up. I guess somewhere in the “dead zone”. Would be interesting if it was small quakes that you detected in there.
No myrtle Diana, we’ve got juniper, willow and birch (Fjalldrapi eða hrís lat. Betula nana) as natives to Iceland
http://www.floraislands.is/latflora.htm
@The Other Lurker
Oh! Thank you so much for that list. I am surprised that Bog Myrtle (Myrica Gale) is not found in Iceland. Especially as I thought maybe that Myrdalsjokull could have been named after that plant. But then my Icelandic language abilities are virtually non existant!
I am going to work my way through those plants recorded , just to satisfy my curiosity.
I am interested to see what Grasses other than those in the Juncus family are present also
Myr = bog
dal = valley
Jökull = glacier
So it should be Bogvalleys glacier, but I am not an Icelander so I might have missed some fine point.
I am still remembering when I discovered what the slight difference made of Kaldarsel and Kaldarsél. The first one is “Cold Arse”, the second means “Cold area of Slackwater”.
I still prefer the Cold Arse version. I can see the desillusioned sheep farmer with a really black sense of humour naming the place after sitting on a cold stone. Very poetic, very much me.
Carl, you can’t do this like that.
Mýrdalur = valley of mýri (certainly not bog, bog is much more wet than swamp, but a swamp will definently get your feet wet)
jökull = glacier
Cold arse lol
Kaldá is referring to something called kaldárvermsl ie where fresh water springs from earth / a natural spring well from such depth (temp ~3/4 deg C) and with enough force as not to freeze.
Kaldá = Cold river
Sel = flat place (is one translation, but sel can be similar to the Norwegian sel)
(Not picking, really, just explaining).
But do you have different words for bog and swamp? Because a myr is in both norwegian (as far as I know) and in Swedish the interused for both bog and swamp.
So it did not produce peat, well I could go with Swampvalleyglacier since I do not even see the difference.
I always will run a bit wrong since you guys have such an odd way of writing things 😉 Teasing here. 🙂
Kaldá would be Kallå in Swedish for instance. But it is a combined word, so Kall (cold) and å (mini-river, rivulet).
I think that Iceland is going to get whatever remains of hurricane Irine late next week (Wednesday, Thursday or Friday).
This might mean a major storm in Iceland and a a lot of changes on SIL stations in Iceland.
The hurricane is really not looking good for the east coast USA. I have a lot of family and friends there (I grew up there) and of course they have taken appropriate precautions and will hopefully be safe but it’s still worrying. There will certainly be a lot of property damages but I really hope everyone got out of the way and aren’t hurt. In some ways to me a hurricane is the worst kind of disaster compared to an earthquake, volcano, or even tornado, because you can know a hurricane is coming from so far in advance but of course are completely powerless to stop it.
Curious, does anyone have a comparison to how much energy a hurricane releases as compared to earthquakes?
Method 1) – Total energy released through cloud/rain formation:
5.2 x 10^19 Joules/day
A magnitude 9.95 quake would be about 5.31 x 10^19 joules.
Method 2) – Total kinetic energy (wind energy) generated:
1.3 x 10^17 Joules/day
A magnitude 8.2 quake is about 1.26 x 10^17 joules.
Method 1 and 2 are listed at
http://www.aoml.noaa.gov/hrd/tcfaq/D7.html
Quake energy calculated via =10^((1.5*Mag)+4.8)
“The hurricane is really not looking good for the east coast USA.”
Being a resident of Florida, I can pretty much state that a lot of what you are seeing is alarmism on the part of the press and publicity seekers (politicians).
Can it be nasty? Yes. I rode the bad side of Ivan with 115 mph (185 kph) winds for about two to two and a half hours. Based on data digging after the fact, the Eastern side of the eyewall winds were right on top of us. Lets just say that it was not fun.
But… I’ve also been in several other storms, Opal, Erin, Camille (150 miles inland thank God). Literally rode Ewa in the Pacific on a 424 foot Frigate (80 kt winds and 30 foot swells while pulling out of Pearl Harbor) and had Floyd chase us around the Atlantic. I’ve had the roof torn off in tornados, and been in numerous other weather related scrapes. Still, a storm is a storm. Ain’t nothing but a thing. I respect them, and I watch them.
Irene is not what you call a spectacular storm.
Use your head and stay prepared, and it’s nothing more than an inconvenience as you deal with aftermath and the people who did not prepare.
Usually, I stay on track with what the storm is doing by accessing the USN Meteorological sites, but they have ramped up their security, and the data is not as easy to find as it used to be. Add to that the real possibility that Norfolk is shut down or operating with only the ride-out crew there, and its easy to understand how the servers will have little attention paid to them with regard to public access. They have more pressing issues to deal with, such as making sure that 2nd fleet stays apprised of the situation. Early on, Mayport emptied out. Then Charleston, then Norfolk… and likely, Sandy Hook Key. Every one of those ships that can get under way, has gotten underway or will be soon. They made for open water to get on the navigable side of the storm as quickly as possible. The rest put in storm lines and will ride it out at the pier with only a skeleton crew.
But.. it’s still just a storm. And not even a really significant one at that.
Rather than advising people not to go surfing (the first thing he addressed) the Mayor of New York should have advised about getting loose items in the yard put away, getting provisions and other tips that will help the populace deal with the aftermath.
You see, Ron White (comedian) nailed it on the head in his joke.
“It’s not that wind is blowing, it’s what the wind is blowing.
From experience, I’ve learned that usually, the aftermath is the real hazard.
Storms are fickle. They nudge left and right of track and behave how the steering currents dictate. If a storm is big enough, it makes its own steering currents. (Camile, Ivan, Katrina sizes) But even at that, they are victims of their environment and can be pushed around by other systems and fronts. One of the most drastic battles is the one where the storm’s desire to go west battles with a dropping front from the northwest. The air mass flowing up the face of that front will pick up that storm and sling it off towards the storm graveyard… an area also known as the Icelandic Low. There it will merge in with that semi-permanent feature and cease to exist.
This turning is known as the recurve.
Okay, enough yammering by me. One last definition, the DR track. A DR track…also known as deduced reckoning (dead reckoning) is where you take the forward speed of an object, and the direction of travel, and you lay out where along that track the object will be at some point in the future. It’s the most basic “projection” model that you can get.
Here is a plot of the projected track from warning #25 (the last one I could get a shapefile for from NavMet) and a plot of the actual storm locations (from NHC). Though I didn’t put the tick marks, I did lay out the track. Note the last two positions. Those are the posits at Warning 26 and 27.
Based on that DR, it might not even hit New York. It can turn back just as easy, but for now it’s not headed that way. Yeah, the coast would still catch the winds, and surf. But that would be the left side of the storm. (the weaker side).
http://i53.tinypic.com/dpuyr7.png
Caveat: Not only am I not a Geologist, or Seismologist, I am also not a Meteorologist.
Katrina was also a class 3 storm, and most did not even try to bother. So, now those creepy politicians seeking publicity “have learned their lessons”, so to say.
Still I believe, that this alarmism is needed (for some people to cover their asses). Here in Finland we have news headlines that people living in the east coast are stuffing to the coastline 1. to see the storm, and 2. to surf on its waves!
Katrina had been a full blown cat 5… and like Ivan, also a cat 5, had the massive and organized structure that goes with it. Both petered out at in the last hours and came ashore as Cat 3.
In both instances, you could see it coming… quite well.
For Katrina, rather than prep the population or set the wheels in motion, the local government(s) decided that there were better things to focus on. The Federal government is forbidden to do anything at the state level (disaster wise) unless the State requests it. One tidbit of news that never made much headway in the press was that before Katrina, Louisiana was asked by the President if they needed anything. The Governor pretty much stated, no, we’ll call you. Afterward was much pointing of fingers.
(This is why the NJ governor declared a state of emergency a couple of days ago)
In this case, yeah, the storm has some size… but it doesn’t have the well organized structure of a Katrina/Ivan/Camille. All it has is a bit of mass, and most of that is upper level outflow and a broad windfield. It has the makings of a monster, but never could quite reach that level. Failing a boost from the Gulf Stream, this thing is gonna be a normal storm.
Now, I don’t know if it’s incompetence… or if the storm is that poorly defined, but the track reports and the direction of travel is a bit ridiculous.
The background projected track is from Warning 25 since I couldn’t get W26 or W27’s shape file. But note the orange posits… those are the actual reported positions… note how they sit with respect to each other… and also note what was said about the storms motion in each report.
http://i53.tinypic.com/mlp57b.png
And, western Europe will be next (in two weeks time)… Depending on the exact route it can hit either Scandinavia, or head to Central Europe (Britain, Germany, Poland).
Yepp, this years first fall storm coming around the bend (recurve)… And soon time for me to leave Sweden for a warmer spot. Positively hate autumns…
http://www.nytimes.com/projects/hurricanes/#!/2011/Irene
Hurricane Tracker
Any ideas as to what might be causing these movements in the Krýsuvík SIL station? I haven’t seen anything like this before and it looks very different from the other stations nearby or anywhere.
http://hraun.vedur.is/ja/oroi/kri.gif
Also. Is the Grindavík graph messed up for everyone else? For me there are some odd horizontal bars and the red/green/blue traces are overlapping in very strange ways.
@ Seattleite
Yes Grindavik is messy here too. As for Krýsuvík they just readjusted it after a failure. It was out of action for a while. I think it is just settling down.
The SIL stations that are near very near the coast pick up the ebb and Flow of the ocean tides showing nice rhythmical patterns. I am not really sure why Krýsuvík is showing a steep decline. I do think it is just readjusting itself. I could be wrong I will let Jon or someone who knows more respond.
Help! Talking of broken Graphs . I have lost the Blue Hekla borehole strain line on my chart. Has this happened to anyone else?
http://hraun.vedur.is/ja/hekla/borholu_thensla.html
It has been gone for days. For some odd reason it has not cealibrated correctly so the blue one is there, but out of the pictuce.
Irritating, but it is nothing to worry about 🙂
phone line was down at Krísuvík 😉
The strain meters “reset” themselves every now and then, and the reset can be seen as a step in the graph.
Many Thanks Jack@Finland. That makes sense to me . I am happy now 🙂
Yes! I am ready!
Not many people realise that the Autumn storms we have here originated in the warm Atlantic between African West coast and the Shores of Florida.
I watch the Hurricanes on this site
http://www.nhc.noaa.gov/
and track them as gales can affect my little patch of growing vegetables and I can make sure my bean poles are well supported!
Every now and again one of these storms picks back up to Hurricane force if the North Atlantic is nice and warm as they track from eastern American coast eastwards across the Atlantic.
We also get Jon’s storms moving south, then we get snow!
Aren’t the engines of the world interesting and magnificent?
OOps I forgot to say I am Located in North West England.
Just out of curiosity, Cumbria or the Shire, Lancashire?
Lancashire. Right next to the Pennine Hills. One hour drive from Cumbria. 🙂
Living there you probably get snow at the drop of a hat in winter. Down in the south west we usually have to wait years for snow but the last few years (when we’ve had snow) have been the exception rather than the rule! Irene’s track for the end of next week (as has been mentioned) has it somewhere between Iceland & the UK, possibly as a tropical storm. Let’s hope there are no Boscastle type incidents from it!
We are near neighbours then DB. I’m just over the hill in the Fax.
I had a Unit for my business in Dean Clough, Halifax. My grandmother was born there too.
Looking at Strain Charts here. Please can someone explain the recent BUR Graph here
http://hraun.vedur.is/ja/strain/str_corr/index.html
I can understand that there may have been a quake or something releasing pressure at about 20.00 hrs yesterday. But the strain shoots straight back up even higher ! Itis released a little then more strain.
This didn’t happen so obviously at Hekla or the other boreholes.
What probably caused this event at Burfell?
The only quake that fits this event is this one at 19.02 hrs
Friday
26.08.2011 19:02:36 65.161 -16.299 13.0 km 1.2 63.5 2.7 km ESE of Herðubreið
This is miles away near Askja.
Could it have affected Burfell to this extent?
@Diana at 07:40
Probably this one at Mýrdalsjökull, Goðabunga
http://hraun.vedur.is/ja/alert/2011/aug/26/045.html
I wrote a bit about during the night.
I thought it was a small influx of magma releasing the pressure. What you are seeing on the graph was an inverted transient. The normal transients are a sign that the mountain is trying to open up, an inverted is a sign that the mountain is trying to close together.
But then Jón said that there had been small quakes in the SISZ, and after sleeping on it I think that the SISZ is actually influencing Hekla, but as a relaxation-factor only. And it is quite logical since it is after all moving in the other direction (or more exactly moves to the north-east).
So, I believe that the MAR Tripple Junction over at the Sprungur-area is working as a pressure builder, and the SISZ as a relaxing factor. Kind of makes sense.
Whereas I have few problems to construct working models of volcanoes such as Etna, Eyjafjallajökull or Yellowstone from “roots to top” in my mind, I must confess Hekla has me stumped:
* It’s located at the extreme end of a widening chasm, the MAR, at the hinge if you will where it opens up
* It’s located on the edge or just off the edge of the zone of influence of the Icelandic Hot spot
* It’s not a mountain, it’s a 5 km long volcanic ridge rougly oriented at 0 degrees with respect to the MAR and 90 degrees to the IHS
* Given its location and frequency of eruption, it ought to produce nothing more than Hawaiian to Strombolian eruptions, yet many eruptions are Plinian to sub-Plinian or go through such an initial phase
* Unlike (almost?) every other volcano on Earth, Hekla refuses to announce its activities through earthquakes, nor is there sustained and substantial inflation. Instead there are changes in strain and fluctuating inflation/deflation cycles which makes it all but impossible to conclude what’s going on underneath.
This mountain scares me.
That’s a healthy attitude (towards Hekla).
You are correct, it is a very unique volcano.
One thing I haven’t studied or understood is the chemical composition of the magma. My guess (and I really do not have a clue) is that the magma is high in both volatile gasses and water content. Because as you say it should be hawaiian like Hengill, but instead it is very explosice, and gives off really nasty ash.
What I do believe though is that there is some sort of magma reservoir that is very complex. Normally fissure volcanos do not have this, but it is quite logical to suspect that Hekla has it since it is operating differently. Also we have these odd inflations outside of the fissure itself over to the north-west (Búrfell/Isakot).
As I have said before, I would feel very much at ease tripping about ontop Katla, but you would not even get me close to climbing Hekla. It is very scary indeed, and the Icelanders living withing just a few kilometres away are really brave.
I did climb it, but that was before I found out about the sudden eruptions. Glad I did the hike though, as I can brag about it now 🙂 Most windy climb of my life, that’s for sure. Didn’t see much due to drifting snow, so we seemed to never reach the summit. Would like to do the trip during clear sky – the view from up there must be spectacular!
Hmm…
Creeks that drain immediately before an eruption, it’s as if the water’s just swallowed up by the ground. Now, if that was literally true…
Don’t know if all have found this paper, (no doubt Carl,Lurking & Irpsit do) but it gives a good insight as to the petrography of the localities Hekla and Tortafjokull
http://www3.hi.is/~heidi/Data/Article-richard/SoosaluEinarsson04.pdf
“seismic constraints on magma chambers at Hekla & Tortafjokull volcanoes, Iceland”
From what I remember andesitic type magmas are more explosive than basaltic. I need to get the “little grey cells” working again, but i seem to recall some magmas are classed as ‘wet’, ie have an element of hydration in their mineralogy and andesitic types are usually found at convergent plate margins tho’.
I meant more like that some magmas are rich in disolved water on a molecular level, ie dihydrogenoxid molecules as a part of the rock. If I remember (not likely) olivine for instance is rich in water when bopping up since it is a silicic oxide with magnesium (magnesium ore, here I am shure).
But, the water just goes away before so that probably ads up a tiny proportion of the explosivity. That is why Krisuvik and Hengill might not be so peacefull this time around. Because Kleifarvatn is going somewhere now and then, and Thingvellir will become nasty if the fissure erupts under the lake.
@Alan C:
I am sadly inept in petrology and geology. I have tried to learn, but with not a lot of success. That is why I have enrolled back at the university for an evening course in petrology.
@ Carl
We’re never too old to stop learning!! I’ve learned a lot from yourself (some way over my head!) and others here. I’m also taking a Royal Horticultural Society qualification, 63 last month! (you can teach old dogs new tricks – just!)
If I recall, Icelandic basalt flows are of the aa type (blocky like cinders high viscosity/gas content), cf pahoehoe on Hawaii -‘ropy’ (low viscosity/low gas content and so more fluid). Digging deep now!
Lycka till med geologi!
A
I will probably enjoy it, it was a few years since I last took a course at the university. But I do try to go to lecturers now and then when there is an interesting one.
Here by law, all lecturers at the universities are open, so anyone can go. Free entertainment 😉
@Alan:
Has swedish all of a sudden turned into Lingua franca or has Giggle Translate gotten better?
Alla pratar ju svenska.
Uppenbarligen så pratar alla här svenska.
Nu väntar jag bara på Lurking och Irpsit ska komma ut som svenskar…
Still discussing world domination. And still absolutely no eruption at all at Thingmuli, even though nothing in particular happened at 14.36 on the eastern flank.
Jå, det verkar så att det finns en hel del folk här som forstår ditt språk även utan giggle. 🙂
Tänkte dock att Irspit var faktist från Portugal, från gårdagens diskussion?
Irpsit är från Portugal 🙂
I am starting to think that conspiration is directed at me 😉
Inte bara irspit! 🙂
Vilka fler är från Portugal?
Inte jag! Men jag förstår lite norska och det är precis som svenska….. lite!!
@ Carl
It’s about time english speakers learned other languages, many here are too b…… lazy, ‘cos almost all other countries teach english -dunno what giggle translates as, but at times it seems polite to add a comment -hopefully taken as a complement , (sometimes cheeky!)- in others languages!!
Alan
alan c says:
“….It’s about time English speakers learned other languages…”
Yup. I picked the most useful ones to me such as Perl, C, C# etc…
Haha!
1 – 0 to Lurking!
4.6 EQ south of San Francisco in a very active area of fracturing. I don’t recall the statistics on this area. A little disconcertint though as I believe this area of the San Andreas is overdue
Watching……….
People on iceflow at Jokulsarlon – must fancy an cold bath if they fall off!!!!
Is Hekla cam the only one with an image intensifier anyone?
Katla cam has also “night vision” but none of them at Mila.
I see the people on the ice. You would have to be crazy to not want to do that but also crazy for doing it! I never mentioned before because I could not believe my eyes, but I swear I saw a large animal bounding across the ice from floe to floe. In Michigan I would think wow look at that gigantic elk. Or perhaps a UFO…
I think it is a boat there to bring the fireworkers…
Google says it means : crawls or seals. They come from the sea into the lake.
Giggle earth Grindavik: what are the circular structures to the west of the town? Something to do with geothermal power or heating ?
West along coast near Grindavik are (were) salom (fish farm) station, probably these you are seeing. Some went bankrupt, do not know if any are in operation.
oops .. salmon, not salom (finger troble)
It’s on land.
replay appears below (sorry).
Yes, fish farms 😉
Wait a second, are there now two extra-lurkers???
YAL and TOL you guys are very confusing…
Who of you are the icelandic bonus-lurker?
Just reminding you guys and gals of the fireworks show at Jokulsarlon tonight at 23:00 gmt (icelandic time)
it can probably be seen on the jökulsárlón camera, http://live.mila.is/jokulsarlon/ but i am not sure.
check it out 🙂
p.s. i have never seen so fiew icebergs in the lagoon!
This year there were really few. I wonder if they had enough place for the firework. I think it would be fired from the icebergs !?
@carl
Another new “up/down transient” (small one), on checking corretced strain it appears as just a “bump” but still all are in “plus” region. I am inclined to think they are coming from some other area, probably north-east of Hekla – can their origin be (caused by) the filling of them many lakes for the Hydro-Electric stations ??? or their management. Injection of new magma: them we should (possibly) see some EQ there where it is happening.
Question is did 1.oR quake close to Þorlákshöfn (at 20:31:41) trigger this ,
Lat 63.896 Long -21.374
http://hraun.vedur.is/ja/alert/2011/aug/27/050.html
Similar time 27.08.2011 (notice the depth) close by
20:31:55 63,942 -21,357 6,4 km 0,7 90,01 2,0 km A af Raufarhólshelli
The distance from Þorlákshöfn is ~55-65 km from Hekla.
Forgot pics
http://postimage.org/image/domq7tk4/
http://postimage.org/image/doyaz90k/
That was a normal transient. Not caused by anything other than the normal area I think. The inverted ones are the ones that I think needs explaining.
Yes, many resemble circular pools and can be quite far from the sea. Only criteria is plenty of salt-water. One picture on this page here shows one on land. http://www.fa.is/deildir/Liffraedi/VIS/VIS/hafid/fiskeldihannal.htm
@Alan C
I think you see this?
http://ja.is/kort/#x=329603&y=375770&z=9&type=aerial&q=grindavik
ah, these (old) antenna site, .. US Navy station