Fact-checked by Grok 2 weeks ago

Richter scale

The Richter scale, formally known as the local magnitude scale (M_L), is a logarithmic measure of that quantifies the size of an based on the logarithm of the maximum of seismic waves recorded on a Wood-Anderson torsion seismograph, with adjustments for the distance from the . Developed in 1935 by seismologists Charles F. Richter and Beno Gutenberg at the , it was originally intended for assessing local earthquakes in within approximately 600 kilometers of the recording station. Each whole-number increase on the scale corresponds to a tenfold increase in measured wave and roughly 31.6 times greater release, making it a standardized tool for comparing strengths despite not directly measuring shaking at specific locations. The scale's creation addressed the need for a mathematical to compare sizes objectively, as prior assessments relied on qualitative descriptions or inconsistent readings. Richter's work built on earlier seismological research, focusing on high-frequency seismic data from nearby stations to define a where a magnitude-3 event at 100 kilometers produces a specific peak displacement on the instrument. Although initially limited to magnitudes between about 2.0 and 6.5 and shallow crustal events, its simplicity and logarithmic nature allowed it to gain global recognition, influencing public understanding of seismic events through numerical ratings. Despite its historical significance, the Richter scale has notable limitations, including saturation at higher magnitudes where it underestimates energy for very large earthquakes and reduced accuracy for distant or deep events due to its reliance on specific instrument types and distance corrections. In contemporary practice, it has been largely replaced by the (M_w), which calculates earthquake size using the —a physical measure of fault area, slip, and rigidity—and remains valid across all magnitudes without saturation. Updated as of September 10, 2024, the U.S. Geological Survey emphasizes that while M_L values are still computed for smaller events when other data are unavailable, "Richter scale" often colloquially refers to M_w in media and public discourse.

Historical Development

Origins and Invention

The Richter scale, formally known as the local magnitude scale (M_L), was developed in 1935 by American seismologist Charles F. Richter at the California Institute of Technology (Caltech) in Pasadena, California. Richter, working in Caltech's Seismological Laboratory, collaborated closely with his colleague Beno Gutenberg, a German-born seismologist, to refine the concept using data from a network of standardized Wood-Anderson torsion seismographs deployed across Southern California. This partnership leveraged Gutenberg's expertise in seismic wave propagation to ensure the scale's practicality for regional analysis. The primary motivation for creating the scale stemmed from the limitations of existing earthquake assessment methods, which relied on subjective intensity scales such as the Rossi-Forel scale (introduced in 1883) and the (revised in 1931). These scales measured shaking effects based on human observations and structural damage, leading to inconsistent and qualitative evaluations that varied by location and reporter bias. Richter sought an objective, instrumental alternative to quantify the inherent size of earthquakes, focusing on the maximum amplitude of seismic waves recorded on seismographs rather than localized impacts. This shift aimed to enable consistent comparisons of seismic events, particularly in seismically active regions like , where frequent quakes demanded better scientific and public communication tools. Initially, the scale was designed specifically for comparing local earthquakes in , utilizing recordings from the seismic network of Wood-Anderson instruments. It was calibrated for events within approximately 600 kilometers of the recording stations, accounting for wave decay with distance to provide a standardized measure. Richter first applied the scale in practice during the analysis of the (magnitude 6.4), demonstrating its utility for assessing regional seismic hazards. The logarithmic nature of the scale allowed for a broad range of earthquake sizes to be expressed on a single numerical continuum, with each whole-number increase representing a tenfold change in . Richter detailed the scale in his seminal 1935 paper, "An Instrumental Earthquake Magnitude Scale," published in the Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America.

Evolution and Refinements

In 1956, Beno Gutenberg and Charles F. Richter formally renamed the original magnitude scale, introduced by Richter in , as the local magnitude scale, denoted as M_L, to emphasize its applicability to nearby earthquakes and to distinguish it from emerging global magnitude measures. This revision, detailed in their seminal , incorporated refinements to the scale's calibration, including empirical correlations between M_L and other magnitude types, such as M_s = 1.27 (M_L - 1) - 0.016 M_L^2, to improve consistency for moderate events recorded on Wood-Anderson seismometers. The renaming reflected growing recognition of the scale's regional focus on , where it was initially calibrated using high-frequency body waves from distances up to about 600 km. During the and , the M_L scale underwent extensions to accommodate greater epicentral distances and larger earthquakes, driven by expansions in global seismograph networks. Richter's publication provided updated corrections, such as -\log A_0 values adjusted for hypocentral distances beyond the original 100 km , addressing underestimations for events closer than 40 km and overestimations farther than 200 km; these were based on expanded datasets from earthquakes. Adaptations for non-Southern California regions involved regional models to account for varying crustal properties, enabling broader application while maintaining the logarithmic framework tied to maximum ground displacement amplitudes. For instance, synthetic seismograms from accelerograms allowed estimation of M_L for great earthquakes, extending the scale's utility despite its saturation above magnitude 7. Key refinements included the integration of body-wave and surface-wave data, leading to the development of precursor scales like the body-wave magnitude m_b and surface-wave magnitude M_s, which built directly on Richter's local approach. Gutenberg introduced m_b in 1945 using the amplitude of the first five seconds of teleseismic P-waves, calibrated to match M_L for nearby events and suitable for distant recordings where local waves attenuate. Similarly, M_s, also pioneered by Gutenberg and Richter in the mid-1940s, relied on 20-second period Rayleigh surface waves for teleseismic observations, providing a complementary measure for larger, distant earthquakes and serving as a bridge to unified global scales. These innovations incorporated lower-frequency waves to mitigate the high-frequency bias of the original M_L, enhancing comparability across wave types. By the 1960s, the M_L scale, despite its regional limitations, achieved widespread adoption among seismologists, including the (USGS), which routinely applied the Gutenberg-Richter magnitude framework in annual earthquake reports. The USGS's 1960 compilation, for example, rated events using this scale to quantify release, documenting over 1,500 epicenters with magnitudes from 3.5 to 8.3, reflecting its integration into standard monitoring practices. Global seismological bodies similarly embraced M_L and its extensions for cataloging moderate earthquakes, solidifying its role as a foundational tool until further advancements addressed its constraints for very large or teleseismic events.

Principles of Measurement

Logarithmic Scale and Definition

The Richter scale, formally known as the local magnitude scale (), provides a quantitative measure of an earthquake's size by assessing the amplitude of seismic waves generated at the earthquake's —the underground point where the rupture along a fault begins—and recorded by seismographs at the surface. Seismic waves are the vibrations that propagate through the from this hypocenter, with the epicenter representing the point on the surface directly above it. Introduced in 1935, this scale focuses on the total energy released by the earthquake, offering a standardized way to compare local events within its designed regional scope. At its core, the Richter scale is logarithmic to base 10, meaning it expresses as the logarithm of the maximum of seismic waves detected by instruments, adjusted for from the . This logarithmic structure compresses the vast range of sizes into a manageable numerical scale: each whole-number increase in corresponds to a tenfold increase in the measured wave on a seismogram. For release, the relationship is more pronounced, as seismic scales approximately with the power of the ; thus, a one-unit increase equates to approximately 31.6 times greater output, often rounded to 32 times in practical descriptions. Unlike intensity scales, which describe the effects of shaking at specific locations and vary based on factors like distance from the , local , and depth of the , the Richter magnitude is a single, objective value that quantifies the earthquake's intrinsic energy release and remains consistent across observation points. This distinction is crucial for scientific analysis, as captures the overall scale of the event while assesses localized impacts, such as structural damage or human perception.

Instruments and Data Used

The Richter scale relies on recordings from the Wood-Anderson torsion as its primary , a device specifically designed for detecting horizontal ground motion from local earthquakes. This features a natural period of 0.8 seconds, a constant of 0.8, and a static of 2800, making it highly sensitive to short-period seismic waves typical of regional events in . These specifications standardized the across the network, ensuring consistent amplification of ground displacement for magnitude calculations. Data for the scale were derived from the maximum trace amplitude (A) on the horizontal components (east-west and north-south), typically from the S-waves, captured on the seismograms produced by the Wood-Anderson seismometers. These amplitudes were then corrected for the epicentral distance (δ) to account for wave attenuation with distance, allowing for comparable measurements across stations. The logarithmic nature of the scale compresses the wide range of these amplitude variations into a manageable numerical value. The instrumental data originated from the seismic array managed by the California Institute of Technology's Seismological Laboratory during , which included multiple stations strategically placed throughout to monitor tectonic activity in the region. This network focused on local earthquakes occurring within approximately 600 km of the stations, providing a dense coverage suited to the scale's design for regional . Despite its standardization, the Wood-Anderson seismometer exhibits sensitivity to local , where variations in and conditions at recording sites can amplify or attenuate seismic , leading to inconsistencies in amplitude measurements across different locations. This site-dependent variability underscores the scale's optimization for the relatively uniform geology of , potentially affecting its applicability elsewhere without adjustments.

Calculation Methods

Original Formula

The original formula for the local magnitude scale, denoted as M_L, was developed by Charles F. Richter in 1935 to quantify size based on seismograph recordings in . It is defined as M_L = \log_{10} A - \log_{10} A_0(\delta), where A is the maximum trace amplitude of the seismic waves recorded on a standard Wood-Anderson , measured in millimeters, and A_0(\delta) is an empirically determined reference amplitude that depends on the epicentral distance \delta in kilometers. This formula arises from the need to compare earthquake strengths across different distances, using a to handle the wide range of . Richter derived it by analyzing data from earthquakes recorded between 1931 and 1934, particularly calibrating against a set of well-documented shocks from January 1932. The reference A_0(\delta) was fitted empirically from plots of \log_{10} A versus , assuming that for earthquakes of the same decrease predictably with due to geometric spreading and . For a standard of \delta = 100 km, A_0 \approx 0.001 mm, which sets the zero point of the such that an of 1 mm at this corresponds to M_L = 3.0. The variable \delta represents the epicentral distance from the earthquake's origin to the recording station, typically calculated using travel-time differences between P and S waves. The formula incorporates corrections for instrument response, as it assumes a standardized Wood-Anderson torsion seismometer with a period of 0.8 seconds and magnification of 2800, to ensure consistent amplitude measurements. Site-specific effects, such as local soil conditions that amplify ground motion, were noted but not fully integrated into the original formula; instead, Richter recommended averaging readings from multiple stations to mitigate such variations. As an illustrative example, consider an recorded with A = 1 mm at \delta = 100 : \log_{10} 1 = 0 and \log_{10} 0.001 = -3, yielding M_L = 0 - (-3) = 3.0. For greater distances, A_0(\delta) increases (e.g., approximately 0.008 mm at \delta = 200 ), requiring larger observed amplitudes to achieve the same . This calibration ensured the scale's applicability to regional earthquakes within about 600 , prioritizing instrumental data over felt reports.

Empirical Variations

Empirical variations of the local scale () have been developed to extend the applicability of Richter to non-ideal conditions, such as varying regional characteristics and modern recording . These adaptations aim to mitigate limitations like magnitude saturation for larger events and discrepancies arising from local crustal properties that affect wave propagation, which the baseline formula does not fully account for. In modern practice, is often computed using broadband digital seismometers by simulating the response of a Wood-Anderson to ensure compatibility with . One notable variation is the formula implemented in the HYPOELLIPSE program by Lahr (1989), designed for regional networks and utilizing data from modern seismometers. The local magnitude (XMAG) is calculated as \text{XMAG} = \log_{10}\left(\frac{A}{2 \cdot \text{CIO}}\right) + R - B_1 + B_2 \log_{10}(X^2) + G, where A is the maximum zero-to-peak amplitude in mm, CIO is a calibration constant, R is the frequency response correction, B_1 and B_2 are distance-dependent coefficients (B_2 = 0.80 for 1 km < distance < 200 km), X^2 = D^2 + Z^2 (D = epicentral distance in km, Z = depth in km), and G is a station correction. This formula adjusts for instrument response and regional effects while maintaining compatibility with the Wood-Anderson scale. Other regional variants include the standard for Western Canada Sedimentary Basin, which uses M_L = \log_{10} A - \log_{10} A_0, with \log_{10} A_0 = 0.671 \log_{10}\left(\frac{R_{\text{hypo}}}{100}\right) + 0.003 (R_{\text{hypo}} - 100) + 3.0 for hypocentral distances R_{\text{hypo}} \leq 85 km, and a different coefficient (-0.881) for greater distances, calibrated to correct for attenuation in sedimentary basins. A variant known as MLv, used in some software like SeisComP, incorporates the dominant period T by using maximum ground particle velocity (A/T)_{\max} instead of amplitude A to improve accuracy for varying frequency content. Japanese adaptations for the Japan Meteorological Agency (JMA) magnitude, which functions similarly to ML in regional contexts, modify the attenuation terms to account for higher attenuation in subduction zones. For example, one formulation uses a coefficient of 1.73 on \log_{10} R for epicentral distance R, reducing bias for events in volcanic and oceanic crust. A significant advancement toward standardization is the unified ML formulation proposed by Bormann et al. (2009), intended for international application. This approach incorporates site-specific velocity models to derive attenuation corrections, allowing consistent ML computation across diverse tectonic regimes while aligning with global moment magnitude scales for magnitudes up to 6.5.

Interpretation and Effects

Magnitude Values and Descriptions

The Richter scale categorizes earthquakes into descriptive ranges based on their magnitude values, which reflect the logarithm of the seismic wave amplitude recorded by instruments. These categories provide a framework for understanding the relative size and commonality of seismic events, with smaller magnitudes occurring far more frequently than larger ones due to the exponential decrease in earthquake frequency as magnitude increases. Globally, approximately 1 million earthquakes of magnitude 2.0 or greater are detected annually, with the numbers dropping sharply for higher magnitudes according to the observed in seismic data.
Magnitude RangeDescriptionApproximate Global Frequency
1.0–1.9 (Micro)Rarely felt by people; detected primarily by sensitive seismographs near the epicenter.About 8,000 per day (over 2.9 million per year).
4.0–4.9 (Light)Often noticeable as mild shaking indoors; may be felt by people at rest in quiet environments.About 10,000–13,000 per year.
6.0–6.9 (Strong)Felt widely with moderate to strong shaking; can cause alarm and minor disruptions.About 100–150 per year.
At the upper end of the scale, great earthquakes of magnitude 8.0–8.9 occur approximately once per year and are capable of producing intense shaking over large areas. Events exceeding magnitude 9.0 are exceptionally rare, with the largest recorded being the 1960 Valdivia earthquake in Chile at magnitude 9.5, which ruptured a fault over 1,000 km long. The theoretical maximum magnitude is estimated around 9.5 to 10.0, constrained by the physical limits of Earth's fault systems and lithospheric structure, beyond which larger ruptures become mechanically impossible.

Relation to Earthquake Impacts

The Richter magnitude (M_L) measures the size of an earthquake at its source, quantifying the energy released through seismic waves recorded on instruments, whereas intensity scales like the assess the local effects of shaking, such as damage to structures and human perceptions, which can vary significantly across different locations for the same event. This distinction is crucial because M_L provides a single, objective value for the earthquake's overall strength, independent of distance or local conditions, while MMI relies on observed impacts like fallen chimneys or cracked walls to rate shaking from I (not felt) to XII (total destruction). Earthquakes with M_L around 5.0 typically produce moderate shaking that is widely felt, causing minor damage such as cracked walls or broken windows in populated areas, though effects are often limited without other aggravating factors. In contrast, an M_L 7.0 represents a major event capable of widespread destruction, including collapsed buildings and infrastructure failure over tens to hundreds of kilometers, and if occurring offshore or near coasts, it can displace seafloor sediments to generate with runup heights of several meters. Several factors beyond magnitude influence the actual impacts of an earthquake, including its depth (shallower events produce stronger surface shaking), local soil type (soft sediments amplify waves more than bedrock), and building quality (structures with poor reinforcement suffer greater collapse risk). For instance, the 1989 (M_L 6.9) occurred at a depth of about 19 km and epicenter roughly 50 miles from urban centers, yet caused 63 deaths and $6–10 billion in damage primarily due to amplification on soft bay soils and the vulnerability of older infrastructure in densely populated and . A common misconception is that a higher Richter magnitude always equates to proportionally greater damage, but in reality, the severity of effects depends heavily on location-specific variables like proximity to the fault and population density, such that a moderate-magnitude quake in a city can be more destructive than a larger one in a remote area.

Limitations and Modern Context

Shortcomings of the Richter Scale

The Richter scale, or local magnitude (ML), exhibits a saturation effect for earthquakes exceeding approximately magnitude 6.5 to 7, where the maximum amplitude of seismic waves recorded on traditional Wood-Anderson seismographs clips or fails to increase proportionally with the event's size, leading to underestimation of true magnitude. This limitation arises because the scale relies on high-frequency surface waves that do not capture the full rupture dynamics of large events, causing the measured amplitude to plateau despite greater energy release. For instance, the 1906 San Francisco earthquake was initially assigned a magnitude of about 7.7 using surface-wave measurements akin to early ML estimates, but modern assessments place its true magnitude at approximately 7.9 on the moment magnitude scale, highlighting the underestimation due to saturation. A significant regional bias stems from the scale's original calibration using data from seismograph stations in Southern California, making it optimized for shallow tectonic earthquakes within 600 km of the recording site and specific attenuation paths in that crustal structure. Outside this region, such as in distant, deep, or tectonically distinct areas like volcanic zones, the scale's distance correction terms lead to inaccuracies; for example, it tends to overestimate magnitudes in regions like the Danakil volcanic area of Ethiopia due to mismatched wave propagation characteristics. In central and eastern North America, its applicability is further restricted to distances under 150 km, as the amplitude decay patterns differ from those in California, resulting in inconsistent magnitude assignments across global seismic networks. The scale's reliance on peak ground amplitude rather than total seismic moment introduces non-linearity in relating magnitude to energy release, particularly for very large earthquakes where fault rupture length and slip area contribute substantially to overall energy but are not directly accounted for in ML calculations. This makes ML an indirect proxy for energy, as it measures local shaking intensity at specific frequencies without integrating the full fault dimensions, leading to discrepancies when comparing to physical measures of rupture. Additionally, ML shows sensitivity to local site conditions, such as soil amplification or station-specific geology, requiring empirical corrections that can vary and introduce further variability in measurements. The scale is also not well-suited for non-tectonic events like mining blasts, which produce distinct waveform signatures and energy distributions that deviate from the tectonic earthquake assumptions underlying the calibration, often necessitating separate discrimination methods to avoid misclassification.

Transition to Moment Magnitude Scale

The moment magnitude scale (M_w) was developed to address limitations in earlier magnitude scales, particularly their inability to accurately measure very large earthquakes. It was formally introduced in 1979 by seismologists Thomas C. Hanks and Hiroo Kanamori, building on Hiroo Kanamori's 1977 work relating earthquake energy release to seismic moment. Unlike the local magnitude scale (M_L), M_w is defined directly from the seismic moment (M_0), calculated as the product of the fault area's rupture length and width (A), the average slip (D), and the crustal rigidity or shear modulus (\mu), via the formula: M_w = \frac{2}{3} \log_{10} M_0 - 6.0 where M_0 is in newton-meters. This physically grounded approach measures the total energy released by the earthquake, providing a consistent scale applicable worldwide. Key advantages of M_w over M_L include its lack of saturation for magnitudes above 8, allowing accurate assessment of events exceeding M_w 9, such as the 1960 Chile earthquake (revised to M_w 9.5); its basis in fundamental physical properties rather than empirical wave amplitudes; and its uniformity across global seismic networks, independent of local recording conditions. These features make M_w more reliable for comparing earthquake sizes internationally and estimating total radiated energy. The transition to M_w began shortly after its introduction, with the United States Geological Survey (USGS) adopting it in 1979 for routine reporting. By the 1990s, it had become the standard for large earthquakes (typically M_w > 5) worldwide, supplanting M_L for global catalogs. Despite this, and public discourse often refer colloquially to "Richter scale" magnitudes, even when reporting M_w values. In current practice, M_L remains in use for small, local earthquakes (generally below magnitude 6.0) where high-frequency data are available and moment tensor solutions are impractical, while M_w is applied to all other events for its precision. Organizations like the International Seismological Centre (ISC) and the (EMSC) have fully integrated M_w into their global bulletins since the late 20th century, ensuring standardized dissemination. Public misconceptions persist regarding the distinction between M_L and M_w, leading to confusion in interpreting reported magnitudes; for instance, the 2011 Tōhoku earthquake was assigned M_w 9.0–9.1 based on its massive , a value unattainable via M_L due to saturation. This highlights the importance of specifying the scale in communications to avoid underestimating great earthquake risks.

References

  1. [1]
    Magnitude Types | U.S. Geological Survey - USGS.gov
    The original magnitude relationship defined by Richter and Gutenberg in 1935 for local earthquakes. It is based on the maximum amplitude of a seismogram ...
  2. [2]
    "How Much Bigger…?" Calculator - Earthquake Hazards Program
    A magnitude earthquake is times bigger than a magnitude earthquake, but it is times stronger (energy release).Missing: factor | Show results with:factor
  3. [3]
    Earthquake Magnitude, Energy Release, and Shaking Intensity
    The Richter magnitude of an earthquake is determined from the logarithm of the amplitude of waves recorded by seismographs. Adjustments are included for the ...View Media Details · Magnitude Types · How much bigger is a...
  4. [4]
    Moment magnitude, Richter scale - what are the different magnitude scales, and why are there so many?
    ### Summary of Richter Scale vs. Moment Magnitude Scale, History, and Key Facts
  5. [5]
    An instrumental earthquake magnitude scale - GeoScienceWorld
    Mar 3, 2017 · Richter; An instrumental earthquake magnitude scale. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America 1935;; 25 (1): 1–32. doi: https://doi ...
  6. [6]
    Charles Richter and His Scale - UC Berkeley Seismology Lab
    Nov 18, 2008 · Richter was inspired by the astronomers' scheme to classify the brightness of stars, he called his units magnitude, hence the phrase "magnitude on the Richter ...
  7. [7]
    The Richter Scale's California Origins - History.com
    Oct 2, 2024 · Charles Richter worked with Beno Gutenberg to develop one of the first data-driven ways of comparing earthquakes.
  8. [8]
    [PDF] Magnitude and energy of earthquakes - Annals of Geophysics
    This paper is in continuation of previous investigations. [Gutenberg and Richter 1942, 1956]. The earthquake magnitude has statistical and other uses.
  9. [9]
    [PDF] The Richter scale: its development and use for determining ...
    The M, scale, introduced by Richter in 1935, is the antecedent of every magnitude scale in use today. The scale is defined such that a magnitude-3.Missing: refinements 1950s 1960s
  10. [10]
    Earthquake Size
    Gutenberg and Richter developed two magnitudes for application to distant earthquakes: mb is measured using the first five seconds of a teleseismic (distant) P- ...
  11. [11]
    [PDF] United States Earthquakes, 1960 - USGS Publications Warehouse
    UNITED STATES EARTHQUAKES, 1960. Magnitude and Intensity (Damage) Hat- ings. Magnitude Rating, stated accord- ing to The Gutenberg-Richter scale, is a.
  12. [12]
    An instrumental earthquake magnitude scale - GeoScienceWorld
    Mar 3, 2017 · Research Article| January 01, 1935 An instrumental earthquake magnitude scale * Available Charles F. RichterMissing: original | Show results with:original
  13. [13]
    What is the difference between earthquake magnitude and ...
    Intensity scales, like the Modified Mercalli Scale and the Rossi-Forel scale, measure the amount of shaking at a particular location. An earthquake causes many ...Missing: motivation | Show results with:motivation
  14. [14]
    [PDF] The wood Anderson mAGniTude of The TriesTe sTATion (Tri - GNGTS
    The WA torsion seismograph, with its natural period of. 0.8 s, 0.8 damping and GS value equal to 2800, was the instrument with which Richter (1935) defined ...
  15. [15]
    [PDF] DETERMINATION OF LOCAL MAGNITUDE, ML, FROM STRONG
    The local magnitude is based on the amplitude recorded by the Wood- Anderson torsion seismograph with a natural period of 0.8 sec, a damping constant of h = 0. ...
  16. [16]
    [PDF] The Richter scale - David M. Boore
    The dashed line is the average attenuation curve, the negative of which is the distance correction used to calculate magnitude. (From Richter, 1958, fig. 22-2).
  17. [17]
    Caltech's Seismo Lab Celebrates 100 Years at the Forefront of ...
    Nov 9, 2022 · By contrast, the Richter Scale, first laid out in a paper published in 1935, used a seismograph to measure the actual size of an earthquake by ...
  18. [18]
    Seismo Life - Seismological Laboratory
    In the early 1930s, two Caltech scientists—physicist Charles Richter and mathematician Beno Gutenberg—played a pivotal role in developing seismology into an ...
  19. [19]
    The Richter scale: its development and use for determining ...
    The Richter scale, introduced in 1935, is used to catalog earthquakes by size, predict ground shaking, and estimate energy and seismic moment.
  20. [20]
    [PDF] Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America
    JANUARY, 1935. No. 1. AN INSTRUMENTAL EARTHQUAKE MAGNITUDE SCALE*. BY CHARLES F. RICHTER. In the course of historical or statistical study of earthquakes in any.
  21. [21]
    None
    Summary of each segment:
  22. [22]
    [PDF] Standard for Calculation of Local Magnitude in the Western Canada ...
    5. 𝑀𝐿 = log(𝐴) − log (𝐴0) where 𝐴 is the vertical recorded WA amplitude in mm obtained in the third step.
  23. [23]
    MEASUREMENT OF THE JMA MAGNITUDE WITH SLIP ... - J-Stage
    The local magnitude ML has been defined from the peak trace of the standard Wood-Anderson torsional seismograph with 0.8 sec natural period and 0.8 damping ...<|control11|><|separator|>
  24. [24]
    [PDF] Chapter 3 - GFZpublic
    Page. 3.1. Introduction to seismic sources and source parameters (P. Bormann). 3. 3.1.1 Types and peculiarities of seismic source processes.
  25. [25]
    Earthquake Facts & Earthquake Fantasy | U.S. Geological Survey
    Seismologists have observed that for every magnitude 6 earthquake there are about 10 of magnitude 5, 100 of magnitude 4, 1,000 of magnitude 3, and so forth as ...Fact: Earthquakes Are Sudden... · Fiction: Earthquakes Only... · Partially Fact: People Can...
  26. [26]
    Why are we having so many (or so few) earthquakes? Has naturally ...
    According to long-term records (since about 1900), we expect about 16 major earthquakes in any given year. That includes 15 earthquakes in the magnitude 7 range ...
  27. [27]
    Lists, Maps, and Statistics | U.S. Geological Survey - USGS.gov
    Basic earthquake counts for the World and United States. All Earthquakes. United States. Magnitude 8+ · Magnitude 7+. World.Magnitude 8+ · Magnitude 7+ · World - M6+ in 2025 · World - M7+ in 2025
  28. [28]
    M 9.5 - 1960 Great Chilean Earthquake (Valdivia Earthquake)
    Review Status: AUTOMATIC ; Magnitude: 9.5 mw ; Depth: 25.0 km ; Time: 1960-05-22 19:11:20 UTC.Impact SummaryRegional Information
  29. [29]
    Can "MegaQuakes" really happen? Like a magnitude 10 or larger?
    No, earthquakes of magnitude 10 or larger cannot happen. The magnitude of an earthquake is related to the length of the fault on which it occurs.
  30. [30]
    Tsunamis | U.S. Geological Survey - USGS.gov
    Tsunamis are giant waves generated when the seafloor experiences rapid vertical displacements, by shallow faults that slip during large earthquakes.
  31. [31]
    How do earthquakes affect buildings? | U.S. Geological Survey
    Many factors influence the strength of earthquake shaking at a site including the earthquake's magnitude, the site's proximity to the fault, the local geology, ...
  32. [32]
    Progress Toward a Safer Future Since the 1989 Loma Prieta ...
    Nov 3, 1999 · Centered near Loma Prieta peak in the mountains south of San Jose, the quake killed 63 people and caused an estimated $6 billion to $10 billion ...
  33. [33]
    The Severity of an Earthquake - USGS Publications Warehouse
    Nov 5, 2021 · Earthquake severity is measured by intensity, based on observed effects, and magnitude, based on seismic energy released. Intensity is measured ...
  34. [34]
    What was the magnitude? - Earthquake Hazards Program
    The magnitude of 1906 has been redetermined in two recent studies that used rather different approaches: M = 7.7.Missing: saturation | Show results with:saturation
  35. [35]
  36. [36]
    Which types of magnitude do we distinguish?
    In order to correct the influence of the station's local soil conditions, the geometry of the earthquake focus and the noise, it is necessary to assess M0 ...Local Magnitude Ml (the... · Local Magnitude Mlhc · Moment Magnitude Mw<|separator|>
  37. [37]
    Does the Latest Earthquakes map show non-earthquake seismic ...
    If we determine a seismic event to be a mining blast or some other non-earthquake event, we will designate it on our Latest Earthquakes map using a diamond icon ...
  38. [38]
    The energy release in great earthquakes - 1977 - Wiley Online Library
    Jul 10, 1977 · The strain energy drop W (difference in strain energy before and after an earthquake) in great earthquakes is estimated from the seismic moment M 0.
  39. [39]
    How Big Was That Earthquake? | U.S. Geological Survey - USGS.gov
    Nov 15, 2020 · Richter adapted the concept of magnitude from astronomy, including the use of a logarithmic scale to characterize the huge range of earthquake ...Missing: original formula<|control11|><|separator|>
  40. [40]
    The 2011 Magnitude 9.0 Tohoku-Oki Earthquake - Science
    May 19, 2011 · The 2011 Tohoku-Oki earthquake occurred on the megathrust where the Pacific Plate subducts below Japan at an average rate of about 8 to 8.5 cm/ ...