Anonymous
Anonymous asked in Science & MathematicsEarth Sciences & Geology · 1 year ago

Do you agree that it's impossible that LA gets hit by a 9.0 magnitude earthquake. What people are worrying about?

8 Answers

Relevance
  • Anonymous
    1 year ago

    Earthquake science is an imprecise science.

    • Commenter avatarLogin to reply the answers
  • 1 year ago

    Oh, LA will surely feel the M9 Cascadia quake, if only as moderate shaking that lasts a disturbingly long time (three to ten minutes, to be precise). But the San Andreas, being a transform plate boundary, won't be what produces it. Only megathrust faults, found at subduction zones, are capable of producing anything above an M8.5. Even the 8.6 that occurred in the Himalayas once upon a time was the result of subduction beneath the fusion point.

    • Commenter avatarLogin to reply the answers
  • 1 year ago

    It is not impossible, just highly unlikely.

    • Atarah Derek
      Lv 7
      1 year agoReport

      It is possible that it would FEEL such an earthquake, but it would NOT be the epicenter.

    • Commenter avatarLogin to reply the answers
  • Mark
    Lv 7
    1 year ago

    No, it's quite possible for LA to have a 9.0 earthquake. Actually, most of the cities on the West Coast of North America are subject to that.

    • Atarah Derek
      Lv 7
      1 year agoReport

      It is possible that it would FEEL such an earthquake, but it would NOT be the epicenter.

    • Commenter avatarLogin to reply the answers
  • How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
  • 1 year ago

    I would not see any good argument to say that a mag 9.0 quake is impossible in the LA region.

    • Atarah Derek
      Lv 7
      1 year agoReport

      How about the fact that ONLY megathrust faults can produce earthquakes of that size?

    • Commenter avatarLogin to reply the answers
  • 1 year ago

    No, I do not agree. While it is unlikely that the west coast, more specifically southwest California, will get a Richter scale 9 or higher earthquake, it IS possible. The October, 1989 earthquake in the Bay area was an 8.6. The strongest earthquake so far on record was a .9.6 The 1964 earthquake in Alaska is in the top 10 earthquakes, after Krakatoa and Their/Santorini, which was probably the origin of the Atlantis myth.

    The Richter scale is a logarithmic scale, not a linear scale.

    What are you going to do when Mt . Ranier wakes up and does a Mt. St. Helen's lateral eruption and wipes out Seattle and Portland with ash?

    What is NOT going to happen is part of California sliding into the Pacific. The recent earthquakes were not along the San Andreas fault.

    • ...Show all comments
    • Atarah Derek
      Lv 7
      1 year agoReport

      And no, San Francisco has NEVER been the epicenter of an 8.6 quake. The ONLY quake of that magnitude that did NOT happen along a traditional subduction zone still had the remnants of a subduction zone beneath it that triggered it.

    • Commenter avatarLogin to reply the answers
  • 1 year ago

    no I don't agree, it's entirely possible.

    • Commenter avatarLogin to reply the answers
  • Bill
    Lv 6
    1 year ago

    no I don't agree

    the standreas fault line is east of california and runs from mexico to canada

    there is a very real chance of an earthquake of suck magnititude that california is shifted away from mainland america and becomes an island state

    • ...Show all comments
    • Atarah Derek
      Lv 7
      1 year agoReport

      @oldprof The San Andreas is a transform boundary, not a convergent boundary. It is where the Pacific and North American plates slide past one another. For this reason, it is not deep enough to produce an earthquake over M8.5.

    • Commenter avatarLogin to reply the answers
Still have questions? Get your answers by asking now.