Project Body

Our project scope is to create a multi channel platform, with a sophisticated smart engine. Which uses a probability algorithm to determine the liklihood of an incoming earthquake. With upto a 24hours advanced assesment range.

By using the incoming solar wind and bc componet data, in comparrison to recent usgs seismic events. Our goal is to triangulate seismic episodes with advanced probability models in hopes to alert any given region with advanced warning; to limit the loss of life and socio-economical, impacts.

The Seismic Module would display the most recent seismic analysis. Determining the likelihood of an incoming shock. Based on the triangulation of variables from existing usgs data sets and the incoming solar wind stream and bz componet data. We will gain a greater ability to assess an incoming seismic activity by imploying a sophisticated probability engine. One which quickly assesses all past archives at every possible interval of time and magnitude to assess the probability of a given seismic episode.

By measuring the time dialation, and magnetic intrusions excreted on the planet we hope to provide an effective system capable of someday assessing the smallest detectable seismic events hours if not days in advance. So the data must be highly accurate and the timing sequences of between and during all past seismic episodes must be placed with a high level of accuracy taking up as many channels as sevents have sequenced in tandum. This is the body of the project focus. The seismic data must be assessed for every sequence frequency and value which compliments a live feed.

My thoughts are to use ten years seismological record. Using the first five years as a knowledge base. While using the following five years as a 'sybthetic' live feed. Updating the appropriate values to keep the data on track as the development and deployment stages move along. By measuring the project against known data we can reassess values proving to provide poor reflexes to our model.

Bz componet Module The Bz componet data module (Channel 2), may be the easiest one really. Rhis system is already online with a live feed. We merely need to mark past incidents and auto program a 'spitter program' to mark / split 'max impact events'; going on to trip an alert system. (When a given range of data provides an algorithm significant to a future seismic episode). All data is already digitized. Making the bulk of this system easy to monitor.

Solar wind data Module This is the spine of the project. It is the first line of authority in terms of the seismic prediction itself. We will be using this systems display values to trip the probability engine itself.

By monitoring for highspeed incoming solar data our seismic system recieves advanced warning of seismic episodes. This is due to the consistent evidence that 'will or will not' be discovered while segregating the data into sequences and modeling.

We are hoping to establish a pattern of all three systems. Solar winds to bz breaches to seismic activity.

If we can establish a consistent relationship by any degree using the past 10 year data sets of each given value. Then we will remove the feeds and create the final needed mechanism. A world gps field grid capable of displaying a highly / statistiically supported region to likely produce a seismic event. Based on triangulated datasets.

As well as a color coded alert mechanism.

Green

Yellow

Red.

This digital display showing the percentage of value given to a seismic event in the area-

Thought experiment: https://youtu.be/mUz1ZaIHvDs This is a simple experiment which outlines a force interaction. Imagine the candle is invisible-

We are attempting to draw the effect of invisible forces by measuring the forces acting around them. We do 'not' know every intimate detail recordable in the respects of why earthquakes happen on earth.

We are hoping to answer 'how they happen'. By measuring what else is happening all around us. Each venture unraveling a new and significant fragment of the subject as a whole. (start to finish).

"This is equivellent to making earthquakes a social network, And monitoring them". "Using probability as a tool to determine their next big move". It may even be possible to integrate all existing data sets to install and add existing network modules on this system. Adding to its very accuracy and logics.

We already have the technological tools to create an existing project. We simply need to process the data with an elite team of staticians and programmer's.

What they can accomplish over a few lunches could help another kind stranger, see his way to his next dinner.

Note: Print a copy of all three modules. Lay them in side to side format in dated order. Thats the exact circumstances involved in which our model will work. This sequence of events is the very process we are attempting to identify. Had we done this sooner. Its very possible we would have seen this moments, hours, or even days ahead of time. I see no reason not to attempt this regardless of its complexity. We've been collecting records some 20 years. All that data accumulating.

We just gotta put it to work now-

The basic geological modeling of earth is already quite established

*On the standard globe there are 24 regions depicted in longitude and 14 in latitude. Giving a zone of 24 X 14; making for a total of 344 respective territories.

My thoughts are that we should begin this project by assigning each individual zone with a unique and identifiable alpha-numerical value system, to be customizable within a digital model...

A simple method as shown below:

A 1 - 24

B 1 - 24

C 1 - 24

D 1 - 24

E 1 - 24

F 1 - 24

G 1 - 24

H 1 - 24

I 1 - 24

J 1 - 24

K 1 - 24

L 1 - 24

M 1 - 24

N 1 - 24

This would create the base of our model of earth. A 344 region palette. To be used for data-positioning.

Our next step would be to map all seismic events by its respective appearance in timeline. (using a 10 year past data sample)

For a more accurate model we would apply all usgs events from 3.0 to 9.5 magnitude to the model.

note: a simpler system would focus on 5.0+ events greatly reducing the workload

We have to know the exact time dilation between events as well as the approximate estimation of the events as they were manifested via seismological records; documenting any periods of seismic absence in between events. (to be used via the predictive algorithm).

So now after creating the base system with the addition of usgs's data sets we will have a basic model showing all 344 regions /zones with an overlay of seismic events which have happened over a 10 year period...

The next step would be to locate frequencies within the data as well as sequences.

Frequency = how frequent a seismic region is known to strike a region. I.e. Per minute hour day week month year.

Sequence = how likely the earthquake is to replicate or move to an alternative location. I.e. will an eq in guam be followed by a strike in another region. (based on past activity)

The sequence's frequency would also likely have to be taken into consideration or any configurations of trend that would help predict the next likely seismic event; *as my initial thoughts are that this is a sort of 'sliding-scale' 'system'; based upon the earths percieved or 'available seismic energy build-up'.

Seismic energy we are hoping will be identifiable, by a respective pattern or 'Pitch'. Pitch = solar data high velocity shifts and breaches...

If we use the solar incidents as a 'harbinger' in our model to compare for the future assessments of earthquakes in a given region, then once the initial timeline is created via a seismic to solar module. Then the solar module would be placed in a seperate channel.(matching time and date stamps).

The solar data needed are as follows:

Bz componet (i.e. breaches in the magnetosphere)...

Solar winds (high velocity shifts / impacts with earth)...

Density (photon absorbtion)...

If a determinative pattern can be identified, showing that 'Solar data' does in fact act as a 'Pitch' value towards seismic events. Then were ready for our last step.

Utilizing a computational predictive algorithm to assess and read the incoming solar data. Recording the 'pitch' which would then compute and compare / cross checking our models data points for the mosy likely 'seismic' sequence and frequency to follow said pitch in terms of a real time model.

In short by naming each past seismic event on earth with an assigned value via the mean median and mode system; with a high low probability model; This may in fact give us a very significant idea of which of the 344 regions is likely to recieve x amount of seismic energy based upon x amount of solar pitch.

Its a very basic system-

From there we should begin to program and assign a logic display with a 3, 5, or even 7 scale; Warning tear level. With a level 1, being a low seismic risk value to a level 7 event being given to regions in the highest risk of future seismology events.

By using the 344 region system we also can opt to use a 3x3 grid location value. Meaning that if we see a high probability for an example risk to region B- 14. Our model coyld be assigned to effectively warn a 3x3 grid: I.e. Region B - 14 level 7 risk. Warnings applied to:

A- 13, 14, 15,

B- 13, 14, 15,

C- 13, 14, 15,

Utilizing a grid will give us the potential to give a mild warning to surrounding areas while a larger probability to the main region in question. (until the system proves effective enough to support reason to be more dialed down).

I'd assume it will-

The main thing I have really thought about this as being significant to our participation is that: "should there be 'no' effective relationship or significant meaning to the correlation of solar / seismic events". This system would still function accurately in the area of seismology itself. (giving a likely and accurate probability of any incoming quake based on the seismological records alone);

This makes the system a needed utility regardless of the time or funds spent devolved in its execution. Which may in time lead our team to a vast amount of discoveries which compliment both the solar and seismic fields.

An effective model would undoubtedly be a ground breaking achievement of human innovation in that regard alone. Yet by identifying if solar energy is a 'pitch' regulator in seismic studies would effectively lead to a vast change in the field of seismology itself-

I believe that the pitch factor is evident based on my own personal findings. This is a percieved data imput on the project.

Note: By using the multi-channel system we can later add other channels to our model. (Such as moon movements, incoming tidal patterns; and going as far as to pairing the solar lens to the earthfacing disk in real time)... (This to map the exact sequence of events taking place from the surface of the sun to earth).

The more features we add the more complex the utility could become either greatly evolving it with vast and needed imputs, or devolving it with less practical methods and useless data points...

I assume that our using a 344 point grid. With a 3x3 range. Determined by usgs seismic records and noaa solar records attributed to both the wind fluctuations and bz breaches. (establishing a pitch) (via a 3 channel system) would be the most significant steps we as laymen could manifest on our own accord with the limited resources at our disposal.

*This system would then after being trained to read the pitch accordingly would go over ten years past data sets to compile the mathematical values of a tree algorothm which would go on to make an assessment of the liklihood of an incoming seismic event. Likely giving upto 24hours to a weeks warning via the models completion.

At the point that we can establish a working system, we can then switch the solar data module to the real time noaa module. To locate the pitch in real-time. Effectively reading the data and assigning probable seismic data to follow each and every interval that trips its sensors.*

There by displaying a warning level via our 7 tear warning values as while displaying the 1 out of 344 regions likely to be struck in a seismic episode- as well as its general vicinity / probability.

Past studies that support our goal, 2, 3, M.A. Vukcevic: Earthquakes and Geomagnetic Storms Posted: March 17, 2011 by tallbloke in Astrophysics, climate, Energy, solar system dynamics Regular contributor M.A. Vukcevic has kindly given permission to reproduce some ongoing research which will be of interest to people learning about earthquakes and their precursor indicators. Vukcevic states: “the tb’s talkshop does not take any responsibility either for statements or data presented. Please note that there are number of the geomag parameters which I have not labelled, in case I decide they are no longer relevant, or if pattern does hold for some time I might be able to publish results.”

EARTHQUAKES AND GEOMAGNETIC STORMS This is an ongoing ‘live’ project (started on 02/03/2011, prompted by the N. Zealand earthquake) to establish if there is a link between the geomagnetic activity (magnetic storms) and acceleration of the earthquake’s occurrence. It is not claimed that geomagnetic storm is a primary cause of any earthquake. However if conditions for an earthquake are ‘ripe’, then solar storm could be a trigger (not the cause) for it, and bring it forward for few hours or days. There is strong evidence of electromagnetic processes responsible for earthquake triggering, that we study extensively. We will focus here on one correlation between power in solar wind compressional fluctuations and power in magnetospheric pulsations and ground H component fluctuations. The variation of the horizontal component H of the geomagnetic field is the crucial parameter in the Magneto-Seismic Effect MSE to be discussed in a companion paper. The connection of earthquake activity to possible solar or solar wind drivers is not well understood; many authors have attempted correlations in the past with mixed results. Geophysical Research Abstracts,Vol.8,01705, 2006;Lab for Solar and Space Physics, NASA Goddard Space Flight Center,Greenbelt, MD http://www.cosis.net/abstracts/EGU06/01705/EGU06-J-01705.pdf

Scientists have been tracking and studying substorms for more than a century, yet these phenomena remained mostly unknown until THEMIS went into action. Even more impressive was the substorm’s power. Angelopoulos estimates the total energy of the two-hour event at five hundred thousand billion ( 5 x 10¹⁴ ) Joules. That’s approximately equivalent to the energy of a magnitude 5.5 earthquake http://science.nasa.gov/science-news/science-at-nasa/2007/11dec_themis/

It is likely that in the electrical terms any tectonic fault is also the weakest point. Geomagnetic storm of 10-11 March coinciding with the Japan’s mega-quake lasted nearly 24 hours.

See also:

source

Can Solar Activity Cause Earthquakes, Volcanoes and Extreme Weather? Posted on August 25, 2011 by WashingtonsBlog

Some Scientists Believe Solar Activity Can Cause Earthquakes, Volcanoes or Extreme Weather

A 1967 study published in the Earth and Planetary Science Letters found:

Solar activity, as indicated by sunspots, radio noise and geomagnetic indices, plays a significant but by no means exclusive role in the triggering of earthquakes. Maximum quake frequency occurs at times of moderately high and fluctuating solar activity. Terrestrial solar flare effects which are the actual coupling mechanisms which trigger quakes appear to be either abrupt accelerations in the earth’s angular velocity or surges of telluric currents in the earth’s crust. The graphs presented in this paper permit probabilistic forecasting of earthquakes, and when used in conjunction with local indicators may provide a significant tool for specific earthquake prediction.

A 1998 report by a scientist from the Beijing Astronomical Observatory, Chinese Academy of Sciences, also found a correlation between low solar activity and earthquakes:

It has been found that:

(1) Earthquakes occur frequently around the minimum years of solar activity. Generally, the earthquake activities are relatively less during the peak value years of solar activity, some say, around the period when magnetic polarity in the solar polar regions is reversed.

(2) The earthquake frequency in the minimum period of solar activity is closely related to the maximum annual means of sunspot numbers, the maximum annual means of solar 10.7 cm radio flux and solar proton events of a whole solar cycle, and the relation between earthquake and solar proton events is closer than others.

Mitch Battros theorized in 1998 that large solar flares affect Earth’s magnetic field, which in turn shifts the oceanic and atmospheric currents, which can cause earthquakes and extreme weather. As Battros summarizes his formula:

Sunspots => Solar Flares (charged particles) => Magnetic Field Shift => Shifting Ocean and Jet Stream Currents => Extreme Weather [including earthquakes, volcanoes, hurricanes or other extreme natural events]

Battros’ theories have been endorsed to one degree or another by:

Dr. Ernest Hildner, Director NOAA Space Weather Center Dr. Tom Van Flandern, former US Naval Observatory Chief of Celestial Mechanics Dr. Stefaan Poedts: Lead Scientist University of Leuven Center for Plasma Astrophysics Dr. Ronald van der Linden, Director of Solar Physics Department of the Royal Observatory Dr. Pål Brekke, Deputy Director of SOHO project- European Space Agency The BBC pointed out in 2008:

Nasa scientists have said they could be on the verge of a breakthrough in their efforts to forecast earthquakes.

Researchers say they have found a close link between electrical disturbances on the edge of our atmosphere and impending quakes on the ground below.

Just such a signal was spotted in the days leading up to the recent devastating event in China.

They have teamed up with experts in the UK to investigate a possible space-based early warning system.

Many in the scientific community remain deeply sceptical about whether such signals are indeed indicators of an approaching earthquake.

But Minoru Freund, a physicist and director for advanced aerospace materials and devices at Nasa’s Ames Research Center in California, told BBC News: “I do believe that we will be able to establish a clear correlation between certain earthquakes and certain pre-earthquake signals, in an unbiased way.”

The ionosphere is distinguished from other layers of Earth’s atmosphere because it is electrically charged through exposure to solar radiation.

On a significant number of occasions, satellites have picked up disturbances in this part of the atmosphere 100-600km above areas that have later been hit by earthquakes.

One of the most important of these is a fluctuation in the density of electrons and other electrically-charged particles in the ionosphere.

One study looked at over 100 earthquakes with magnitudes of 5.0 or larger in Taiwan over several decades. The researchers found that almost all of the earthquakes down to a depth of about 35km were preceded by distinct electrical disturbances in the ionosphere.

The analysis was carried out by Jann-Yeng Liu, from the Center for Space and Remote Sensing Research in Chung-Li, Taiwan.

Though full details have yet to be released, the BBC understands that scientists also observed a “huge” signal in the ionosphere before the Magnitude 7.8 earthquake in China on 12 May.

Minoru and his father Friedemann Freund, also from Nasa Ames Research Center, developed the scientific theory behind these earthquake precursors. It boils down to the idea that when rocks are compressed – as when tectonic plates shift – they act like batteries, producing electric currents.

“We now pretty much understand the solid-state physics of these rocks,” Minoru added.

According to their theory, the charge carrier is a “positive hole”, known as a phole, which can travel large distances in laboratory experiments.

When they travel to the surface of the Earth, the surface becomes positively charged. And this charge can be strong enough to affect the ionosphere, causing the disturbances documented by satellites.

When these pholes “recombine” at the surface of the Earth, they enter an excited state. They subsequently “de-excite” and emit mid-infrared light particles, or photons. This may explain the IR observations.

NASA assumes that compressed rocks release electrical charges which travel upwards into the ionosphere. But no one has tested whether or not the reverse is happening: solar fluctuations are charging the ionosphere, causing earthquakes.

NASA also discovered last year that “space weather” causes “spacequakes” on Earth:

Researchers using NASA’s fleet of five THEMIS spacecraft have discovered a form of space weather that packs the punch of an earthquake and plays a key role in sparking bright Northern Lights. They call it “the spacequake.” A spacequake is a temblor in Earth’s magnetic field. It is felt most strongly in Earth orbit, but is not exclusive to space. The effects can reach all the way down to the surface of Earth itself.

“Magnetic reverberations have been detected at ground stations all around the globe, much like seismic detectors measure a large earthquake,” says THEMIS principal investigator Vassilis Angelopoulos of UCLA.

It’s an apt analogy because “the total energy in a spacequake can rival that of a magnitude 5 or 6 earthquake,” according to Evgeny Panov of the Space Research Institute in Austria.

“Now we know,” says THEMIS project scientist David Sibeck of the Goddard Space Flight Center. “Plasma jets trigger spacequakes.”

According to THEMIS, the jets crash into the geomagnetic field some 30,000 km above Earth’s equator. The impact sets off a rebounding process, in which the incoming plasma actually bounces up and down on the reverberating magnetic field. Researchers call it “repetitive flow rebuffing.” It’s akin to a tennis ball bouncing up and down on a carpeted floor. The first bounce is a big one, followed by bounces of decreasing amplitude as energy is dissipated in the carpet.

“When plasma jets hit the inner magnetosphere, vortices with opposite sense of rotation appear and reappear on either side of the plasma jet,” explains Rumi Nakamura of the Space Research Institute in Austria, a co-author of the study. “We believe the vortices can generate substantial electrical currents in the near-Earth environment.”

Acting together, vortices and spacequakes could have a noticeable effect on Earth. The tails of vortices may funnel particles into Earth’s atmosphere, sparking auroras and making waves of ionization that disturb radio communications and GPS. By tugging on surface magnetic fields, spacequakes generate currents in the very ground we walk on. Ground current surges can have profound consequences, in extreme cases bringing down power grids over a wide area.

What does this mean?

Some allege that spacequakes cause actual, physical earthquakes on Earth. The above-quoted NASA article concludes with a poem which implies such a connection:

Vortices swirl plasma a’twirl Richter predicts a magnitude six

However, the poem may use artistic license rather than scientific rigor.

BBC weather presenter and climate correspondent Paul Hudson noted in March:

Last year a preliminary study was published from the Space and Science research centre in Florida. [Here is the study]

A review of historical records was performed for 350 years of global volcanic activity (1650-2009) and seismic (earthquake) activity for the past 300 years (1700 to 2009) within the continental United States and then compared to the Sun’s record of sunspots as a measure of solar activity.

According to this study, there exists a strong correlation between solar activity and the Earth’s largest seismic and volcanic events.

They found an impressive degree of correlation for global volcanic activity (>80.6%) and for the largest USA earthquakes (100% of the top 7 most powerful) versus solar activity lows.

Piers Corbyn, at Weather action, added last month following the New Zealand earthquake that within such long quieter solar periods like we have been through, the biggest earthquake & volcano events are triggered by extra solar activity, particularly during the the rising phase of even solar cycles.

This is precisely where we are now as Solar cycle 24 gains in strength….

According to Mr Corbyn, ‘The (New Zealand) event follows the world wide increase in volcanism and earthquakes in the last year or two and confirms the general statistical fact that more – and more serious – earthquakes, and volcanic activity, tend to occur around solar cycle minima’.

He reckons there will be more strong earthquakes like the ones we have recently witnessed in the next 2 years.

This is another one of those frustrating areas of science. There does seem to be empirical evidence to show a link between periods of low solar activity, and increased occurrences of earthquakes, but quite why this is so is not fully understood.

RT claimed in July:

The change in the Earth’s seismic activity coincides with the rise of activity on the sun. Scientists have been witnessing gigantic bursts of plasma on its surface and say they are affecting our planet, even though it is over 90 million miles away.

Each burst sends billions of particles into space which impacts the Earth’s magnetic field. This may trigger some of the processes going on deep bellow its surface, leading to earthquakes and volcanic eruptions.

Scientists predict solar activity will increase and say in the next few years, large-scale disruptions of electronic equipment, radio transmissions, computer failures and massive black-outs could become parts of everyday life.

Postscript: United States Secretary of Defense William Cohen said to a conference on terrorism on April 28, 1997 that people can:

 Alter the climate, set off earthquakes, volcanoes remotely through the use of electromagnetic waves.

If Secretary Cohen is correct that electromagnetic waves can alter climate, set off earthquakes and cause volcanoes, then that could bolster the argument that the sun could do so as well, since it is a very large source of electromagnetic waves.

more on resonance](https://books.google.com/books?id=JO_BVJnc20sC&pg=PA95&lpg=PA95&dq=atmospheric+hertz+anomalies&source=bl&ots=65kesaEEhW&sig=JvGWO8VeUpUOm-7QQV9npeybYGU&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiviIO22ZnVAhUnw1QKHePuCswQ6AEITTAF#v=onepage&q=atmospheric%20hertz%20anomalies&f=false)

Citation,And definition, also: visually seen here

Magnetic flux tubes https://youtu.be/ymZEOihlIdU

Flux tube

There are two systems. The "Bz Componet", (Located at the top of this graph) is a device that measures the Magnetosphere. (the outer system).

When a breach occurs in the outer magnetosphere, Particles have successfully penetrated the earths outer protection system. This allows them to contact the "flux tubes", near the ionosphere.

I theorize that during these breaching events, electric and magnetic particles (within the solar winds), absorb with the tubes. Causing a dramatic change in the flow / speed of the conveying tube structures... (could be feeding, Charging, or even Halting the system)...

This speed differential is exchanged throughout the earths core Dynamo Causing the system to build inertia; Additional speed then leads to heat decay, and (in short), as the temperature builds, this causes the earths magma layer to expand.

As magma expands cavity's are created which after cooling likely collapse upon themselves causing a 'p' wave. Which is (in short), the initial charged energy, releasing itself back to the earths surface.

In theory- This is energy transfer-

Much like the solo cup of water rippling as the t-rex in Jurassic Park Moves about off screen; (We are attempting to draw the unseen dinosaur); Based on the size of the ripples within the glass.

To be honest what we know about this system is mainly theoretical. However it was proven to exist last year

Our main goal for a Poc, Would be measuring time vs intensity of each solar uptick, and comparing it to: Time vs Intensity of the following seismic episodes on earth.

If some correlation can be proven. (even minimal), then we can begin extracting values, and mapping the entirety of the system.

(I don't want us to technically get carried away) overworking, So the first thing we need to do; Is effectively do a simple side by side comparison of the data.

If Event A. (solar), compliments Event B. (seismic), then we can assess there is a system in the middle. Likely harboring its own values which we can extract by deduction.

Example. Event A. (solar 1 minute event + 7 intensity). Event B. (seismic 1 minute event + 6 intensity).

Answer -1.

(by extracting the "loss" in between events, We are essentially mapping the system taking place in between.

The more we discover the closer we will be to proving the entirety of this endeavor.

Introduction to programming, &

Bluemix

application

Application long

The more I do this the more relevant these 'hypothetical' programs begin to seem...

I never believed in its conspiracy in the past. Yet I do feel they had gear to accomplish some very interesting findings. (maybe just exploratory work)? but earthquakes seem less mysterious when considering ulterior processes of their foundations.

I dont have an accute handle on the particle physics. Your help would be appreciated.

Its just an idea for a seismic predictive application. This is my thoughts on how the system functions. Just an attempted description.

The system is the main focus. I really dont know much about the entirety of this.

I just assume if we placed seismic events on a social networking algorithm. We could establish friend lists. Then use the solar data as a vector of deploying the past archives and sequences. Its not really a bad idea inherently.

Were basically mappimg the flux tubes. Assessing volume absorption and output.

Using the intensity and duration of past breaches in comparison to past recorded earthquake sequences. Then using the record to assimilate a working live model, which processes the live data to assess an event probability.

I'm not claiming to be a genius. I just think the system may prove useful...

I dont have an accute handle on the particle physics. Your help would be appreciated.

Its just an idea for a seismic predictive application. This is my thoughts on how the system functions. Just an attempted description.

The system is the main focus. I really dont know much about the entirety of this.

I just assume if we placed seismic events on a social networking algorithm. We could establish friend lists. Then use the solar data as a vector of deploying the past archives and sequences. Its not really a bad idea inherently.

Were basically mappimg the flux tubes. Assessing volume absorption and output.

Using the intensity and duration of past breaches in comparison to past recorded earthquake sequences. Then using the record to assimilate a working live model, which processes the live data to assess an event probability.

I'm not claiming to be a genius. I just think the system may prove useful...

I dont have an accute handle on the particle physics. Your help would be appreciated.

Its just an idea for a seismic predictive application. This is my thoughts on how the system functions. Just an attempted description.

The system is the main focus. I really dont know much about the entirety of this.

I just assume if we placed seismic events on a social networking algorithm. We could establish friend lists. Then use the solar data as a vector of deploying the past archives and sequences. Its not really a bad idea inherently.

Were basically mappimg the flux tubes. Assessing volume absorption and output.

Using the intensity and duration of past breaches in comparison to past recorded earthquake sequences. Then using the record to assimilate a working live model, which processes the live data to assess an event probability.

I'm not claiming to be a genius. I just think the system may prove useful...

I dont have an accute handle on the particle physics. Your help would be appreciated.

Its just an idea for a seismic predictive application. This is my thoughts on how the system functions. Just an attempted description.

The system is the main focus. I really dont know much about the entirety of this.

I just assume if we placed seismic events on a social networking algorithm. We could establish friend lists. Then use the solar data as a vector of deploying the past archives and sequences. Its not really a bad idea inherently.

Were basically mappimg the flux tubes. Assessing volume absorption and output.

Using the intensity and duration of past breaches in comparison to past recorded earthquake sequences. Then using the record to assimilate a working live model, which processes the live data to assess an event probability.

I'm not claiming to be a genius. I just think the system may prove useful...

Any thoughts on the concept? (Regardless of terminology);

We have arguments which solar activiry may indeed influence seismic activity on earth.

My impression is the best way to prove this is simply by accepting it first, and Then assessing its validity via a simple data extraction method.

Regardless of the terminology again...

How does this approach seem illogical?

Isnt Testing 'something.' = loosely /to: 'accept' that 'it' exists?

I admit there may be no factual correlations ever found...

I've never argued that differently.

Yet for nearly a year I have been seeing results which I feel compliment the work ive commited myself too. Staging for (what I assume as my next step) is the full creation of a demo application. (P.O.C)...

You're in a position to do things differently I imagine...

I mean that as a 'positive' and as 'an inquisitive remark'.

I'm not like most people at all...?

Do you need to be an electrician to notice a lightbulb needs replacing?

I do admit I lack the skillset to use the appropriate terminology and professionalism required to elaborate the concepts. (Yet, my only true intent is to replace the lightbulb).

Over time tools become more efficiently and publically distributed allowing the technical complications involved to be more easily approachable by the laymen.

"A new set if eyes" if you will...

Depending on the damage. Yes, I can.

I've been doing that at my best.

Im self taught, so terminology appears more unprofessional; as well as my written architecture.

I can't afford my student debts so I am attempting to go about this at an amateur level with professional aspirations... Thanks for the thoughts and consideration. You are right, I am simply in a very difficult environment which complicates my ability to maintain a more professional ethic.

I dont have an accute handle on the particle physics. Your help would be appreciated.

Its just an idea for a seismic predictive application. This is my thoughts on how the system functions. Just an attempted description.

The system is the main focus. I really dont know much about the entirety of this.

I just assume if we placed seismic events on a social networking algorithm. We could establish friend lists. Then use the solar data as a vector of deploying the past archives and sequences. Its not really a bad idea inherently.

Were basically mappimg the flux tubes. Assessing volume absorption and output.

Using the intensity and duration of past breaches in comparison to past recorded earthquake sequences. Then using the record to assimilate a working live model, which processes the live data to assess an event probability.

I'm not claiming to be a genius. I just think the system may prove useful...