Japanese Quake and tsunami

It is funny how the finger pointers seem to always point fingers at the deepest pockets rather than at the true culprit. When a plane is brought down by terrorists, it is the airline that gets sued; not the terrorists. Japanese government didn't cause the earthquake; neither did Tepco or GE. Don't blame God either.

 

The blame lies firmly with the moon. It at its closest it has been for a few decades. This gravitational forces cause high tides and takes pressure off the great plates that can allow them to settle --which is an earth quake.

 

Thanks Hippo
That did help make sense of all the fuel types and what they do with them and why.

as far as laying blame I think just about any time something this significant fails it deserves to be looked into. Chances are no individual is to blame but instead the overlying concept behind the decision making process. I mentioned the DOD because there needs might have influenced the decision making process, others might have also effected the decision making process some adversely some not. Wont know till they investigate the whole enchilada and find out why things are the way they are. Might be that no one is at fault, might not.

I'm just suggesting that they take a good long look and see where they can improve in the future. Personally I'm not to impressed with nuclear but if the powers that be are going to insist on having them, then lets see if we cant find a way to avoid this kind of failure in the future, is all I'm sayin

cheers
B

 

No. The Moon has an elliptical orbit, and routinely swings closer and farther away. The news stories we're seeing are simply about a full moon (i.e., completely out of the Earth's shadow) this weekend, which is occuring closer than any have in a few years -- because it's coinciding with the nearest part of the moon's orbit, not because the moon is abnormally close.

At the time of the earthquake, the moon was about halfway between the nearest and farthest point of its oribit (its perigee and apogee).

 

221 567 this is the excact ammount of miles the moon is away from the earth today the super moon is on the 19 March 2011, Errr when is that then.

Supermoons are blamed for many occurances.

Oh anyway read it for yourself http://hoowstuffworks.blogspot.com/2011/03/are-super-moon-and-japan-tsunami.html

But yes the moon is going away --slowly. At one time it was a mere 10,000 miles away with 1000 feet high tides encircling the globe at 1000 miles per hour. This mulch of water and chemicals is thought to be the cause of life.

 

Do you realize nothing in that article backs up your claim? It basically says, "some people blame supermoons for catastrophes... in spite of the fact that experts say they're full of it."

The moon's orbit is about 28 days, which means it takes 14 days to travel from the apogee to the perigee, and another 14 back. So if it's at it's closest point right now, it means that when the earthquake hit 8 days ago, the moon was about halfway between the two -- in other words, it was an average distance away, and couldn't have had squat to do with Japan's earthquake.

 

I agree entirely, but without the moon the planet would be dead. You have to take the good with the bad sometimes.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plate_tectonics

" Their movement is thought to be driven by a combination of the motion of seafloor away from the spreading ridge (due to variations in topography and density of the crust that result in differences in gravitational forces) and drag, downward suction, at the subduction zones. A different explanation lies in different forces generated by the rotation of the Globe and tidal forces of the Sun and the Moon."

The gravitational forces of the Sun and Moon create friction which heats the magma and promotes convection in the mantle.

 

What are 'ya, some kinda lunatic?!?!?

(Punn, kidding, joking, having fun, fooling around, being light hearting... lunatic having to do with the moon as in lunar...)

-Tom

 

Why, yes I am!

 

Nothing is in perfect orbit, it has oscilation.

 

Dunno about the continents but I'm gonna be awake... staring at full moon.. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5BmEGm-mraE

oouuwwll Teddy

 

my gwod Hoyt I think we might actually agree on something

the sun has a barycentric orbit, the earth has a slightly barycentric orbit and the moon has about a 350 year extremely complex orbital pattern based on that and its own inconsistencies ( cosmology was my fave subject ). The moon does place the greater stress on the earth with the sun and then various planetary alignments coming into the picture in that order, however plate tectonics is not as well understood as some people might make it out to be. Only recently it was proposed that instead of the plates being a thin crust floating on a sea of molten magma that they were instead like giant icebergs complete with rivers or channels through which the magma can relieve pressure from time to time. That being of course in conjunction with various edge effects where the crust does seem to get thinner. But the concept of super caldera's and known hot spots is still screwing up even the best theories to date.

So what combination of things might cause a whopping 9.0 quake is anyone's guess but the primary reasons are at least reasonably well established. The moon did it? hmmmmm I suppose you could say it may have had something to do with it but its far more likely that the quake in Brazil had more to do with it than anything.

Who knows, just sayin

cheers
B

 

The chances of the 2 events are probably on a par.

 

Absolutely, positively my house would not withstand a tsunami, and probably not the quake. It's an old house which was not especially well built or cared for, and it was what is now considered a tiny duplex by modern standards in this area. At the time it was lower income families who occupied this sort of house.

I can accept that the steel building might be better than most types of construction for those conditions, but certainly it can't be infallible. I saw one picture of a large ship sitting quite some distance from the water, and if that had been a residential area full of steel buildings I doubt any of those would be standing.

I think we're nit-picking here, and that's not my intent. The videos of people who are being overtaken by the wave but still not running because they refuse to leave behind someone they love speaks to the only real tragedy there.

Buildings falling apart we can learn from, and improve them. People living or dying, while inevitable, is the only terrible event from which all other tragedies spring.

I intended that as an understatement, I assumed everyone would realize that.

That's what I thought too, although IMO any failure was in TEPCO by covering up the nature and scope of the problems they were facing. Had they been a bit more honest and quick, more lives might have been saved and the reactors less damaged. I wasn't there so I can't know, but hopefully if/when something like this happens again the management will be more cautious than calm.

I vaguely remember Chernobyl, but I was more interested in shaving peach fuzz off my face than in something happening on the other side of the world. But it seems to me that the USSR was fairly quick in asking for advice on containing a meltdown.

How do we know they weren't? It's an older design, but I imagine given the nature of Japan's experience with the atomic bombs fresh in their minds, I bet they were extremely careful about containment, to the best of anyone's understanding.

I agree completely. I'm expressing my opinion just like everyone else.