Is a 10.0 earthquake actually possible?

  • Thread starter Thread starter ElliotSmith
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Earthquake
AI Thread Summary
A magnitude 10.0 earthquake is not theoretically possible according to the moment magnitude scale (Mw), which measures earthquake magnitudes logarithmically. The largest recorded earthquake was a 9.5 magnitude in Chile in 1960. The scale indicates that a magnitude increase represents a tenfold increase in seismic wave amplitude and approximately 31.6 times more energy release. Tectonic plate boundaries currently known are not large enough to accumulate the stress required for a magnitude 10 event. The friction on fault lines would cause them to break before reaching such a magnitude. While other geological events, like supervolcano eruptions or asteroid impacts, could theoretically release energy equivalent to or greater than a 10.0 earthquake, these are not classified as earthquakes. The consensus in the seismological community is that no existing fault can generate a magnitude 10 earthquake due to the limitations of fault length and the mechanics of tectonic stress.
  • #51
jim mcnamara said:
I think that the question reflects a little misunderstanding. For an M10 earthquake on a slip strike fault to happen, the fault would have extend almost all the way around the planet. No such fault is known to exist.

From
https://www.usgs.gov/faqs/can-megaq...s_science_products=0#qt-news_science_productsFor a subduction fault zone the size would be smaller because the energy released (the M10 thing) is proportional to the surface where the faulting plates overlap. It still would be really unlikely.

The scale is a logarithmic one, so each magnitude step is 10 times greter than the previous one. So an M11 would require a larger Earth than we have.

Yes, exactly, as I was trying to get across to readers way back in post #19 :smile: Dave
 
  • Like
Likes DaveC426913
Earth sciences news on Phys.org
  • #52
Well, @davenn, I'm not sure our effort will work. We can try. But. Were are fighting:

This is about the San Andreas fault system:

https://www.imdb.com/title/tt3488056/ How many people have read the USGS site versus how many have seen movies like the above?
 
  • #53
jim mcnamara said:
I'm not sure our effort will work. We can try. But. Were are fighting:

This is about the San Andreas fault system:

https://www.imdb.com/title/tt3488056/

How many people have read the USGS site versus how many have seen movies like the above?

uh huh, it's an uphill battle to get the truth out to the masses :smile:

Dave
 
  • #56
davenn said:
yes, as stated in previous posts :smile:
Sorry didn't look at any previous quotes LOL 😉 :oldbiggrin: Too manyo0)
 
  • #57
Physics4Eva said:
Sorry didn't look at any previous quotes LOL 😉 :oldbiggrin: Too manyo0)
Ahhh ... something for you to get used to doing :smile:

welcome to PF Dave
 

Similar threads

M 7.4 - 2025 Drake Passage Earthquake - unusual
Replies
3
Views
2K
M7.5 Earthquake, near Anamizu, W Japan
Replies
5
Views
4K
Mount Rainier - earthquake swarm July 2025
Replies
2
Views
150
Low magnitude earthquakes in Scotland, Highlands and Inner Hebrides
Replies
3
Views
3K
M 5.9 - 37 km WNW of Linxia Chengguanzhen, China
Replies
1
Views
3K
2004 Indian Ocean earthquake and tsunami (19 years ago)
Replies
2
Views
3K
Mag 2.7 earthquake in Cornwall, 19 Nov 2023
Replies
1
Views
3K
Mt St Helens - More than 400 earthquakes, yet no imminent eruption
Replies
1
Views
3K
Mag 7.0 Earthquake - Acapulco, Mexico
Replies
1
Views
2K
(Unprecedented?) Cluster of earthquakes in Greek islands
Replies
13
Views
2K

Hot Threads

Recent Insights

Back
Top