Measuring the Richter Scale with logarithms

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around calculating the magnitude of an earthquake on the Richter Scale, specifically when comparing the intensity of an earthquake measuring 6.1 to one that is twice as powerful. Participants are exploring the implications of the formula used for intensity and magnitude.

Discussion Character

  • Conceptual clarification, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss the formula I = I0 × 10M and express confusion regarding the value of I0, questioning whether it can be zero. There is an exploration of the implications of assuming I0 to be 1 instead.

Discussion Status

The conversation is ongoing, with participants sharing their interpretations of the problem and the definitions involved. Some have suggested alternative values for I0, while others express uncertainty about the definitions provided in their materials.

Contextual Notes

Participants note that the original problem lacks additional context or information, which may contribute to the confusion regarding the assumptions about I0. There is also mention of differing definitions of the Richter Scale in various sources.

Gregory.gags
Messages
31
Reaction score
2
An Earthquake measures 6.1 on the Richter Scale. What is the rating on an earthquake that is twice as powerful?

I = I0 × 10M
I-intensity of earthquake
I0-earthquake with intensity of 0
M-magnitude of earthquake on the Richter Scale

So I figured I'd use I1 = I0 × 106.1 to find the intensity of earthquake 1 (I1)
then, 2I=I2 to find the intensity of earthquake 2 (I2), which is double that of I1
and finally, M=log(I2/I0) to find the resulting magnitude, or rating, of the Richter Scale.

But my problem begins at the very beginning.

If I0 = 0 then I1 = 0 too...
and I'm quite thrown off by this.
Am I taking the totally wrong approach to this?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Gregory.gags said:
An Earthquake measures 6.1 on the Richter Scale. What is the rating on an earthquake that is twice as powerful?

I = I0 × 10M
I-intensity of earthquake
I0-earthquake with intensity of 0
M-magnitude of earthquake on the Richter Scale

So I figured I'd use I1 = I0 × 106.1 to find the intensity of earthquake 1 (I1)
then, 2I=I2 to find the intensity of earthquake 2 (I2), which is double that of I1
and finally, M=log(I2/I0) to find the resulting magnitude, or rating, of the Richter Scale.

But my problem begins at the very beginning.

If I0 = 0 then I1 = 0 too...
and I'm quite thrown off by this.
Am I taking the totally wrong approach to this?

I0 can't be 0.
 
I know! :P I don't understand what else it could be though?? No additional info was given in the question and no one else that I have showed this to has a clue of what to do!
 
exactly! that would make sense wouldn't it? But no where in the question, or even in the lesson as a matter of fact, did it mention Io being equal to 1.
Quote from the text : "The Richter scale... is based on a comparison of intensities to Io, which is an earthquake of intensity 0."
Did I just understand that incorrectly?
 
Gregory.gags said:
exactly! that would make sense wouldn't it? But no where in the question, or even in the lesson as a matter of fact, did it mention Io being equal to 1.
Quote from the text : "The Richter scale... is based on a comparison of intensities to Io, which is an earthquake of intensity 0."
Did I just understand that incorrectly?
I don't think it was worded very well. In any case, the definition your book uses in terms of intensities seems unusual. I did a search yesterday when you posted your other question - most of the definitions I saw for Richter calculations involve the shaking amplitude, not the earthquake intensity.

The formula I saw gives the earthquake magnitude as ML = log10(A/A0(δ)), where A is the shaking amplitude of a given earthquake, and A0(δ) is a function of the distance from the epicenter of the quake.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
8K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
7K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
6K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
25K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
7K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K