HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Full Text (PDF) Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by EVERNDEN, J. F. Search for Related Content

Earthquake prediction: What we have learned and what we should do now

U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY OFFICE OF EARTHQUAKE STUDIES, 345 MIDDLEFIELD ROAD, MENLO PARK, CALIFORNIA 94025

Abstract

Adopting out of necessity a definition of "earthquake prediction" which stresses short-term warnings (months, weeks, day, and hours), I must conclude that either we are doing the wrong things or such predictions may be impossible. Assuming the former, I recommend major emphasis on direct or nearly direct measurements of stress/strain change in or across fault zones in the immediate vicinity of strong points or "asperities" (how do you find asperities?). This recommendation presupposes essentially total emphasis of the United States' program in California. Even if this recommendation is unpalatable, it is certain that resources now available require a total reanalysis of the present program and a consequent reallocation of funds.