01-16-2010, 11:37 AM
@ Dakine:
I had a feeling you were just leading me on with all of this... But in fact I am well versed on the subject and even the Harvard boyz are speculating -- no one knows exactly the dimensions of our magma chambers and are also still making educated guesses based on ongoing research here and elsewhere. I do not appreciate you playing with me on the subject. Feel free to write your own blog on the subject sighting all you sources.
I provide a free source of local information and utilize local geological studies as needed. You can attempt to answer your own challenge as to why a tremor at nine miles deep under an active volcano is NOT related to magma pressures, but do so for your own learning curve. My inference to the relationship is a logical.
quote]Originally posted by dakine
actually I think a lot more is known than you might be aware of. I was asking my initial question (how was the earthquake at the base of the volcano related to the shallow deformation we are witnessing at the summit's surface) because, when one considers the model of the summit's magma plumbing system, as described by Peter Cervelli and Asta Miklius in "The shallow magmatic system of Kilauea Volcano" the abstract of which can be found at:
http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2002AGUFM.V71A1251C
and begins as follows:
"Geodetic leveling and Global Positioning System (GPS) measurements image a deflating magma reservoir in the southern part of Kilauea caldera. This reservoir, centered about 3.5 km below ground level, has been slowly deflating (~ 2.5 x 106 km3 per year) since the beginning of the Pu`u `O`o eruption. Electronic borehole tiltmeters reveal a secondary, much shallower magma chamber located just east of Halemaumau Crater at about 750 m below ground level. This secondary reservoir produces episodic deformation events, many of which share striking similarities that suggest a corresponding similarity of process...."
it is hard to see as direct a correlation as you imply. though I love your enthusiasm.. it's great!
[/quote]
I had a feeling you were just leading me on with all of this... But in fact I am well versed on the subject and even the Harvard boyz are speculating -- no one knows exactly the dimensions of our magma chambers and are also still making educated guesses based on ongoing research here and elsewhere. I do not appreciate you playing with me on the subject. Feel free to write your own blog on the subject sighting all you sources.
I provide a free source of local information and utilize local geological studies as needed. You can attempt to answer your own challenge as to why a tremor at nine miles deep under an active volcano is NOT related to magma pressures, but do so for your own learning curve. My inference to the relationship is a logical.
quote]Originally posted by dakine
quote:
Originally posted by PunaLeigh
No one really knows the actual size & depth of our local magma chambers...
actually I think a lot more is known than you might be aware of. I was asking my initial question (how was the earthquake at the base of the volcano related to the shallow deformation we are witnessing at the summit's surface) because, when one considers the model of the summit's magma plumbing system, as described by Peter Cervelli and Asta Miklius in "The shallow magmatic system of Kilauea Volcano" the abstract of which can be found at:
http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2002AGUFM.V71A1251C
and begins as follows:
"Geodetic leveling and Global Positioning System (GPS) measurements image a deflating magma reservoir in the southern part of Kilauea caldera. This reservoir, centered about 3.5 km below ground level, has been slowly deflating (~ 2.5 x 106 km3 per year) since the beginning of the Pu`u `O`o eruption. Electronic borehole tiltmeters reveal a secondary, much shallower magma chamber located just east of Halemaumau Crater at about 750 m below ground level. This secondary reservoir produces episodic deformation events, many of which share striking similarities that suggest a corresponding similarity of process...."
it is hard to see as direct a correlation as you imply. though I love your enthusiasm.. it's great!
[/quote]