论文部分内容阅读
过去100年特大地震的图像提出了大地震的发生是否在全球距离有联系的问题,或者说地震的时间丛集是否可被认为是随机偶然的。特别是过去10年特大地震的频度引起了媒体对全球灾害增加的推测。因此我们检查了地球最大地震一年分辨率的地震间隔时间的分布,并计算了它们与时间随机泊松过程一致的程度。我们用合成目录说明,任何全球地震间隔时间特殊分布的发生概率都是低的,并且短期的丛集是泊松过程最少重复的特征。我们检查实际目录发现,正如根据合成目录所预期,如果泊松过程是活动的(平均发生率为3.2%),过去111年中最小概率的M≥8.3地震的间隔是短的(t<1年)。在我们研究删除了局部触发事件的M≥8.3地震目录时,我们发现0～1年间隔的高平均发生率为9.5%,和根据时间随机指数分布得出的模拟目录的值(11.1%)相差不大。这里我们强调短事件间隔时间,因为它们最明显且引起了全球地震之间物理上有联系的推测。我们还发现,整个111年观测的M≥8.3地震间隔时间的分布(包括长静止期)与泊松过程的比较并不显著不同于用合成目录所做的相同比较。因此我们发现没有证据说明全球特大地震的发生不是时间随机的泊松过程。
The images of the earthquakes of the past 100 years have raised the question of whether the occurrence of major earthquakes is linked to global distances or whether the temporal clustering of earthquakes can be considered as random accidental. In particular, the frequency of the major earthquake of the past decade has caused the media to speculate on the increase of global disasters. Therefore, we examined the distribution of seismic intervals at one-year resolution of the Earth’s largest earthquake and calculated their agreement with the time-random Poisson process. Using synthetic catalogs, we show that the probability of occurrence of any particular distribution of earthquakes at a global interval is low, and short-term clustering is the least repeatable feature of Poisson processes. We examined the actual table of contents and found that the interval of M ≥ 8.3 earthquakes with the shortest probability in the past 111 years is short (t <1 year), as expected from the synthetic table, if the Poisson process is active (average 3.2%) ). When we study the catalog of M ≥ 8.3 earthquakes with partial triggers removed, we find that the high average incidence at intervals of 0 to 1 year is 9.5%, which differs from the value of the simulated table based on the time-random exponential distribution (11.1%) Not big. Here we emphasize the short event intervals because they are the most obvious and give rise to the speculation that there is a physical connection between earthquakes around the world. We also found that the distribution of M ≥ 8.3 earthquakes (including long quiescent periods) observed over 111 years compared to the Poisson process did not differ significantly from the same comparisons made with the synthetic catalog. Therefore, we find that there is no evidence that the occurrence of a catastrophic earthquake in the world is not a random Poisson process.