MQ_San Andreas -1

.docx

School

Temple University *

*We aren’t endorsed by this school

Course

701

Subject

Geography

Date

Apr 3, 2024

Type

docx

Pages

Uploaded by ChiefDiscovery9104

San Andreas movie questions Take a look at the questions below. As you watch the movie, keep an eye out for answers to these questions. Some of these are related to the events in the movie but require that you understand the subject matter to answer them (you won’t necessarily get the answer in the movie itself). 1. What kind of fault is the San Andreas? How do the two sides of the fault move against each other? The San Andreas Fault is a transform fault where the Pacific Plate and the North American Plate slide horizontally past each other. This horizontal motion causes the two sides of the fault to grind and slip against each other, which is the source of the earthquakes experienced in California. 2. Cal Tech Professor Lawrence describes giant subduction zone earthquakes (Chile and Alaska). He states that a large mega-thrust (9.0 or greater) is due to hit the San Andreas fault. Is a megathrust (reverse fault) possible along the San Andreas? Why or why not? What is a main difference between earthquakes at these two boundary types? A megathrust earthquake is not possible along the San Andreas Fault because it is a transform fault, not a subduction zone. Megathrust earthquakes occur at convergent plate boundaries, where one tectonic plate is forced under another, these are subduction zones like the one found off the coast of Chile or Alaska, where the Pacific Plate subducts beneath the South American and North American Plates. The main difference is the movement of the plates 3. Considering the type of fault the San Andreas is, would it be possible for it to rupture and split apart into a massive fissure/chasm? Why or why not? (Think about stress and friction along faults). The San Andreas Fault can’t actually rupture into a massive chasm because it's a strike-slip fault where two plates slide horizontally past each other. The forces involved are shear stress, not tensional, which means the land on either side of the fault moves sideways rather than apart, preventing the formation of a large chasm. 4. Seismologists believe that the San Andreas can’t have an earthquake larger than 8.3 magnitude. The one in the movie is a 9.6, perhaps because the entire San Andreas fault slips. How much more energy does a 9.6 have than an 8.6? In real life, is it typical for a fault the size of the San Andreas to move along its entire length?

According to the Richter scale, each whole number increase in magnitude represents a tenfold increase in measured amplitude. A magnitude 9.6 earthquake releases about 31.6 times more energy than an 8.6. It’s highly uncommon for the entire length of a fault like the San Andreas to slip all at once. Only segments of a fault rupture during an earthquake. 5. Dr. Hayes explains on the news that San Francisco will “get hit again, with a 9.5M event or higher. It will be so big that people on the east coast will feel it.” What is wrong with this statement? The statement that San Francisco could be hit by a 9.5 magnitude earthquake is unrealistic because the San Andreas Fault is a strike-slip fault that doesn’t produce the highest magnitude earthquakes, those are associated with subduction zones. The idea that an earthquake in San Francisco could be felt on the East Coast is ridiculous because of the immense distance between the two states. seismic waves don’t travel far, an earthquake's intensity decreases with distance, and it's very unlikely that an earthquake on the West Coast would be felt on the East Coast. 5. Would all the skyscrapers just topple over like they do in the movie? Why or why not? Not all skyscrapers would topple over in an earthquake, many that are built are designed to withstand seismic activity through flexible materials and engineering that allows them to absorb the energy without collapsing. 7. Knowing what you know about predicting earthquakes, do you think “magnetic pulses” are going to tell us when and how an EQ will hit? I don’t think it’s too realistic to know if an earthquake will hit based on magnetic pulses because as of today’s science and technology, there has been no proven technology to detect when and where an earthquake will hit. 8. Can seismologists predict earthquakes like they do in the movie? What information about potential earthquakes can scientists tell us? Are there predictive indicators? Seismologists cannot predict specific details of earthquakes such as timing and magnitude but they can identify areas at risk and estimate earthquake probabilities based on historical data and tectonic science 9. What about the tsunami scene was accurate? What was not accurate? What was most accurate was the trigger of the tsunami being the earthquake and following that the receding water and low tide getting sucked back out to see but what was not accurate is how the water came back. It began to form a nice crest of a wave perfect for a surfer but in reality, it would just be a flood of water rising and eventually receding. What was also a little realistic was the aftermath of floods and water that hasn’t receded.

Your preview ends here

Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version

Access to all documents
Unlimited textbook solutions
24/7 expert homework help