In a message dated 29/01/2008, gpayton880@....... writes:

Yes,  Pete, that is an interesting theory.  I wonder what is the "electrical" 
 component of an earthquake that is measured by a seismograph?  I thought  
all the seismic waves were physical movements.  Comments out  there?


Hi Jerry,
 
    Note that the depths concerned are from 400 to 1800  miles - deeper than 
most earthquake sources. The para-magnetic properties  of the iron compounds 
vary. You are unlikely to see electrical effects at the  surface due to this, 
although there may be other surface electrical / magnetic  effects. 
Seismometers do not measure changes in potential or magnetic fields,  only physical 
movements.
 
    Regards,
 
    Chris Chapman



   






In a message dated 29/01/2008, gpayton880@....... writes:
<=
FONT=20
  style=3D"BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent" face=3DArial color=3D#000000 size=
=3D2>Yes,=20
  Pete, that is an interesting theory.  I wonder what is the "electrica=
l"=20
  component of an earthquake that is measured by a seismograph?  I thou=
ght=20
  all the seismic waves were physical movements.  Comments out=20
there?

Hi Jerry,
 
    Note that the depths concerned are from 400 to=20=
1800=20
miles - deeper than most earthquake sources. The para-magnetic properti=
es=20
of the iron compounds vary. You are unlikely to see electrical effects at th=
e=20
surface due to this, although there may be other surface electrical / magnet=
ic=20
effects. Seismometers do not measure changes in potential or magnetic fields=
,=20
only physical movements.
 
    Regards,
 
    Chris Chapman