5.3 earthquake in Los Angeles

[Pebbles]

Downgraded to a 4.9 per caltech ... Dr. Lucy Jones

Edit: On a side not.. this gal is fantastic explainer on the type of earthquakes! No wonder they have her in public relations.

[furluvcats]

I just went downstairs and it actually moved the speakers to our stereo that sits on top of our Big screen...moved them from their spots...guess it was the jolt...

[Pebbles]

I just went downstairs and it actually moved the speakers to our stereo that sits on top of our Big screen...moved them from their spots...guess it was the jolt...

How far are you from Yucaipa? Did you guys feel it? How did the kiddos take it? Having never been in one naturally curious on how locals react.

[furluvcats]

Brett and I were having lunch at a Japanese Steak house....we felt it...but didn't realize what it was this time...it was more up and down jolting...sundays was rolling...Chloe is at the movies/mall with friends and felt it in the theatre...we're all OK...but wish these things would stop...

We're about 50 miles from Yucaipa...maybe more...

[knotimpaired]

I just talked to our daughter who was in her office in Studio City, east of LA. They definitely felt it but it was over quickly. She has seen no damage in the area.

[BEER980]

That's three for CA as well as one for Alaska and one for Chile -- all since Sunday.

What's up???

Glad you're okay, Furry.

It could be just stress relief from the Indonisia quakes or it could be leading up to a event on the 25th or 26th. I am still looking into it and don't have much to go on yet.

[Guest]

It could be just stress relief from the Indonisia quakes or it could be leading up to a event on the 25th or 26th. I am still looking into it and don't have much to go on yet.

The experts on the cable networks were saying these quakes of recent could be FORE-shocks. Keep us posted, BEER!

[Brent]

I was starting to note it after Tuesday Night's big quake off the coast... but it really ramped up in my mind when I heard about today's quake. When they first broke in as they were going to break just before 5 and said "seismic activity near L.A." I immediately thought it was the big one... fortunately, it wasn't, but it's going to happen one day.

[furluvcats]

What exactly IS the big one everyone is always talking about and why do people seem to think it'll happen?

[JTD]

What exactly IS the big one everyone is always talking about and why do people seem to think it'll happen?

Furry, the big one would be a 7, 8, or 9 magnitude quake striking downtown Los Angeles or San Francisco. There would be thousands of deaths and injuries and it would probably be the costliest natural disaster in U.S history. Since it affected such a large metropolitan area, the property damage would also be bad. Skyscrapers would probably collapse.

The good news is that they say structures like houses are safe and it's the larger buildings that are in danger.

As to why they think it will happen? I'm not sure. After all, LA and SF both had big earthquakes relatively recently so hopefully the stress has been relieved for a good long time (1994-LA/1989-SF). Sometimes, faults after earthquakes like that aren't active for years and years.

[Guest]

Skyscrapers would probably collapse.

Don't they have the most rigid building codes, particuarly for skyscrapeers, in California. Or is it that technology does not exist for anything above a 6 or 7?

[feederband]

Kind of concerned that there might be a bigger picture we are not seeing . The amount of quakes seem to be on the rise. Seems like they have been on the rise ever since the South East Asia quake in December.. Or just more tv coverage......

[JTD]

Skyscrapers would probably collapse.

Don't they have the most rigid building codes, particuarly for skyscrapeers, in California. Or is it that technology does not exist for anything above a 6 or 7?

Good question! I read somewhere on google that tall buildings would collapse but small structures would be OK so that's the only thing I base it on. One would think that they would be "earthquake proof" when one thinks about it and certainly stronger than smaller structures.

Does anyone know why google would say something like that?

[Brent]

What exactly IS the big one everyone is always talking about and why do people seem to think it'll happen?

Big one would be a Northridge... Loma Prieta(1989 during the World Series), or like the great 1906 San Francisco quake. Anything from an upper 6 on up in a highly populated area. Had that 7.0(or 7.2, whatever it's rated) been centered over land, even in a not-so-populated area like Northern California, there would have been significant damage and some deaths and injuries. Were that to hit in S.F. or L.A. there would be catastrophic damage, especially road failures(remember the freeway collapse, during one of them?)

3 days before Christmas in 2003, a low-end 6 struck around Paso Robles halfway between S.F. and L.A. and killed 2 or 3 people after a building collapse, so even those could be bad in a highly populated area(the building WAS old though).

[Brent]

Skyscrapers would probably collapse.

The good news is that they say structures like houses are safe and it's the larger buildings that are in danger.

That would only happen if it were an 8 or a 9(which you don't want to think about). Northridge was a 6.8 and the Loma Prieta was a 7.1 and we saw how bad that was, but skyscrapers didn't collapse.

Most major structures in California, especially ones built in the last couple of decades, would survive almost all earthquakes(an 8 or a 9 is EXTREMELY unlikely even though some day it will happen).

Old buildings are what you need to not be in during even a moderate sized earthquake.

[vbhoutex]

I'm not sure any skyscrapers would collapse. They could recieve significant damage, but the building codes have been very rigid in CA for many years especially for tall buildings. I don't remember any skyscrapers collapsing during the Loma Prieta quake in SF. Many did have extensive damage to the outsides, but I don't remember any tall buildings collapsing unless you consider 6 stories tall.

[Pebbles]

OH HEAVENS! an 8 or 9 WOULD be the "big one" and then some! Lets pray that's not anytime soon! *crosses fingers*

[Brent]

I'm not sure any skyscrapers would collapse. They could recieve significant damage, but the building codes have been very rigid in CA for many years especially for tall buildings. I don't remember any skyscrapers collapsing during the Loma Prieta quake in SF. Many did have extensive damage to the outsides, but I don't remember any tall buildings collapsing unless you consider 6 stories tall.

Your right... unless it's an EXTREME quake(which would be stronger than any quake in California in at least 100 years) the damage to skyscrapers would primarily be broken glass. I'd much rather be in a skyscraper than a house that's 40 years old during a big quake... let's put it that way.

[Thunder44]

They had another one last night. Just offshore of Northern CA, near where the other 7.0 quake happened a few days ago. It was a 6.4. Might be an aftershock.

http://earthquake.usgs.gov/eqinthenews/2005/uszkal/

[Matt-hurricanewatcher]

6.6 now