加卸载响应比(Load/Unload Response Ratio)、能量加速释放(AE/MR)的临界区尺度及地震预测

加卸载响应比理论的主要思路是 :系统在稳定状态时加载响应与卸载响应的比值与非稳定状态时加载响应与卸载响应的比值是完全不同的。大震前加卸载响应比升高和能量加速释放这两种现象可以用来对地震进行中期预报。同时 ,加卸载响应比理论和能量加速释放可能有相同的物理机制。为了验证这种地震预报方法的可行性 ,我们研究了几例发生在澳大利亚与中国 ,M 5 0～ 7 9之间的地震 ,其中包括破坏严重的澳大利亚纽卡斯尔地震和中国的唐山地震。我们利用以震源中心一定范围内的数据计算了震前的加卸载响应比和能量加速释放的幂律拟合。能量幂律加速释放存在一组最佳的拟合 ,一定范围内加卸载响应比达最大值表明加卸载响应比也有一个临界区尺度。进一步讲 ,加卸载响应比与能量加速释放的临界区尺度是相似的。这些结果表明加卸载响应比与能量加速释放有相同的物理机制。进一步的研究可能会对这种物理机制提供更好的解释 ,同时也能对地震的中期预报提供理论基础

Whales and Sonar: Environmental Exemptions for the Navy’s Mid-Frequency Active Sonar Training

Mid-frequency active (MFA) sonar emits pulses of sound from an underwater transmitter to help determine the size, distance, and speed of objects. The sound waves bounce off objects and reflect back to underwater acoustic receivers as an echo. MFA sonar has been used since World War II, and the Navy indicates it is the only reliable way to track submarines, especially more recently designed submarines that operate more quietly, making them more difficult to detect. Scientists have asserted that sonar may harm certain marine mammals under certain conditions, especially beaked whales. Depending on the exposure, they believe that sonar may damage the ears of the mammals, causing hemorrhaging and/or disorientation. The Navy agrees that the sonar may harm some marine mammals, but says it has taken protective measures so that animals are not harmed. MFA training must comply with a variety of environmental laws, unless an exemption is granted by the appropriate authority. Marine mammals are protected under the Marine Mammal Protection Act (MMPA) and some under the Endangered Species Act (ESA). The training program must also comply with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), and in some cases the Coastal Zone Management Act (CZMA). Each of these laws provides some exemption for certain federal actions. The Navy has invoked all of the exemptions to continue its sonar training exercises. Litigation challenging the MFA training off the coast of Southern California ended with a November 2008 U.S. Supreme Court decision. The Supreme Court said that the lower court had improperly favored the possibility of injuring marine animals over the importance of military readiness. The Supreme Court’s ruling allowed the training to continue without the limitations imposed on it by other courts. (pdf contains 20pp.)