<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" standalone="yes"?><rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"><channel><title>Geoscience on Dasher</title><link>https://DasherAmtlich.github.io/tags/geoscience/</link><description>Recent content in Geoscience on Dasher</description><generator>Hugo -- 0.157.0</generator><language>en</language><lastBuildDate>Tue, 03 Mar 2026 00:00:00 +0000</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="https://DasherAmtlich.github.io/tags/geoscience/index.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/><item><title>Predicting Maximum Earthquake Magnitudes</title><link>https://DasherAmtlich.github.io/posts/mag-pred/</link><pubDate>Tue, 03 Mar 2026 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate><guid>https://DasherAmtlich.github.io/posts/mag-pred/</guid><description>&lt;h2 id="central-question"&gt;Central Question&lt;/h2&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Could you possibly build a compuationally light earthquake predicting algorithm?&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;h3 id="short-answer"&gt;Short answer&lt;/h3&gt;
&lt;p&gt;No. Earthquake prediction, especially time predictions is pretty much impossible. However, using aftershock mechanics and regional seismic activity, one could build an algorithm that predicts the maximum magnitude an earthquake could have.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Find out more in my paper below:&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;iframe src ="https://drive.google.com/file/d/1lznUSwW9ELRF257SSRN-G-TOme-PuGqB/preview" width = "816px", height = "1056px"&gt;
&lt;/iframe&gt;
&lt;h3 id="further-workchallenges"&gt;Further Work/Challenges&lt;/h3&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Need more information how the magnitude of completeness changes simulations, the effects using a Weibull distribution vs. a Poisson distribution, and how important are uncertainties in inferred variables.&lt;/p&gt;</description></item></channel></rss>