The global seismic activity influence on process in atmosphere and ionosphere
Рубрика:
| 1Zakharov, IG, 1Chernogor, LF 1V.N. Karazin National University of Kharkiv, Kharkiv, Ukraine |
| Space Sci. & Technol. 2021, 27 ;(5):019-034 |
| https://doi.org/10.15407/knit2021.05.019 |
| Язык публикации: Ukrainian |
Аннотация: In recent decades, ideas about earthquakes (EQ) have been formed as a final stage of a planetary continuous self-organizing tectonic process with periods of accumulation and relaxation of tectonic stresses. However, the scientific literature still presents studies of the response of atmospheric and ionospheric processes to individual strong EQs.
In this paper, for the first time, the relationship between processes in the lithosphere, troposphere, and ionosphere is considered, taking into account new ideas about the seismic process as a global phenomenon and on the background of processes caused by space weather. Both planetary data (EQ, total electron content (TEC) of the ionosphere) and data (atmospheric pressure, critical frequency of the F2 layer of the ionosphere) of widely spaced observation points in the western and eastern hemispheres were used. To increase the reliability of statistical results, 4 independent databases of daily data for 2007–2015 were used. Stable effects of global seismic activity (GSA) in the considered parameters are established. Thus, the critical frequency of the F2 region with a sharp increase in the GSA increases by 0.4–0.5 MHz. This effect is quite stable and manifests itself almost simultaneously at ionospheric stations of the eastern and western hemispheres, as well as in planetary TEC values.
At the same time, in the ionospheric variations, as before, the influence of both the troposphere (especially at a low level of solar activity) and space weather is traced, the characteristics of which in 75 % of cases also show an association with GSA. Therefore, space weather often but not always can act as a trigger on the EQs. In general, in the western hemisphere, the minimum atmospheric pressure occurs earlier than in the eastern, which leads to a noticeable increase in the pressure difference between the hemispheres by 10 mm. Hg., that indicates the relationship between global seismicity and global atmospheric circulation. The established GSA effects, as a rule, have the character of not a local short-term burst, but a jump followed by a gradual decrease (increase) of the index until the next active period (saw-toothed curve), i.e., the influence of the lithosphere on the overlying layers is continuous and is cyclical in nature, probably due to the cyclical nature of tectonic processes. Most likely, several different couplings between geospheres are realized at the same time, partially synchronized by changes in space weather, which requires new physical mechanisms to explain them.
|
| Ключевые слова: seismic activity, superposed epoch method, tropospheric and ionospheric disturbances |
References:
1. Bokov V. N. (2003). Variability of atmospheric circulation as initiator of strong earthquakes.Bull. of the Rus. Geograph. Soc.,135 (6), 54—65 [In Russian].
2. Boyarchuk K. A., Karelin A. V., Pulinets S. A., Tertyshnikov A. V., Uzunov D. P., Yudin I. A. (2012). A unified concept for detecting signs of impending strong earthquake in the framework of integrated system of lithosphere – atmosphere – iono-sphere –magnetosphere. Cosmonautics and Rocket Sci., 3 (68), 21—31 [In Russian].
3. Brownlee K. A. (1977). Statistical theory and methodology in science and Engineering. Moscow: Nauka [In Russian].
4. Vikulin A. V., Ivanishin A. G. (1998). Rotational model of seismic process. Pacific geology, 17(6), 95—103 [In Russian].
5. Voitov G. I. (1999). On the cold degassing of methane into the troposphere of the Earth. Theoretical and regional problems of geodynamics. Proc. of Geol. In-te of RAS. Is. 515. Moscow: Nauka, 242—251 [In Russian].
6. Gnedyshev M. N., Ol A. I. (1982). On the methodology of some heliobiological studies. Probl. Space Biology, 43, 216—219 [In Russian].
7. Gordiets B. F., Markov M. N., Shelepin L. A. (1980). Solar activity and the Earth. Moscow: Znanie [In Russian].
8. Gorkavy N. N., Trapeznikov Yu. A., Fridman A. M. (1994). On the global component of the seismic process and its rela- tionship with observed features of the Earth’s rotation. Reports of the Academy of Sciences. Geophysics,338(40), 525—527 [In Russian].
9. Dobrovolsky I. P. (1991). Theory of tectonic earthquake preparation. Moscow: Nauka [In Russian].
10. Kazachevskaya T. V., Nusinov A. A. (1986). Prognostic model of short-wave ultraviolet radiation of the Sun. Geomagnetism and aeronomy, 15(2), 593—596 [In Russian].
11. Letnikov F. A. (1992). Synergetics of geological systems. Novosibirsk: Science [In Russian].
12. Pulinets S. A., Uzunov D. P., Karelin A. V., Davidenko D. V. (2015). Physical basis for the generation of short-term earth-quake precursors. A complex model of geophysical processes in the lithosphere – atmosphere – ionosphere – magnetosphere, initiated by ionization. Geomagnetism and Aeronomy, 55(4), 521—538 [In Russian].
https://doi.org/10.1134/S0016793215040131
13. Pushcharovsky Yu. M. (2001). General problems of global tectonics. Moscow: Nauchnyj mir [In Russian].
14. Ruzmaikin A. (2014). Climate as a game of chance. Adv. in Phys. Sci., 184(3), 297—311 [In Russian].
https://doi.org/10.3367/UFNr.0184.201403f.0297
15. Sadovsky M. A., Pisarenko V. F. (1991). Seismic process in a block environment. Moscow: Nauka [In Russian].
16. Syvorotkin V. L. (2002). Deep degassing and global disasters. Moscow: Geoinformmark [In Russian].
17. Tertyshnikov A. V. (2013). Assessment of practical significance of geomagnetic precursors of strong earthquakes. Heliogeophys. Res., 3, 63—70 [In Russian].
18. Sytinsky A. D. (1989). On the relationship of earthquakes with solar activity. Phys. Earth, 2, 13—30 [In Russian].
19. Khomutov S. Yu. (1995). Investigation of dependence of global seismicity on of moon position.Geology and Geophys., 36(4), 88—102 [In Russian].
20. Chernogor L. F. (2008). On nonlinearity in nature and science. Kharkiv: V. N. Karazin Kharkiv Nat. Univ. Publ. [In Russian].
21. Shestopalov I. P., Kharin E. P. (2006). Time variability of the Earth’s seismicity relationships with solar activity cycles of different durations. Geophys. J., 28(4), 59—70 [In Russian].
22. Shirokov V. A. (2001). Experience of short-term forecast of time, place and strength of Kamchatka earthquakes in 1996–2000 with magnitude M = 6–7.8 for a complex of seismological and geophysical data. Geodynamics and volcanism of the Kuril-Kamchatka island-arc system. Petropavlovsk-Kamchatsky: In-te of volcan. geology and geochim. of the RAS, 95—116 [In Russian].
23. Shuman V. N. (2015). Nonlinear dynamics, seismicity and aerospace sounding systems. Geophys. J.,37(2), 38—55 [In Russian].
https://doi.org/10.24028/gzh.0203-3100.v37i2.2015.111302
24. Sadovsky M. A. (Ed.) (1982). Electromagnetic earthquake precursors. Moscow: Nauka [In Russian].
25. Bak P. (1996). How nature works: The science of self-organized criticality. New York: Springer-Verlag.
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4757-5426-1
26. Bogdanov Yu. A., Zakharov I. G., Tyrnov O. F., Hayakawa M. (2003). Electromagnetic effects Associated with Regional Seismic Activity in Crimea during the Interval July—August 2002. J. Atmosph. Electricity, 23(2), 57—67.
https://doi.org/10.1541/jae.23.57
27. Bogdanov Yu. A., Zakharov I. G. (2006). Electromagnetic and acoustic emissions associated with seismic activity. Proc. of the 6th Int. Conf.:Problem of Geocosmos. St. Petersburg, Petrodvorets, 357—360.
28. Chao B. F., Gross R. S. (1995). Changes in Earth’s rotational energy induced by earthquakes. Geophys. Int., 122, 776—783.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-246X.1995.tb06836.x
29. Chernogor L. F. (2011). The Earth — atmosphere — geospace system: main properties and processes. Int. J. Rem. Sens., 32(11), 3199—3218.
https://doi.org/10.1080/01431161.2010.541510
30. Costain J. K., Bollinger G. A. (1991). Correlations between streamflow and intraplate seismicity in the central Virginia, U.S.A., seismic zone: evidence for possible climatic controls. Tectonophysics, 186(1–2), 193—214.
https://doi.org/10.1016/0040-1951(91)90393-7
31. Gulyaeva T. (2014). Association of Seismic Activity with Solar Cycle and Geomagnetic Activity. Development in Earth Sci., 2, 14—19.
32. Hayakawa M. (2007). VLF/LF radio sounding of ionospheric perturbations associated with earthquakes. Sensors. 7 (7), 1141—1158.
https://doi.org/10.3390/s7071141
33. Jhuang H. K., Ho Y . Y., Kakinami Y., Liu J. Y., Oyama K.-I., Parrot M., Hattori K., Nishihashi M., Zhang D. (2010). Seismo-ionospheric anomalies of the GPS-TEC appear before the 12 May 2008 magnitude 8.0 Wenchuan Earthquake. Int. J. Remote Sens., 31, 3579—3587.
https://doi.org/10.1080/01431161003727796
34. Jin S., Occhipinti G., Jin R. (2015). GNSS ionospheric seismology: Recent observation evidences and characteristics. Earth-Sci. Revs, 147, 54—64.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.earscirev.2015.05.003
35. Korepanov V., Hayakawa M., Yampolski Yu., Lizunov G. (2009). AGW as a seismo-ionospheric coupling responsible agent. Phys. and Chem. of the Earth, 34(6–7), 485—495.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pce.2008.07.014
36. Liperovsky V. A., Pokhotelov O. A., Meister C.-V., Liperovskaya E. V. (2007). On recent physical models of lithosphere — atmosphere — ionosphere coupling before earthquakes. Natural Hazard and Earth System Sciences, 0000:0001.12. URL: https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/796d/9cf121303f56f665cebba41df7427996cb... (Last accessed 17.02.2020).
37. Love J. J., Thomas J. N. (2013). Insignificant solar-terrestrial triggering of earthquakes.Geophys. Res. Lett., 40, 1165—1170.
https://doi.org/10.1002/grl.50211
38. Odintsova S., Boyarchuk K., Georgieva K., Kirov B., Atanasov D. (2006). Long-period trends in global seismic and geomagnetic activity and their relation to solar activity. Phys. and Chem. Earth, 31, 88—93.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pce.2005.03.004
39. Parrot M., Li M. (2015). DEMETER Results related to seismic activity. Radio Sci. Bul., 355, 18—25.
40. Sasorova E., Levin B. (2016). The relationship of the global seismic activity with variations in the angular velocity of the Earth’s rotation for 1720—2014 years. Proc. EGU General Assembly, 18, EGU2016–1687.
41. Sharma G., Champatiray P, K., Mohanty S., Kannaujiya S. (2017). Ionospheric TEC modelling for earthquakes precursors from GNSS data. Quatern. Internat., 462, 65—74.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.quaint.2017.05.007
42. Shirley J. H. (1986). Lunar periodicity in great earthquakes, 1950–1965. Gerlands Beitr. Geophys., 95 (6), 509—515.
43. Yao Y. B., Chen P., Zhang S., Chen J. J., Yan F., Peng W. F. (2012). Analysis of pre-earthquake ionospheric anomalies before the global M = 7.0+ earthquakes in 2010. Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci., 12, 575—585.
https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-12-575-2012
44. Tanimoto T., Heki K., Artru-Lambin J. (2015). Interaction of Solid Earth, Atmosphere, and Ionosphere. Treatise on Geophysics, Oxford: Elsevier, 4, 421—443.
https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-444-53802-4.00083-X
45. Tavares M., Azevedo A. (2011). Influences of solar cycles on earthquakes. Natural Sci., 3, 436—443.
https://doi.org/10.4236/ns.2011.36060
46. Veretenenko S. V., Ogurtsov M. G. (2015). Nature of long-term correlation between cloud state and variations in galactic cosmic rays flux. Geomagnetism and aeronomy, 55(4), 442—449.
https://doi.org/10.1134/S0016793215040143
47. Zakharov I. G. (2018). The Influence of Global Seismic Activity on Variations in VLF Emissions and Infrasound in a Seismically Quiet Area. Proc. of the XVIIth Int. Conf.: Geoinformatics: Theoretical and Applied Aspects. Kyiv, Ukraine. N 13800, 5 p.
https://doi.org/10.3997/2214-4609.201801826
48. Zakharov I. G., Chernogor L. F. (2018). Ionosphere as an Indicator of Processes in the Geospace, Troposphere, and Lithosphere. Geomagnetism and Aeronomy, 58(3), 430—437.