A New Way for Determining Earthquake Magnitude Based on Electromagnetic Radiation

Abstract

The article proposes the possibility of determining the magnitude of a future earthquake with high accuracy, based on the frequency data of VLF/LF electromagnetic emissions, as a diagnostic precursor that exists before an earthquake. Such magnitude will contribute to significantly improving the research on various fundamental issues in seismology in the future.

Share and Cite:

Kachakhidze, M., Kachakhidze-Murphy, N., Khvitia, B., Ramishvili, G. and Kukhianidze, V. (2026) A New Way for Determining Earthquake Magnitude Based on Electromagnetic Radiation. Open Journal of Earthquake Research, 15, 98-118. doi: 10.4236/ojer.2026.154005.

1. Introduction

Modern ground-based and satellite observations have revealed various anomalous changes in geophysical fields that attend the process of earthquake preparation in the lithosphere, as well as in the atmosphere and ionosphere. They are: changing of intensity of electrotelluric current in focal area; Perturbations of geomagnetic field in forms of irregular pulsations or regular short-period pulsations; Perturbations of atmospheric electric field; Irregular changing of characteristic parameters of the lower ionosphere (plasma frequency, electron content-ration, height of D layer, etc.); Irregular perturbations reaching the upper ionosphere, namely F2-layer, for 2 - 3 days before the earthquake; Increased intensity of electromagnetic emissions in upper ionosphere in several hours or tenths of minutes before earthquake; Lighting before earthquake; Infrared radiation; Total Electron Content (TEC) anomalies so on. Obviously, all the above-mentioned phenomena are not observed before every earthquake and do not have a specific sequence [1]-[9].

It has been proven that among them there exists a geophysical field (VLF/LF electromagnetic emissions that existed before the earthquakes), the anomalous changes of which accurately describe the geological processes of fault formation in the earthquake focus. Therefore, this field can be considered a diagnostic precursor. In such a case, it is no longer in dispute that it is possible to predict earthquakes based on it [10] [11]. It has been revealed that, based on this precursor field, it is possible to determine with very high accuracy the relationship between incoming earthquake fault length (l) and magnitude (M), which, in modern seismology, despite the very high level of development of this area of science, for the present remains one of the most important problem.

2. Discussion

2.1. Some Information about Diagnostic Precursor of the Earthquakes

As is known, the process of earthquake preparation proceeds in accordance with the well-known avalanche-like unstable geological model of fault formation, which step by step describes the occurrence of cracks of various sizes and the main process of forming the length of the fault in the focus of an impending earthquake. Namely, at the first stage, chaotic crack formation occurs in the earthquake preparation zone, when, as a result of the interaction of cracks, the average density of ruptures reaches a certain critical value in the entire volume or a significant part of it. As a result of the interaction of cracks, an avalanche stage of a given earthquake preparation sets in. It means that the first stage of earthquake preparation goes over to the second stage. The involvement of an increasing number of inhibited cracks in this process leads to the unification of cracks of a higher rank (larger size), which is associated with a rapid and sharp redistribution of the local stress field. An increase in the number and size of cracks, like an avalanche-like process, leads to a sharp increase in the rate of overall deformation, which causes a change in the integral physical characteristics of the medium. The increase in deformation is already accompanied by a drop in stress in the third stage. Due to the heterogeneity of the properties of the medium, the unstable deformation is compressed into a narrow zone, in which several relatively large cracks form. In this case, there is a general drop in average macro stresses over most of the volume. Due to this, the cracks stop developing and partially close. This process can be considered as the so-called main period of the “silence”, which immediately begins after the end of the active stage of the avalanche process.

Already then, at the final stage, against the background of increasing tectonic tension, the fault of the earthquake is formed by ripping apart the cofferdam (links between cracks) in the focus of the upcoming earthquake. This process qualitatively is similar to the general process, and therefore it, by short-term and smaller changes in the amplitude of the strain rate, must be preceded. It happens that the destruction of one of the cofferdams may not be enough to rupture the entire main fault.

Due to this, there can be several such short-term changes in the deformation rate. In this case, as a result, these oscillations must precede large foreshocks, and the final one must be a direct foreshock or the main shock itself [12].

It is widely believed in seismology that “One of the reasons making earthquake prediction so difficult is because we cannot monitor the stress and strain conditions of rocks a few kilometers below the ground surface where earthquakes are initiated” [13]. However, a geophysical field that makes it possible to trace step-by-step the geological process has now been discovered. This field is very low frequency/low frequency (VLF/LF) electromagnetic emissions that existed before the earthquake [10] [11].

It should be noted that research into the interaction between seismic activity and electromagnetic radiation has intensified worldwide since the second half of the last century, as, alongside the theoretical research, it has become possible to conduct high-level laboratory and satellite experiments. Long-term observations have revealed special properties of VLF/LF electromagnetic radiation that manifest themselves both during the preparation of an earthquake and during the earthquake itself.

Networks to collect VLF/LF radio signals associated with seismic activity have been established since the end of the last century in various seismically active regions and countries around the world. One such network, based on the data of which our research was conducted, is the European Network for collecting VLF/LF radio signals (INFREP) [4] [14].

Before an earthquake, as mentioned above, many geophysical fields undergo anomalous changes, which is why all of these fields are referred to in the literature as precursors.

Our group has been studying anomalous changes in various geophysical fields before an earthquake for a long time, and concluded that, for further research in the right direction, it is necessary to classify geophysical fields into triggers, indicators, and precursor according to their generation mechanisms and role in the earthquake preparation process [15].

We think that for the observer, a precursor of an earthquake, or more precisely, a diagnostic precursor of the earthquake, is that geophysical field that is an exact manifestation of the geological stages of the avalanche-unstable model, and on the surface of the Earth, it describes the process of fault formation in the earthquake focus. A study of global scientific research allowed us to develop a model for the generation of electromagnetic radiation recorded before earthquakes, based on electrodynamics and the classical geological model of the avalanche-like process of fault formation. This is the model of electromagnetic radiation of lithospheric origin that exists before and during an earthquake. The seismogenic area is considered to be an oscillatory-distributed system. This model simplifies physical analyses of the nonlinear effects and qualitatively explains the mechanisms that generate very low frequency electromagnetic waves in the period prior to an earthquake.

Using the VLF/LF electromagnetic radiation that exists in the period preceding the earthquake, the authors obtained formula (1), which, for the first time, analytically links the frequency of the observed electromagnetic radiation and the linear size (length of the fault at the source) of the earthquake:

ω=k c l (1)

where c is the velocity of light, l is the length of the rupture, k is the characteristic coefficient of geological medium and it is approximately equal to 1 [10]. It should be emphasized that the very high accuracy of measuring electromagnetic radiation in the VLF/LF ranges also makes it possible to determine the length of small cracks with high accuracy. For instance, before the L’Aquila catastrophic earthquake (6 April 2009), besides the other electromagnetic anomalies, 41 MHz ( ω 1 ) and about 54 MHz ( ω 2 ) radiation were also recorded [16]. According to our study (formula 1), the corresponding length of the first emitting body (which radiates ω 1 frequency) would be l 1 = 0.007 km, and the corresponding length of the second emitting body (which emitted ω 2 frequency) would be l 2 = 0.006 km. This means that electromagnetic radiation can detect even the slightest changes in the length of the microcracks.

Studies have shown that formula (1) is in good agreement with real earthquake data [11] [17].

To relate magnitude and rupture length l , we used two formulas: for MS (2) [18] and for MW (3) [19] for M ≥ 5.0 earthquakes:

lgl=0.6 M s −2.5 (2)

M w =4.38+1.49×logl (3)

It should be noted that, unlike satellite-based studies, work relying on data from ground-based networks make it possible to record the electromagnetic field at the very moment an earthquake occurs [11] [15] [17] [20].

2.2. Possibility of Increasing the Accuracy of Earthquake Magnitude Measurements Based on Modern Research

Accurate measurement of earthquake magnitude remains one of the main tasks of seismology to this day. The famous scientist C. F. Richter wrote that, “the local magnitude (ML) requires only a source-receiver distance and a measurement of the peak amplitude of a filtered seismogram” [21]. “Since then, different studies have developed local magnitude formulas that account for the local attenuation properties of a particular region. Despite such widespread use of ML, the consistency and accuracy of ML are challenged by large variations in estimates from station to station, influences of radiation pattern and rupture directivity, and spatially variable attenuation structure. In addition, highlights that ML might not be physically meaningful for small events, as the systematic and random errors in its determination are likely greater than its variability relative to moment magnitude estimates” [22].

“Conventional magnitude scales, including mb, Ms, and ML, encounter saturation issues when the earthquake’s rupture dimension exceeds the wavelength of the seismic waves used for magnitude determination. For large earthquakes, rupture dimensions often exceed the wavelengths of seismic waves commonly employed for magnitude estimation” [23].

Almost every famous seismologist in the world has studied and continues to study this issue, but the problem has still not been solved.

Based on the above, we propose a new way for measuring earthquake magnitude that can be used in any region for the entire magnitude spectrum, covering not only small and medium, but also large and very large earthquakes, which is another additional problem in seismology.

Table 1 and Table 2 give data of the fault length, corresponding to the magnitude, measured to tenths of accuracy, as accepted in seismology and of the VLF/LF electromagnetic emissions for earthquakes of magnitudes M ≥ 5, calculated using formulas (1)-(3), and data of the relevant energies calculated by formulas (4)-(5):

lg 10 E=4.8+1.5 M S (4)

log 10 E=5.24+1.44 M w (5)

It should be noted that the lengths of the faults that occurred in the focus of the earthquake are given with an accuracy of even cm, because calculations performed with VLF/LF electromagnetic emissions allow us to measure the existing fault with such accuracy.

Table 1. The diapasons of rupture lengths, EMR frequencies and energies at a fixed magnitude MS.

MS

l (km)

Frequency (Hz)

Energy E (joule)

5

3.16228 - 3.62577

94,868 - 82,741

2.00E+12 - 2.81E+12

5.1

3.63078 - 4.16294

82,626 - 72,064

2.82E+12 - 3.97E+12

5.2

4.16869 - 4.77969

71,965 - 62,765

3.98E+12 - 5.60E+12

5.3

4.7863 - 5.48782

62,678 - 54,666

5.62E+12 - 7.92E+12

5.4

5.49541 - 6.30086

54,591 - 47,612

7.94E+12 - 1.12E+13

5.5

6.30957 - 7.23436

47,546 - 41,468

1.12E+13 - 1.58E+13

5.6

7.24436 - 8.30615

41,411 - 36,117

1.58E+13 - 2.23E+13

5.7

8.31764 - 9.53674

36,067 - 31,457

2.24E+13 - 3.15E+13

5.8

9.54993 - 10.9496

31,413 - 27,398

3.16E+13 - 4.45E+13

5.9

10.9648 - 12.5719

27,360 - 23,862

4.47E+13 - 6.29E+13

6

12.5893 - 14.4344

23,829 - 20,783

6.31E+13 - 8.88E+13

6.1

14.4544 - 16.573

20,754 - 18,101

8.91E+13 - 1.25E+14

6.2

16.5959 - 19.0283

18,076 - 15,766

1.26E+14 - 1.77E+14

6.3

19.0546 - 21.8474

15,744 - 13,731

1.78E+14 - 2.50E+14

6.4

21.8776 - 25.0842

13,712 - 11,959

2.51E+14 - 3.54E+14

6.5

25.1189 - 28.8005

11,943 - 10,416

3.55E+14 - 4.99E+14

6.6

28.8403 - 33.0674

10,402 - 9072

5.01E+14 - 7.06E+14

6.7

33.1131 - 37.9665

9059 - 7901

7.08E+14 - 9.97E+14

6.8

38.0189 - 43.5913

7890 - 6882

1.00E+15 - 1.41E+15

6.9

43.6516 - 50.0495

6872 - 5994

1.41E+15 - 1.99E+15

7

50.1187 - 57.4645

5985 - 5220

2.00E+15 - 2.81E+15

7.1

57.544 - 65.9781

5213 - 4547

2.82E+15 - 3.97E+15

7.2

66.0693 - 75.753

4540 - 3960

3.98E+15 - 5.60E+15

7.3

75.8578 - 86.9761

3954 - 3449

5.62E+15 - 7.92E+15

7.4

87.0964 - 99.8619

3444 - 3004

7.94E+15 - 1.12E+16

7.5

100 - 114.657

3000 - 2616

1.12E+16 - 1.58E+16

7.6

114.815 - 131.644

2612 - 2278

1.58E+16 - 2.23E+16

7.7

131.826 - 151.147

2275 - 1984

2.24E+16 - 3.15E+16

7.8

151.356 - 173.54

1982 - 1728

3.16E+16 - 4.45E+16

7.9

173.78 - 199.251

1726 - 1505

4.47E+16 - 6.29E+16

8

199.526 - 228.77

1503 - 1311

6.31E+16 - 8.88E+16

8.1

229.087 - 262.664

1309 - 1142

8.91E+16 - 1.25E+17

8.2

263.027 - 301.578

1140 - 994

1.26E+17 - 1.77E+17

8.3

301.995 - 346.258

993 - 866

1.78E+17 - 2.50E+17

8.4

346.737 - 397.558

865 - 754

2.51E+17 - 3.54E+17

8.5

398.107 - 456.457

753 - 657

3.55E+17 - 4.99E+17

8.6

457.088 - 524.083

656 - 572

5.01E+17 - 7.06E+17

8.7

524.807 - 601.728

571 - 498

7.08E+17 - 9.97E+17

8.8

602.56 - 690.876

497 - 434

1.00E+18 - 1.41E+18

8.9

691.831 - 793.232

433 - 377

1.41E+18 - 1.99E+18

9

794.328 - 910.752

377 - 329

2.00E+18 - 2.81E+18

Table 2. The diapasons of rupture lengths, EMR frequencies and energies at a fixed magnitude Mw.

Mw

l (km)

Frequency (Hz)

Energy E (joule)

5

2.60679 - 3.03773

115,083 - 98,757

2.75E+12 - 3.82E+12

5.1

3.04243 - 3.54539

98,605 - 84,616

3.84E+12 - 5.33E+12

5.2

3.55087 - 4.13788

84,486 - 72,500

5.35E+12 - 7.42E+12

5.3

4.14428 - 4.82939

72,388 - 62,119

7.45E+12 - 1.03E+13

5.4

4.83686 - 5.63646

62,023 - 53,224

1.04E+13 - 1.44E+13

5.5

5.64518 - 6.57840

53,142 - 45,603

1.45E+13 - 2.01E+13

5.6

6.58858 - 7.67776

45,533 - 39,073

2.01E+13 - 2.80E+13

5.7

7.68964 - 8.96084

39,013 - 33,479

2.81E+13 - 3.90E+13

5.8

8.97470 - 10.45835

33,427 - 28,685

3.91E+13 - 5.43E+13

5.9

10.4745 - 12.20611

28,640 - 24,577

5.45E+13 - 7.56E+13

6

12.22498 - 14.24595

24,539 - 21,058

7.59E+13 - 1.05E+14

6.1

14.26798 - 16.62667

21,026 - 18,043

1.06E+14 - 1.47E+14

6.2

16.65239 - 19.40526

18,015 - 15,459

1.47E+14 - 2.04E+14

6.3

19.43527 - 22.64819

15,435 - 13,246

2.05E+14 - 2.85E+14

6.4

22.68322 - 26.43307

13,225 - 11,349

2.86E+14 - 3.97E+14

6.5

26.47395 - 30.85047

11,331 - 9724

3.98E+14 - 5.53E+14

6.6

30.89818 - 36.00608

9709 - 8331

5.55E+14 - 7.70E+14

6.7

36.06177 - 42.02328

8319 - 7138

7.73E+14 - 1.07E+15

6.8

42.08827 - 49.04605

7127 - 6116

1.08E+15 - 1.49E+15

6.9

49.1219 - 57.24244

6107 - 5240

1.50E+15 - 2.08E+15

7

57.33097 - 66.80858

5232 - 4490

2.09E+15 - 2.90E+15

7.1

66.9119 - 77.97337

4483 - 3847

2.91E+15 - 4.04E+15

7.2

78.09396 - 91.00398

3841 - 3296

4.06E+15 - 5.63E+15

7.3

91.14473 - 106.2122

3291 - 2824

5.65E+15 - 7.84E+15

7.4

106.3765 - 123.962

2820 - 2420

7.87E+15 - 1.09E+16

7.5

124.1537 - 144.6781

2416 - 2073

1.10E+16 - 1.52E+16

7.6

144.9018 - 168.8561

2070 - 1776

1.53E+16 - 2.12E+16

7.7

169.1173 - 197.0747

1773 - 1522

2.13E+16 - 2.96E+16

7.8

197.3795 - 230.0091

1519 - 1304

2.96E+16 - 4.12E+16

7.9

230.3648 - 268.4473

1302 - 1117

4.13E+16 - 5.74E+16

8

268.8625 - 313.3092

1115 - 957

5.75E+16 - 7.99E+16

8.1

313.7938 - 365.6682

956 - 820

8.02E+16 - 1.11E+17

8.2

366.2338 - 426.7773

819 - 702

1.12E+17 - 1.55E+17

8.3

427.4374 - 498.0987

701 - 602

1.56E+17 - 2.16E+17

8.4

498.8691 - 581.3391

601 - 516

2.17E+17 - 3.01E+17

8.5

582.2382 - 678.4903

515 - 442

3.02E+17 - 4.19E+17

8.6

679.5396 - 791.877

441 - 378

4.21E+17 - 5.84E+17

8.7

793.1017 - 924.2124

378 - 324

5.86E+17 - 8.14E+17

8.8

925.6418 - 1078.663

324 - 278

8.17E+17 - 1.13E+18

8.9

1080.332 - 1258.925

277 - 238

1.14E+18 - 1.58E+18

9

1260.872 - 1469.312

237 - 204

1.58E+18 - 2.20E+18

The fact is that, based on studies of VLF/LF electromagnetic radiation that existed before the earthquake, it was established that to each value of Ms and Mw magnitudes, measured with an accuracy of one tenth, corresponds a certain diapason of rupture length and a certain diapason of earthquake energy.

To overcome this difficulty, we set ourselves the task: with what accuracy should the magnitude of a future earthquake be measured so that one specific magnitude value corresponds to one specific rupture length value and one specific earthquake energy value?

This paper proposes a method to determine the rupture length (i.e., magnitude) of a future earthquake with higher accuracy, and thus provides a completely different way to solve the problem of accurately determining earthquake energy.

In particular, it is proposed to measure the frequency of VLF/LF electromagnetic radiation before an earthquake to within 0.1 Hz, which will make it possible to estimate the earthquake’s magnitude to within 0.001. In turn, a specific, unique magnitude value, measured to within 0.001, corresponds to a unique rupture length value, measured to a precision of one meter, and determines a unique, specific value for the earthquake energy.

As an example, the results of calculations for earthquakes 7.4 ≤ M ≤ 7.499 in Table 3 and Table 4 are given. This order of columns in the tables is conditioned by the nature of the set task at hand.

When monitoring the earthquake preparation process, the frequency of the VLF/LF electromagnetic emissions needs to be measured to within 0.1, which ensures the uniqueness of all other parameters.

Table 3 and Table 4 present data on the frequency of electromagnetic radiation (measured with an accuracy of 0.1 Hz), the length of the rupture with an accuracy of one meter, and the energy (measured in joules) for cases of earthquakes of (Ms and Mw) 7.4 ≤ M ≤ 7.499. Magnitude measured with an accuracy of 0.001.

Table 3. The rupture lengths, EMR frequencies and energies at a fixed magnitude MS.

MS

Length (km)

Frequency (Hz)

Energy (joule)

7.4

87.096

3444.5

7.943E+15

7.401

87.217

3439.7

7.971E+15

7.402

87.337

3435.0

7.998E+15

7.403

87.458

3430.2

8.026E+15

7.404

87.579

3425.5

8.054E+15

7.405

87.7

3420.7

8.082E+15

7.406

87.821

3416.0

8.110E+15

7.407

87.943

3411.3

8.138E+15

7.408

88.064

3406.6

8.166E+15

7.409

88.186

3401.9

8.194E+15

7.41

88.308

3397.2

8.222E+15

7.411

88.43

3392.5

8.251E+15

7.412

88.552

3387.8

8.279E+15

7.413

88.675

3383.2

8.308E+15

7.414

88.797

3378.5

8.337E+15

7.415

88.92

3373.8

8.366E+15

7.416

89.043

3369.2

8.395E+15

7.417

89.166

3364.5

8.424E+15

7.418

89.289

3359.9

8.453E+15

7.419

89.413

3355.2

8.482E+15

7.42

89.536

3350.6

8.511E+15

7.421

89.66

3346.0

8.541E+15

7.422

89.784

3341.3

8.570E+15

7.423

89.908

3336.7

8.600E+15

7.424

90.033

3332.1

8.630E+15

7.425

90.157

3327.5

8.660E+15

7.426

90.282

3322.9

8.690E+15

7.427

90.407

3318.3

8.720E+15

7.428

90.532

3313.8

8.750E+15

7.429

90.657

3309.2

8.780E+15

7.43

90.782

3304.6

8.810E+15

7.431

90.908

3300.1

8.841E+15

7.432

91.033

3295.5

8.872E+15

7.433

91.159

3290.9

8.902E+15

7.434

91.285

3286.4

8.933E+15

7.435

91.411

3281.9

8.964E+15

7.436

91.538

3277.3

8.995E+15

7.437

91.664

3272.8

9.026E+15

7.438

91.791

3268.3

9.057E+15

7.439

91.918

3263.8

9.089E+15

7.44

92.045

3259.3

9.120E+15

7.441

92.172

3254.8

9.152E+15

7.442

92.3

3250.3

9.183E+15

7.443

92.427

3245.8

9.215E+15

7.444

92.555

3241.3

9.247E+15

7.445

92.683

3236.8

9.279E+15

7.446

92.811

3232.4

9.311E+15

7.447

92.939

3227.9

9.343E+15

7.448

93.068

3223.5

9.376E+15

7.449

93.197

3219.0

9.408E+15

7.45

93.325

3214.6

9.441E+15

7.451

93.454

3210.1

9.473E+15

7.452

93.584

3205.7

9.506E+15

7.453

93.713

3201.3

9.539E+15

7.454

93.843

3196.8

9.572E+15

7.455

93.972

3192.4

9.605E+15

7.456

94.102

3188.0

9.638E+15

7.457

94.232

3183.6

9.672E+15

7.458

94.363

3179.2

9.705E+15

7.459

94.493

3174.8

9.739E+15

7.46

94.624

3170.5

9.772E+15

7.461

94.755

3166.1

9.806E+15

7.462

94.886

3161.7

9.840E+15

7.463

95.017

3157.3

9.874E+15

7.464

95.148

3153.0

9.908E+15

7.465

95.28

3148.6

9.943E+15

7.466

95.411

3144.3

9.977E+15

7.467

95.543

3139.9

1.001E+16

7.468

95.675

3135.6

1.005E+16

7.469

95.808

3131.3

1.008E+16

7.47

95.94

3127.0

1.012E+16

7.471

96.073

3122.6

1.015E+16

7.472

96.206

3118.3

1.019E+16

7.473

96.339

3114.0

1.022E+16

7.474

96.472

3109.7

1.026E+16

7.475

96.605

3105.4

1.029E+16

7.476

96.739

3101.1

1.033E+16

7.477

96.872

3096.9

1.036E+16

7.478

97.006

3092.6

1.040E+16

7.479

97.14

3088.3

1.044E+16

7.48

97.275

3084.0

1.047E+16

7.481

97.409

3079.8

1.051E+16

7.482

97.544

3075.5

1.054E+16

7.483

97.679

3071.3

1.058E+16

7.484

97.814

3067.1

1.062E+16

7.485

97.949

3062.8

1.065E+16

7.486

98.084

3058.6

1.069E+16

7.487

98.22

3054.4

1.073E+16

7.488

98.356

3050.2

1.076E+16

7.489

98.492

3045.9

1.080E+16

7.49

98.628

3041.7

1.084E+16

7.491

98.764

3037.5

1.088E+16

7.492

98.901

3033.3

1.091E+16

7.493

99.038

3029.2

1.095E+16

7.494

99.174

3025.0

1.099E+16

7.495

99.312

3020.8

1.103E+16

7.496

99.449

3016.6

1.107E+16

7.497

99.586

3012.5

1.110E+16

7.498

99.724

3008.3

1.114E+16

7.499

99.862

3004.1

1.118E+16

Table 4. The rupture lengths, EMR frequencies and energies at a fixed magnitude Mw.

Mw

Length (km)

Frequency (Hz)

Energy (joule)

7.4

106.376

2820.2

7.870E+15

7.401

106.541

2815.8

7.897E+15

7.402

106.706

2811.5

7.923E+15

7.403

106.871

2807.1

7.949E+15

7.404

107.036

2802.8

7.976E+15

7.405

107.202

2798.5

8.002E+15

7.406

107.367

2794.1

8.029E+15

7.407

107.533

2789.8

8.055E+15

7.408

107.7

2785.5

8.082E+15

7.409

107.866

2781.2

8.109E+15

7.41

108.033

2776.9

8.136E+15

7.411

108.2

2772.6

8.163E+15

7.412

108.368

2768.4

8.190E+15

7.413

108.535

2764.1

8.217E+15

7.414

108.703

2759.8

8.244E+15

7.415

108.871

2755.6

8.272E+15

7.416

109.04

2751.3

8.299E+15

7.417

109.208

2747.0

8.327E+15

7.418

109.377

2742.8

8.354E+15

7.419

109.546

2738.6

8.382E+15

7.42

109.716

2734.3

8.410E+15

7.421

109.885

2730.1

8.438E+15

7.422

110.055

2725.9

8.466E+15

7.423

110.225

2721.7

8.494E+15

7.424

110.396

2717.5

8.522E+15

7.425

110.567

2713.3

8.551E+15

7.426

110.738

2709.1

8.579E+15

7.427

110.909

2704.9

8.608E+15

7.428

111.08

2700.7

8.636E+15

7.429

111.252

2696.6

8.665E+15

7.43

111.424

2692.4

8.694E+15

7.431

111.597

2688.3

8.722E+15

7.432

111.769

2684.1

8.751E+15

7.433

111.942

2680.0

8.781E+15

7.434

112.115

2675.8

8.810E+15

7.435

112.289

2671.7

8.839E+15

7.436

112.462

2667.6

8.868E+15

7.437

112.636

2663.4

8.898E+15

7.438

112.81

2659.3

8.927E+15

7.439

112.985

2655.2

8.957E+15

7.44

113.16

2651.1

8.987E+15

7.441

113.335

2647.0

9.017E+15

7.442

113.51

2642.9

9.046E+15

7.443

113.685

2638.9

9.077E+15

7.444

113.861

2634.8

9.107E+15

7.445

114.037

2630.7

9.137E+15

7.446

114.214

2626.7

9.167E+15

7.447

114.39

2622.6

9.198E+15

7.448

114.567

2618.5

9.228E+15

7.449

114.744

2614.5

9.259E+15

7.45

114.922

2610.5

9.290E+15

7.451

115.1

2606.4

9.321E+15

7.452

115.278

2602.4

9.351E+15

7.453

115.456

2598.4

9.383E+15

7.454

115.634

2594.4

9.414E+15

7.455

115.813

2590.4

9.445E+15

7.456

115.992

2586.4

9.476E+15

7.457

116.172

2582.4

9.508E+15

7.458

116.351

2578.4

9.539E+15

7.459

116.531

2574.4

9.571E+15

7.46

116.712

2570.4

9.603E+15

7.461

116.892

2566.5

9.635E+15

7.462

117.073

2562.5

9.667E+15

7.463

117.254

2558.5

9.699E+15

7.464

117.435

2554.6

9.731E+15

7.465

117.617

2550.7

9.763E+15

7.466

117.799

2546.7

9.796E+15

7.467

117.981

2542.8

9.828E+15

7.468

118.163

2538.9

9.861E+15

7.469

118.346

2534.9

9.894E+15

7.47

118.529

2531.0

9.927E+15

7.471

118.713

2527.1

9.960E+15

7.472

118.896

2523.2

9.993E+15

7.473

119.08

2519.3

1.003E+16

7.474

119.264

2515.4

1.006E+16

7.475

119.449

2511.5

1.009E+16

7.476

119.633

2507.7

1.013E+16

7.477

119.818

2503.8

1.016E+16

7.478

120.004

2499.9

1.019E+16

7.479

120.189

2496.1

1.023E+16

7.48

120.375

2492.2

1.026E+16

7.481

120.561

2488.4

1.030E+16

7.482

120.748

2484.5

1.033E+16

7.483

120.935

2480.7

1.036E+16

7.484

121.122

2476.9

1.040E+16

7.485

121.309

2473.0

1.043E+16

7.486

121.496

2469.2

1.047E+16

7.487

121.684

2465.4

1.050E+16

7.488

121.873

2461.6

1.054E+16

7.489

122.061

2457.8

1.057E+16

7.49

122.25

2454.0

1.061E+16

7.491

122.439

2450.2

1.064E+16

7.492

122.628

2446.4

1.068E+16

7.493

122.818

2442.6

1.071E+16

7.494

123.008

2438.9

1.075E+16

7.495

123.198

2435.1

1.078E+16

7.496

123.389

2431.3

1.082E+16

7.497

123.579

2427.6

1.086E+16

7.498

123.771

2423.8

1.089E+16

7.499

123.962

2420.1

1.093E+16

From Table 3 and Table 4, it is clear that one value of the frequency of electromagnetic radiation corresponds to only one value of the magnitude, length of the rupture, and energy of the earthquake.

We have conducted similar calculations for earthquakes of magnitude 1 ≤ M ≤ 9, but due to the large volume of data, we could not include the corresponding tables in the article.

The proposed method will allow for the accurate solution of some fundamental problems of seismology in the future.

As we noted above, in our model, the seismogenic area is considered to be an oscillatory-distributed system, which is characterized by the following features:

1) The segment of earth crust, where the incoming earthquake focus is to be formed from the very starting moment of earthquake preparation, belongs to the system, which suffers specific type oscillations: the process of energy accumulation is in progress in the system. But as a result of foreshocks, the main shock, and aftershocks, the accumulated energy is released. Taking this into account, this system is an oscillatory system [24].

2) In the seismogenic area, the mass, elasticity (mechanical systems), capacity, and inductance (electric systems) elements are uniformly and uninterruptedly spread in the whole volume of the system.

In addition, due to piezoelectric, piezomagnetic, electrochemical, and other effects, every tiny element in the earthquake preparation zone has its capacitance and inductance. Therefore, seismogenic zone can be considered a distributed system simultaneously. The relationship between the arrangement of elements (or groups of elements) plays a significant role in terms of the functioning of the system, since this system is constantly subject to tectonic stress, which changes the physical and chemical properties of the environment.

As a rule, in distributed systems, it is impossible to isolate a single point, since each channel for the passage of energy is considered as a pair of poles (connection points) [24], and therefore, the radiation frequency in the system will change in accordance with changes in the lengths of the combined fractures involved in the process of fault formation. This means that during the processes of closing and opening of cracks of different sizes in the focal zone and their ordering in a certain direction, which ultimately leads to the formation of the main fault, the emitted frequency in the system accurately reflects the change in the smallest distances between the pair of poles (connection points), which is also accurately reflected in the magnitude value.

The need for increased accuracy was clearly demonstrated by the example of an actual earthquake. In particular, in the case of hourly earthquake monitoring, it has become not only possible but also necessary to calculate changes in the length of a fault at the focus with an accuracy of up to a meter in the period preceding an earthquake [11].

As mentioned above, the ultimate formation of the fracture length occurs by the rupture of a cofferdam between major fractures.

The analysis of the Crete (25.05.2016, M = 5.6) earthquake convinced us that the final formation of the fault length does indeed occur in accordance with the classical geological model. Before the first destruction of the cofferdams (16:00, 24 May), the length of the fault was 7828 meters. At the moment of the first destruction of the cofferdam, the length of the rupture became 7.5 km. That is, the length of the fault at the focus decreased by 328 m. It happened 16 hours before the earthquake. The process of the first destruction was expressed in the EM radiation in the form of an anomaly. The second destruction of another cofferdam occurred at 22:00 (24 May), which again was recorded by an electromagnetic radiation anomaly. As a result, the length of the rupture became 7.496 km. This time, the length of the fault decreased by 4 m. The earthquake occurred 16 hours and 36 minutes after the first anomaly and 10 hours and 36 minutes after the second, with the fault length decreasing by 21 m.

The above indicates that for a complete consideration of the complex geological process of earthquake preparation and occurrence, it is desirable to measure the fault length with an accuracy of meters by the formula (1).

Research on the Crete earthquake indicates that, on the scale of kilometers, rupture occurring at the earthquake focus is sensitive to the destruction on the scale of meters of cofferdams [11].

Studies also confirm that during the nucleation stage, high-frequency FEMR (Fracture-Induced Electromagnetic Radiation) pulses in the MHz range appear as microcracks form. As the system transitions into the stick-slip phase, the frequency decreases to the kHz range [25] [26]. Since the MHz range in the main corresponds to meter-scale ruptures, we believe they should be influenced by the destruction of centimeter-scale cofferdams.

Based on this view, it is better if the unified magnitude scale is divided into three subscales, depending on the accuracy of measuring the rupture length, where earthquakes are classified by magnitude as follows:

1) 1 ≤ Ms ≤ 3.909; 2) 3.91 ≤ Ms ≤ 8.909 and 3) 8.91 ≤ Ms ≤ 9

Furthermore, it should be noted that, as previously mentioned, electromagnetic radiation in the MHz range is observed even during the period preceding an earthquake [16].

It is possible that, from a geological perspective, determining the length of the rupture in centimeters may not be of great importance; however, it is important for initial monitoring of the length of the rupture at the focus of an earthquake, even in the case of a strong earthquake, as well as for underground engineering applications. Thus, when determining length with such high precision using formulas (1), (2), and (3) for a specific electromagnetic radiation frequency, we obtain a precise and unique value for the magnitude and, consequently, a precise and unique value for the energy of the earthquake, which is of great importance in seismology.

2.3. Advantages and Potential Difficulties of EM Emissions That Existed before Earthquakes

As is known, for decades, theoretical, laboratory, and observational studies have been conducted on the EM radiation that occurs before an earthquake, which has revealed the advantages of this field compared to other geophysical field anomalies related to earthquakes:

1) Scientists note that electromagnetic radiation before an earthquake, at very large distances from the earthquake’s epicenter, can be observed [27]-[30]. For example, at the time of the earthquake in Crete, between the electromagnetic radiation receiver and the epicenter of the earthquake, the distance was approximately 200 km [31].

2) Scientific studies confirm that pre-earthquake electromagnetic emissions are observed considerably long before the earthquake [14] [16] [30] [32] [33].

3) Our theoretical and retrospective material studies have revealed a key and decisive advantage in this field: electromagnetic radiation in the range 23,830 kHz ≥ f ≥ 0.378 kHz is responsible for earthquakes with magnitude 1 ≤ M ≤ 9.

4) Formula (1) is valid for earthquakes of any magnitude and can be applicable in all seismically active countries and regions, because, as it was mentioned above, in a system where earthquakes are being prepared (distributed system), it is impossible to isolate a single point, since each channel for the passage of energy is considered as a pair of poles (connection points) [24]. Therefore, the radiation frequency in the system will change in accordance with changes in the lengths of the combined fractures involved in the process of fault formation. This means that during the processes of closing and opening of cracks of different sizes in the focal zone and their ordering in a certain direction, which ultimately leads to the formation of the main fault, the emitted frequency in the system accurately reflects the change in the smallest distances between the pair of poles (connection points), which is also accurately reflected in the magnitude value.

Thus, the problems associated with the precise measurement of the magnitude of earthquakes of varying strengths, as well as the limitations of the applicability of the magnitude estimation formulas existing only for one region (country), are possible to be solved.

5) Based on the above, it is clear that the high accuracy of measuring the frequency of VLF/LF emissions (0.1 Hz) that existed before an earthquake allows, based on formula (1), to determine with very high (meter or centimeter) accuracy the length of the rupture occurring in the earthquake’s focus and, consequently, allows measure the magnitude of an earthquake to within 0.001 for any region. This, in turn, in any region allows us to accurately estimate the energy of earthquakes, which is of crucial importance in modern seismology.

From the above, it is clear that the formula created by famous seismologists for any country or region, which links the length of the fault at the focus of an earthquake to the magnitude of the earthquake, is completely acceptable. It is also worth noting that the characteristic parameters of a future earthquake can be determined with such precision in advance, before it occurs.

6) Calculations for magnitudes Ms and Mw, based on the frequency of VLF/LF emissions that existed before the earthquake, accurately reflect the entire spectrum of earthquake magnitudes, from small to medium and large.

7) It is worth emphasizing that the VLF/LF electromagnetic radiation that existed before an earthquake always appears from the moment when the avalanche-like unstable process begins, and therefore, monitoring the frequency of this field and, hence, all other parameters becomes possible precisely from this moment on. This means that the length of the main fault of an incoming earthquake (i.e., magnitude), several tens of days before the earthquake, can be determined.

8) Seismology currently lacks a reliable criterion for distinguishing strong foreshocks from the main shock. This question can be answered with a fairly high degree of accuracy using a theoretical model [10]: if a trend toward decreasing electromagnetic radiation is observed after any tremor, this indicates that fault formation at the earthquake’s epicenter has not yet been completed, and the main shock should be expected. The situation is reversed with aftershocks.

9) Due to the determination in advance of fault length and magnitude with high accuracy, it also becomes possible to calculate in advance with high accuracy: the surface rupture length, downdip rupture width, rupture area, maximum and average displacement per event, the average subsurface displacement on the fault plane, seismic moment, and others [19].

10) Although the paper proposes a completely new parameter (VLF/LF electromagnetic radiation that existed before the earthquake) to determine the length of the rupture formed at the earthquake focus, it should be emphasized that this study does not take into account errors in formulas (2)-(5), which may be insignificant, but when monitoring real earthquakes can still appear. Therefore, from our point of view, it is desirable to specify the real errors when using formulas (2)-(5).

3. Conclusions

To obtain specific and unique values of earthquake characteristic magnitudes, the article proposes a completely new parameter, the frequency of the earthquake’s prognostic precursor, i.e., the frequency of the VLF/LF electromagnetic emissions that existed before the earthquake, and calculations based on it. This allows us:

1) During the monitoring of the earthquake preparation process, the frequency of VLF/LF electromagnetic radiation has to be measured within 0.1 Hz.

2) Based on the frequency of VLF/LF electromagnetic radiation, the length of the rupture occurring in the earthquake focus in advance, before the onset of an earthquake, has to be precisely determined with high accuracy (km, m, cm).

3) Based on the rupture length, the magnitude of a future earthquake has to be determined to within 0.001.

4) According to the one-thousandth magnitude, the energy of the upcoming earthquake should be measured (in joules).

5) Such precision measuring of these parameters was chosen because, in that case, one concrete, unique value of the fault length corresponds to a concrete, unique value of the magnitude and energy of the earthquake.

6) The magnitude, fault length, and earthquake energy with high precision early detection, it becomes possible to resolve various geophysical and engineering problems in advance, including those related to seismic hazard.

We propose that various international agencies, such as the ISC, NEIC, and GCMT, consider adopting the method we have presented for measuring magnitude with a precision of one-thousandth, which is completely different from existing magnitude measurement methods.

It is based on a high-precision numerical estimate of the rupture length at the earthquake source, which, in turn, is determined from the frequency of electromagnetic emissions in the VLF/LF ranges observed before the earthquake. Measuring the magnitude with a precision of one-thousandth ensures the uniqueness of the earthquake’s corresponding energy.

Acknowledgements

The authors are grateful to the network INFREP for providing us with the MHz and kHz fractal-electromagnetic emissions data used in this paper.

Author Contributions

M.K. and N.K.-M.: conceptualization, methodology, formal analysis, investigation, writing—original draft preparation, and writing—editing. B.K.: conversion of electromagnetic radiation amplitude data recorded by the INFREP network into frequency values based on the Gaussian normal distribution, data curation. G.R. and V.K.: visualization and writing—review and editing.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest regarding the publication of this paper.

References

[1] Gokhberg, M.B., Morgounov, V.A., Yoshino, T. and Tomizawa, I. (1982) Experimental Measurement of Electromagnetic Emissions Possibly Related to Earthquakes in Japan. Journal of Geophysical Research: Solid Earth, 87, 7824-7828.[CrossRef]
[2] Uyeda, S., Nagao, T., Orihara, Y., Yamaguchi, T. and Takahashi, I. (2000) Geoelectric Potential Changes: Possible Precursors to Earthquakes in Japan. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 97, 4561-4566.[CrossRef] [PubMed]
[3] Hayakawa, M., Hobara, Y., Rozhnoi, A., Solovieva, M., Ohta, K., Izutsu, J., et al. (2013) The Ionospheric Precursor to the 2011 March 11 Earthquake as Based on the Japan-Pacific Subionospheric VLF/LF Network Observation. Telecommunications and Radio Engineering, 71, 1687-1706.[CrossRef]
[4] Biagi, P.F., Castellana, L., Maggipinto, T., Loiacono, D., Schiavulli, L., Ligonzo, T., et al. (2009) A Pre Seismic Radio Anomaly Revealed in the Area Where the Abruzzo Earthquake (M = 6.3) Occurred on 6 April 2009. Natural Hazards and Earth System Sciences, 9, 1551-1556.[CrossRef]
[5] Pulinets, S. and Ouzounov, D. (2011) Lithosphere-Atmosphere-Ionosphere Coupling (LAIC) Model—An Unified Concept for Earthquake Precursors Validation. Journal of Asian Earth Sciences, 41, 371-382.[CrossRef]
[6] Varotsos, P.A., Sarlis, N.V., Skordas, E.S., Tanaka, H.K. and Lazaridou, M.S. (2006) Entropy of Seismic Electric Signals: Analysis in Natural Time under Time Reversal. Physical Review E, 73, Article ID: 031114.[CrossRef] [PubMed]
[7] Parrot Michel (2004-2010) Principal Investigator of Demeter (Detection of Electromagnetic Emissions Transmitted from Earthquake Regions) The Scientific Mission.
https://cnes.fr/en/projects/demeter
[8] Ouzounov, D., Bryant, N., Logan, T., Pulinets, S. and Taylor, P. (2006) Satellite Thermal IR Phenomena Associated with Some of the Major Earthquakes in 1999-2003. Physics and Chemistry of the Earth, Parts A/B/C, 31, 154-163.[CrossRef]
[9] Contadakis, M.E., Arabelos, D.N., Vergos, G.S. and Scordilis, E.M. (2019) Lower Ionospheric Turbulence Variations during the Intense Tectonic Activity of October, 2018 at Zakynthos Area, Greece. Open Journal of Earthquake Research, 8, 255-266.[CrossRef]
[10] Kachakhidze, M.K., Kachakhidze, N.K. and Kaladze, T.D. (2015) A Model of the Generation of Electromagnetic Emissions Detected Prior to Earthquakes. Physics and Chemistry of the Earth, Parts A/B/C, 85, 78-81.[CrossRef]
[11] Kachakhidze, M., Kachakhidze-Murphy, N., Ramishvili, G. and Khvitia, B. (2024) Earthquakes Three-Stage Early Warning and Short-Term Prediction. Prevention and Treatment of Natural Disasters, 3, 84-94.[CrossRef]
[12] Mjachkin, V.I., Brace, W.F., Sobolev, G.A. and Dieterich, J.H. (1975) Two Models for Earthquake Forerunners. In: Wyss, M., Ed., Earthquake Prediction and Rock Mechanics, Birkhäuser Basel, 169-181.[CrossRef]
[13] Geller, R.J., Jackson, D.D., Kagan, Y.Y. and Mulargia, F. (1997) Earthquakes Cannot Be Predicted. Science, 275, 1616-1616.[CrossRef]
[14] Biagi, P.F., Magippinto, T., Schiavulli, L., Ligonzo, T. and Ermini, A. (2013) European Network for Collecting VLF/LF Radio Signals (D5.1a). DPC-INGV-S3 Project. Short Term Earthquake Prediction and Preparation.
https://www.scirp.org/reference/referencespapers?referenceid=2620226
[15] Kachakhidze, M., Kachakhidze-Murphy, N.K., Kukhianidze, V., Ramishvili, G. and Khvitia, B. (2024) For the Classification of Anomalous Geophysical Fields That Existed Prior to an Earthquake. Prevention and Treatment of Natural Disasters, 3, 1-16.[CrossRef]
[16] Eftaxias, K., Athanasopoulou, L., Balasis, G., Kalimeri, M., Nikolopoulos, S., Contoyiannis, Y., et al. (2009) Unfolding the Procedure of Characterizing Recorded Ultra Low Frequency, kHz and MHz Electromagetic Anomalies Prior to the L’aquila Earthquake as Pre-Seismic Ones—Part 1. Natural Hazards and Earth System Sciences, 9, 1953-1971.[CrossRef]
[17] Kachakhidze, M., Kachakhidze-Murphy, N., Khvitia, B. and Ramishvili, G. (2019) Large Earthquake Prediction Methods. Open Journal of Earthquake Research, 8, 239-254.[CrossRef]
[18] Ulomov, V.I. (1999) Seismic Hazard of Northern Eurasia. Annals of Geophysics, 42, 1023-1038.[CrossRef]
[19] Wells, D.L. and Coppersmith, K.J. (1994) New Empirical Relationships among Magnitude, Rupture Length, Rupture Width, Rupture Area, and Surface Displacement. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 84, 974-1002.[CrossRef]
[20] Kachakhidze, M. and Kachakhidze-Murphy, N. (2022) VLF/LF Electromagnetic Emissions Predict an Earthquake. Open Journal of Earthquake Research, 11, 31-43.[CrossRef]
[21] Richter, C.F. (1935) An Instrumental Earthquake Magnitude Scale. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 25, 1-32.[CrossRef]
[22] Peña Castro, A.F., Schmandt, B., Glasgow, M., Jamalreyhani, M., Wang, R. and Cochran, E. (2026) Small Earthquake Moment Magnitude and Implications for Frequency-Magnitude Scaling of Injection Induced Earthquakes of the Raton Basin. Seismica, 5, 1-20.[CrossRef]
[23] Das, R. and Das, A. (2026) Limitations of Mw and M Scales: Compelling Evidence Advocating for the Das Magnitude Scale (Mwg)—A Critical Review and Analysis. Indian Geotechnical Journal, 56, 979-997.[CrossRef]
[24] Migulin, V.V., Medvedev, V.I., Mustel, E.P. and Parigin, V.N. (1978) Principles of Oscillation Theory. Nauka, 391. (In Russian)
[25] Rabinovitch, A., Frid, V. and Bahat, D. (2007) Surface Oscillations—A Possible Source of Fracture Induced Electromagnetic Radiation. Tectonophysics, 431, 15-21.[CrossRef]
[26] Rabinovitch, A., Frid, V. and Bahat, D. (2017) Directionality of Electromagnetic Radiation from Fractures. International Journal of Fracture, 204, 239-244.[CrossRef]
[27] Gokhberg, M.B., Gufeld, I.L., Rozhnoy, A.A., Marenko, V.F., Yampolsky, V.S. and Ponomarev, E.A. (1989) Study of Seismic Influence on the Ionosphere by Super Long-Wave Probing of the Earth-Ionosphere Waveguide. Physics of the Earth and Planetary Interiors, 57, 64-67.[CrossRef]
[28] Gufeld, I.L., Rozhnoi, A.A., Tyumensev, S.N., Sherstuk, S.V. and Yampolsky, V.S. (1992) Radiowave Disturbances in Period to Rudber and Rachinsk Earthquakes. Izvestiya, Physics of the Solid Earth, 28, 267-270.
[29] Hayakawa, M. (2007) VLF/LF Radio Sounding of Ionospheric Perturbations Associated with Earthquakes. Sensors, 7, 1141-1158.[CrossRef]
[30] Li, M., Yu, C., Zhang, Y., Zhao, H., Zhang, X., Li, W., et al. (2020) Electromagnetic Emissions Recorded by a Borehole TOA Installment before Four Huge Destructive MS ≥ 8.0 Earthquakes in Asia. Open Journal of Earthquake Research, 9, 50-68.[CrossRef]
[31] Kachakhidze, M., Kachakhidze-Murphy, N., Khazaradze, G. and Khvitia, B. (2021) An Earthquake Precursor Mobile Network. Earthquake Science, 34, 168-176.[CrossRef]
[32] Zhang, X. and Shen, X. (2011) Electromagnetic Anomalies around the Wenchuan Earthquake and Their Relationship with Earthquake Preparation. International Journal of Geophysics, 2011, 1-8.[CrossRef]
[33] Papadopoulos, G.A., Charalampakis, M., Fokaefs, A. and Minadakis, G. (2010) Strong Foreshock Signal Preceding the L’aquila (Italy) Earthquake (Mw6.3) of 6 April 2009. Natural Hazards and Earth System Sciences, 10, 19-24.[CrossRef]

Copyright © 2026 by authors and Scientific Research Publishing Inc.

Creative Commons License

This work and the related PDF file are licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.