A new study on the nonlinear interaction of the fluctuating planetary gravitational field with the lithosphere suggests that not only the directly acting gravitational forces are of influence, but mainly higher harmonics of the celestial bodies considered as oscillators on large scales [1]. In the meantime, resonances caused by fluctuating gravity can also be detected on small scales in the laboratory [2].
Earthquake Triggering Planetary Gravity Field Gravitational Field Fluctuations Harmonics1. Introduction
Gravity is a force that acts both on large scales, the planetary system, and on small scales, on the micro scale of atoms. The kinematics of the planets correspond to oscillators that have been stable and have been able to exert their effects over billions of years of evolution. The gravitational forces are weak and sensually only in the coupling of sun and moon in the tides directly noticeable. As in nonlinear optics, the special effects of the fluctuating gravitational field become visible only in the harmonics. A correlation function constructed to indicate the change in probabilities for stable (harmonic) and unstable (disharmonic) states is also applied to earthquake triggering.
Tidal stresses are very small, so there is still a lot of debate about whether they can trigger an earthquake at all. Several studies have found no correlation between tides and earthquake occurrence, e.g. Kennedy et al. [3]. Other studies report small positive correlations, e.g., Kasahara [4]. Some recent research by Metivier et al. suggests evidence that tidal-induced uplift may reduce the normal stresses that hold faults together [5].
Previous studies related to the triggering of earthquakes do not take into account the gravitational interactions of the planets, e.g. [6] [7] [8].
A correlation function (derivation of function see [1]) is a Fourier series expansion of a periodic process and can be optimized both in its order and in its frequencies for the respective problem. It has the function of a high pass filter (as shown in Figure 1).
This new research method was applied to an initial study of 41 of the strongest earthquakes between 1900 and 2000 and first published as a Lecture on the 10th conference on synergetics and complexity research: “Self Organization in Psychology, Psychiatry and Social Sciences” 6th-8th June 2002 conference centre Bildungszentrum Kloster Seeon (Bavaria, Germany) [9].
The result shows the density function (Figure 2).
Monte Carlo simulation was used to calculate the density function. 10,000 groups of 41 events each were randomly selected in the period from 1900 to the end of 2000.
Further research on the 41 earthquakes is in [1].
2. Other Groups of Earthquakes
Other groups of earthquakes were presented at various international congresses, including International Association for Mathematical Geology IAMG 2003 Portsmouth, UK; September 7-12, 2003 [10] and EGS-AGU-EUG; Joint Assembly Nice, France, April 25-30, 2004 [11].
The method was extended in 2021 by investigations of the whole period before and after an earthquake. An estimation of the suitability of this method as an element for earthquake forecasting was also carried out (585 earthquakes [12]).
If only the absolute value of the correlation function (proportional to the energy) is considered, the following course before and after the earthquake is obtained (Table 1 and Table 2).
3. Examination
Examination of the Sun, Moon, Jupiter, Saturn and IC alone shows that something like 6% of the 588 earthquakes may be triggered by these celestial bodies. These results refer to the superposition of all correlations.
Looking at this more closely, we can see that individual correlations produce a pattern that could lend itself as one element (among many others) to predicting earthquakes.
The correlation matrix Hi,j shows a specific pattern of probability for instability for the 588 earthquakes.
Time offsets for 588 earthquakes in the period 1996 to 2002. They are the correlations of the Sun, Moon and IC (Earth’s center)
Order 10 time-shift/ Probability So-Mo-IC
−6 h
−5 h
−4 h
−3 h
−2 h
−1 h
0 event
+1 h
+2 h
+3 h
+4 h
+5 h
+6 h
Energy Σ|Hi,j|
92.06
35.04
64.60
56.82
81.02
30.72
0.10
1.75
19.46
3.24
4.90
80.32
5.70
Time shift for 588 earthquakes in the period 1996 to 2002. These are the correlations of Jupiter, Saturn and IC (earth center)
Order 10 time-shift/ Probability Ju-Sa-IC
−6 h
−5 h
−4 h
−3 h
−2 h
−1 h
0 event
+1 h
+2 h
+3 h
+4 h
+5 h
+6 h
Energy Σ|Hi,j|
20.76
65.46
83.54
72.32
58.30
43.56
0.58
1.75
0.02
10.30
23.62
84.92
28.32
9 out of 55 elements of the matrix are significant with ≤5% p ≤ 0.05; probability of error: 0.0015.
4. Conclusion
The whole matrix is not significantly unstable. 85.8% of the 3000 control groups show more stability. However, 9 correlations show significant instability against no correlation shows significant stability. This pattern of instability, in conjunction with other elements of the correlation function Hi,j (e.g. 1st derivative of the function), may appear suitable to be incorporated as an element in an AI. However, further investigations are necessary for this purpose. The computer program can be downloaded here for free [13].
Conflicts of Interest
The author declares no conflicts of interest regarding the publication of this paper.
Cite this paper
Nitsche, M. (2022) The Nonlinear Influence of Large Celestial Bodies on Earthquakes—Short Commentary. Journal of High Energy Physics, Gravitation and Cosmology, 8, 1032-1036. https://doi.org/10.4236/jhepgc.2022.84073
ReferencesNitsche, M. (2022) Triggering Earthquakes Fluctuations of the Planetary Gravitational Field and Nonlinear Interactions with Matter. Earth & Environmental Science Research & Reviews, 5, 1-18. https://doi.org/10.33140/EESRR.05.01.08Brack, T., Zybach, B., Balabdaoui, F., et al. (2022) Dynamic Measurement of Gravitational Coupling between Resonating Beams in the Hertz Regime. Nature Physics, 18, 952-957. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41567-022-01642-8Kennedy, M., et al. (2004) Earthquakes and the Moon: Syzygy Predictions Fail the Test. Seismological Research Letters, 75, 607-612. https://doi.org/10.1785/gssrl.75.5.607Kasahara, J. (2002) Tides, Earthquakes, and Volcanoes. Science, 297, 348-349.https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1074601Metivier, L., et al. (2009) Evidence of Earthquake Triggering by the Solid Earth Tides. Earth and Planetary Science Letters, 278, 370-375.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.epsl.2008.12.024Vinayak, G. (2011) Kolvankar, Sun, Moon and Earthquakes. New Concepts in Global Tectonics Newsletter, No. 60.Cochran, E.S., et al. (2004) Earth Tides Can Trigger Shallow Thrust Fault Earthquakes. Science, 306, 1164-1166. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1103961Wilhelm, H. and Wenzel, H.-G. (1997) Tidal Phenomena. Springer, 1st Edition.Nitsche, M. (2002) Are the Stabilizing and Destabilizing Influences of the Planetary Gravitational Field on the Structural Formation of Biological Patterns Real? Lecture on the 10th Conference on Synergetics and Complexity Research: Self Organization in Psychology, Psychiatry and Social Sciences, 6th-8th June 2002, Bavaria. http://www.planetare-korrelation.eu/index_htm_files/seon-2002-e.pdfNitsche, M. (2003) The Non-Linear Interaction of the Planetary Gravitational Field On Earthquakes. Lecture on the International Association for Mathematical Geology, 7-12 September, 2003, Portsmouth.Nitsche, M. (2004) The Non-Linear Interaction of the Planetary Gravitational Field on Earthquakes. EGS-AGU-EUG, Nice, 25-30 April 2004.Nitsche M. ,et al. (2022). Fluctuations of the Planetary Gravitational Field and Nonlinear Interactions with Matter as an Element of Artificial Intelligence Journal of Robotics and Automation Research 3, 124-130.Nitsche, M. (2021) Microgravity—Fluctuations of the Planetary Gravitational Field and Nonlinear Interactions with Matter. http://www.planetare-korrelation.eu/index_htm_files/GRAV-book-manual.pdf