<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><!DOCTYPE article  PUBLIC "-//NLM//DTD Journal Publishing DTD v3.0 20080202//EN" "http://dtd.nlm.nih.gov/publishing/3.0/journalpublishing3.dtd"><article xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" dtd-version="3.0" xml:lang="en" article-type="research article"><front><journal-meta><journal-id journal-id-type="publisher-id">IJG</journal-id><journal-title-group><journal-title>International Journal of Geosciences</journal-title></journal-title-group><issn pub-type="epub">2156-8359</issn><publisher><publisher-name>Scientific Research Publishing</publisher-name></publisher></journal-meta><article-meta><article-id pub-id-type="doi">10.4236/ijg.2012.35109</article-id><article-id pub-id-type="publisher-id">IJG-24955</article-id><article-categories><subj-group subj-group-type="heading"><subject>Articles</subject></subj-group><subj-group subj-group-type="Discipline-v2"><subject>Earth&amp;Environmental Sciences</subject></subj-group></article-categories><title-group><article-title>
 
 
  Spatial Distribution of Seismicity: Relationships with Geomagnetic Z-Component in Geocentric Solar Magnetospheric Coordinate System
 
</article-title></title-group><contrib-group><contrib contrib-type="author" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>alina</surname><given-names>Khachikyan</given-names></name><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1"><sup>1</sup></xref><xref ref-type="corresp" rid="cor1"><sup>*</sup></xref></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Alexander</surname><given-names>Inchin</given-names></name><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff2"><sup>2</sup></xref></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Atatoly</surname><given-names>Lozbin</given-names></name><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff2"><sup>2</sup></xref></contrib></contrib-group><aff id="aff1"><addr-line>Institute of Seismology, Almaty, Kazakhstan</addr-line></aff><aff id="aff2"><addr-line>Institute of Space Techniques and Technologies, Almaty, Kazakhstan</addr-line></aff><author-notes><corresp id="cor1">* E-mail:<email>khachikjan@seismology.kz(AK)</email>;</corresp></author-notes><pub-date pub-type="epub"><day>29</day><month>11</month><year>2012</year></pub-date><volume>03</volume><issue>05</issue><fpage>1084</fpage><lpage>1088</lpage><history><date date-type="received"><day>July</day>	<month>21,</month>	<year>2012</year></date><date date-type="rev-recd"><day>August</day>	<month>23,</month>	<year>2012</year>	</date><date date-type="accepted"><day>September</day>	<month>23,</month>	<year>2012</year></date></history><permissions><copyright-statement>&#169; Copyright  2014 by authors and Scientific Research Publishing Inc. </copyright-statement><copyright-year>2014</copyright-year><license><license-p>This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution International License (CC BY). http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/</license-p></license></permissions><abstract><p>
 
 
  For 173477 epicenters of earthquakes with М ≥ 4.5, which occurred at the globe in 1973-2010, the geomagnetic Z-component in Geocentric Solar Magnetospheric (GSM) coordinate system were evaluated for the moment of earthquake occurrence on the base of the International Geomagnetic Reference Field model (IGRF-10). It is found that in the regions, where the Z
  <sub>GSM </sub>reaches large positive value (low and middle latitudes), earthquake occurrence is higher than in the regions where Z
  <sub>GSM </sub> is mainly negative (high latitudes). In the area of strongest seismicity at the globe, which is located in the longitudinal ranges of about 120
  <sup>0</sup>E - 170
  <sup>0</sup>W, the values of Z
  <sub>GSM </sub> are the most high at the globe. It is found that statistically significant dependence, with correlation coefficient R = 0.91, exists between the maximal possible magnitude of earthquake (M
  <sub>max</sub>) and the logarithm of absolute value of Z
  <sub>GSM </sub>. We suggest that earthquake occurrence is triggered by the perturbations, which in first occur at the magnetopause due to reconnection of the magnetic field of the solar wind with the Earth’s magnetic field, and then propagate into the solid earth via the GEC, which is considered at present as a main applicant for a physical mechanism of solar-terrestrial relationships. It is clear that much work remains to further verify this speculative assertion and to find the physical processes linking seismicity with the main geomagnetic field structure.
 
</p></abstract><kwd-group><kwd>Earthquake Occurrence; Earthquake Magnitude; Main Geomagnetic Field; Geocentric Solar Magnetospheric Coordinate System</kwd></kwd-group></article-meta></front><body><sec id="s1"><title>1. Introduction</title><p>From the beginning of the space age, the satellites obtained a lot of evidences on the electromagnetic effects in the near space plasma parameters prior major earthquakes [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.24955-ref1">1</xref>]. To explain that findings, an idea was advanced [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.24955-ref2">2</xref>] that the generation mechanism of electromagnetic effects of earthquakes is a modification of the electric field in the Global Electric Circuit (GEC) due to earthquake preparation. The classical concept of GEC, firstly suggested in [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.24955-ref3">3</xref>], presents a system of stationary electric currents between the ground and the ionosphere driven by the global thunderstorm activity [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.24955-ref4">4</xref>]. Recently, the idea of electric coupling between the ionosphere and earthquake region was successfully used in [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.24955-ref5">5</xref>] to explain the changes in the natural extremely low-frequency radio noise observed in the topside ionosphere aboard the DEMETER satellite at night, before major earthquakes. As in any electric circuit the electromagnetic perturbation in one region affects another regions, one may speculate that not only the state of near space plasma responds to electromagnetic perturbation in the lithosphere, as it is suggested in [2,5], but and vice versa, the lithosphere responds to electromagnetic perturbation in the near space plasma up to the upper boundary of the GEC. At present, the GEC is considered as a main applicant for the mechanism of solar-terrestrial coupling [4,6], and it is believed [7,8] that its upper boundary may be located at the magnetopause, where the reconnection of the solar wind magnetic field with the earth’s magnetic field occur. The effectiveness of magnetic reconnection [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.24955-ref9">9</xref>] depends on value and orientation of Z-<sub> </sub>components in both the solar wind magnetic field and Earth’s magnetic field as estimated in the Geocentric Solar Magnetospheric (GSM) coordinate system [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.24955-ref10">10</xref>]. The most effective reconnection occur when the Z<sub>GSM</sub>-component for solar wind magnetic field is large and negative, while the geomagnetic Z<sub>GSM</sub>-component is large and positive [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.24955-ref9">9</xref>]. As the geomagnetic Z<sub>GSM</sub>-component shows noticeable spatial and temporal variations, we check up in present paper if a pattern of spatial variation of seismicity shows any similarity with a pattern of spatial variation of geomagnetic Z<sub>GSM</sub>-component. It is found that the largest amount of earthquakes occur in the regions where the geomagnetic Z<sub>GSM</sub>-component reaches large positive value.</p></sec><sec id="s2"><title>2. Data and Method</title><p>In this study, we use the data on earthquakes with magnitude М ≥ 4.5 occurred at the globe in 1973-2010 years (173477 events) from the global seismological catalogue NEIC [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.24955-ref11">11</xref>]. For the each of the epicenters, the components of the main geomagnetic field in Geocentric Solar Magnetospheric (GSM) coordinate system were calculated with using the FORTRAN subroutines Geopack- 2008 [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.24955-ref12">12</xref>], which are based on the International Geomagnetic Reference Field model (IGRF-10) [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.24955-ref13">13</xref>]. Geomagnetic field components (X<sub>GSM</sub>, Y<sub>GSM</sub>, and Z<sub>GSM</sub>) were calculated exactly for point of the epicenter and exactly for the time of earthquake occurrence. In GSM coordinate system [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.24955-ref10">10</xref>] the X-axis points from the Earth towards the Sun. The Z-axis (positive) is perpendicular to the X-axis and parallel to the projection of the negative dipole moment on a plane perpendicular to the X-axis (the northern magnetic pole is in the same hemisphere as the tail of the magnetic moment vector). The Y-axis completes a right-handed coordinate system. It is defined to be perpendicular to the Earth’s magnetic dipole so that the X-Z plane contains the dipole axis. Since the Y-axis is perpendicular to the dipole axis, it is always in the magnetic equator and since it is perpendicular to the Earth-Sun-line, it is in the dawn-dusk meridian (pointing towards dusk). The GSM coordinate system rocks about the solar direction with a 24 hour period in addition to a yearly period due to the motion of the Earth about the Sun. As a result, for any particular geographical point, the geomagnetic components in GSM coordinate system vary in the course of day and year.</p><p>Since for the magnetic reconnection the most important is the value of Z<sub>GSM</sub> [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.24955-ref9">9</xref>], in this study we analyze only the behavior of Z<sub>GSM</sub>-component (Z<sub>GSM</sub> here and after). To visualize the spatial and temporal Z<sub>GSM</sub> variations, the test calculations have been performed. For this purpose, Z<sub>GSM</sub> values were calculated for each hour and each month of 2005 year at geographical latitudes: 90˚S, 60˚S, 30˚S, 0˚, 30˚N, 60˚N, and 90˚N at four longitudes: 0˚, 180˚, 90˚W and 90˚E. In <xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig1">Figure 1</xref>, we present, as an example, the Z<sub>GSM</sub> values for each hour and each month at geographical equator (latitude 0˚) for two longitudes: 90˚W and 90˚E (a, b, respectively).</p><p>It is seen from <xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig1">Figure 1</xref> that at the geographical equator, the Z<sub>GSM</sub> values are always positive but vary noticeably from hour to hour, and from month to month, and reach more high values in the eastern hemisphere (90˚E) in comparison with the western hemisphere (90˚W). <xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig2">Figure 2</xref> presents latitudinal variation of the mean Z<sub>GSM</sub></p><p>value calculated for 2005 year. Vertical bars show standard deviations with percentile 95.</p><p>It is seen from <xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig2">Figure 2</xref> that at low latitudes (30˚S - 30˚N), the mean Z<sub>GSM</sub> values are positive, while they are negative at high latitudes. The Z<sub>GSM</sub> component has also secular variation (not shown) which is in agreement with the secular variation of the main geomagnetic field, which is included in the IGRF-10 model, but this variation is not so appreciated as those ones presented in Figures 1 and 2.</p></sec><sec id="s3"><title>3. Results</title><sec id="s3_1"><title>3.1. Does the Earthquake Counts Depend on Geomagnetic Z<sub>GSM</sub>?</title><p>Let us consider the composed <xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig3">Figure 3</xref>, where the panel</p><p>(a) presents the map of epicenters of earthquakes with magnitude М ≥ 4.5 occurred at the globe in 1973-2010 years (173477 events) from the global seismological catalogue NEIC [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.24955-ref11">11</xref>], and the panel (b) shows the histogram for longitudinal variation of seismicity (number of earthquakes) obtained on the base of 173477 events presented at the panel (a).</p><p>Different colors of epicenters correspond to different values of the geomagnetic Z<sub>GSM</sub>-component in the point of epicenter in the moment of earthquake occurrence, as calculated with help of Geopack-2008 [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.24955-ref12">12</xref>]. The scale for Z<sub>GSM</sub> values is given in right. One may conclude from (3a) that in agreement with the test calculations (Figures 1 and 2), the Z<sub>GSM</sub> value is large positive in epicenters located at low and middle latitudes, while it is small positive or negative in epicenters located at high latitudes. It is seen also, that Z<sub>GSM</sub> reach more high values (red color) in eastern hemisphere where the seismic activity is the most high. This is evident from the bottom panel (3b) where the histogram for number of earthquakes depending on geographical longitude is presented. A compareson between 3(b) and 3(a) allows one to suggest that in seismically active areas (where tectonic destructions take place), the earthquakes prefer occur in those regions, where the geomagnetic Z<sub>GSM</sub> component has the highest positive value. This suggestion may be supported by the results in <xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig4">Figure 4</xref>, which presents the histogram for earthquakes counts (EC) depending on the value of Z<sub>GSM</sub> in the epicenter in the moment of event occurrence.</p><p>Black curve on <xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig4">Figure 4</xref> is an exponential of order 2 fit to data as follows:</p><disp-formula id="scirp.24955-formula142902"><label>(1)</label><graphic position="anchor" xlink:href="8-2800328\e19d186b-1fbe-4ec5-ab60-552d5ca57053.jpg"  xlink:type="simple"/></disp-formula><p>where y<sub>0</sub> = 0, A<sub>1</sub> = 7112, t<sub>1</sub> = –43827, A<sub>2</sub> = –1859, and t<sub>2</sub> = –2011597 with correlation coefficient R = 0.99. It is seen that the largest number of earthquakes indeed occur in regions where geomagnetic Z<sub>GSM</sub> values are large positive—reach more than 30000 nT. At the same time, the earthquake counts are decreased for Z<sub>GSM</sub> ≥ 40000 nT. Investigations in more details showed that this phenomenon results from the geometry of the main geomagnetic field, which allows to reach the value of Z<sub>GSM</sub> ≥ 40000 nT only for restricted time intervals.</p></sec><sec id="s3_2"><title>3.2. Does the Magnitude of Earthquake Depend on the Geomagnetic Z<sub>GSM</sub>?</title><p>Figures 5 is a scatter plot of the magnitude of earthquake versus the geomagnetic Z<sub>GSM</sub> value. Visually, cloud of points is fairly stretched and, to a first approximation, can be characterized by a linear dependence.</p><p>Black solid line in <xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig5">Figure 5</xref> is an envelope of maximal magnitude in the sequential Z<sub>GSM</sub> bins of 3000 nT size, and red solid line is the linear fit to envelope with a cor-</p><p>relation coefficient R = 0.62. The correlation coefficient is not high because it is seen from figure that the maximal possible magnitude (M<sub>max</sub>) may reach high values (more than 8.0) for both the large positive Z<sub>GSM</sub> values, and large negative Z<sub>GSM</sub> as well. The analysis in more details showed dependence between M<sub>max</sub> and the logarithm of the absolute value of geomagnetic Z<sub>GSM</sub> component. Therefore, in <xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig6">Figure 6</xref> we present a scatter plot of the magnitude of earthquake versus<img src="8-2800328\7e50fdf7-4e81-4606-8da8-0caac5e98c3a.jpg" />. Black solid line in <xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig6">Figure 6</xref> is an envelope of maximal magnitude (M<sub>max</sub>) in sequential <img src="8-2800328\b0350d62-0b76-4a9f-b8ae-8ef67135bcf2.jpg" /> bins of 0.15 size, and red solid line is the linear fit to envelope as follows:</p><disp-formula id="scirp.24955-formula142903"><label>(2)</label><graphic position="anchor" xlink:href="8-2800328\f1762cd5-d8e7-4e3a-935f-7993960d2716.jpg"  xlink:type="simple"/></disp-formula><p>where a = 5.22 &#177; 0.17, b = 0.78 &#177; 0.06, with correlation coefficient R = 0.91, standard deviation SD = 0.56, and probability 0.95. Rather high value of correlation coefficient between <img src="8-2800328\473d088c-5792-4c7a-a643-cc61dc4c2aa2.jpg" /> and M<sub>max</sub> supports suggestion that the magnitude of earthquake depends not only on the geometry of the geomagnetic field, but on its intensity as well.</p></sec></sec><sec id="s4"><title>4. Discussion and Conclusion</title><p>It is documented at present that earthquake epicenters are located mainly along the boundaries of lithospheric plates, at the same time, the forces that trigger earthquakes are not well known yet. Thanks to the satellite measurements, the electromagnetic disturbances in the near space plasma parameters prior major earthquakes were observed, that allowed to advance an idea that earthquake is an element of Global Electric Circuit (GEC). In a modern concept of GEC, it is a vertical electrical loop electrodynamically coupling all geospheres from the magnetopause to the Earth’s core. As in any electric circuit the electromagnetic disturbances in one</p><p>In conclusion:</p><p>1) Rather close relationships between earthquake counts, earthquake magnitude and geomagnetic Z component in geocentric solar magnetospheric coordinate system (Z<sub>GSM</sub>) is revealed.</p><p>2) Since the value and direction of Z<sub>GSM</sub> are the key parameters for the process of magnetic reconnection between the magnetic field of the solar wind and the Earth’s magnetic field, we suggest that earthquake occurrence is related somehow to the process of magnetic reconnection. For example, earthquake occurrence may be triggered by the electromagnetic disturbances, which firstly appear at the magnetopause due to magnetic reconnection, and then penetrate to the lower Earth’s spheres via the global electric circuit.</p><p>It is clear that much work remains to further verify this speculative assertion and to find the physical processes linking seismicity with the main geomagnetic field structure.</p></sec><sec id="s5"><title>5. Acknowledgements</title><p>We thank N. Tsyganenko for consultations regarding his set of programs Geopack-2008. Constructive comments from both referees are appreciated. Also, we thank the IJG Editorial Board for a number of consultations regarding the paper submitting.</p></sec><sec id="s6"><title>REFERENCES</title></sec></body><back><ref-list><title>References</title><ref id="scirp.24955-ref1"><label>1</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">S. A. Pulinets and K. A. Boyarchuk, “Ionospheric Precursors of Earthquakes,” Springer, Berlin &amp; New York, 2004.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.24955-ref2"><label>2</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">S. A. Pulinets, “Physical Mechanism of the Vertical Electric Field Generation over Active Tectonic Faults,” Advances in Space Research, Vol. 44, No. 6, 2009, pp. 767773. doi:10.1016/j.asr.2009.04.038</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.24955-ref3"><label>3</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">C. T. R.Wilson, “Investigations on Lightning Discharges and on the Electric Field of Thunderstorms,” Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A, Vol. 221, No. 582-593, 1920, pp. 73-115. doi:10.1098/rsta.1921.0003</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.24955-ref4"><label>4</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">M. J. Rycroft, S. Israelsson and C. Price, “The Global Atmospheric Electric Circuit, Solar Activity and Climate Change,” Journal of Atmospheric and Solar-Terrestrial Physics, Vol. 62, No. 17, 2000, pp. 1563-1576.  
doi:10.1016/S1364-6826(00)00112-7</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.24955-ref5"><label>5</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">R. G. Harrison, K. Aplin and M. Rycroft, “Atmospheric Electricity Coupling between Earthquake Regions and the Ionosphere,” Journal of Atmospheric and Solar-Terrestrial Physics, Vol. 72, No. 5-6, 2010, pp. 376-381. </mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.24955-ref6"><label>6</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">R. G. Harrison, “The Global Atmospheric Electrical Circuit and Climate,” Survey in Geophysics, Vol. 25, No. 5-6, 2004, pp. 441-484. doi:10.1007/s10712-004-5439-8</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.24955-ref7"><label>7</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">E. A. Bering, A. A. Few and J. R. Benbrook, “The Global Electric Circuit,” Physics Today, Vol. 51, No. 10, 1998, pp. 24-30. doi:10.1063/1.882422</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.24955-ref8"><label>8</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">L. N. Makarova and A. V. Shirochkov, “A New Approach to the Global Electric Circuit Conception,” 1998. 
http://www.sgo.fi/SPECIAL/Contributions/Makarova.pdf</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.24955-ref9"><label>9</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">С. T. Russell, “Reconnection in Planetary Magnetospheres,” Advances in Space Research, Vol. 29, No. 7, 2002, pp. 1045-1052.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.24955-ref10"><label>10</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">C. T. Russell, “Geophysical Coordinate Transformations,” Cosmic Electrodynamics, Vol. 2, 1971, pp. 184196</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.24955-ref11"><label>11</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Global NEIC catalogue, 1973-2010. 
http://neic.usgs.gov/neis/epic/epic_global.html</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.24955-ref12"><label>12</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">N. A. Tsyganenko, “Geopack: A Set of Fortran Subroutines for Computations of the Geomagnetic Field in the Earth’s Magnetosphere,” 2008. 
http://geo.phys.spbu.ru/~tsyganenko/Geopack-2008.html</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.24955-ref13"><label>13</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">The International Geomagnetic Reference Field model. http://www.ngdc.noaa.gov/IAGA/ vmod/igrf.html</mixed-citation></ref></ref-list></back></article>