Scioly.org

Posted: **March 28th, 2010, 10:29 am**

Technicalities that could result in point deductions on the test, depending on how picky the test admins are. (It's happened to me before)

Posted: **March 28th, 2010, 10:38 am**

Which earthquake was bigger depends on what scale you're using. If you go by Richter Magnitude, then the Chile 'quake was way worse. However, if you use the Mercalli Intensity Scale, which is the one based on what people feel and how much damage is done, then the Haiti 'quake was probably worse. If you come across a question about stuff like this, make sure you read carefully to know exactly what they're asking.

Posted: **March 28th, 2010, 10:52 am**

the Haiti earthquake had a higher mercalli rating becuase of the the amount of deaths and buildings destroyed

Posted: **March 28th, 2010, 11:26 am**

right, the mercalli scale is based in people and infrastructure, while the richter scale is based on the energy released. Haiti had a larger mercalli reading and chile had a larger richter reading.

Posted: **March 29th, 2010, 1:33 pm**

our regional test was all reading and figures with straight forward answer from those, so basically no dynamic planet knowledge was needed!That got me very angry and I think is why we got only 7th. And apparently the highschool division had the same test as last years regional test for B division. SO STUPID!

Posted: **March 29th, 2010, 4:26 pm**

i didnt reply back over night and look what happen -.- sesh anyway i think me and my bud epic failed on the volcano mapping part <---- lol

Posted: **March 29th, 2010, 4:27 pm**

Big_Platypus wrote: our regional test was all reading and figures with straight forward answer from those, so basically no dynamic planet knowledge was needed!That got me very angry and I think is why we got only 7th. And apparently the highschool division had the same test as last years regional test for B division. SO STUPID!

where was your riegonals ? mine was at grand valley

Posted: **March 29th, 2010, 4:50 pm**

hanajitenshi wrote:
Big_Platypus wrote: our regional test was all reading and figures with straight forward answer from those, so basically no dynamic planet knowledge was needed!That got me very angry and I think is why we got only 7th. And apparently the highschool division had the same test as last years regional test for B division. SO STUPID!
where was your riegonals ? mine was at grand valley

My regional was grand valley

So like...we competed against you. What did you place? Also, how do you calculate the power or whatever it is of an earthquake. Our test said something about like fissure fault or somethin like that X something else..... And I had no idea what to do.

Posted: **April 2nd, 2010, 6:03 am**

Big_Platypus wrote:
hanajitenshi wrote:
Big_Platypus wrote: our regional test was all reading and figures with straight forward answer from those, so basically no dynamic planet knowledge was needed!That got me very angry and I think is why we got only 7th. And apparently the highschool division had the same test as last years regional test for B division. SO STUPID!
where was your riegonals ? mine was at grand valley
My regional was grand valley So like...we competed against you. What did you place? Also, how do you calculate the power or whatever it is of an earthquake. Our test said something about like fissure fault or somethin like that X something else..... And I had no idea what to do.

wait what what school were you i was Lamont Christian

<--- team that got the most improved award and to calculate power of a earth quake you need to know the epic center ( loctation) , magitude of each of atleast 3 loctations changeing it to s and p waves then find the miles each wave traveled and a bunch of other stuff im to tired to rememeber
Happy Spring Break Everyone

Posted: **April 2nd, 2010, 8:38 am**

IdahoSciGuy wrote:
hanajitenshi wrote:hatiti's was only 7.0 not even in the same league of destruction as the 9.5 in chile in 1960
I think the only thing wrong with that statement is the word "destruction". Yes, both quakes were devestating, but I can easily find people who would argue that the Haiti quake was much more "destructive" than the Valdivia quake. In those regards, I would change the word "destruction" to the words "energy release"

The Haiti quake released about 132 Petajoules of energy. (Peta is the next step from Tera)

The Valdivia quake of 1960 released about 744 Exajoules of Energy. (Exa is the next step up from Peta)

To put this in a little better persective, The recent Chile earthquake, magnitude 8.8, was about 1000 times the size of the Haiti quake energy wise. now raise that to the level of the 1960 quake. Thats A LOT in energy difference.

... i never said anything about enegy release or that. the destruction of that earthquake broke roads cannels but didnt take many lives the hatiti earthquake did less damage but took more lives
hatiti sent almost no tidal waves the one from chile did killing 21985 people on average and i estimated cost was around 6 million but you forget it was during the great depression so it would be higher -.- so do you get what i meant now IdahoSciGuy =.=

Scioly.org

Dynamic Planet B/C

Re: Dynamic Planet B/C

Re: Dynamic Planet B/C

Re: Dynamic Planet B/C

Re: Dynamic Planet B/C

Re: Dynamic Planet B/C

Re: Dynamic Planet B/C

Re: Dynamic Planet B/C

Re: Dynamic Planet B/C

Re: Dynamic Planet B/C

Re: Dynamic Planet B/C