New Study Suggests We Don't Understand Supervolcanoes (sciencealert.com) 105
Better microsampling (and analysis) are revealing "previously obscured" clues about how super-hot molten lava behaves, according to a Science Alert article shared by schwit1:
"The older view is that there's a long period with a big tank of molten rock in the crust," says geoscientist Nathan Andersen from the University of Wisconsin-Madison. "A new view is that magma is stored for a long period in a state that is locked, cool, crystalline, and unable to produce an eruption. That dormant system would need a huge infusion of heat to erupt." Such a huge infusion of heat is what's thought to have unleashed a violent supereruption in California some 765,000 years ago... [A]s awesomely destructive as the supereruption was, lingering evidence from the aftermath can tell us about the magma conditions deep underground before the top blew so spectacularly.
Specifically, an analysis of argon isotopes contained in crystals from the Bishop Tuff -- the large rocky outcrop produced when the Long Valley Caldera was created -- shows the magma from the supereruption was heated rapidly, not slowly simmered. Geologically speaking, that is -- meaning the heating forces that produced the supereruption occurred over decades, or perhaps a couple of centuries. (A long time for people, sure, but a blink of an eye in the life-time of a supervolcano.) The reasoning is that argon quickly escapes from hot crystals, so it wouldn't have a chance to accumulate in the rock if the rock were super-heated for a long time... Unfortunately, while scientists are doing everything they can to read the signs of volcanic supereruptions -- something NASA views as more dangerous than asteroid strikes -- the reality is, the new findings don't bring us any closer to seeing the future.
"This does not point to prediction in any concrete way," warns geologist Brad Singer, "but it does point to the fact that we don't understand what is going on in these systems, in the period of 10 to 1,000 years that precedes a large eruption."
Specifically, an analysis of argon isotopes contained in crystals from the Bishop Tuff -- the large rocky outcrop produced when the Long Valley Caldera was created -- shows the magma from the supereruption was heated rapidly, not slowly simmered. Geologically speaking, that is -- meaning the heating forces that produced the supereruption occurred over decades, or perhaps a couple of centuries. (A long time for people, sure, but a blink of an eye in the life-time of a supervolcano.) The reasoning is that argon quickly escapes from hot crystals, so it wouldn't have a chance to accumulate in the rock if the rock were super-heated for a long time... Unfortunately, while scientists are doing everything they can to read the signs of volcanic supereruptions -- something NASA views as more dangerous than asteroid strikes -- the reality is, the new findings don't bring us any closer to seeing the future.
"This does not point to prediction in any concrete way," warns geologist Brad Singer, "but it does point to the fact that we don't understand what is going on in these systems, in the period of 10 to 1,000 years that precedes a large eruption."
Re: (Score:2)
No, this means that what's under Antarctica probably won't erupt soon - but that has nothing to do with it being hot enough to melt ice.
Re:Yeah, but it's actually all about global warmin (Score:5, Insightful)
That's the problem with people like the previous two AC's (dare I say climate science deniers). They don't have a unified coherent idea about what's going on. It's all scattershot like a shotgun. So one person says it's volcanic activity causing global warming, another says it's the sun and others say the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics proves the greenhouse effect is impossible but provide no reason for the warming, etc, etc. They throw out a bunch of thoughts with the hope that some of the shot will hit the target. They seldom do.
On the other hand climate scientists do have a unified coherent idea about what's going on. The message hasn't changed much in over 50 years, they've just filled in more and more details and improved their understanding of them.
Regarding the first AC they need to show that it's not something that's been going on for more than 10,000 years and that there's been a significant change in the volcanic activity in Antarctica in the last few hundred years. There is no evidence that is the case. Also not much evidence that isn't the case but if it had changed significantly in the past 50 years or so I think we would have noticed.
Regarding the second AC the sun since around 2006 has shown its lowest activity level in the past 100 years. Yet there is no indication of cooling as a result of it.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Regarding the second AC the sun since around 2006 has shown its lowest activity level in the past 100 years. Yet there is no indication of cooling as a result of it.
Not the same AC and not a denier of AGW, but there was the infamous "pause" in global temperature increase that is not yet explained and did happen during the solar minimum superposition between the typical decades-long cycle and longer cycles that you are eluding to.
The real problem many have with global warming is that the models really aren't any good. The specific predictions made are repeatedly proven wrong while the general predictions have such huge uncertainty bars that a coin toss is nearly as robu
Re: (Score:2)
I figured someone might come back to me with the so called "pause". The problem with that is while the rise in atmospheric temperatures may have slowed down to a statistically insignificant degree the oceans where over 90 percent of the warming occurs continued to warm during that time. There was no real pause, just a small change in the distribution of heat in the system.
The real problem many have with global warming is that the models really aren't any good. The specific predictions made are repeatedly proven wrong while the general predictions have such huge uncertainty bars that a coin toss is nearly as robust.
Did you see the post a couple of days ago about how two scientists accurately predicted global warming in 1967? [slashdot.org] I would suggest that y
Re: (Score:2)
Sheesh! The story from a few days ago was based on actual research published in 1967. I've been aware of the 1967 paper from Manabe and Wetherald for close to two decades. Nothing popsci about it.
Re: (Score:2)
I figured someone might come back to me with the so called "pause". The problem with that is while the rise in atmospheric temperatures may have slowed down to a statistically insignificant degree the oceans where over 90 percent of the warming occurs continued to warm during that time. There was no real pause, just a small change in the distribution of heat in the system.
Your grossly overstating the state of climate science. The baseline of climate knowledge that is irrefutably known so far as modelling go
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Technically that is true. The sun is responsible for over 99% of the energy on the Earth's surface. But since the sun's output hasn't changed enough to account for the actual warming we've seen there must be other factors that help hold the sun's energy on the Earth such as an increase in greenhouse gases. AC was implying it was because the sun was at a high level of output.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:So you wrote an article about Supervolcanoes (Score:4, Insightful)
Well in a world of so called experts, who amass all their knowledge from a Discovery Chanel Documentary. We need people to say, "Dude, you really don't know what your talking about, and you are unnecessarily scaring yourself and other people"
While we shouldn't celibate our ignorance, we need to recognize it, and decide if learning more in the area is worth the time and effort, or it should go to something else.
While at the Pharmacist (Chemist) someone was complaining how long they had to wait to get their drugs, "I don't know why it takes so long!", Neither do I, however because I don't know what all the steps are (Because I am not a Pharmacist) I shouldn't be so judgmental, because I am just getting angry about something I know little about. If I really wanted too I can do the studying and see why it takes so long, but I assume they were some other people tacking the problem, and we still cannot make it much quicker. So I will be patient and wait for the services. My ignorance in the process that I am not willing to expand on, shouldn't outrage me, because I need to recognize my ignorance in what is going on, and I need to default to they are doing the best they can.
Re: So you wrote an article about Supervolcanoes (Score:3)
Some should.
Re: (Score:3)
We need people to say, "Dude, you really don't know what your talking about, and you are unnecessarily scaring yourself and other people"
We might not know much about the specifics of the underlying mechanisms in supervolcano eruptions, but that doesn't mean we can't study such eruptions in a statistical fashion, and assign a statistical likelihood for one happening in any given period of time.
What the present results tell us is that we might have only a few decades of warning about such an event, which is not a lot of time given how hard it is to get people to agree about what to do about such things, and in particular who will pay for it.
Re: (Score:2)
Super volcanoes are like great earthquakes. After 30+ years of warnings, I'm still waiting for California to slide into the Pacific Ocean.
That’s because the San Andreas is horizontal, not vertical.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
That's article is not about the San Andreas, it's about another fault system.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
California is a nice place, but too expensive, so my plans have always been to move there after TBO when all the land is cheap.
Re: (Score:2)
If prices are "right", the risk is priced in, and after TBO, prices will be higher because the risk is no longer high.
Re: (Score:2)
If prices are "right", the risk is priced in, and after TBO, prices will be higher because the risk is no longer high.
The interesting thing about a fault line which has just had a major shift is that it can immediately have another major shift.
P.S. Lightning often strikes the same place multiple times.
Re: (Score:2)
"immediately have another"
Good thing 15-day close is about as fast as you can buy a house these days :-)
Re: (Score:1)
A little large picture analysis (Score:2, Interesting)
Any process which has a form of relaxation oscillations, such as mounting mechanical tension resulting in catastrophic release in an earthquake, or supernova blast in a binary star system, or an supervolcano eruption caused by a sudden event, has to have three underlying processes: first, of slow rise to criticality, second, of constant dissipation which pushes system away from criticality, and the third: of sudden relaxation when level of criticality is crossed.
Looking at the Earth geology, we first must u
Re: (Score:2)
Oh come on. An additional 2c in the atmosphere is really going to slow down the cooling of magma underneath/in the crust.
It will, but the question is, how much? Also, the temperature of the atmosphere is only part of the issue. There's also the temperature of the soil, and the temperature of the ocean. The rate of thermal transfer is related to the difference in temperature. Probably it will be barely measurable though, as you perhaps intended to suggest.
BOOOOOOMSHAKALAKA!!!!!! (Score:1)
News flash (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Humans don't understand nearly as much as they think they do.
Except for AGW.
There, "the science is settled". ...
The basic science of AGW hasn't changed much in over 50 years (you could perhaps say since Arrhenius in 1895). Of course like any science it's subject to revision pending new information. But over 50 years of the basic message remaining the same makes it settled enough for me.
Good news, everyone! (Score:5, Funny)
It turns out a massive eruption at Yellowstone would only wipe out the part of the country that us coastal elitist don't care about! [inquisitr.com] #WhoNeedsFoodAnyway ;)
Re: (Score:3)
And, as a (former) geologist, the resultant shock of the Caldera Collapse would also likely trigger the entire San Andreas and New Madrid fault systems, so we're looking at massive earthquakes in areas outside the ash zones.
So even MORE death and devastation would be the sprinkles on top of the Sundae of Doom (grin)
Re: (Score:2)
#WhoNeedsFoodAnyway
Most of it comes from California, and if it doesn't have to go to those places in the red because they've gone all Pompeii, there'll be more for us.
gee thanks (Score:1)
Like we don't understand why someone would choose a nick like FrostyPis--oh,wait. I got it. Never mind
The Core (Score:2)
Col. Robert Iverson: People. Doctors Zimsky and Keyes? You guys are our resident geophysicists, so what do you make of this?
Dr. Conrad Zimsky: The mantle is a chemical hodgepodge of, a, variety of elements...
Dr. Ed 'Braz' Brazzelton: Say it with me: "I don't know."
---
The first rule of being a true scientist. Admit you don't know everything.
Re: (Score:2)
You've probably seen this already, but in case anyone else missed the Movie Physics review of The Core, here it is. [intuitor.com]
Science (Score:3)
Re: (Score:1)
Are you writing about true scientists (whom you have likely never met in person), or the popularized version in the various media (who don't really exist in any numbers)? And when true scientists talk, do you have enough awareness to distinguish between the larger picture (which they rightly may be confident of) and the smaller, evolving details (which they may be less sure of)? I think that you have a lot less expertise in evaluating scientists than you claim.
Re: (Score:2)
I think the real hubris here is people who don't have the expertise to evaluate the scientists work judging them anyway.
Headline is incorrect (Score:2)
Exact Prediction (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
>The Arab emirates that compose five nations will have to be evacuated prior to 2025 as warming in that area will be so severe that the land can not support human life nor can things like air conditioning save the day.
I'll bet you $10,000 that is completely, totally, untrue.
In fact, I'll double-or-nothing you that in 2025 the population of the UAE will be higher than today.
Re: (Score:2)
In fact, I'll double-or-nothing you that in 2025 the population of the UAE will be higher than today.
What's the average elevation of the UAE again?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Lava, magma, rock (Score:2)
"previously obscured" clues about how super-hot molten lava behaves
Lava is on the surface, so I think this is about magma. Also all lava is hot and molten.
"A new view is that magma is stored for a long period in a state that is locked, cool, crystalline
Wouldn't that be referred to as "rock" and not "magma"?