Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2005 10:18:20 -0800 From: Richard GrossHello Ron - By changing the mass distribution of the Earth, and hence its inertia tensor, conservation of angular momentum dictates that the Sumatran earthquake of December 26, 2004 should have changed the rotation of the Earth. Models of the effect of the earthquake on the Earth's rotation predict that the length of the day should have become shorter by 2.68 microseconds and that the figure axis of the Earth should have shifted by 0.821 milliarcseconds in the direction of 145 East longitude (Chao and Gross, "Did the 26 December 2004 Sumatra, Indonesia, Earthquake Disrupt the Earth's Rotation as the Mass Media Have Said?", EOS, vol. 86, No. 1, pp. 1-2, 2005). Space-geodetic measurement techniques like satellite laser ranging (SLR) are able to directly estimate changes in the length-of-day, but not changes in the figure axis; instead, SLR directly estimates the position of the rotation axis. Of course, the motion of the rotation axis will change in response to the shift of the figure axis, and it is this response of the rotation axis to the shift in the figure axis caused by the earthquake that may have been detected in SLR measurements. However, the figure axis, and hence the rotation axis, will change in response to any change in the mass distribution of the Earth, including changes in the mass distribution of the atmosphere and oceans. In fact, these changes in the mass distribution of the atmosphere and oceans are nearly 100 times larger than the changes predicted to have been caused by the earthquake. Prior to attributing a change in the position of the rotation axis to the Sumatran earthquake, I think that the much larger changes caused by the atmosphere and oceans should first be accounted for. Since the atmosphere and oceans are in constant motion, they will also affect the motion of the rotation axis in December, and the particular change attributed to the earthquake may instead be caused by the atmosphere and/or oceans. While the change in the motion of the rotation axis occurs near the time of the earthquake, similar shifts in the motion of the rotation axis can be observed at other epochs. For example, global positioning system (GPS) estimates show the same change in the motion of the rotation axis near the time of the earthquake (igscb.jpl.nasa.gov/images/Dec2004EQ.Gendt.gif). However, the GPS estimates show that a similar change in the motion of the rotation axis, albeit of smaller amplitude, also occurred near December 19, 2004. So, in summary, without accounting for the larger effects of the atmosphere and oceans on the motion of the rotation axis, I think it is premature to attribute the detected change to the earthquake. The change in the position of the figure axis caused by the earthquake should have a unique signature --- it should appear as a step-like change. The earthquake has permanently redistributed the Earth's mass, causing a permanent change in the length-of-day and in the position of the figure axis. Since the atmosphere and oceans are fluids, they cannot support a permanent redistribution of mass; hence, the changes caused by the atmosphere and oceans will not be step-like. They can still cause sudden changes in the position of the figure axis since the atmospheric and oceanic mass can move suddenly, but the atmospheric and oceanic mass should then move back again with no net, permanent, redistribution of mass. So, to unambiguously attribute a change in the Earth's rotation to the earthquake, a step-like change in the position of the figure axis at the time of the earthquake should be looked for. I will, of course, be doing this as soon as estimates of the atmospheric and oceanic angular momentum for December and January become available. Removing the effects of the atmosphere and oceans on the figure axis should make it easier to detect a step-like change. Best regards, Richard