Answer:
Ocean currents are carry warm and tropical waters all over the world which makes heat go toward polar regions and makes solar radiation
The difference between the two mentioned magnitudes is 4.
A magnitude 1 earth-quack is 10000 times bigger than a magnitude -3 earth-quack. On the other hand, it is 1000000 times stronger in terms of energy release.
Note: To calculate the difference in energy between two earth-quacks, first you calculate the difference between their magnitudes and then you raise 10 to the output you obtain.
It has gone through four half-lives of carbon-14 (5730 years<span> x 4 = </span>22920 years<span>)
It is 22920 years old.
Hope this helps!</span>
Well first, cons
1.) We can't forecast the timing, so that's a biggie. The prospects of forecasting the timing for earthquakes is quite dim at the moment and not in the foreseable future.
2.)Unless you predict earthquakes 100% of the time then improper forecasting can actually result in fatalities and lifeloss.
3.)If we could predict earthquakes, there would be some huge societal implications. For instance Hurricane Katrina was predicted several days out but that didn't result in a wholly successful evacuation of New Orleans which was biased against the poor.
4.)Accurate forecasting would not change the need for preparedness and good building codes. The ground is still going to shake, buildings still need to resist lateral seismic forces, people still need to be prepared for not having gas, water, telecom, electricity, for a certain amount of time.
And pros,
It would relieve some peoples anxiety about "when the big one" is going to hit. But then that would turn into "how big is the big one" anxiety.
The questions you ask can be considered similar to "what are the pros and cons of forecasting when each of us will die". It doesn't change the fact, just what and how we worry about it.
