On 26 December 2004, one of the largest recorded earthquakes occurred, triggering a devastating tsunami that killed an estimated 300,000 people. The event was initially classified as Mw 9.0 based on the analysis of seismic body and surface waves (Nettles and Ekstrom, 2004; Ji, 2005; Park et al. , 2005). Classical methods of magnitude calculation are hampered by the long duration of the event, however, since late-arriving phases from the earliest portion of the rupture may obscure first-arriving energy sourced from other portions of the rupture. This same phenomenon also limits our ability to constrain the earthquake's duration, length, and speed of propagation. To work around these limitations, Stein and Okal (2005) studied Earth's low-order normal modes to estimate the size of the earthquake. Their results indicated a moment of 1.3 × 1030 dyne-cm ( Mw 9.3), which is ∼2.5 times larger than initial reports, and a centroid position near 7°N. In contrast with previous analyses, which had suggested displacement occurred primarily along the southern third of the aftershock region (Ji, 2005; Yagi, 2005; Yamanaka, 2005), these results argue that significant slip occurred along the entire aftershock zone. For shallow submarine earthquakes, hydroacoustic recordings of tertiary ( T ) waves can provide additional constraints on rupture length, as well as velocity and direction of rupture propagation ( e.g. , Bohnenstiehl et al. , 2004). T waves are formed when seismically generated energy is scattered at the seafloor-ocean interface and becomes trapped in the ocean's low-velocity wave guide, which is known as the SOund Fixing And Ranging (SOFAR) channel (Tolstoy and Ewing, 1950). Locating the source of a T wave, therefore, does not necessarily provide an estimate of the earthquake epicenter, but rather the position of the T -wave radiator. This is particularly true for the subduction zone …
Read full abstract