GeologyRocks

I seriously doubt that the moon had any effect on the recent quake.  However I think it might be possible to experience earthquakes on other celestial bodies such as the moons of Jupiter which have a massive gravitational pull exerted on them but the effect would be dampened by the lack of plates.

There are a few papers that show a correlation with shallow quakes and Lunar cycles, and IIRC, they are intra-plate quakes and not associated subduction zones.

Re moonquakes: Since the Apollo era, it has been known that the moon is seismically active. There are 4 types of quakes: deep quakes probably associated with Earth-Sun tidal influences, quakes from impacts, quakes associated with thermal expansion of the crust as the terminator line moves across the surface, and shallow quakes.

See this NASA page: http://science.nasa.gov/science-news/science-at-nasa/2006/15mar_moonquakes/

Thanks for the replies folks. So what I read was definitely wrong in terms of the moon being seismically inactive. And they reckon that there are deep moon quakes that are probably tidal in nature. So that kinda kills the argument. (I wish I could remember where I read it - doesn't seem to be on the internet, so was probably a newspaper).

 That being the case, is there another reason why the general reaction I've seen would be justified; that the moon couldn't have triggered the Japanese earthquake? Someone I know suggested that repeated minor stresses caused by the day-to-day tidal influence of the moon might be enough to set an earthquake off. A sort of 'last straw' effect.

The moon was apparently at a position where it wasn't having any out of the ordinary tidal effect on the day of the earthquake, but repeated push and relax stuff might be influencial. Does that make any sense?

Thanks again. L14

Nice discussion! And interesting topic!

This makes me think of the following! 

Remember the guy that was predicting earthquakes to hit western America in a specific period: http://www.allvoices.com/contributed-news/8507300-earthquake-predicted-to-hit-us-west-coast-this-saturday-through-march-26 

He had it al figured out with lunar cycles, magnetic field stuff, stress regimes and whales being too close to shore... Nothing happened and I always find it such a pitty that that is NOT big news! people can go out and make these predicition when there is a media hype towards earthquakes and they are never called to answer for it... Shame!

Zhoog - at the time I started this thread, I was commenting on a friend's Facebook Wall about this. They had cited this Jim Berkland bloke you linked to as 'evidence' that the moon had caused the Japanese earthquake and mentioned his prediction about the Calfornia coast.

 That's why I came here to see if I could find some sensible information. (Which of course, I did!)

L14

That was a really interesting, informative thread.  Thanks folks :-)  Have a fondness for continuing the geological studies elsewhere in the solar system, though is that still technically geology?  Apologies, but having studied Classics and knowing that geology literally means studying the Earth, it makes me wonder silly things like this!

Hi Jenny, 

studying the geology of other planets in our solar system is called planetary Geology. A few universities specialise in this, or have very good lecturers in this field. One that comes to mind in Imperial College London.

Leah 

Technically you're right Jenny, "geo" meaning "the Earth". I suppose the study of Venus would be "Venerology"? Doesn't quite have the same ring to it!

I take it that it was the Philological element of Classics that made you ask?

Ben.