[HN Gopher] Strong earthquake hits northern Japan, tsunami warni...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Strong earthquake hits northern Japan, tsunami warning issued
        
       https://www.data.jma.go.jp/multi/quake/quake_detail.html?eve...
       https://www3.nhk.or.jp/nhkworld/en/news/weather-disaster/tsu...
       https://earthquake.usgs.gov/earthquakes/map/?currentFeatureI...
       https://www.tsunami.gov/?p=PHEB/2025/12/08/25342050/2/WEPA40
        
       Author : lattis
       Score  : 238 points
       Date   : 2025-12-08 14:50 UTC (8 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (www3.nhk.or.jp)
 (TXT) w3m dump (www3.nhk.or.jp)
        
       | ChrisMarshallNY wrote:
       | Damn. That sounds bad. Hope it didn't trigger a tsunami.
       | 
       | I guess we'll know, soon.
        
       | octaane wrote:
       | https://www.tsunami.gov/?p=PHEB/2025/12/08/25342050/2/WEPA40
       | 
       | Shouldn't be too bad; USGS forecasts up to 1 meter tsunami.
        
         | e12e wrote:
         | Nhk has some more information - looks like the areas hardest
         | hit will have been hit by now, with 3m high waves:
         | 
         | https://www3.nhk.or.jp/nhkworld/en/news/weather-disaster/tsu...
        
           | ekianjo wrote:
           | No, estimated height has nothing to do with actual
           | measurements
        
             | ctxc wrote:
             | Can you elaborate?
        
         | Kye wrote:
         | 1 meter is bad. That's a lot of water full of things you don't
         | want slamming into you or any structure. Then it comes back
         | full of even worse things.
        
           | belorn wrote:
           | Is 1 meter bad? In context it seems to be missing what kind
           | of waves normally hit the coast line, and what kind tide
           | differences exist, and what the current water level is when
           | the wave hit.
           | 
           | What is a typical maximum wave height during hurricane
           | seasons in north of japan?
        
             | astrobe_ wrote:
             | Apparently 2 meters is : _A 2 meters (6 ft 7 in) high
             | tsunami hit Chiba Prefecture about 2+1/2 hours after the
             | quake, causing heavy damage to cities such as Asahi._
             | (Tohoku 2011) [1]
             | 
             | WRT comparison with hurricane waves, I assume they carry a
             | lot less energy than tsunami's, because they are
             | "superficial waves" - caused by the friction of the wind on
             | the water - whereas a tsunami wave is caused by the
             | movement of a huge mass of mater.
             | 
             | [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2011_T%C5%8Dhoku_earthqua
             | ke_an...
        
               | Kye wrote:
               | People vastly underestimate the danger of a moving body
               | of water in general, but especially when that water is
               | where it isn't normally. Even a relatively tame storm
               | surge picks up sewage, dangerous chemicals, debris, and
               | confused wild animals.
        
       | kachapopopow wrote:
       | When I was in japan the earthquakes were oddly exciting rather
       | than scary, had three different ones while I was there that
       | visibly shook rather heavy objects around. Two being in a
       | building and one outside.
       | 
       | It was rather interesting seeing things shift around leaving a
       | permanent imprint that there was in-fact an earthquake and it
       | wasn't some kind of illusion when earthquakes these size couple
       | of decades ago would cause non zero amount of damage.
       | 
       | Although, I am scared for tokyo about the predicted earthquake
       | that would push all these systems near the breaking point and
       | even beyond it, but hopefully the past in not prediction of the
       | feature and instead it'll just be a lot of smaller earthquakes.
        
         | jacquesm wrote:
         | Funny, I had the exact opposite reaction. Things I had taken
         | for granted all my life suddenly became un-anchored and as a
         | result so did I. I have never felt an actual feeling of panic
         | that threatened to overwhelm me before that happened and it was
         | a very mild earthquake. I had to _really_ force myself to calm
         | down and stay rational and do what was the safest rather than
         | to give in to the  'flee' reflex.
         | 
         | The problem with earthquakes is when they start you know you're
         | in one but you have no idea where you're headed, whether this
         | is as bad as it gets or whether you're going to end up in a
         | pile of collapsed rubble and what is the best decision greatly
         | hinges on something you can't know ahead of time, which is the
         | peak magnitude and the kind of earthquake you are experiencing.
        
           | kachapopopow wrote:
           | I always was in one of the major cities so I had full
           | confidence in them. Lacking the natural fear of death
           | probably has something to do with it as well.
        
             | embedding-shape wrote:
             | What seems to matter greatly how affect someone is by an
             | earthquake, seems to also be related to how used people are
             | to being unbalanced. I was once with a group of friends who
             | most of them were skaters and snowboarders, so used to
             | thinking about balance and being in situations where they
             | can't do much about it, standing on relatively unbalanced
             | things. During the earthquake, similarly to parent, most of
             | them were fascinated, while the non-skaters quickly
             | panicked and threw themselves on the ground.
             | 
             | Of course, just an anecdote, and those people could also
             | have a general lack of fear of death, but the difference
             | between the two of you made me think of the event again.
        
               | kachapopopow wrote:
               | Well you actually bring up a very good point, people who
               | do extreme things know full well that one mistake and
               | they can hit their head and never walk again, feeling the
               | same fear while knowing that you are not in any danger is
               | what creates excitement in a way.
        
               | jacquesm wrote:
               | I knew a woman like that.
        
               | rjsw wrote:
               | I ski. Responding to being out of balance is just
               | automatic, it doesn't come from needing to think about
               | it.
               | 
               | It is a transferable skill. Have tried ice skating twice,
               | could just do it fine.
        
           | throwawaylaptop wrote:
           | 99% of your problem can be solved by studying statistics for
           | your area, and having a plan... So that you aren't just at
           | the whims of the moment when it's actually happening.
        
             | mikestorrent wrote:
             | What kinds of statistics is it that one should study?
             | 
             | Having a bugout bag and emergency supplies and water on
             | hand is a reasonable idea everyone with the means ought to
             | do; it's a good thing to not have to depend on gov't
             | intervention (not because of a lack of trust, but because
             | the general public will, and the potential for mob
             | situations is high).
             | 
             | But what should I have read about to know what to do?
             | Topological maps and flood planes?
        
               | throwawaylaptop wrote:
               | Op seemed to be freaked out about unknowns.
               | 
               | So my solution would be to look at historical data for
               | earth quakes in his area so he knows basically what to
               | expect.. that way when it starts shaking, he doesn't
               | think "omg how big will this be?" And instead can know
               | "ok this will be between 2.9 and 3.5 like the last 500
               | quakes in this area for 50+ years. Thank God no one has
               | ever died in this area from an earthquake"
               | 
               | And then he can also know that he is prepared for even a
               | much bigger quake in his area before... Because he
               | prepared something.
               | 
               | This is obvious stuff. In case the guy I wrote to didn't
               | know, now he does. If he wants to dwell in his
               | neuroticism he can.
        
           | rdtsc wrote:
           | > Things I had taken for granted all my life suddenly became
           | un-anchored and as a result so did I.
           | 
           | Same for me. If you don't grow up with a number of small
           | regular quakes or live in high-rise building that sways with
           | the wind, it's pretty unsettling to feel, what you always
           | know as stable hard ground, solid buildings all of the sudden
           | bouncing around. Rationally you know what it is and how it
           | works but it's still scary.
        
         | dyauspitr wrote:
         | I lived in California for a while. I've always found
         | earthquakes exciting. Probably because I trust the building
         | codes and the ones I experienced were pretty mild.
        
         | cedws wrote:
         | I was secretly hoping for a 'proper' earthquake when I was
         | living in Japan. Obviously I didn't want anybody to get hurt or
         | anything to get damaged, but I only ever got to feel a few ~M3
         | earthquakes which were just slight bumps I felt when laying in
         | bed.
        
       | cpncrunch wrote:
       | 0.3-1m.
        
       | linhns wrote:
       | Epicentre very deep underground, so shouldn't be dangerous aside
       | from small tsunamis.
        
         | nonethewiser wrote:
         | Gojira kimasu.
        
         | onceiwasthere wrote:
         | Your comment prompted me to go read about epicenters and I
         | learned something new. The hypocenter of an earthquake is
         | apparently the point of origin of the earthquake and the
         | epicenter is the point on the earth's surface directly above
         | the hypocenter. Had never heard of a hypocenter before.
        
           | rpozarickij wrote:
           | I didn't know about hypocenter before too but it's neat how
           | you can sometimes deduce the meaning of a word from its parts
           | (because "hypo" means "under"/"below" in Greek, like in
           | hypodermic, hypoglycaemia, etc).
        
             | macintux wrote:
             | The class wasn't as interesting as I'd hoped, in part
             | because it seemed to attract older kids hoping for an easy
             | grade, but in my high school we had an etymology class.
             | 
             | (My school also offered Latin, but etymology seemed a much
             | more direct/easier way to get the same basics. I just wish
             | someone had taught me about demographics so I would have
             | taken Spanish instead of German.)
        
               | waldothedog wrote:
               | But how much did they teach you about insects?
        
             | Aachen wrote:
             | Basically every language works that way? You can say
             | underquake in English if you like, doesn't have to be
             | Greek. In fact, it might make sense to pick a widely
             | understood language rather than one with ~13 million
             | speakers
        
           | LadyCailin wrote:
           | Interestingly, I learned the word hypocenter in Japan as
           | well, in a much more sobering way. The atom bomb that hit
           | Hiroshima exploded above the ground, and the building
           | directly under that, where the blast would have hit first, is
           | called the hypocenter.
        
       | lagniappe wrote:
       | Somewhat offtopic curiosity: Is there anything that Japanese
       | fishkeepers do to keep the water and livestock inside the tank
       | during earthquakes? Here we have no such risk for earthquakes, so
       | a 600lb tank of water 4ft off the ground isn't much of an issue,
       | even when bumped. I'd imagine earthquakes of this frequency could
       | complicate that.
        
         | awirth wrote:
         | I have a 60L fish tank in my Tokyo apartment on around the 10th
         | floor. It's sitting on stand that is not bolted to the wall. I
         | have several friends with similar setups.
         | 
         | In the last 6 years there have been two or three earthquakes
         | that caused enough water to slosh on to the floor.
         | 
         | Of those only the 2021 Fukushima earthquake caused any fish to
         | slosh out - perhaps 10 medaka if I recall correctly. Luckily I
         | was home and I was able to save all the fish, however there was
         | one adult red cherry shrimp that didn't make it because I had
         | trouble picking it up off the floor. I cleaned up the water
         | with some paper towels and it didn't seem to cause any lasting
         | damage.
         | 
         | I think if I had a 600 lb (270L?) tank or expensive fish though
         | I would probably have a different perspective.
        
       | netcraft wrote:
       | better link:
       | https://earthquake.usgs.gov/earthquakes/eventpage/us6000rtdt...
        
         | dang wrote:
         | (originally posted to
         | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46193413 but we've merged
         | the threads)
        
       | jeffbee wrote:
       | Does anyone else find the way of using tsunami.gov totally
       | baffling? It tells the user almost nothing, and the target of all
       | the hrefs for the supposed messages listed in the map is just the
       | tsunami.gov homepage again. The entire above-the-fold is occupied
       | by the map, and the map tells the user nothing.
        
         | oniony wrote:
         | The map has pins for events. At this moment there is one off
         | Japan and one off Alaska.
        
         | ghjv wrote:
         | anyone able to ping this to the lads at the National Design
         | Studio?
        
       | throwup238 wrote:
       | This would be the tenth major earthquake (7+ magnitude) along the
       | Pacific ring of fire this year.
       | 
       | With the Kamchatka and other earthquakes in the news recently I
       | had a fear that were building to some major event but turns out
       | that this year is about average if not slightly below average for
       | major quakes along the ring of fire.
        
         | markus_zhang wrote:
         | I heard that smaller (relative) earthquakes actually lower the
         | prob of larger ones, so maybe it is a good thing? A bunch of
         | 7.X earthquakes in the ocean are not going to be hugely
         | destructive.
        
           | jacquesm wrote:
           | That's correct, if relatively small earthquakes would stop
           | that could be the precursor to a much bigger one. It's like
           | releasing tension gradually rather than all at once.
        
             | tonmoy wrote:
             | Isn't that a myth? Do you have any sources to back up your
             | claim?
        
               | indigodaddy wrote:
               | Various scientists in this video. The video is a great
               | watch btw.
               | 
               | https://youtu.be/HBluLfX2F_k
               | 
               | (stresses build up and are often released through many
               | small, unfelt earthquakes (25:54). If these small
               | movements don't dissipate the stress, it can accumulate
               | and lead to a powerful chain reaction (26:25) *
               | disclaimer I used YouTube's built-in AI to find/summarize
               | the timestamps, as I couldn't remember offhand where it
               | was when I previously watched this.
        
               | mturmon wrote:
               | I don't believe the video quite says this (I watched the
               | relevant section).
               | 
               | It's worth noting that they are mostly interested in
               | critical phenomena in general, and earthquakes are kind
               | of a drive-by application, treated along with fires and
               | sand piles.
               | 
               | They do hint around the edges, but they don't head-on
               | make the claim _for earthquakes_ that small EQs
               | _materially_ lessen stress buildup and thereby make
               | larger EQ 's less likely.
               | 
               | I was looking for a credential of one of the people they
               | interview, to see if they are really a solid earth person
               | or more of a critical phenomena person -- their names
               | aren't easy to find. This particular myth ("small
               | earthquakes relieve stress") is a bit of a stinker in the
               | solid earth community, and I think a solid earth person
               | would be quite careful about their words as they discuss
               | this.
        
               | indigodaddy wrote:
               | I think you've summed it up correctly. It's not proof and
               | some scientists claiming some things isn't the same as
               | studies/evidence. However, is there evidence that it's
               | not true? The fact is we do have these smaller movements
               | and earthquakes quite regularly, so we don't really know
               | what would happen after a long absence of them (do we? I
               | suppose there are simulations perhaps that could be run?
               | But I don't know that that's proof either way). To me
               | though it makes a lot of sense that it would/could spur a
               | huge event.
        
               | __s wrote:
               | Seems like it, & each rank is 30x more energy than the
               | last[1]
               | 
               | https://www.usgs.gov/faqs/what-probability-earthquake-a-
               | fore... Suggests 5% for larger quake to follow within
               | week. But overall most sources I could find suggested
               | it's hard to know, needs more research
               | 
               | 1: https://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/10wecl8/d
               | o_litt...
        
               | jacquesm wrote:
               | https://www.geo.ruhr-uni-bochum.de/en/new-study-connects-
               | ear...
        
               | criddell wrote:
               | https://news.caloes.ca.gov/earthquake-myths-separating-
               | fact-...
               | 
               | Myth 5 is "Small Earthquakes Relieve Pressure and Prevent
               | Larger Ones"
        
               | jacquesm wrote:
               | Myth: new knowledge never trumps old knowledge. Check the
               | dates on those two publications.
        
               | fc417fc802 wrote:
               | GP is correct; I'm not sure why CA gov is calling that a
               | myth (it's not). However keep in mind that it's not
               | necessarily true 100% of the time. Or at least the things
               | it might seem to imply at first glance aren't true - the
               | presence or absence of small quakes in a given period
               | doesn't necessarily tell you anything useful about the
               | future.
        
               | jacquesm wrote:
               | Indeed. But I get why people are confused because it is a
               | subtle difference between 'stress relieved through small
               | earthquakes is stress expended' vs 'stress relieved
               | through small earth quakes is not indicative of the
               | magnitude of future events'.
               | 
               | The long term absence of stress relief small quakes on a
               | known fault line might be bad news, or no news at all,
               | statistics are where the difference is here, not in
               | particular events. See also, 'the big one' and various
               | theories around it.
        
               | mturmon wrote:
               | I think you intended this to be a validation of the idea
               | that small quakes relieve stress and therefore lower the
               | chance of a large quake.
               | 
               | The above link does not answer that question. It is
               | relating stress release to "fault strength", or the
               | maximum shear stress that can be withstood by the fault.
               | There is an incidental relationship with depth that plays
               | a role.
               | 
               | The video linked nearby (on criticality) also does not
               | address the question at issue.
               | 
               | I'm only replying because I work adjacent to this area,
               | and my understanding is that the idea that small EQ's
               | release stress is a myth. Here [1] is another link,
               | listed as #1 in the "Myths" category. And you can dig up
               | quotes from none other than Lucy Jones [2] saying that
               | this is a myth.
               | 
               | I don't work directly in this area, so I'm not willing to
               | say absolutely _no_. But I 'd really like to see a head-
               | on reference supporting the claim that it's not a myth.
               | 
               | [1] https://earthquakes.berkeley.edu/outreach/faq.html
               | 
               | [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lucy_Jones
        
               | fc417fc802 wrote:
               | EQs are a release of energy. That energy is stored as
               | stress prior to release. There is a finite amount of
               | stored energy at any given time.
               | 
               | So the statement "EQs release stress" is true and it
               | follows that adding the modifier "small" to the front
               | doesn't change this.
               | 
               | It should also be immediately apparent that it would be
               | very surprising if there were not statistical
               | implications as a result of this. So surprising in fact
               | that I would suggest that the burden of evidence should
               | fall on those claiming that any such statistical effects
               | are unexpected.
        
               | numpad0 wrote:
               | This type of argument is kind of logical but not so
               | immediately useful. Earthquakes just happen and no one is
               | involved in that process. There could still be the big
               | one coming, or that one might have been defused by this
               | one. No one knows.
        
           | lostlogin wrote:
           | > A bunch of 7.X earthquakes in the ocean are not going to be
           | hugely destructive.
           | 
           | New Zealand's 5th most deadly disaster was Christchurch's 6.2
           | which killed 185 people. It was a shallow aftershock from a
           | larger, less destructive quake.
           | 
           | The damage was huge.
           | 
           | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2011_Christchurch_earthquake
        
             | y1n0 wrote:
             | The key phrase in the parent is "in the ocean"
        
             | alex1138 wrote:
             | Leading Sarah Wynn-Williams to decide Facebook was a great
             | idea, to be able to contact people in an emergency, later
             | got dissuaded, wrote a book
             | https://www.amazon.com/Careless-People-Cautionary-Power-
             | Idea...
        
           | jansan wrote:
           | That is correct, but OTOH there was a 7.3 foreshock two days
           | before the 2011 Tohoku earthquake.
           | 
           | So the only thing we can say for sure is that it is still
           | extremely difficult to predict earthquakes.
        
           | Someone wrote:
           | On the one hand earthquakes remove tension from the earth's
           | crust and release energy that can't be used in future shocks.
           | 
           | On the other hand, if a shock doesn't release all energy it
           | may come to rest in a relatively weak spot that will soon
           | give away again
           | (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earthquake_swarm: _"The
           | Matsushiro swarm lasted from 1965 to 1967 and generated about
           | 1 million earthquakes. This swarm had the peculiarity of
           | being sited just under a seismological observatory installed
           | in 1947 in a decommissioned military tunnel. It began in
           | August 1965 with three earthquakes too weak to be felt, but
           | three months later, a hundred earthquakes could be felt
           | daily. On 17 April 1966, the observatory counted 6,780
           | earthquakes, with 585 of them having a magnitude great enough
           | to be felt, which means that an earthquake could be felt, on
           | average, every two and a half minutes."_ )
           | 
           | Because of that, I think an earthquake will increase the
           | probability of one occurring again soon, but decrease its
           | strength.
        
           | xvedejas wrote:
           | Almost all energy released in earthquakes is released in the
           | biggest ones. No realistic number of smaller quakes is ever
           | going to add up to even the single biggest earthquake ever
           | recorded.
        
         | almosthere wrote:
         | It's probably related to a phenomenon we're not yet aware of.
        
           | junon wrote:
           | Like?
        
             | doug713705 wrote:
             | Alien invasion
        
           | jibal wrote:
           | It's probably not.
        
         | bamboozled wrote:
         | The year isn't over yet though ... Jgov said there is a
         | slightly higher chance of an 8+ in the next few days. Hope not.
        
       | tetris11 wrote:
       | NHK (english):
       | https://www3.nhk.or.jp/nhkworld/en/news/20251209_02/
       | 
       | > The Japanese government set up a task force at the crisis
       | management center in the prime minister's office at 11:16 p.m. on
       | Monday in response to the earthquake.
       | 
       | A thousand Naruto shadow-clones just got deployed. I'm not being
       | cute, these guys are heroes and role-models to all.
        
         | phantasmish wrote:
         | I'm imagining the folks from Shin Godzilla.
         | 
         | I assume that movie is for Japanese civil servants like the
         | show Silicon Valley is for programmers. Stuff like the repeated
         | meeting-room changes for no apparent reason reads as too
         | specific and weird to be made-up.
        
         | dang wrote:
         | (Thanks for the link - we've since merged the threads to a
         | submission of that one. I've included the other major links
         | that people have been posting in the toptext.)
        
         | stackghost wrote:
         | What's a Naruto shadow clone? Google hits are just about a kids
         | show.
        
           | asdff wrote:
           | That is the reference
        
             | embedding-shape wrote:
             | The Wikipedia redirect is apparently dead
             | (https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Shadow_clone&redirect=no)
             | and the main page for Naruto doesn't show anything about
             | shadow clones.
             | 
             | Care to explain the reference? Do people dress up like a
             | character from the TV show and help out people or what's
             | going on?
        
               | foota wrote:
               | It's an ability from the show:
               | https://naruto.fandom.com/wiki/Shadow_Clone_Technique.
        
           | opan wrote:
           | It's a technique to temporarily make one or more duplicates
           | of your body which can move independently and have your
           | memories/abilities. A strong enough hit will dispel them, or
           | the user can do it manually, after which the memories of what
           | the clones did return to the user.
           | 
           | The usage here by GP might just be because everyone looks/is-
           | dressed the same and is working in unison, and since they're
           | Japanese, anime comes to mind. In the show, Naruto often uses
           | shadow clones to pull off more complex techniques, throwing
           | himself, having them take turns punching/kicking, or in the
           | case of the rasengan he divides the work of controlling the
           | ball of chakra since he struggled to do it successfully by
           | himself.
        
           | tetris11 wrote:
           | It is a kid's show. The main characters' outfit is modelled
           | after Japan's iconic recovery workers (stark orange and
           | blue), a compliment of their heroics echoed in fiction.
           | 
           | This character can clone himself hundreds times to help
           | others, with art often mirroring the thousands of recovery
           | workers seen in actual event footage.
           | 
           | My comment intended to link back the image of childhood
           | heroes as corporeal selfless adults
        
       | mceachen wrote:
       | In case the site gets hugged to death:
       | 
       | https://www.tsunami.gov/events/PAAQ/2025/12/08/t6yfla/1/WEAK...
       | 
       | WEAK53 PAAQ 081430 TIBAK1
       | 
       | Tsunami Information Statement Number 1
       | 
       | NWS National Tsunami Warning Center Palmer AK
       | 
       | 630 AM PST Mon Dec 8 2025
       | 
       | ...THIS IS A TSUNAMI INFORMATION STATEMENT FOR ALASKA, BRITISH
       | COLUMBIA, WASHINGTON, OREGON AND CALIFORNIA...
       | 
       | EVALUATION
       | 
       | ----------
       | 
       | * There is no tsunami danger for the U.S. West Coast, British
       | Columbia, or Alaska.
       | 
       | * Based on earthquake information and historic tsunami records,
       | the earthquake is not expected to generate a tsunami.
       | 
       | * An earthquake has occurred with parameters listed below.
       | 
       | PRELIMINARY EARTHQUAKE PARAMETERS
       | 
       | ---------------------------------
       | 
       | * The following parameters are based on a rapid preliminary
       | assessment of the earthquake and changes may occur.
       | 
       | * Magnitude 7.6
       | 
       | * Origin Time 0515 AKST Dec 08 2025 0615 PST Dec 08 2025 1415 UTC
       | Dec 08 2025
       | 
       | * Coordinates 41.0 North 142.3 East
       | 
       | * Depth 32 miles
       | 
       | * Location in the Hokkaido, Japan region
       | 
       | ADDITIONAL INFORMATION AND NEXT UPDATE
       | 
       | --------------------------------------
       | 
       | * Refer to the internet site tsunami.gov for more information.
       | 
       | * Pacific coastal regions outside California, Oregon, Washington,
       | British Columbia, and Alaska should refer to the Pacific Tsunami
       | Warning Center messages at tsunami.gov.
       | 
       | * This will be the only U.S. National Tsunami Warning Center
       | message issued for this event unless additional information
       | becomes available.
       | 
       | $$
        
         | dang wrote:
         | (originally posted to
         | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46193413 but we've merged
         | the threads)
        
       | intunderflow wrote:
       | Was in a hotel in Sapporo, almost got thrown out of bed. Lot of
       | people in the hotel lobby now.
       | 
       | Considering leaving Hokkaido by air if a Hokkaido and Sanriku
       | Subsequent Earthquake Advisory is issued, don't really want to be
       | in a potential megaquake.
        
         | linenmerchant wrote:
         | Best of luck!
        
         | akg_67 wrote:
         | Good luck, the Sapporo Chitose airport is closed for inspection
         | of both runways.
         | 
         | BTW, you are safer in hotel than outside. No need to stay in
         | lobby, go to bed, just protect your head. I experienced much
         | bigger one in Sapporo in 2018.
        
           | rishikeshs wrote:
           | I'm curious, how is it more safer inside a building than
           | being outside?
        
             | nerbert wrote:
             | Buildings are built to resist earthquakes. Outside,
             | anything (electric poles, roof tiles...) can fall on you.
        
               | decae wrote:
               | Shards of glass falling from ten stories up would be one
               | of the main things to try to avoid.
        
             | jasonvorhe wrote:
             | Modern buildings like hotels are built to withstand
             | earthquakes of some magnitudes. Wouldn't count on that at a
             | local construction site or a worn down house you might pass
             | on the street.
        
               | buildbot wrote:
               | Especially somewhere like Japan. A newer hotel is
               | probably one of the safest places to be.
        
               | traceroute66 wrote:
               | > worn down house you might pass on the street.
               | 
               | That "worn down house" might be good until "upper 6".
               | Beyond that it all depends on when it was built and the
               | associated construction standards at the time.
               | 
               | Source: https://isec-
               | society.org/ISEC_PRESS/ASEA_SEC_03/pdf/St-5_v5_...
        
             | traceroute66 wrote:
             | Japan has had earthquakes forever. Their building
             | regulations mandate things like isolation and dampers.
             | 
             | It all stems from an earthquake in 1923 in Yokohama which
             | killed 140,000. Since then Japan's has over time developed
             | some of the strictest seismic standards.
        
           | pcl wrote:
           | When I moved to SF, someone told me that the three most
           | important things you can do for earthquake safety are:
           | 
           | - make sure nothing can fall on you when you're in bed (no
           | mounted artwork above the headboard; no lamps etc on side
           | tables that are high enough to fall on you)
           | 
           | - make sure you have footwear in your bedroom, so you can be
           | mobile if there's broken glass everywhere
           | 
           | - store extra drinking water somewhere (I used a 6-gallon
           | carboy that I periodically refilled)
           | 
           | Probably there are other good things to do, but all those
           | made a lot of sense to me. Most of us spend more time in bed
           | than in any other fixed location, so making sure the bed is a
           | safe place rings true. And water is life.
        
         | cedws wrote:
         | People were freaking about the July megaquake prophecy and
         | nothing happened. Trying to time it is silly, just chill and
         | enjoy your stay, you'll probably be fine.
        
           | freetime2 wrote:
           | This is different than the July megaquake prophecy, which was
           | indeed dumb. With a strong quake like this there _will_ be
           | aftershocks. Most will be small, but there is a risk (about
           | 5% according to the USGS) of an even stronger quake than the
           | first within the next week or so [1].
           | 
           | I agree the parent will likely be fine, but it can be
           | stressful in the aftermath of a large quake. And if they want
           | to leave the area and have the opportunity to do so calmly
           | and safely, I think that's justified.
           | 
           | [1] https://www.usgs.gov/faqs/what-probability-earthquake-a-
           | fore...
        
             | kulahan wrote:
             | Why was the July megaquake, an 8.8 magnitude, a dumb
             | prophecy, but this "strong quake" at a magnitude of 7.6 is
             | a smart prophecy?
        
               | freetime2 wrote:
               | This isn't something that I personally wish to debate,
               | but I'll leave link to the wikipedia page for the July
               | 2025 prophecy [1] for anyone who may not know what we are
               | talking about.
               | 
               | And also point out that last night's earthquake in
               | Northern Japan was not a "prophecy". Just a regular,
               | large earthquake - which do occur pretty frequently in
               | Japan. And I say "large" not just because of the
               | magnitude, but because parts of Aomori experienced 6+
               | shaking on the shindo scale [2] which is categorized as
               | "brutal" [3].
               | 
               | [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/July_2025_Japan_megaqua
               | ke_prop...
               | 
               | [2] https://www.data.jma.go.jp/multi/quake/quake_detail.h
               | tml?eve...
               | 
               | [3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japan_Meteorological_Ag
               | ency_se...
        
               | scottlamb wrote:
               | Strange question.
               | 
               | The July megaquake prophecy scare was dumb because it
               | originated in a work of fiction, not intended to be taken
               | seriously by its author and not based on any scientific
               | evidence. If the "prophecy" had come true, it'd be by
               | luck alone. fwiw, I'd say it didn't come true; the 8.8
               | magnitude earthquake was near Kamchatka and didn't
               | actually damage Japan, though a tsunami seemed plausible
               | enough that there was a precautionary evacuation.
               | 
               | This "strong quake" is a thing that happened, not a
               | "smart prophecy" [1]. Talk of aftershocks is not a
               | prophecy either; it's a common-sense prediction
               | consistent with observations from many previous
               | earthquakes.
               | 
               | [1] smart prophecy is an oxymoron. A prediction is either
               | based on scientific evidence (not a prophecy) or a (dumb)
               | prophecy.
        
               | kulahan wrote:
               | You are certainly reading something into my question that
               | isn't there. I'm genuinely ignorant. I thought you were
               | saying that predictions of a strong aftershock following
               | an M8.8 were dumb, but the same thing following an M7.6
               | were smart. Is that not the case?
               | 
               | Again, sorry if this seemed antagonistic or something, I
               | really am just unsure of what you were saying.
        
               | refulgentis wrote:
               | You asked what I would have asked, in a sentence, my
               | understanding is: it was LITERALLY a prophecy, I.e. an
               | unscientific statement out of thin air, that in July,
               | there would be an earthquake followed by a larger one.
               | Here, we have reality, an earthquake, ergo the first
               | prong of a mega quake was satisfied, as opposed to
               | prophesied.
        
               | kulahan wrote:
               | Ah, that's probably it. Thank you.
        
               | hnuser123456 wrote:
               | A manga book published in 1999 randomly predicted a
               | disaster in March 2011, which seemed to come true with
               | Fukushima. The manga was re-published in 2021 predicting
               | a M8.8 in July 2025, but nothing happened. This is the
               | dumb prophecy part, it was not based on seismology
               | studies, just a shot in the dark to try to seem prophetic
               | again. Countless works of fiction are published every
               | year which predict some future disaster at an arbitrary
               | date. Every once in a while, one of those thousands of
               | random predictions can be interpreted as coming true when
               | something bad happens on that day, which retroactively
               | drives interest in that work of fiction, and less
               | scientific minds believing the author has actual future
               | predicting power beyond the abilities of science.
               | 
               | A relatively major (but not M8.8) quake has now hit in
               | December 2025. It is intelligent to expect there may be
               | aftershocks in the days after a significant earthquake
               | actually happens, which can sometimes be larger than the
               | initial quake. This is a well-accepted scientific fact
               | born out of large amounts of data and statistical
               | patterns, not whimsical doomsdayism.
        
       | meindnoch wrote:
       | We're seeing the buildup for a 9+ megathrust earthquake.
        
         | chrsw wrote:
         | How do you know?
        
           | lostlogin wrote:
           | If it happens today, OP is right, and if it happens in a
           | century they are too.
        
             | boringg wrote:
             | What about if its in a millenium?
        
               | Loughla wrote:
               | That's the nice thing about completely unsubstantiated,
               | baseless claims on the Internet, if it ever happens, you
               | can always point at it like you're Nostradamus.
               | 
               | My predictions:
               | 
               | Actual zombie president in 2044.
               | 
               | New COVID in 2061.
               | 
               | Dinosaurs come back in 2123, reveal they've been steadily
               | populating hidden Nazi underground bunkers and have
               | declared peace with the yeti.
        
           | meindnoch wrote:
           | I've connected the dots.
        
         | kelnos wrote:
         | That's completely unsupported speculation.
        
       | anthk wrote:
       | It has recently been a 4th degree one at Vitoria-Gasteiz, in the
       | North of Spain. One of the least probable places you would even
       | think of have an earthquake...
        
         | jacquesm wrote:
         | Unfortunately Spain and Portugal have seen quite a few
         | earthquakes over the centuries, some of them quite deadly:
         | 
         | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_earthquakes_in_Spain
        
           | pfdietz wrote:
           | There may be a new subduction zone forming in the Atlantic
           | off the coast there.
           | 
           | This all happens in geologic slow motion, of course.
           | 
           | https://www.livescience.com/37418-subduction-zone-forming-
           | of...
        
         | whitehexagon wrote:
         | The updated IGN website doesnt work properly for me. The old
         | site was so much better, do you know if there is an
         | alternative?
        
       | i4k wrote:
       | Does anyone has information if any prefecture got hit by big
       | waves? If none, how much time usually before the warnings are
       | lifted?
        
       | uyzstvqs wrote:
       | Official map with wave observations:
       | https://www.jma.go.jp/bosai/map.html#5/33.909/141.192/&conte...
       | 
       | 0.7m observed about 40 minutes ago.
        
       | qwertox wrote:
       | Today I got served this video " _Earthquake and Liquefaction his
       | Urayasu, Chiba 3 /11/2011_" [0], which is from the earthquake
       | which caused the huge tsunami in Japan.
       | 
       | I have rarely seen something as scary as this.
       | 
       | [0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FGblnPeOXJg
        
         | pengaru wrote:
         | The flood videos of towns, cars, and people being violently
         | washed away are way scarier IMO.
         | 
         | Urayasu looks built on the water and all I see in the linked
         | video is a threshold condition where the water is just barely
         | peeking up through the ground below. People are still walking
         | around, cars driving. There are far more chaotic and
         | destructive scenes on youtube from that tsunami.
        
           | qwertox wrote:
           | I remember it, as it was unfolding live on tv. I've never
           | seen anything as brutal as that tsunami, in terms of a
           | natural catastrophe.
        
           | andrewflnr wrote:
           | Different kinds of scary. The tsunami is clearly more
           | dangerous as an actual threat, but it basically looks and
           | works like a flood. This is a pretty familiar threat.
           | 
           | We think the ground is familiar too. So watching it change
           | into something else, a squirming alien beast, is a different
           | kind of fear. It violates your assumptions about what is
           | safe, about what is possible at all.
        
         | Medox wrote:
         | Terrifying. I know that Japan is earthquake-proofing its
         | architecture but how about the underground infra? Do they have
         | to dig and redo the pipes? The cables seem to be mostly
         | overground (at least in this video) and are probably easier to
         | repair (oldschool infra ftw).
        
           | traceroute66 wrote:
           | > The cables seem to be mostly overground (at least in this
           | video) and are probably easier to repair (oldschool infra
           | ftw).
           | 
           | In Japan cables are (still) mostly overground. Use of
           | underground is still a relatively new topic as addressed by
           | the TEPCO website[1]. The first footer on the bottom of that
           | page provides a nice TL;DR of the state of play:
           | The plans for underground conversion have consisted of "Plan
           | for Underground Conversion of Power Lines", which covered
           | three terms from FY 1986 to FY 1998, followed by the "New
           | Plan for Underground Conversion of Power Lines" from FY 1999
           | to FY 2003, and then the "Plan for the Removal of Utility
           | Poles" from FY 2004 to FY 2008. Based on these plans,
           | approximately 7,700 km of lines all across Japan were placed
           | underground over 23 years by the end of FY 2008 (with TEPCO
           | responsible for approximately 3,500 km).          Currently,
           | we are consulting with related personnel regarding items such
           | as locations for conversion as based on the new "Guidelines
           | for the Removal of Utility Poles" established in FY 2009.
           | 
           | [1] https://www.tepco.co.jp/en/hd/about/facilities/distributi
           | on-...
        
         | eej71 wrote:
         | Oddly enough, the YouTube recommendation engine served that one
         | up to me too.
        
       | keepamovin wrote:
       | Is it so serious? It was extremely deep, normally that's not as
       | strong, right?
        
       | snvzz wrote:
       | Felt it in Tokyo. It was a quite solid shake, and lasted a minute
       | or two.
        
       | ZebusJesus wrote:
       | To think that these are happening more and more around the world
       | and the USA just lost 9 detection stations near Alaska because of
       | NOAA budget cuts. There was also the giant tsunami in the middle
       | of nowhere this year.
       | 
       | https://www.alaskasnewssource.com/2025/11/01/state-seismolog...
        
       | spullara wrote:
       | Did the title of the page change as only advisories are shown on
       | the map. A warning is a very specific thing where the tsunami was
       | seen and is coming.
        
       | pezezin wrote:
       | I live in Misawa (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Misawa,_Aomori)
       | and work in Rokkasho (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rokkasho),
       | which is the area where the earthquake hit the strongest. It was
       | quite violent, apparently the strongest earthquake ever recorded
       | in the region. My house suffered no damage other than a few
       | things falling off the cabinets, and I could sleep soundly
       | afterwards, but lets see today at work.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2025-12-08 23:00 UTC)