New Issue: Orbital Catastrophe Ahead? Read Now

Earthquakes Exert Global Influence

An earthquake in Indonesia can mean future tremors in California. David Biello reports

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


[The following is an exact transcript of this podcast.]

A powerful earthquake beneath the Pacific triggers a tsunami that devastates Samoa and American Samoa. Another powerful temblor strikes off the coast of Sumatra. But is there a connection beyond the fact that both sit on the geologically active Ring of Fire that encircles the Pacific Ocean? According to new research published in Nature this week: yes. U.S. seismologists looked back at powerful earthquakes of the past, such as the 2004 seismic event off Sumatra that spawned a killer tsunami throughout southeast Asia. That earthquake, the second largest ever recorded, had a discernible impact on the San Andreas fault half a world away. Earthquakes occur when such faults slip due to weakness or stress. But measuring fault strength has not been possible in the past.  By looking back at the seismic record for the San Andreas fault near Parkfield, Calif., the "Earthquake Capital of the World," the seismologists found that an increase in microquakes there corresponded with subtle shifts in subterranean fluids between 1987 and 2008. Two of these shifts followed nearby earthquakes—within 200 miles—and boosted the number of tiny quakes. But the third shift occurred after the Sumatran quake in 2004. That means a new way to predict quakes in future and the possibility that this week's earthquake-related tragedies could strike on the other side of the Pacific, as well. 

—David Biello

Subscribe to Support Independent Journalism

Great science journalism requires human expertise, time, effort and creativity. And it costs money. That’s why I and the journalists here at Scientific American hope you’ll join our community.

When you subscribe, you are supporting staff and freelance journalists who are passionate about telling science stories that are true, important and compelling. Our editors and reporters are often experts in their fields, which means they understand the nuances of big discoveries and can untangle the breakthroughs from the hype. With a subscription, you are also supporting rigorous fact-checking to ensure the words we publish are precise and accurate. And you’re supporting original illustrations, graphics and photos that bring you closer to an advanced laboratory, an ice sheet in Antarctica or a space mission in orbit. You’re helping us craft other types of high-quality journalism as well: Our newsletters are carefully written, edited and curated by staffers you have or will come to know and love. Our Science Quickly podcast is based on original reporting, collaboration with editors and scientists and exacting production.

Subscriptions keep this engine running so we can continue to deliver thoughtful, rigorous and independent science journalism to you. In an era of viral misinformation, this work is crucial. If you value what we do, I hope you’ll consider joining us as a subscriber

Thank you,

Jeanna Bryner, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe