Just a question....What did seismometer's in Europe catch during the time of the Nova Kakhovka Dam explosion, would be interesting to see or is there a reason for the silence????
Mayon is among my favorite volcanoes for obvious reasons. I read an article on Volcano Cafe which suggested that the size of its edifice is also quite dangerous due to Mayon overlying some faults. I also remember that article saying that due to Mayon's symmetry, it is very difficult to determine which direction the pyroclastic flows will take. This is also due to the lack of deep ravines on the volcano, which would restrict the areas where pyroclastic flows can go! What do you think of this, Geology Hub?
Hey GeologyHub I was wondering if you could make videos about historical seismicity outside of the West Coast and Alaska, such as in Nevada, Idaho, Wyoming, Colorado, and elsewhere east.
I wish that Mayon won't have a caldera forming eruption, I don't want its beauty to fade and lose its almost perfect cone appearance. It erupted VEI 4 in the past so there's a possibility that it could erupt much stronger but I hope it won't.
Mr. Geology Hub: Not only Mayon but our country's 2 active volcanoes are simultaneously acting up. Taal and Kanlaon. Can you do a video of all 3 Volcanoes having connections to each other. All Three are showing some unrest.
In the beginning of this notification he did mention that the volcano was in the Philippines. But I agree with you that he should mention the location several times during these notices.
Everytime I see a volcano so tall and pointy I wonder how long it can keep maintaining adding weight and adding weight over the magma chamber before something drastic happens. Youd think at some point itd add 1 too many new layers and all hell would break loose.
For a future video? Has the amount of water on the earth remained mostly constant in the past 4.5Billion years? (regardless of sea level and polar ice cover, ice sheets etc), We understand that earth got it's water from comets and asteroids arriving in it's primordial era. Could there have been a period where the amount of water on earth increased AFTER the primordial epoch? By release from minerals in subduction etc?
This is a tricky and largely unresolved question. On one hand here is growing evidence that Earth's water is likely original to the planet as through use of seismic tomography and laboratory modeling as well as isotopic ratio analysis Enstatite chondrites the type of rock thought to have principally formed the bulk of the Earth while long thought to have been hydrogen poor have been recently shown to have not only have hydrogen in the form of mineral hydrates but to occur in approximately the same ratio of rock to water that seismic tomography indicates resides in Earth's mantle plus Earth's surface water in our oceans relative to the bulk rocky Earth moreover with the isotopic ratios being a close match unlike water derived from more distant sources in the outer solar system which is more deuterium rich. The extremely close to exact match between the hydrogen isotopic ratios and the total quantity and ratio of water to rock in the bulk Earth is so precise that any possibility other than virtually 100% of Earth's water being primordial in origin seems extremely improbable. This is also strongly supported based on the isotopic ratios of other volatile elements like Nitrogen in undifferentiated chondrites relative to the bulk Earth. Thus in principal it looks to be the case that virtually all elements on Earth likely were derived from pure E chondritic material with negligible contributions from any other population. The reason this is still somewhat controversial despite the strength of the evidence is that the classical model of planet formation has always been that asteroid like clumps of dust lump together and accrete over tens of millions of years to form planets. However evidence has been building up which greatly challenges this classical model most notably being the astronomical observations made by long baseline interferometry which effectively tell us that models timescale of planet formation is hundreds to thousands of times too long with planets form on timescales of many thousands of years not millions and thus far there is no way to make a planetary core yet alone a planet in that timescale using the classical accretionary models. Now you can get part of the way with the pebble accretion model which at least provides a good means to explain the later stages of planet formation however this method still can't form the initial seed embryos on the sort of timescale observations show us planets form on. This leads us to direct collapse models which are currently the only way to form massive things quickly enough from gas and dust particulates, pure direct collapse unfortunately requires a region to reach a threshold known as the Jeans mass and is thought to be responsible for leading to star formation but simulations have shown that in a turbulent environment like an accretion disk you can naturally get eddies and whirls of material which can allow much smaller astrophysical bodies to rapidly coalesce. This process also appears to be quite general as we see the same thing occurring in very different environments from the disk of very massive stars orbiting Sagittarius A star to smaller companion stars forming around extremely massive protostars and of course planets all forming on timescales far less than that of planetary differentiation thus eliminating the need for secondary delivery of volatiles. There is also evidence for this process known as disk instability direct collapse within our solar system notably the flyby of the classic Kuiper belt object 486958 Arrokoth showed almost a perfect example of a fossil of direct collapse formation and the interior structures of Mars Jupiter and Saturn have all turned out to be less well differentiated than we had expected based on the analysis of Earth and our Moon. That last detail namely how different the interior structure of the Earth and the Moon appear to be compared to the other planetary bodies we have probed the interior structure of as the giant impact hypothesis can neatly explain this in its more violent forms. This is supported by the way that such simulations behave when we ramp up the grid scale resolution, i.e. they get more dynamic and violent for a wider array of possibilities compared to the lower resolution simulations which treat each particle in the N body simulation as rigid bodies rather than allowing fluid dynamics and phase transitions. The net result here is that as the resolution has improved the timescale and violence of the event has decreased and increased respectively. In this case surface tension seems to be very important as is the thermodynamics control on how much water can combine with silicate minerals to form hydrated rocks in the mantle. Of course if we account for the amount of water and have it all starting as a gas then it could reach the pressures and temperatures to become a supercritical fluid (supercritical water by the way does still occur naturally around deep sea hydrothermal vents so this isn't surprising in it of itself) the important point is this could allow water to skip the gas to liquid phase transition to in essence have the ocean already be present before the planet's crust could solidify. The catch however is that it turns out that liquid rock and supercritical water have a natural tendency to form a mixed fluid that is stable under high pressures, this notably is the fluid responsible for subduction melts in volcanic arcs on modern Earth, this means not all that fluid water would be part of a distinct separate ocean at least initially though so probably not all the water in Earth's mantle today was in the oceans. However we do have good evidence that the amount of water in our oceans versus in the mantle has changed over time and this may be critical to the process we call plate tectonics. The rabbit hole goes far deeper than this but I see this has already gotten super long so I'll stop here. Hopefully it shows how complicated things are.
Mount Apo is the Tallest Mountain in the Philippines the home of the Great Eagle..focus your Watch on that Mountain..it will dissappear anytime.(Revelation 16:18-21).
Who else found themselves leaning in when he said, "this is why"?
Not me
I didn't, though I'm on my phone and blind. Basically, if I leaned in, I'd be smacking my face. 😁. I like the analysis provided
Oh, absolutely.
All things aside… what an absolutely beautiful volcano. So aggressive spike-like shape. I love it.
Q: Where do volcanoes go to relieve themselves?
A: The lava-tory.
Smell of sulfur in there mate, i'd leave the danger zone for a while.
Lol.
Booooooooooooo!!!!!!!!
Dad joke alert!😊
Nice one haha
Thanks! Really appreciate you efforts to keep us informed
I’m always glad to help. Thank you for your support!
Love your explanations, GeologyHub - you're SO good at conveying what's going on!
That mountain still looks the same as when I passed it in a C-130 back in the 80's. The perfect cone.
Very nicely done thank you for the information always loved your channel keep up the good work on keeping information out there have a great day
Just a question....What did seismometer's in Europe catch during the time of the Nova Kakhovka Dam explosion, would be interesting to see or is there a reason for the silence????
Mayon is among my favorite volcanoes for obvious reasons. I read an article on Volcano Cafe which suggested that the size of its edifice is also quite dangerous due to Mayon overlying some faults. I also remember that article saying that due to Mayon's symmetry, it is very difficult to determine which direction the pyroclastic flows will take. This is also due to the lack of deep ravines on the volcano, which would restrict the areas where pyroclastic flows can go! What do you think of this, Geology Hub?
Hey GeologyHub
I was wondering if you could make videos about historical seismicity outside of the West Coast and Alaska, such as in Nevada, Idaho, Wyoming, Colorado, and elsewhere east.
Watching from the Philippines so very interesting.
I wish that Mayon won't have a caldera forming eruption, I don't want its beauty to fade and lose its almost perfect cone appearance. It erupted VEI 4 in the past so there's a possibility that it could erupt much stronger but I hope it won't.
Mr. Geology Hub:
Not only Mayon but our country's 2 active volcanoes are simultaneously acting up. Taal and Kanlaon. Can you do a video of all 3 Volcanoes having connections to each other. All Three are showing some unrest.
The alert level was raised to a 3 earlier today.
Mayon is one of the most symetrical volcano on the world 😌
It just did though, the sulfur dioxide went from 208 t/d on June 5 to 574 t/d on June 6, 2023.
Thank you for the update I am always updated in here also taal volcano still producing vog in the island of Luzon here in Philippines :)
Mount Illiamna in Alaska has an increased in earthquakes and alert levels.
With the history of explosive eruptions in the Philippines, I would err to the cautious side of "Nope. Not going near that volcano!"
Looking forward to another vid, beause I heard the alert level is now Level 3.
Kilauea sounded off this morning! Cheehoo!
Great content. Love to watch more of this. And btw
Can you make also on Taal Volcano in Philippines? Thank you
I've been there a few times while visiting the Philippines.....
Could you please add the country to the volcano name. I'm clueless where these volcanoes are located. Thanks
In the beginning of this notification he did mention that the volcano was in the Philippines.
But I agree with you that he should mention the location several times during these notices.
Try paying attention
Everytime I see a volcano so tall and pointy I wonder how long it can keep maintaining adding weight and adding weight over the magma chamber before something drastic happens. Youd think at some point itd add 1 too many new layers and all hell would break loose.
Can you discuss about mt. Arayat also in the Philippines
Mount Hood has started quakes
THAT is one to watch!
I always love it when he makes predictions, and then you see another vid days or weeks later that proves/ disproves his prediction lol
what is the seamount south of cyprus? Looks like submarine shield volcano inside of 120x100km caldera
For a future video?
Has the amount of water on the earth remained mostly constant in the past 4.5Billion years? (regardless of sea level and polar ice cover, ice sheets etc), We understand that earth got it's water from comets and asteroids arriving in it's primordial era.
Could there have been a period where the amount of water on earth increased AFTER the primordial epoch? By release from minerals in subduction etc?
This is a tricky and largely unresolved question.
On one hand here is growing evidence that Earth's water is likely original to the planet as through use of seismic tomography and laboratory modeling as well as isotopic ratio analysis
Enstatite chondrites the type of rock thought to have principally formed the bulk of the Earth while long thought to have been hydrogen poor have been recently shown to have not only have hydrogen in the form of mineral hydrates but to occur in approximately the same ratio of rock to water that seismic tomography indicates resides in Earth's mantle plus Earth's surface water in our oceans relative to the bulk rocky Earth moreover with the isotopic ratios being a close match unlike water derived from more distant sources in the outer solar system which is more deuterium rich. The extremely close to exact match between the hydrogen isotopic ratios and the total quantity and ratio of water to rock in the bulk Earth is so precise that any possibility other than virtually 100% of Earth's water being primordial in origin seems extremely improbable.
This is also strongly supported based on the isotopic ratios of other volatile elements like Nitrogen in undifferentiated chondrites relative to the bulk Earth. Thus in principal it looks to be the case that virtually all elements on Earth likely were derived from pure E chondritic material with negligible contributions from any other population.
The reason this is still somewhat controversial despite the strength of the evidence is that the classical model of planet formation has always been that asteroid like clumps of dust lump together and accrete over tens of millions of years to form planets. However evidence has been building up which greatly challenges this classical model most notably being the astronomical observations made by long baseline interferometry which effectively tell us that models timescale of planet formation is hundreds to thousands of times too long with planets form on timescales of many thousands of years not millions and thus far there is no way to make a planetary core yet alone a planet in that timescale using the classical accretionary models.
Now you can get part of the way with the pebble accretion model which at least provides a good means to explain the later stages of planet formation however this method still can't form the initial seed embryos on the sort of timescale observations show us planets form on. This leads us to direct collapse models which are currently the only way to form massive things quickly enough from gas and dust particulates, pure direct collapse unfortunately requires a region to reach a threshold known as the Jeans mass and is thought to be responsible for leading to star formation but simulations have shown that in a turbulent environment like an accretion disk you can naturally get eddies and whirls of material which can allow much smaller astrophysical bodies to rapidly coalesce. This process also appears to be quite general as we see the same thing occurring in very different environments from the disk of very massive stars orbiting Sagittarius A star to smaller companion stars forming around extremely massive protostars and of course planets all forming on timescales far less than that of planetary differentiation thus eliminating the need for secondary delivery of volatiles.
There is also evidence for this process known as disk instability direct collapse within our solar system notably the flyby of the classic Kuiper belt object 486958 Arrokoth showed almost a perfect example of a fossil of direct collapse formation and the interior structures of Mars Jupiter and Saturn have all turned out to be less well differentiated than we had expected based on the analysis of Earth and our Moon.
That last detail namely how different the interior structure of the Earth and the Moon appear to be compared to the other planetary bodies we have probed the interior structure of as the giant impact hypothesis can neatly explain this in its more violent forms. This is supported by the way that such simulations behave when we ramp up the grid scale resolution, i.e. they get more dynamic and violent for a wider array of possibilities compared to the lower resolution simulations which treat each particle in the N body simulation as rigid bodies rather than allowing fluid dynamics and phase transitions. The net result here is that as the resolution has improved the timescale and violence of the event has decreased and increased respectively. In this case surface tension seems to be very important as is the thermodynamics control on how much water can combine with silicate minerals to form hydrated rocks in the mantle. Of course if we account for the amount of water and have it all starting as a gas then it could reach the pressures and temperatures to become a supercritical fluid (supercritical water by the way does still occur naturally around deep sea hydrothermal vents so this isn't surprising in it of itself) the important point is this could allow water to skip the gas to liquid phase transition to in essence have the ocean already be present before the planet's crust could solidify.
The catch however is that it turns out that liquid rock and supercritical water have a natural tendency to form a mixed fluid that is stable under high pressures, this notably is the fluid responsible for subduction melts in volcanic arcs on modern Earth, this means not all that fluid water would be part of a distinct separate ocean at least initially though so probably not all the water in Earth's mantle today was in the oceans.
However we do have good evidence that the amount of water in our oceans versus in the mantle has changed over time and this may be critical to the process we call plate tectonics.
The rabbit hole goes far deeper than this but I see this has already gotten super long so I'll stop here. Hopefully it shows how complicated things are.
@@Dragrath1Thanks.
Can you do a video on muon radiography/topography as it relates to geology, please?
They raised the alert level to 3 now
today volcano mayon,taal and kanlaon are both are erupt in philippines,😢
Mayon is capable of like vei 5-6 right which can blow off that perfect looking top.
Mayon just erupted today.
So in 2023 we have more than 5 volcanos erupting. It's weird. Lots of volcanic activity no????
Solar Cycle 25 is popping.
I see my barangay 🙏 😢
free energy. burn coal, gasoline, and oil for energy.
MAYONNAISE
Hold the Mayo
Mount Apo is the Tallest Mountain in the Philippines the home of the Great Eagle..focus your Watch on that Mountain..it will dissappear anytime.(Revelation 16:18-21).
This didn’t age well I guess lol.
So if the alert level gets any higher you might get...MAYONaise.
Would not want to taste it...😖
MAYONraise
First