I see this kind of comment every time someone decides to take a different path. Pessimistic sounds smart I guess. Well, you are wrong. I have done it myself, started a farm on a whim a couple years back, and did just fine! And no I don't know what hard work you're talking about, I'm much healthier than I was sitting at a desk all day long.
It looks a little bit periodic before we showed up. If it is random with some periodic tendency, I guess we don’t need a particular justification for the highest peak, right? One has to be. It isn’t massively higher than the previous peak.
I don't know, I wasn't there. How old do you think I am?!
Just kidding. I suspect that's an interglacial when you have warming and melting but before the trees have grown back to recapture the co2. But check with an expert if you want a more authoritative answer.
I think is is pretty obvious: those were previous species that tried to become industrial, but were killed by Bigfoots. Humans, with our natural tendency toward absolutely slaughtering other species of large mammals, are the first species to escape the Bigfoot trap.
the change from docker classic swarm into current docker swarm happened years ago. from what I can tell, usage-wise there are not much difference between the two.
however the sad thing is currently swarm is held by other company (mirantis) after being sold by docker inc. and the new company doesn't seem that invested in improving swarm. you could say its in life support now save for a few community contribution
>>> determined from the logarithm of the amplitude of waves recorded by seismographs. Adjustments are included to compensate for the variation in the distance between the various seismographs and the epicenter of the earthquake[1].
So unless people in the East have seismographs located farther underground with scientists staffing them really deep underground -for reasons beyond me- "Shallow depth" is irrelevant.
Also, there's no such thing as a "feels like X magnitude" earthquake [2]
>"Feels like" is measured on seismic intensity scales such as the Mercalli scale. These measure the peak acceleration or velocity at a given point, or the damage done by the earthquake. Intensity is influenced by many things, such as the depth of the earthquake, the distance to the ruptured section of the fault, and the local surface material.
Are you intentionally being pedantic? The point doesn't have anything to do with whether decimals are used or if conversions are direct. The point is that a 4.8 earthquake can feel different given numerous factors. The Mercalli scale attempts to capture the surface-level disruption, rather than the inherent force at the site of the quake as the Richter scale does.
Depth IS relevant to how an earthquake feels (as opposed to your assertion it isn't)--even the usgs publishes depth information. If you go back to the stack overflow link you posted, you can clearly see that a lower magnitude earthquake can be much more damaging.
The point is, richter measurement doesn't tell the whole story, and yes, you could say that a 4.8 would feel like a 6.0, even if we don't have a good way beyond the mercalli scale of discussing that. That's because the original output energy is only partially relevant to how someone experiences a seismic event.
tl;dr: your pedantic assertion that there's no conversion between the two is correct. your assertion that depth doesn't matter for feeling quakes is incorrect.
Yes, the Roman geologists did not use decimals but fractions. "S···· or S∷ | Dextans, dextantis or decunx, decuncis" would be the equivalent of .8 since they used "a duodecimal rather than a decimal system for fractions."
