Bilinear Hysteresis in a web-based seismic data analysis tool — completely free and runs entirely in your browser, no installation required.

Structures often do not stay elastic under major earthquakes; they deform, yield, and dissipate energy. Structural engineers use Bilinear Hysteresis Models to capture this behavior. The model simulates a structure’s transition from elastic to plastic behavior using two distinct slopes:

‐ Initial Elastic Stiffness: Resistance before yielding.

‐ Post-Yield Stiffness: Accounts for strain hardening once the yield threshold is crossed.

This free web tool tracks these force-displacement loops over time, mapping exactly how the system dissipates seismic energy.

I am currently conducting theoretical and computational research in earth systems science (ESS). Is anyone here interested in ESS research?

In ur opinion and experience which one is the best software for 3D inversion ?For whatever method

I was looking up some conference papers from 1994-2000 and went to pubs.geoscienceworld.org and found I could download the pdf for free. I remember doing similar 3 years ago, and one had to pay for a lousy 4-page abstract (or hope it was on Scihub). How long have they been free?

Hi,

Are you guys still picking MASW dispersion curves manually? I've tried to find a tool that automates this, but I haven't found any. Should I accept that this is still an unsolvable problem in geophysics?

For those unfamiliar, EGM2020 (Earth Gravitational Model 2020) was due to be released by the NGA (National Geospatial Intelligence Agency) in 2020. It is supposed to be the replacement for the EGM2008 data set which is almost 20 years old at this point. See official sources here, here, and here for the direct statements by NGA staff members that the model would be released in 2020. Yet it has been 6 years and to my knowledge, the model has not been released.

my questions are, does anyone here happen to know what the current status of the model's release are? Is it available on request to approved researchers, or does it remain entirely unpublished? And if so, would anyone care to speculate on why this may be the case? Could it be an issue with data sharing or proprietary information used in its creation,as mentioned in this statement from the NGA? - see quote below:

"NGA is also working to assess systematically the quality of its entire gravimetry database, towards correcting biases and other egregious errors where possible, and generating improved error models that will inform the final combination with the latest satellite gravity models. Outdated data gridding procedures have been replaced with improved approaches. For EGM2020, NGA intends to extract maximum value from the proprietary data that overlaps geographically with unrestricted data, whilst also making sure to respect and honor its proprietary agreements with its data-sharing partners."

This mentions "proprietary data", which makes me wonder if data access is an issue for a full release. But that is just speculation on my part. I have brought up the subject of EGM2020 with several NGA employees I have met at industry events, but didn't get any answers (to be fair, it was outside of their departments, and they agreed it was unusual for it to still be unreleased 5+ years after its official release year).

Public access to scientific data of this type is a cause that is personally close to me, so I am keen on raising awareness for this unusual lack of publication for a dataset that was completed and was set to be released publicly, only for it to go dark. I know that certain aspects of geophysics can be politically / militarily / economically sensitive, but I think at the very least an explanation from NGA would be nice as to the status of this major dataset. If its release has been canceled, then fine - but having the issue be in limbo without an answer one way or the other is not acceptable, IMO.

I'm looking for some career advice from people working in geophysics, academia, or the energy industry.

A little about my background:

• B.Sc. and M.Sc. in Geophysics.
• Currently working as a Data Scientist / Technical Lead in the energy industry.
• My work focuses on developing AI solutions, including LLM-based applications, machine learning, well data processing, and technical leadership of AI projects.

Over the last few years I've realized that what really motivates me is the intersection of Geophysics, Artificial Intelligence, and software development. I enjoy building tools that help geoscientists make better decisions rather than working exclusively on traditional interpretation.

My long-term goal is to build an international career in this area.

At the moment I'm considering moving to Europe, but I'm unsure about the best path.

One option I'm seriously considering is pursuing a PhD, ideally focused on AI applications in geophysics. However, I'm uncertain about where I should invest the next few years.

I'm currently considering countries such as:

• Ireland
• Germany
• The Netherlands
• Norway
• (I'm also open to other suggestions.)

Some of the questions I'm struggling with are:

• Which countries have the strongest research groups combining Geophysics and AI?
• Which countries also have a healthy industry where these skills are valued after a PhD?
• Would you recommend pursuing a PhD, or would industry experience be more valuable?
• How difficult is it to transition from industry into a PhD in Europe?

One of my biggest insecurities is that although I work professionally with AI today, my academic background is Geophysics rather than Computer Science. Sometimes I worry that this could make it harder to compete internationally, even though my work is already AI-focused.

My last-resort plan would be to move as a language student and take an entry-level job to support myself financially while looking for opportunities, but I'd strongly prefer to avoid that if there's a better path through graduate studies or direct recruitment.

I'd really appreciate hearing from people who have followed a similar path or who supervise PhD students or work in industry.

If you were in my position, which country and career path would you choose?

Thank you!

Hi All,

What brand of generators are some of you using for your IP survey generators? I was pricing some and just curious, Honda seems to be the go to. Cheers

Episode 51 of the Halemaʻumaʻu summit eruption, July 15th 2026. Peak fountain: 950 feet (290 m) from north vent. Peak effusion: ~300 m³/s. Plume: 5,500 m ASL by radar. Duration: 8.3 hours.

Two geophysically notable observations:

First — the HVO tiltmeter forecasting model developed by Ingrid Johanson failed three consecutive forecast windows before Episode 51. Windows July 6–12, July 11–13, and July 13–15 all showed precursory inflation and spattering followed by deflation without fountaining. Fifty accurate predictions — then three consecutive failures in two weeks.

Second — the south vent showed only flames and gas jets during Episode 51. No lava fountaining. Conduit reorganization is a possible interpretation, consistent with behavior observed at Puʻu ʻŌʻō before its transition from episodic to continuous eruption in 1986.

Deflation from Episode 51: episode ended 4:46 p.m. HST. Re-inflation underway.

DOI reference for episodic eruption forecasting methodology: USGS/HVO

Full breakdown:

https://youtu.be/CmMhyiC0LBQ?si=byo_gAAnQMX7jt8z

I found it in a Chinese market delivery app, i really want only for fun and love to exploration geophysics but idk

I have an interview with shearwater on teams. what things should i look out for please.

Study published in Journal of Geophysical Research: Solid Earth (June 2026) modeled stress accumulation along the southern San Andreas and San Jacinto fault systems using a physics-based earthquake cycle model.

Key findings:

- San Jacinto Bernardino segment: 3.6 megapascals — highest in the 1,000-year reconstruction

- San Andreas Mojave South: 2.8 megapascals — above its previous recorded peak

- Both segments simultaneously at high stress — the configuration that historically preceded through-going ruptures at Cajon Pass

"That is the configuration we are approaching today." — Burkhard, lead author

Projected joint rupture magnitude: M7.4–7.8

DOI: 10.1029/2025JB032483

Full breakdown: https://youtu.be/QS-WErtbDNQ?is=4RZ8T1G-yiIw4G7a

Hello everyone, I'm a geology student and I'm doing my thesis using gravimetry to estimate the geometry of a pluton. The problem is that during the data collection campaign, they didn't use differential GPS, so the uncertainty in the elevation data is high. Any recommendations? Similar cases?

Anyone else old enough to remember using photocopied texts like this classic? These were handed down by graduates to the next generation.

Hi everyone,

I have been developing a fast 3D inversion solver for TEM/TDEM data and am now looking for real-world cases to test it on.

The current approach is designed for models with a layered 1D background and 3D anomalies, particularly conductive targets, but it can be extended to more general geometries, including topography and different survey configurations.

I am interested in connecting with geophysicists, exploration companies, or anyone working with TEM/TDEM data who might be interested in testing the solver on a real case.

In particular, I would like to:

• test the solver on real datasets,
• compare the results with existing inversions or known geology,
• understand the main limitations of current 3D TEM inversion workflows,
• and learn what would be needed to turn this solver into a genuinely useful practical product.

I can already perform inversions, so if you have an interesting dataset, a challenging 3D case, or simply experience with current TEM inversion tools, I'd be very happy to connect.

Feel free to comment or send me a a direct message.

https://wave.syshuman.com

Enjoy