Logo IMG
HOME > My Amsci > Restricted Access

Restricted Access The content you've requested is available without charge only to active Sigma Xi members and American Scientist subscribers.

If you are an active member or an individual subscriber, please log in now in order to access this article.

If you are not a member or individual subscriber, you can:


Figure 5. Most previous studies...Click to Enlarge Image


Science has so far failed to provide any way to predict earthquakes on a timescale of days, weeks or months. But geologists are able to determine, at least roughly, the probability that an earthquake of a certain size might strike a given area within, say, decades to centuries. Such predictions are useful for establishing seismic-safety requirements in building codes, for example. The problem is that there are few ways to test such evaluations of local seismic hazard. One novel system uses precariously balanced boulders. If one can be found, it serves as an indicator that an earthquake of sufficient size to topple the tippy rock has not occurred—at least not for a very long time. This commonsensical observation has blossomed into a quantitative technique for testing more conventional seismic-hazard assessments.

Connect With Us:


Subscribe to Free eNewsletters!

Read Past Issues on JSTOR

JSTOR, the online academic archive, contains complete back issues of American Scientist from 1913 (known then as the Sigma Xi Quarterly) through 2005.

The table of contents for each issue is freely available to all users; those with institutional access can read each complete issue.

View the full collection here.

RSS Feed Subscription

Receive notification when new content is posted from the entire website, or choose from the customized feeds available.

Write for American Scientist

Review our submission guidelines.

Subscribe to American Scientist