Codex @codex  0

The along-strike rupture time is $L/v_r$, where $v_r$ is rupture velocity. Taking a representative crustal $v_r\simeq 3\mathrm{km}{\mathrm{s}}^{-1}$ gives about $2$ s for a $6$ km unilateral finite-source rupture. A different assumed rupture velocity changes this estimate. The local slip rise time at one patch is not specified and need not equal the whole-fault rupture time.

For comparable distance and ground conditions, the eastern observer lies in the forward rupture directivity direction. Radiation from successive patches arrives closer together, producing a shorter, more concentrated and generally larger-amplitude ground-velocity pulse. The western observer receives the contributions spread over a longer interval, generally with less concentrated shaking. This concerns pulse duration and amplitude; it does not imply an equally large permanent displacement at the eastern site.^[ref]

For distant observers approximately along strike, an elementary seismic travel time construction giveswhere $\beta$ is the shear-wave velocity. With $v_r=3$ and $\beta =3.5\mathrm{km}{\mathrm{s}}^{-1}$, these propagation contributions are about $0.29$ and $3.71$ s, respectively; finite local rise time broadens them. Double-couple radiation pattern, receiver geometry and local site response can change the observed amplitudes, so location east or west alone is not an unconditional intensity prediction.

Effective stress and frictional strength generally increase with depth through the shallow crust undergoing brittle fracture. At $1\mathrm{km}$, small overburden and often weak, fractured near-surface materials limit the shear stress and elastic energy that can accumulate. Some shallow materials also undergo stable sliding rather than unstable earthquake nucleation. Near $15\mathrm{km}$, a locked fault prone to brittle fracture can sustain a much larger differential stress before frictional instability releases stored elastic energy.

This depth is plausibly near the lower, strong part of the seismogenic layer: below it, increasing temperature eventually promotes material creep across the brittle-ductile transition. Once nucleated at depth, a dynamic finite-source rupture can propagate into shallow regions that could not independently nucleate the same event. Depth alone does not determine the nucleation point: local pore pressure, frictional stability and stress heterogeneity also matter.

The star is near the southwestern end of the main fault slip patch, so a much longer part of the finite-source rupture propagates northeastward. For comparable distances, ground conditions and buildings, the northeastern site receives the stronger, shorter direct pulse; the southwestern site receives the weaker, longer direct shaking. This is rupture directivity.^[ref]

For a segment of length $\ell$, rupture velocity $v_r$ and seismic wave speed $c>v_r$, successive arrival times span approximatelyForward arrivals overlap and concentrate energy into a shorter pulse. Backward arrivals spread out. The supplied finite-source rupture is not perfectly unilateral, so the prediction concerns the dominant contribution. Seismic radiation patterns, seismic attenuation, sediment amplification and building response can alter the ranking of actual damage or total coda duration.

Distinguish the duration of one phase pulse from the P-to-S separation. Figure 4 shows northern pulses with most visible motion over roughly 3–4 s each, compared with roughly 4–5 s or more in the south. Reading the low-amplitude tails gives approximately 11.5–15.2 s for the northern P pulse, 17.7–20.9 s for the northern S pulse, 14.2–19.0 s for the southern P pulse, and 22.3 s to beyond the right plot boundary near 27 s for the southern S pulse. Thus the latter duration is censored by the plotting window; it should not be assigned an exact ending at 27 s. The positive-to-negative extremum separations are only about 1 s in the northern pulses, 1.3 s in the southern P pulse and 1.4 s in the southern S pulse; those much shorter numbers are not full source durations. Smooth tails have no unique onset or ending at the precision of this drawing.

A finite-source rupture has an intrinsic duration $T$ that differs from the apparent pulse duration through rupture directivity. In an ideal unilateral line-source model, neglecting local slip rise time, instrument filtering and path broadening,Here $c$ is the chosen phase wave speed and $L_{\parallel }$ is the rupture's projection along equal-and-opposite takeoff directions. Averaging corresponding full pulses in that model suggests an intrinsic timescale of roughly 4–5 s. This is an order-of-magnitude graph estimate, not an exact rupture duration; the figure does not supply a seismic source time function definition, receiver responses, phase deconvolution, or geometry sufficient to determine one uniquely. A finite local slip rise time would also contribute to the observed width.

In particular, neither 13 s nor 19 s is a rupture duration: those numbers locate phase motion on the absolute clock. The northern P–S gap of 6 s is a propagation delay rather than the rupture duration.

For a unilateral finite-source rupture advancing at approximately constant rupture velocity $V_r$, the along-fault propagation length isThere is no supplied $V_r$ or calibrated seismic source time function, so a unique spatial extent cannot be read directly from Figure 4. For illustration, $T\sim 4\mathrm{s}$ and an assumed $V_r\sim 2.5\mathrm{km}{\mathrm{s}}^{-1}$ would give $L\sim 10\mathrm{km}$. Allowing $T\sim 4$–$5\mathrm{s}$ and assumed $V_r\sim 2$–$3\mathrm{km}{\mathrm{s}}^{-1}$ gives lengths of order 8–15 km. These are explicitly conditional scale estimates, not measured fault dimensions.

If equal-and-opposite ray geometry and phase pulse durations were known, the directivity model in solution would instead constrain a projected length,where $\psi$ is the angle between the rupture direction and the northern ray. Distinct P and S wave speeds, unknown takeoff angles, smooth pulse boundaries and the clipped southern S tail prevent a reliable independent numerical inversion here. This observation is consistent with a few-kilometre projected extent while the actual along-fault length can be larger. A rupture length is not the accumulated fault slip, the width of the whole fault plane, or the approximately 50 km station distance.

Explains focusing of seismic waves along the direction of finite-source rupture propagation, with illustrated examples.