4 ms·

>The team found that all of the volcanoes, including dormant ones, have persistent and large magma bodies. I always thought dormant merely means asleep - as in

>The team found that all of the volcanoes, including dormant ones, have persistent and large magma bodies. I always thought dormant merely means asleep - as in not currently active, but may wake up at any time. This is different from extinct volcanoes, which would actually be expected not to erupt. Crater lake in particular has well established hydrothermal activity, which strongly suggests there is still something going on below and it may erupt again in the future. Any geologists can explain what the surprising thing here is besides the apparent difficulty to distinguish dormant and extinct?

echelon 2y ago
This is pop-sci journalists once again ruining the message by either not understanding the paper or by dumbing it down to the point it becomes lazy and counter-factual. I think it's mostly the former, because there definitely exists a way to "explain it like I'm five" without telling mistruths. This pop-sci garbage has me hardcore Gell-Mann amnesia-ing [1] the rest of the journalism industry. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gell-Mann_amnesia_effect https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gell-Mann_amnesia_effect
- godelski 2y ago
  > counter-factual Be careful, a counterfactual is not just something that is in opposition to the facts[0]. I bring this up because one common way a message is misinterpreted is that words are overloaded. So people read a thing, understand it with one definition of words, but the intended definition is different. Because knowledge is often passed through a game of telephone[1] context is often lost or degraded, making it harder to decode the intended meanings. Probably worth mentioning that there is no lower bound in complexity for a lie, but the is for truth. Worse, no real "truth" exists, it is just ever approaching something that is "more correct" with exponentially increasing complexity. I often wonder if we've just advanced so far that we can no longer make sense of things with first or second order approximations. That it's just so difficult to find sufficient approximations that we break down. Our desire to have answers is stronger than our desire to understand. I suspect this is a great filter if there are any. It makes sense for any evolved creature to hit this point, as we definitely know computational complexity increases dramatically with respect to higher order terms. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Counterfactual_thinking https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Counterfactual_thinking [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Telephone_game https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Telephone_game
snowwrestler 2y ago
Active/dormant/extinct are not ternary since even “active” volcanoes don’t erupt all the time. Active and extinct are more like endpoints with most volcanoes falling into some degree of dormancy, usually indexed by how long it has been since last eruption. The surprising thing is there doesn’t seem to be correlation between time since last eruption, and size/shallowness of a magma chamber. That essentially removes one of the signals that vulcanologists were hoping would help inform predictions of the timing of the next eruption. > I always thought dormant merely means asleep - as in not currently active, but may wake up at any time. There is a lot of hope that dormant volcanoes don’t wake up at “any” time, but rather at predictable times. And the farther in advance we can make an accurate prediction, the better. So a lot of volcano research inclines toward “can this help us improve our predictions?”

echelon 2y ago

This is pop-sci journalists once again ruining the message by either not understanding the paper or by dumbing it down to the point it becomes lazy and counter-factual. I think it's mostly the former, because there definitely exists a way to "explain it like I'm five" without telling mistruths. This pop-sci garbage has me hardcore Gell-Mann amnesia-ing [1] the rest of the journalism industry. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gell-Mann_amnesia_effect https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gell-Mann_amnesia_effect

godelski 2y ago
> counter-factual Be careful, a counterfactual is not just something that is in opposition to the facts[0]. I bring this up because one common way a message is misinterpreted is that words are overloaded. So people read a thing, understand it with one definition of words, but the intended definition is different. Because knowledge is often passed through a game of telephone[1] context is often lost or degraded, making it harder to decode the intended meanings. Probably worth mentioning that there is no lower bound in complexity for a lie, but the is for truth. Worse, no real "truth" exists, it is just ever approaching something that is "more correct" with exponentially increasing complexity. I often wonder if we've just advanced so far that we can no longer make sense of things with first or second order approximations. That it's just so difficult to find sufficient approximations that we break down. Our desire to have answers is stronger than our desire to understand. I suspect this is a great filter if there are any. It makes sense for any evolved creature to hit this point, as we definitely know computational complexity increases dramatically with respect to higher order terms. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Counterfactual_thinking https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Counterfactual_thinking [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Telephone_game https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Telephone_game

snowwrestler 2y ago

Active/dormant/extinct are not ternary since even “active” volcanoes don’t erupt all the time. Active and extinct are more like endpoints with most volcanoes falling into some degree of dormancy, usually indexed by how long it has been since last eruption. The surprising thing is there doesn’t seem to be correlation between time since last eruption, and size/shallowness of a magma chamber. That essentially removes one of the signals that vulcanologists were hoping would help inform predictions of the timing of the next eruption. > I always thought dormant merely means asleep - as in not currently active, but may wake up at any time. There is a lot of hope that dormant volcanoes don’t wake up at “any” time, but rather at predictable times. And the farther in advance we can make an accurate prediction, the better. So a lot of volcano research inclines toward “can this help us improve our predictions?”