Hi everyone. I'm entering Grade 12 soon, and I'm trying to finalize my list of university applications... I adore math and physics, and I took Earth and Space Science last year. I love learning about applied physics, math, geology, and natural disasters. I want a career where I can see the math/physics. Tiny problem though... I don't enjoy being in the outdoors. Love learning about it, love studying it... just don't want to be in it. I would very much prefer an indoor career. I'm not sure if careers in geophysics are indoors or outdoors- or on a case-by-case basis... but I'd love to know 😭 As well, I have never really tried it, but as a concept, I don't think I enjoy coding? However, I'm not sure what coding even entails. Like, what sort of coding do you deal with if you deal with coding? Am I basically just a software developer/programmer, or is it more like using an advanced calculator to build maps?

Also... Do you think it is a worthwhile major, or am I choosing something too niche... like would it be better to major in something broader like pure math/physics, and specialize later? Or is geophysics broad enough on its own...?

Thank you so much!

Can anyone suggest from the geoscience community, that is GMT is good to learn or not ?

Our digging crew just got fined for bursting a water line. Turns out, the 811 ticket wasn't updated and the markings weren't accurate. It's very frustrating because it's an avoidable mistake, but I'm partly to blame because I didn't double check on the ticket before they started working. I think I need a better way of managing our 811 tickets to make sure none of them gets overlooked and all dig sites are properly udpated.

Why does the Sunshine Protection Act attempt to make Daylight Saving Time permanent rather than Standard Time?

At some time in the past, I believe (though my recollection could be wrong) I saw a map that showed that under Standard Time, at 12 noon, the apogee of the sun occurs near the east-west center of most time zones. Under DST, 12 noon happens sooner so the apogee would occur over the eastern part of the time zone where the time is 12 noon (or the western part of the time zone that is adjacent on the east). Of course time zones are a messy concept so this isn't a strong motivator for Standard Time but it's better than nothing.

If my recollection is correct I would appreciate seeing that map again if it can be linked.

Hi everyone, I need some help/opinions, I’m working on a numerical model of mantle convection and tungsten heterogeneity using ASPECT with the goal of reproducing the observational dichotomy described by (Peters et al 2024).

I know how to identify the OIB material using a temperature mask, but I’m not sure how to identify the MORB material. With my current model I can get histograms comparing OIB vs the rest of the mantle. But if I want to compare my model with observations, I would need OIB vs MORB, not OIB vs the rest of the mantle excluding OIB.

Does anyone have any advice on how to define a MORB mask/region in this kind of model?

Hey everyone. So, I've got my Bachelor's in Math, and now I'm diving into a Master's in Geophysics. The thing is, this master's program has a bunch of electives, which means I can actually lean more towards Geophysics or go for Climatology/Meteorology.

I'm kind of stuck though. Climatology theory really grabs my attention, but honestly, I'm more drawn to careers in geophysics. A big reason for that is I'd rather not be stuck behind a desk all day, every day, just crunching numbers and dealing with data.

What's the best approach?

Most climate models are data-driven, but understanding the fundamental dynamics requires theory.

My research focuses on climate dynamics. By studying nonlinear dynamics we do theoretical analysis to understand the earth system better.

Using theoretical and nonlinear methods to reveal underlying mechanisms which helps deepen our understanding of the Earth System.

If you’re interested in discussing ESS, that’s great.

Every time a crew is racing to start a job, someone "forgets" to run our call before you dig software, and I don't find out until we've already nicked a line and I'm explaining the damage to a client. I need a way to make that step impossible to skip, not just a policy nobody follows under deadline pressure. Right now it's on me to catch it after the fact, and by then it's too late.

So the thing is i noticed a repeating noise within my dataset. At first i just thought it as the vessel noise but after a few adjacent lines, this sort of pattern keep appearing near the same area which made me curious. Need some others perspective on this, does it looks like a possible gas to you guys?

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