An earthquake has a high magnitude but a low intensity. Which statement best explains this?(1 point)
In fact it does not help
They right
The statement "An earthquake has a high magnitude but a low intensity because it occurred in a sparsely populated area" best explains this phenomenon.
Explanation:
Magnitude and intensity are two different concepts used to measure different aspects of an earthquake.
Magnitude is a measure of the total energy released by an earthquake at its source. It is often quantified using the Richter scale or the moment magnitude scale (Mw). A high magnitude earthquake indicates that a significant amount of energy was released during the event.
Intensity, on the other hand, describes the effects of an earthquake on the Earth's surface and human structures. It measures the level of shaking and damage caused by the earthquake. It is usually estimated using the Modified Mercalli Intensity (MMI) scale, which is based on observations and reports from people in affected areas.
In the given scenario, the earthquake has a high magnitude, which means it released a large amount of energy. However, the statement mentions low intensity. This implies that despite the strong earthquake, the effects on the surface and structures were minimal. One possible explanation for this could be that the earthquake occurred in a sparsely populated area, where there were fewer buildings and infrastructure to be affected. In such cases, even though the energy released is high, the intensity is low because there are fewer impacts on human structures and less population to experience the shaking.
I would say that magnitude is a fixed value independent of distance from the epicenter of the earthquake, whereas intensity varies and is measured differently at different places depending upon its distance from the epicenter. Intensity decreases as we move farther from the epicenter.
I hope this helps :)