Interview With Hiroo Kanamori


MJ: Professor Hiroo Kanamori, you're the director at the Seismological Laboratory here at Caltech. What exactly does that mean?

Kanamori: Well, a seismological laboratory has quite a few students, professors and secreta ries and techinical staff, and we have been conducting reserach on earthquakes and provide information to tehepublic. So we need to operate as a group and the director has a rather important function in managing the laboratory so that we can function in an orderly fashion.

MJ: We are here today in an area called Caltech. Can you explain to us what that means, what Caltech is?

K: Caltech is a university and we have approxiamately 250 professors and we have approximately 800 undergraduate students and 1,000 graduate students, so it's a very small school compared with many other gigantic universtites in the world. However, we really focus on science and engineering, and we try to be best in certain fields, not everything, but this is the tradition. We try to make this campus as small as possible but we want to do good things. We want to be best in whatever we are doing, and that'a a sort of important characteristic of Caltech. It's a very small campus as you can see.

MJ: What does "Caltech" stand for?

K: Caltech stands for Caligornia Inistitue of Technology, so it's a university, a regular university, but sometimes in this country we can call a university an "institute" instead of "university".

MJ: So these are all University students or are these post graduates?

K: Well as I said, 800 undergraduate students so they come from High-school, from the top 97% of high school students apply here. But we do have a graduate program. We have approximately 1000 graduate students mainly in science engineering. Out of 1000 studnets, 50% of the students are from foregin countries.

MJ: What kind of work are you involved in daily. Are you invovled more in research or in the classroom with the students?

K: Well I have basically 4 functions. One is research, my own research and I also teach classes both undergraduates and graduates. And also we have a lot of graduate students and so we supervise their research. Although most of the students are pretty dependent, so we talk to them from time to time. And the fourth is administrative work. As the President, I carry administrative responsibilities in the seismological laboratories. So I do have to spend some time on administrative problems.

MJ: Here we are in Los Angeles which known for many earthquakes. What kinds of personal experiences have you had with earthquakes since you've been in Los Angeles?

K: If course, the most recent large earthquake here was Northridge in1994, but before that we had the Landers Earthquake in 1992 and Sierra Madre in 1991, and in 1987 we had the Weeknals Earthquake. And before that we didn't have too many. In 1971 there was a fairly large event here, the San Fernando Earthquake, so I often felt those and, in particular, for the Weeknals and Sierra Madre the earthquake happened around 7:40 in the morning, and I usually come here around 6:30 in the morning, so I was here and I was watching the ceilings that came off, and I was wondering what was happening. Around that time our seismic network wasn't very good, so even if I felt shaking I couldn't quite immediately know where the earthquake was and how big it was, but now we have improved our seismic network so we can really have real-time information, so even if I'm sitting here I can usually tell almost immediately where the earthquake was and how big it is. Also, you may have seen these books and papers on the floor. This is partly because of these earthquakes. There was really very strong shaking and these things slid off from the table onto the floor, and they piled up, and that's the most stable position. If they are sitting on the floor, there is no place to slide down anymore. So, in a way, this is a kind of system we have learned through many earthquakes.

MJ: So really you are preparing for the next earthquake already.

K: Nothing is going to happen here because everything is already on the floor. And this is one of the prepardness we have here.

MJ: When did you first get interested in the study of seismology?

K: Actually I started out as a geophysicist, and after I graduated from the University of Tokyo I was working on material property of high pressures and temperatures. It's an experimental work, so I wasn't really doing seismology too much. Although I was trained, to some extent, as a seismologist, but my main interest was in something else. In 1965 I came to Caltech as a post-doctoral research fellow, and it was a very stimulating experience. I really enjoyed life here and there are many good seismologists here. So I sort of switched around that time to become a seismologist, and I went back to Tokyo and became assistant professor to the Earthquake Research Insititute in the University of Tokyo. So around that time I sort of started doing seismology, but maybe it's a combined effect of feelig a very strong earthquake in Japan in 1968. There was a big earthquake in Hokkaido. We call it Tokachi-Oki earthquake, and feeling something, suddenly makes you wonder what it is and you get interested in it. At the same time, the academic experience I had at Caltech had a very profound influence on my career because I really thought of the sort of way to do science and I got interested in this.

MJ: Do you remember your first earthquake experience?

K: I don't quite remember, but in 1964 there was a very interesting thing. In 1964 there was a large earthquake in Japan, Niigata Earthquake, and during the same year we had the first U.S.-Japan Conference on Earthquake Prediction. In 1964 I had just graduated from the graduate program there, so I was sort of participating in this conference as an assistant because I was just out of school, and I felt the Niigata Earthquake. So that is the reason why I remember it very well. But I presume I had felt something before that, but that was the most striking experience I had.

MJ: Now, you're obviously very learned in the area of earthquakes. Does that make you more of less afraid than the average person during an earthquake?

K: Well, probably, I am less afraid because just feeling the first few cycles at least you can tell weather it's at some distance away or not, and if it is some distance away, even if it may last longer, the shaking, it may not have too much effect. But if it is very strong during the first two seconds or so, probably it is going to be very close but we have to sort of see how long the shaking lasts. If it ends within a few seconds, well, not so big earthquake, but I can probably tell what's going to happen. But at the same time, I'm a professional seismologist so when you feel something my mind goes to sort of te scientific aspect of the event, so I really don't have time to worry about it and get to the conclusion immediately, and that's the sort of first reaction.

MJ: And worry about the family later?

K: Well my family knows that Earthquakes can happen anytime and so they are well prepared. But it is a good idea for everyone to worry about Earthquakes. Not neccessarily too much but you can do a lot of things as a private citizen to prepare for earthquakes. Unfortunately most people tend to forget about it so they really don't do too much in the way of preparation?

MJ: Are you well-prepared? Are you more prepared or less prepared than the average?

K: Less prepared, unfortunately.

MJ: Is that right?

K: Welll, there are 2 ways of preparing as a private citizen. One way, if you have a very expensive house and expensive furniture and all kinds of things, you probably want to protect your property, so you buy insurance and you do all kinds of things. That's one way. My way is to buy a very cheap house so that if it collapsed that's it, we rebuild it. That's cheap, and we don't have anything in the house. We don't have anything in the house. We don't buy anything unnecessary, so in my house there is really nothing to worry about except, of course, my family members. They don't have anything, anyway, so that's another way, so I belong to the latter category. So I really want to minimize the things I have to worry about.

MJ: In your experience do you find Americans to be better prepared or less prepared than their Japanese counterparts?

K: Well of course Japanese, in most parts of Japan, they feel Earthquakes more often and also at school they are probably trained better. So in a sense I think they are prepared, although here in California in particular, we are less prepared however the situation I think is much better. Because if you look at their houses, they are built more spacious and there are very wide streets. The spacing between houses is much greater than it is in Japan. So even if we are less prepared that is probably adequate if we are prepared properly. So there is a difference. But it is mainly because of education, the experience and the local environement.

MJ: Some time back there was an Earthquake in Kobe as you are of course aware. Were there any particular new things that were learned as a result of the earthquake in Kobe?

K: Well, of course, an earthquake process is part of geological process and it's going on on the Earth in many places, and in any place like Japan or California we are ilving very close to a plate boundary. In case of California we have the San Andreas Fault. In case of Japan there is a trough called the Nankai Trough, so it's very close to a major plate boundary, and if you go too close to a plate boundary the crust of the Earth is very highly fractured. There are a lot of deformations and fractures.

So, in a sense, you realy have to expect that kind of eathquake at any time at any place. So, in that sense, it wasn't really particularly unexpected. That's unfortunate, but that's really what it is. So in that sense, from that event alone, we don't learn too much.

We learn a lot of things from all earthquakes but not from a single earthquake, so that's one step in stepwise increase in our knowledge, so we study very extens ively regarding what kind of waves that came from the Kobe Earthquake. So, certainly, the information we had from the Kobe Earthquake will help us to prepare for the next one. But the Kobe Earthquake is realy nothing in particular special in terms of seismology, and that's really a very important thing because we have to be prepared for these things.

People think that seismologists are doing studying only for predicting earthquakes, but that's not true. In this country, in particular, we know that earthquakes are very difficult to prepare. We shouldn't give a wrong impression to the public. It's not something we can predict very precisely.

Then the question is what seismologists can do. What are they doing? There is a very important function for seismologists because the modern cities have very complicated systems - lifelines, transportation, communication, banking system, large structures. It's a very, very complex system, and we are living there, and earthquakes are going to happen. It will continue to happen, so our living environment has changed for the last fifteen-hundred years, so we have to live with it. And then the question is, what can we do?

Seismology really provides basic information regarding what to prepare for. We know what ground motion would take place from the next earthquake, and also, as you may have experienced in Kobe, if a major, very devastating earthquake happened, you have to mobilize rescue operations very quickly, and you have to restore damaged properties and facilities. To do that it is very important to hve accurate information of what had happened, and seismologists can provide that kind of information. We call it "real-time seismology." We measure things with very sophisticated instuments, so immediately after an earthquake we can send the information regarding what has happened to many people who are running facilities, emergency services operations, so that they can send their people to the right place at the right time. So I don't know exactly what happened at... It is very easy to critisize people". It is a very large Earthquake. It is very chaotic and it must be very difficult to do things in an orederly fashion but what is most important is to have very good sophisticated infrastructure so that we can send information to rescue operations and restoration operation can be done very quickly and effectively. That's what seismologists are doing. So it's becoming more important these days because of the sophistication and the modernization of the city.

MJ: Some people were very suprised at the lack of preparation or the effective follow up after the Kobe Earthquake. What are you thoughts on that?

K: Well, lack of preparation. I am not really sure I think I have heard of that. But in Japan as a whole, people are very well trained and educated. So preparation wise, at least by the US standard, it must have been pretty good. Of course, I think in terms of research, more focus was placed on Tokai area between Tokyo and Shidoka, so in terms of monitoring activity, certainly this particular area near Kobe wasn't really looked up very carefully. But stil even if you haven't looked up this area very carefully, the Earthquake was unpredictable. It can happen. So the post-earthquake response is certainly more important and I heard from you and from the people that the post-earthquake response was not good, I don't know because I wasn't there. But certianly with modern tecnhology, we ca nimprove the situation greatly. Maybe this is one of the lessons we hav learnt and for the next one we can probably improve the infrastructure so that we can improve the post earthquake relief efforts. But it is very unfortunate and I certainly sympathize with the people who lost their properties and their relatives. But we must be aware that thses things can happen at anytime and any place. And we have to be prepared for them and we can do that we the use of modern technology.

MJ: If we were to look at seismological activity in the past several thousand years, would you say that there is an increase in the activity recently?

K: No, it fluctuates, so there is always a difficulty in explaining this thing. As I said, the earthquake process is a geological process, and that means that the time scale is very long, like a thousand years or ten thousand years or even a million years. So if you look at the whole process of a scale of, say, one million years, you can make some prediction regarding what's going to happen, but if you look at ten years, a hundred years, it's such a short time scale and activity fluctuates, goes up and down, so it's really hard to make anything definitively over time scales of ten to a hundred years. So I don't think there is any significant increase or decrease. I mean, there is always a change.

MJ: Just that there is a media today that reports it. Is that why we feel like it is more activity?

K: Well, because it is the human nature. When you see something you think that those things are happening. But you have to be very careful from the scientific outbreaks and human factors. They are two things and you really have to seperate them.

MJ: Do you have numbers for instance certain earthquake strikes at ilke certain magnitude, equals certain amount of casualty, do you have that sort of framework worked out?

K: Well of course, there is an agency, Fema, who has made up kind of estimates. However, no matter what number you come up with, it subject to a lot of uncertainty because it depends upon so many things. Even if you fixed the magnitude and the location, still the extent of damage depends upon what time of the day and if that day is a holiday or a regular working day, or whether the freeway was very crowded. So there are so many factors and it is bound to be very uncertain. And in particular in the case of Northridge it was very early in the morning before rush hour started and also partly it was the holiday so that helped. In Kobe in a way, it was very early in the morning so probably it was lucky but if it happened during rush hour time, you can easily see that there would have been far more damaging if it happened to say, an hour and a half later. So there are so many factors so it is hard to come up with a number so Fema made some estimates butI can't remember exactly what teh number is, but it is quite reasonable to try to estimate. But whatever number you get it is bound to be very uncertain. And there are also secondary effects to see, with regards to fire, or a landslide or a flood. All kinds of things can contribute to the extend of damage. So it is a very difficult thing.

MJ: When and where did the largest earthquake recorded occur?

K: The largest earthquake was on May 22, 1960 in Chile. This was the largest one, and we had a magnitude of 9.5. In this century that was the largest one.

MJ: Where would you say is the most dangerous location in the world in terms of earthquakes?

K: Well, as I said, it's really not a matter of seismic activity alone. I mean Tokyo is certainly, just considering , the number of people living and considering its proximity to major plate boundaries there. Certainly, it is a very, very worrisome situation. I mean everyone probably knows that.

Mexico City, of course, is built on very, very soft material, so there are a lot of places. Unfortunately, if you look at the world many big cities are located very close to major plate boundaires. I don't know why. San Francisco, Mexico City, Tokyo, Osaka, many of them, and so for that reason, as I said earlier, you can do two things. Well, if you decide you can move the cities. It may be possible, but it's probably not very practical. The second thing is we have to accept the situation. We are living in a big city close to plate boundaries. Then let's try to do our best, and with modern technology, as I said, communication, computer, seismology. We can do much better than we could do ten years ago. So we really have to do it, and we can improve the design of engineering structures. That's very important. So, there are two things. One is even if you don't want to move the city, what Japan has done in terms of moving city life, part of the government institution from Tokyo to Tacuba. That was in a way a very good thing because certainly you dispersed the potential damage to be caused by an Earthquake. And that is very important. So you really have to look at the larger scale program instead of just on the earthquake.

MJ: There has been some reports in the American media about a little device that can detect earthquakes. What do you make of that?

K: Well of course for certain things it may work. But the earthquake process is far more complex thing. For example if you have a device here, if someone hit it, it will trigger, and what do you do. And of course from a personal basis, you just forget about it, that's ok. But if you want to predict on the .... basis, you can't afford to have that kind of situation. You really have to have some intelligence in that kind of system so that is why the kind of system that profeesioal seismologists are talking about is real expensive because it's not a simple matter. You really have to distinguish between an Earthquake shaking to something that can be caused by other causes. So it is not a simple problem. It is a good device and maybe it's for trained students or children, but I do not think that is the reason for improving the infrastructure of large cities. It is too simplistic.

MJ: Does it predict or does it tell in the early stages of an Earthquake?

K: It doesn't predict many things. It is a sensor so if the ground shaked underneath, it will send you some signal. So it detects the ground motion and will tell you that there is ground motion. So if there is an earthquake wave, certainly it is useful. However there are a lot of other things that cancause ground motion. So if you are fooled by the system once or twice, you won't believe it. It is just human nature. So for any system, it has to be completely reliable and shouldn't have any false alarms. False alarm rates much be close to zero. And that is why if you use that kind of system, it is very difficult. But still we are trying to come up with kind of a system.

MJ: Can you tell us a bit about yourself? Where were you born and raised in Japan?

K: I was born in Tokyo and I brought up there for nearly 33 years. I know Tokyo 5 years ago but I don't know very much about it now. And I don't know how to ...

MJ: Was your father involved in this kind of work?

K: No my father is entirely different. Of course he has a very good understanding of science and engineering but he wasn't into this profession. Hewas actually at one time, one of the cabinet member of the Japanese government, just after the war.

MJ: Tell us about your education and how you ended up here in California?

K: Education? In what sense?

MJ: In Japan.

K: I graduated from the University of Tokyo in 1959 and I received my P.H.D in 1964. And I came here from 1965 to 1966 for the ... and went back to Tokyo and went to MIT as a visiting professor from 1969 to 1970 and went back to Tokyo and came here as professor in 1972. So my basic education was in Japan and that was very good. I think Japanese education program is very good. People are complaining that they study too much things. Well of course, sometimes it is bad but to do science, you need to know certain things, so I don't think it is really that bad. So you have to learn certain things. So Japanese education program is actually very good, they should be proud of it. However in terms of doing reserach, you need flexibility and in that sense I think academic ability is very good. You can really do very different things from other people. In Japan, I don't know these days but it's more difficult to do somethig very different there because people think that you are strange. You are expected to do the same things as others, but here, you don't care what other people are doing. It is really innovation, creativity for the individual research. All of that are expected here. In a way, maybe I have a better way because I was educated in Japan with a very good education program. Though I did not study very well but the program was good. Then after I graduated, I came here, so that I can do more for the research. I am lucky I guess.

MJ: Tell us about your family?

K: My family? Well, I have a wife who is a scientist doing Bio-chemistry research here in Pasedena.And I have two children, both are boys. And the oldest son is working at Microsoft. He has P.H.D in computer science, but decide to work at this industry, so he is a programmer, assistant programmer to Microsoft. My second son, graduated from Caltech and he is now studying at Stamford, the graduate program.

MJ: Do you ever regret having move to the US and raise your family here?

K: Well, I don't really have much philosophy actually. I usually go into some environment and I try to do my best there. And in a way it is a bit accidental when I moved to the US. Of course I like this place in 65' so certainly that was a very pleasant experience I have in 1965. It has a tremendous influence on my decision to move to the US permenantly in 1972. But there were also other factors somehow accidental. So, I don't know. I don't really plan very seriously. I just do whatever is feasible and I try to do my best in the environment.

MJ: What types of work are you involved in today.

K: Right now, of course I am still doing research work because I want to understand the basic physics philosophy. How earthquakes occur and what kind of ground motions come out from them. But at the same time, I am looking at the effects of the volcanic eruption into the atmosphere. The outer atmosphere, and if you have volcanic eruption, it puts up to a large amount of energy into the atmosphere and that wil trigger some type of

MJ: You spent many years here in the U.S in the academic community. What are your thoughts on academic life here in the States?

K: Compared with Japan?

MJ: Yes.

K: Firstly, of course, at Caltech I hav many very brilliant colleagues, so certainly it's a very stimulating environment. But one thing which impressed me most here is that really when Caltech wants to bring in faculty members Caltech doesn't really care from which country the person is coming. For the last twenty-three years or so I ahve been here and I have never been discrimintaed raciatlly, and it is really quite impressive, and sometimes even know wehre I came from. People don't know where some person came from. It's essentially everyone is a scientist. It doesn't matter from which country the person came from.

Just the person has to be good in reserach and teaching, and that's it, and we often have a meeting, faculty meeting, to make new appointments. We want to bring in someone here so, of course, we look at this research accomplishments, whether he's good in teaching and others. Sometimes we worry about whether he has a cat at home of not, bue we never questio in a way until the las minute whether he's a French or Japanese or that sort of thing. That's really out of the question, and that really supriesed me and impressed me, and that's certainly one of the reasons why, despite the recent financial problems in thie country, U.S. still is maintaining a fairly high level of academic activity, and that's a very important thing. It's very open, and it it's good you just bring it.

MJ: Thank you for joining us today.

K: Thank you.