<html xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40"> <head> <META HTTP-EQUIV="Content-Type" CONTENT="text/html; charset=us-ascii"> <meta name=Generator content="Microsoft Word 11 (filtered medium)">  <style>  </style> </head> <body lang=EN-US link=blue vlink=blue> <div class=Section1> David Schwarz wrote, in part:<o:p></o:p> <o:p> </o:p> “How big is the big boil on the second Giantess in a series?  How long are the steam phases on the second-day of a mixed-phase Giantess”<o:p></o:p> <o:p> </o:p> My apologies for the confusion.  A Giantess eruption to me is that entire period of activity following the big boil, which might last over 24 hours.  Marler described the various types of eruptions as steam and water, and I believe it was Hutchinson who also first described the mixed.  Later there was the aborted.  These are all different types of a single eruption. <o:p></o:p> <o:p> </o:p> What I was referring to is Giantess’s predilection for having two or three eruptions in a somewhat short period of time – within a couple of months – followed by a protracted period (over a year sometimes) with no eruptions.  Whether or not this is a “series” by the normal way of defining “series” of eruptions is a reasonable question.  I think, statistically, that these spacing of eruptions is not some randomness but actually significant.  <o:p></o:p> <o:p> </o:p> So – to answer your questions – the second eruption starts with the same size big boil as the first, as would the third.  The pool behaves the exact same way before the start of any Giantess eruption.  And the steam phases on a second-day of a mixed-phase Giantess is a contradiction, to the best of my knowledge, because mixed eruptions have water phases in the 2nd day rather than steam phases.  But it’s a geyser, and it does what it wants.  If such an eruption occurred – steam phases on the 2nd day of a mixed phase eruption – we’d probably consider it a variation of a new type of eruption.<o:p></o:p> <o:p> </o:p> And to make it clear: a new type of a single eruption.<o:p></o:p> <o:p> </o:p> Paul Strasser<o:p></o:p> <o:p> </o:p> <o:p> </o:p> <div> <div class=MsoNormal align=center style='text-align:center'> <hr size=2 width="100%" align=center tabindex=-1> </div> From: geysers-bounces@lists.wallawalla.edu [mailto:geysers-bounces@lists.wallawalla.edu] On Behalf Of David Schwarz Sent: Thursday, June 11, 2009 9:31 PM To: Geyser Observation Reports Subject: Re: [Geysers] Geysers that Erupt in Series<o:p></o:p> </div> <o:p> </o:p> <o:p> </o:p> <div> On Tue, Jun 9, 2009 at 8:08 PM, Paul Strasser <<a href="mailto:upperbasin@comcast.net">upperbasin@comcast.net</a>> wrote:<o:p></o:p> Jeff may dispute this, but nobody - repeat: nobody - considers Flounder's 2nd burst a separate eruption.  IF it was, what was the pause?  How much overflow did it have?  You can say the same thing about Grand's 2nd burst - was it a T or G?  And F&M after the initial 15 minutes - did the second eruption "start" after a river vent pause?<o:p></o:p> <div>  I don't think I buy the argument that because the followup bursts / eruptions don't have the same characteristics as the initial, they're just bursts rather than eruptions.  How big is the big boil on the second Giantess in a series?  How long are the steam phases on the second-day of a mixed-phase Giantess?  How long does Lion splash before its in-series eruptions?  How much does Spiteful's overflow increase right before an in-series eruption starts? By the way, if we're listing geysers that erupt in series and weaken the well-known/large requirement, Spiteful definitely belongs on the list.  Also, arguably, East Sentinel, although it's more F&M-style (long eruption, pause, weak eruption, pause, until it finally quits).  Jewel goes in the category of cases people will argue about, along with Plume, Grand, et al.  Link has certainly been known to erupt in series, and is large, if not as well-known as some. Ultimately, since we're looking at surface manifestations rather than what's actually going on underground, I think we're going to end up arguing semantics.  If subsequent eruptions happen quickly enough after a pause, most people at least informally seem to lump them into a single eruption, whereas if the pause is long, they're considered separate eruptions, even if the followups are very different from the initial.  Does that mean there's a fundamental difference between the bursts of Grand and eruptions of Lion?  I dunno.  Maybe? David Schwarz<o:p></o:p> </div> </div> </div> </body> </html>