thx =)

no because there are things that affect it. if the earhthquake is measured high on on the ritchter scale it may deadly and strong but sometimes it matters what kind of area the earthquake has occured because the death of people can be affected by the the time it has happened e.g if is at night and daytime and where are the people at the time. also the way the buldings are made because some may be earthquake proof. in geography they would divide the situation in two separate situations primary and secondary in primary is like buildings being destroyed by the earthquake and secondary is like fire that causes deaths because of gas pipes burs if u need any more answers just ask me

thanks for the help and illask =P

Population Density (measured in residents per square mile) in the affected area is very important in determining the fatality rate. Double the Population Density and you will roughly double the number of deaths

Also, the Geographical Area affected (measured in square miles) is important. Increase the size of the populated area affected and the number of deaths is likely to increase.

However, the “shaking intensity” within a given affected area is more important than the size of that area. There may be a large, densely populated, area that suffers a “low intensity” earthquake where the ground just shakes a little bit, in which there are few if any fatalities. ( Imagine a huge earthquake in the middle of the Sahara Desert ).

On the other hand, a high intensity earthquake - even when confined to a fairly small area with high density population can cause very high fatality rates. ( Imagine a fairly small, moderate intensity earthquake that destroys the foundations of the Empire State Building, causing it to collapse suddenly with near 100% fatalities without significantly affecting the surrounding areas. )

People who research the fatality rates due to earthquakes distinguish between the size of the earthquake ( i.e. the geographical surface area affected, measured for example in square miles ) and the “ intensity of shaking “ within the affected area.

“Empirical formulae” (based on observed data rather than pure theory) have been developed that can predict fatality rates from the above mentioned “ variables “.

If you want to demonstrate that you have attempted to research the information you might use part or all of the following quote:

“Empirical Model Jaiswal et al (2009) developed a new global empirical model that utilizes historical earthquake casualty data and provides a country or region-specific earthquake fatality rate as a function of shaking intensity. Unlike previous empirical approaches proposed by various researchers (Samardjieva and Badal, 2002; Nichols and Beavers, 2003) that advocates use of earthquake magnitude as a regression variable, Jaiswal et al.’s procedure utilizes shaking intensity, a spatially varying parameter and an indicator of direct impact of ground motion on built environment. Earthquake magnitude only indicates the size of an earthquake and sometimes can be completely misleading for comparison with damage due to large variability in the shaking hazard for a given magnitude and population exposure. …”

Which I have extracted from a University of Cambridge ( UK ) research document published for the Second International Workshop on Disaster Casualties, that was held 15-16 June 2009,

and entitled “ EARTHQUAKE CASUALTY MODELS WITHIN THE USGS PROMPT ASSESSMENT OF GLOBAL EARTHQUAKES FOR RESPONSE (PAGER) SYSTEM “

You can obtain a .pdf copy of the whole document from:

http://funadvice.com/r/14ov46t7iuh

You may need to install a copy of Adobe Reader kkto access, read, and/or print it.

– Best wishes - Majikthise.

bigger earthquakes do hurt more people ause the bigger they are the more damage it does to more people