<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<!DOCTYPE article PUBLIC "-//NLM//DTD Journal Publishing with OASIS Tables v3.0 20080202//EN" "journalpub-oasis3.dtd">
<article xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:oasis="http://docs.oasis-open.org/ns/oasis-exchange/table" dtd-version="3.0">
  <front>
    <journal-meta>
<journal-id journal-id-type="publisher">NHESS</journal-id>
<journal-title-group>
<journal-title>Natural Hazards and Earth System Science</journal-title>
<abbrev-journal-title abbrev-type="publisher">NHESS</abbrev-journal-title>
<abbrev-journal-title abbrev-type="nlm-ta">Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci.</abbrev-journal-title>
</journal-title-group>
<issn pub-type="epub">1684-9981</issn>
<publisher><publisher-name>Copernicus GmbH</publisher-name>
<publisher-loc>Göttingen, Germany</publisher-loc>
</publisher>
</journal-meta>

    <article-meta>
      <article-id pub-id-type="doi">10.5194/nhess-15-1873-2015</article-id><title-group><article-title>Pre-earthquake magnetic pulses</article-title>
      </title-group><?xmltex \runningtitle{Pre-earthquake magnetic pulses}?><?xmltex \runningauthor{J.~Scoville et al.}?>
      <contrib-group>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="yes" rid="aff1 aff2 aff3">
          <name><surname>Scoville</surname><given-names>J.</given-names></name>
          <email>atpsynthase@mail.com</email>
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff4">
          <name><surname>Heraud</surname><given-names>J.</given-names></name>
          
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff1 aff2 aff3">
          <name><surname>Freund</surname><given-names>F.</given-names></name>
          
        </contrib>
        <aff id="aff1"><label>1</label><institution>San Jose State University, Dept. of Physics, San Jose, CA 95192-0106, USA</institution>
        </aff>
        <aff id="aff2"><label>2</label><institution>SETI Institute, Mountain View, CA 94043, USA</institution>
        </aff>
        <aff id="aff3"><label>3</label><institution>NASA Ames Research Center, Moffett Field, CA 94035, USA</institution>
        </aff>
        <aff id="aff4"><label>4</label><institution>Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú, Lima, Peru</institution>
        </aff>
      </contrib-group>
      <author-notes><corresp id="corr1">J. Scoville (atpsynthase@mail.com)</corresp></author-notes><pub-date><day>20</day><month>August</month><year>2015</year></pub-date>
      
      <volume>15</volume>
      <issue>8</issue>
      <fpage>1873</fpage><lpage>1880</lpage>
      <history>
        <date date-type="received"><day>22</day><month>September</month><year>2014</year></date>
           <date date-type="accepted"><day>19</day><month>November</month><year>2014</year></date>
      </history>
      <permissions>
<license license-type="open-access">
<license-p>This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported License. To view a copy of this license, visit <ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/">http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/</ext-link></license-p>
</license>
</permissions><self-uri xlink:href="https://nhess.copernicus.org/articles/.html">This article is available from https://nhess.copernicus.org/articles/.html</self-uri>
<self-uri xlink:href="https://nhess.copernicus.org/articles/.pdf">The full text article is available as a PDF file from https://nhess.copernicus.org/articles/.pdf</self-uri>


      <abstract>
    <p>A semiconductor model of rocks is shown to describe unipolar magnetic pulses,
a phenomenon that has been observed prior to earthquakes. These pulses are
suspected to be generated deep in the Earth's crust, in and around the
hypocentral volume, days or even weeks before earthquakes. Their extremely
long wavelength allows them to pass through kilometers of rock.
Interestingly, when the sources of these pulses are triangulated, the
locations coincide with the epicenters of future earthquakes. We couple a
drift-diffusion semiconductor model to a magnetic field in order to describe
the electromagnetic effects associated with electrical currents flowing
within rocks. The resulting system of equations is solved numerically and it
is seen that a volume of rock may act as a diode that produces transient
currents when it switches bias. These unidirectional currents are expected to
produce transient unipolar magnetic pulses similar in form, amplitude, and
duration to those observed before earthquakes, and this suggests that the
pulses could be the result of geophysical semiconductor processes.</p>
  </abstract>
    </article-meta>
  </front>
<body>
      

<sec id="Ch1.S1" sec-type="intro">
  <title>Introduction</title>
      <p>Rocks, especially igneous rocks, behave as semiconductors under conditions of
temperature and pressure that occur in the Earth's crust <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx24 bib1.bibx30 bib1.bibx10" id="paren.1"/>. Semiconductor behavior has also been
demonstrated in laboratory settings using rocks at room temperatures
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx9 bib1.bibx11 bib1.bibx13 bib1.bibx5 bib1.bibx23" id="paren.2"/>.</p>
      <p>Although the magnetic fields produced by small semiconductors are often
negligible, semiconductors on geophysical scales may produce significant
magnetic fields. This is of particular interest since these fields can pass
through the crust, potentially conveying information about the state of rocks
deep below.</p>
      <p>Ultra-low<fn id="Ch1.Footn1"><p>In this context, “ultra-low” refers to electromagnetic
waves having frequencies from millihertz to a few Hertz, in contrast to the
International Telecommunications Union (ITU) definition of ultra-low, which
would correspond to waves having frequencies of
300 <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Hz</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>–3 <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">kHz</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>.</p></fn> frequency (ULF) electromagnetic emissions are
reported as having been observed prior to earthquakes <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx2" id="paren.3"/>,
possibly resulting from electric currents flowing deep in the crust
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx3" id="paren.4"/>. Increased levels of magnetic fluctuations have been
repeatedly observed prior to earthquakes since at least 1964
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx20" id="paren.5"/>, but these transient phenomena are not yet fully understood
and their applicability as earthquake precursors remains controversial within
the geophysical community as many claimed precursory signals have been
disputed or disproven in subsequent studies. For example, one of the most
frequently cited magnetic anomalies preceded the Loma Prieta earthquake
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx7" id="paren.6"/>. Some authors dismiss this as normal geomagnetic
activity enhanced by operator or amplifier malfunction <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx4 bib1.bibx29" id="paren.7"/>, while counterarguments <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx8" id="paren.8"/> point out that
continuous calibration tests should preclude this as a possibility, that the
precursor lacks the diurnal behavior of typical geomagnetic activity, and
that amplifier malfunction would not preferentially amplify low-frequency
signals. <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx8" id="paren.9"/> states that “<inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">…</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>there is independent
scientific support for us believing that the magnetic field fluctuations may
have been precursory, but quite obviously further independent confirming
measurements are required, according to the normal scientific process, before
such magnetic field changes can be referred to definitively as precursors.”</p>
      <p>There are also reports of electric signals being associated with seismicity
without a significant magnetic component. This is frequently the case with
the Varotsos VAN method <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx32" id="paren.10"/>, presumably due to electrostatic
charge accumulating at the Earth's surface.</p>
      <p>During the weeks leading up to the <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>M</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn>5.4</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> Alum Rock earthquake of
30 October 2007, a magnetometer located about 2 <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">km</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> from the epicenter
recorded unusual non-alternating magnetic pulses, reaching amplitudes up to
30 <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">nT</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx3 bib1.bibx2" id="paren.11"/>. The incidence of these pulses
increased as the day of the earthquake approached. Figure 4 from
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx2" id="text.12"/> shows that in the 3 weeks preceding the Alum rock
earthquake, the pulse count was much higher than any other 3-week period from
2006–2007. After the earthquake, the pulse count immediately falls back to
normal levels. <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx2" id="paren.13"/> also note that there were no nearby
lightning strikes at corresponding times, and that in comparison to the PC3
and PC4 geomagnetic pulsations, these localized unipolar pulses were much
stronger and lasted longer, and could not be seen at locations far from the
EQ epicenter, as would be expected for geomagnetic activity. Observed
pre-earthquake electromagnetic waves typically have frequencies between 0.01
and 20 <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Hz</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>, possibly owing to the fact that only low-frequency
components may traverse tens of kilometers through the rock column.</p>
      <p>A pair of magnetometer stations in Peru recently recorded similar unipolar
pulses prior to several medium-sized earthquakes, and triangulating the
source of these pulses revealed the location of subsequent earthquake
epicenters <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx17" id="paren.14"/>. The unipolar magnetic pulses observed prior
to earthquakes have a characteristic shape that can be seen in
Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F1"/>. The unipolar nature of the magnetic pulses is somewhat
unusual and bears resemblance to pulses produced by lightning and other
electrical breakdown phenomena. However, the duration of many pre-earthquake
pulses exceeds several seconds, much longer than any lightning strike.
Moreover, triangulation of such pulses near Lima, Peru revealed that strong
pulses originated almost exclusively from locations within a few kilometers
of future earthquake epicenters <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx17" id="paren.15"/>.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F1"><caption><p>Magnetic pulses observed prior to an earthquake in Lima, Peru,
approximately 25 km from the epicenter.</p></caption>
        <?xmltex \igopts{width=241.848425pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://nhess.copernicus.org/articles/15/1873/2015/nhess-15-1873-2015-f01.png"/>

      </fig>

      <p>To model the electromagnetic phenomena associated with volumes of
rock, we solve a three-dimensional drift-diffusion model of
a semiconductor and calculate the magnetic fields induced by its
electric currents.  The model is seen to describe transient
low-frequency unipolar magnetic pulses.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S2">
  <title>Rocks as semiconductors</title>
      <p>The conductivity of crustal rocks in fault zones has been measured by
magnetotellurics <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx24 bib1.bibx30" id="paren.16"/> as having conductivity values
too low to be a conductor but too high to be an insulator. Such a material is
called a semiconductor <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx16" id="paren.17"/>. Rocks having conductivities in the
range 0.1–1 <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Sm</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> have been observed in magnetotelluric surveys,
e.g. from deep crustal rocks along the San Andreas fault
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx30" id="paren.18"/>. Although there is no generally accepted reason for such
high levels of conductivity, several hypotheses have been proposed, such as
fluid saturation <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx30" id="paren.19"/>, partial melting <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx24" id="paren.20"/>,
intergranular carbon films <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx6" id="paren.21"/>, and the presence of mobile
charge carriers referred to as positive holes <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx10" id="paren.22"/>.</p>
      <p>We will show that unipolar pulses can emerge
simply from the electrical drift and random diffusion of charge carriers
in a semiconducting volume of rock.  There are several reasons why this
is a plausible mechanism for the observed pulses.  Large electrical
currents are known to accompany earthquakes, occasionally so large that
luminous effects known as earthquake lights <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx28" id="paren.23"/> become
apparent.  There is experimental evidence <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx9 bib1.bibx11 bib1.bibx13 bib1.bibx19 bib1.bibx23" id="paren.24"/> indicating that, during stressing,
electrons and holes are freed in igneous rocks and become available to
populate states in the conduction and valence bands, respectively.</p>
      <p>One proposed source of charge carriers in rock is the break-up of
peroxy defects <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx9 bib1.bibx11 bib1.bibx13 bib1.bibx23" id="paren.25"/> as
a result of the increase in tectonic stresses.  The oxygen sublattice
of a wide variety of silicate minerals can form peroxy defects that
act as sources of electron/hole pairs <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx11" id="paren.26"/>, causing these
minerals to exhibit semiconductivity.  Once activated, highly mobile
electronic charge carriers diffuse through the minerals.</p>
      <p>Peroxy defects are point defects, typically introduced through the
incorporation of <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">H</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> into nominally anhydrous minerals that
crystallize in <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">H</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>-laden magmas or recrystallize in
high-temperature <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">H</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>-laden environments <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx11" id="paren.27"/>.
The incorporation of <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">H</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> into oxides and silicates leads to
<inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">OH</mml:mi><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> pairs that subsequently undergo redox conversion.  The
two <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">H</mml:mi><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> of the <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">OH</mml:mi><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> pairs combine to form
<inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">H</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, and the <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> ions bind to form a peroxy bond.
The formation of these peroxy bonds has been extensively studied in
laboratory experiments <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx11 bib1.bibx9 bib1.bibx12 bib1.bibx15" id="paren.28"/> and treated by computational chemistry
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx22" id="paren.29"/>.</p>
      <p>When peroxy bonds are energized via stresses in the rock or by heat, they may
produce electron-hole pairs. The peroxy bond breaks, forming a transient
state with two unpaired electrons. This is followed by a fully dissociated
state in which a hole is free to move through the crystal structure.
A neighboring oxygen atom donates an electron and becomes a hole, as its
valence shell becomes deficient by one electron. The donated electron becomes
trapped near the broken peroxy bond <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx15" id="paren.30"/> in a new state whose
energy level is slightly below the upper edge of the valence band. In terms
of the valence state, the neighboring oxygen atom, which was previously in an
<inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> state, becomes <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>. This oxygen anion in the
1 - state is effectively a positive hole with an incomplete valence shell
and could also be regarded as an unstable oxygen radical <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx9" id="paren.31"/>.</p>
      <p>Holes are capable of propagating through the oxygen lattice, exchanging
valence electrons by a phonon-assisted vacancy hopping mechanism
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx25" id="paren.32"/>. This process effectively constitutes a diffusion of
<inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> states through a lattice of <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> atoms. The trapped
electrons are immobile but participate through recombination and
electrostatic interactions. Positive hole charge carriers propagate at
100–200 m s<inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx9 bib1.bibx23" id="paren.33"/>, much slower than
piezoelectric effects or crack propagation, which propagate at the speed of
sound (2000–8000 m s<inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>), but faster than ion transport which takes
place at much slower speeds. The charge carrier velocity allows mechanisms
such as piezoelectricity, crack dislocation effects <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx31" id="paren.34"/>,
and the electrokinetic effect <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx21" id="paren.35"/> to be ruled out as the
predominant source of electrical activity in many rocks.</p>
      <p>A recent study <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx5" id="paren.36"/> has suggested that if crustal
semiconductivity is the result of fluid-saturation, the positive hole model
might not apply. This conclusion was based on a series of experiments
involving dry and fluid-saturated rock samples. However, even if the
fluid-saturation hypothesis is valid, analysis of these results<fn id="Ch1.Footn2"><p>In
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx5" id="text.37"/>, the authors conclude that stress-stimulated currents do
not occur in fluid-saturated samples of gabbro. Figure 4b in
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx5" id="text.38"/>, however, clearly indicates that, given the “ST1”
experimental setup <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx9" id="paren.39"><named-content content-type="pre">which is erroneously cited several times as
originating from</named-content></xref> currents change in response to stress. These
are, in fact, stronger than those observed in dry samples, as expected due to
their increased conductivity. Figure 5b in <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx5" id="text.40"/>, based on the
“ST2” experimental setup, shows a 43 % increase in current from an
unusually high baseline of 4.85 to about 6.95 nA over the course of seven
loading-unloading cycles. In spite of these current changes,
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx5" id="text.41"/> conclude that stress-stimulated currents are not
observed in fluid-saturated samples of gabbro.</p></fn> as well as the experimental
results of a more recent study <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx23" id="paren.42"/> contradict certain results
<fn id="Ch1.Footn3"><p>In addition to an opinion on stress-stimulated currents,
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx5" id="text.43"/> conclude that the polarity (negative) of observed
currents in dry gabbro was opposite to that previously reported in the
literature (positive). Some of the experiments reported in <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx23" id="text.44"/>
reproduce the ST1 setup reported in <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx5" id="text.45"/> for dry gabbro,
obtaining a positive polarity that agrees with the existing literature and
contradicts the conclusion of <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx5" id="text.46"/>. The anomalous results of
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx5" id="text.47"/> might be explained by wires having been connected to
terminals of the incorrect polarity. The experiments in <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx5" id="text.48"/>
also produced baseline noise levels that are 2–3 orders of magnitude higher
than those reported in <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx23" id="text.49"/>, calling into question the accuracy of
the data reported in <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx5" id="text.50"/>.</p></fn> of <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx5" id="text.51"/>.
Moreover, the true conditions of rocks at depth are difficult to emulate in a
laboratory setting. At depths of more than a few kilometers the pore spaces
of rocks are closed by the overload pressure. Without a connected pore space,
no contiguous voids exist within rocks for water or other fluids to fill.
Furthermore, liquid water cannot exist at any pressure when temperatures
exceed 373.95 <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">C</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>, which is the case deep in the crust. At the
temperatures and pressures found in the deep crust, water exists not as a
liquid but as highly reactive supercritical fluid with very different
physical and chemical properties and would be consumed by mineral reactions
over geologically short timescales.</p>
      <p>The dynamics of other charge carriers (polarons) <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx24" id="paren.52"/> behave in a
manner similar to positive holes, via a vacancy-hopping mechanism. For
example, electrons can hop between Fe<inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> and Fe<inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> atoms in a manner
similar to O<inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> and O<inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> atoms, albeit with different mobility and
diffusion parameters. Regardless of the mechanism by which semiconductivity
arises in crustal rocks, semiconductors on macroscopic scales generally obey
the same dynamics of drift and diffusion presented in the next section.</p>
      <p><xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx23" id="paren.53"/> reports a series of experiments relevant to the phenomenon of
unipolar pulses. By applying a rapid (approx. 1ms) impulse to a rock tile, a
predominantly unipolar pulse of current is consistently observed. Since
currents act as sources for the magnetic field, the predominantly unipolar
current pulses observed in <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx23" id="paren.54"/> should be accompanied by
predominantly unipolar magnetic pulses. This can be seen in Fig. 2, showing
the result of five experiments that deliver a rapid (but non-destructive)
force to dry gabbro samples. In the following section, we show that the
semiconductor model predicts this behavior in response to charge carrier
injection.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F2" specific-use="star"><caption><p>Current pulses observed after delivering a rapid impulse to gabbro
samples.</p></caption>
        <?xmltex \igopts{width=369.885827pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://nhess.copernicus.org/articles/15/1873/2015/nhess-15-1873-2015-f02.png"/>

      </fig>

      <p>The broadening of the <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>≈</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> ms impulse to a 3–6 ms current pulse
indicates that diffusion is taking place as the charge carriers drift through
the rock, a behavior that is characteristic of semiconductors. This is the
phenomenon that originally allowed Haynes and Shockley
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx26 bib1.bibx27" id="paren.55"/> to confirm the drift-diffusion
dynamics of semiconductors. These pulses also characteristically rise faster
than they fall, a behavior that is also seen in most of the unipolar magnetic
pulses shown in Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F1"/>. This is also characteristic of the
diffusion of charge carriers through semiconductors.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S3">
  <title>Drift-diffusion semiconductor model</title>
      <p>The drift-diffusion equations are the most frequently used model for
semiconductor physics, and perform well on scales greater than about <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">5</mml:mn><mml:mo>×</mml:mo><mml:msup><mml:mn>10</mml:mn><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">7</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx33" id="paren.56"/>. They describe current in terms
of charge carrier concentrations and an electrostatic field, and this
determines the change in charge carrier concentrations via continuity of the
current density.<?xmltex \hack{\newpage}?> The drift-diffusion equations are:

              <disp-formula specific-use="align" content-type="numbered"><mml:math display="block"><mml:mtable displaystyle="true"><mml:mtr><mml:mtd/><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mo>∂</mml:mo><mml:mi>t</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="bold-italic">n</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="bold-italic">R</mml:mi><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="bold-italic">n</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="bold-italic">p</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">∇</mml:mi><mml:mo>⋅</mml:mo><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mi>n</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">∇</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="bold-italic">n</mml:mi><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">μ</mml:mi><mml:mi>n</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="bold-italic">n</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">∇</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="bold-italic">V</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:mtd></mml:mtr><mml:mtr><mml:mtd/><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mo>∂</mml:mo><mml:mi>t</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="bold-italic">p</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="bold-italic">R</mml:mi><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="bold-italic">n</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="bold-italic">p</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">∇</mml:mi><mml:mo>⋅</mml:mo><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mi>p</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">∇</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="bold-italic">p</mml:mi><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">μ</mml:mi><mml:mi>p</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="bold-italic">p</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">∇</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="bold-italic">V</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:mtd></mml:mtr><mml:mlabeledtr id="Ch1.E1"><mml:mtd/><mml:mtd/><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="bold-italic">V</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mfrac><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">ϵ</mml:mi></mml:mfrac><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="bold-italic">n</mml:mi><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="bold-italic">p</mml:mi><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="bold-italic">C</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:mo>.</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:mtd></mml:mlabeledtr></mml:mtable></mml:math></disp-formula>

          Here, <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="bold-italic">n</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>, <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="bold-italic">p</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>, <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="bold-italic">R</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>, <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="bold-italic">V</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>, and <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="bold-italic">C</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> are defined
on a domain <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Ω</mml:mi><mml:mo>×</mml:mo><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0</mml:mn><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, where <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Ω</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> is a subset of a 3-D space
on which these partial differential equations are to be solved. The functions
<inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="bold-italic">n</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="bold-italic">p</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> are concentrations of electron and hole charges,
respectively, and <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="bold-italic">C</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> is the charge of any dopant ions that are
present. <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="bold-italic">n</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="bold-italic">p</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> are constrained to be non-negative.
<inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="bold-italic">R</mml:mi><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="bold-italic">n</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="bold-italic">p</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> is the recombination and/or generation rate of
electrons and holes. The third equation is Poisson's law of electrostatics
whose solution describes the electric potential <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="bold-italic">V</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>. <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">ϵ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> is the
electric permittivity. The constants <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">μ</mml:mi><mml:mi>n</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">μ</mml:mi><mml:mi>p</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> are the mobilities
of electrons and holes, respectively, (not to be confused with the magnetic
permeability <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">μ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> or <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">μ</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) and <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mi>n</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mi>p</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> are the corresponding
diffusion coefficients. In the particular instance of the model under
consideration, <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">μ</mml:mi><mml:mi>n</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mi>n</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> are approximately zero due to electrons
becoming trapped in the valence band. The conductivity associated with a
particular charge carrier is determined by the product of the number density
of the charge carrier, the charge carried (one electronic charge, in this
case), and its mobility.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S4">
  <title>Coupling electromagnetism to drift-diffusion</title>
      <p>Maxwell's equations describe propagation at the speed of light, which
is much faster than the charge carriers diffusing in a typical
semiconductor.  Rather than modeling propagation on two very different
timescales, we make use of a quasi-static (magnetostatic) approximation
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx18" id="paren.57"/>, assuming that currents do not alternate rapidly or
approach the speed of light.  Specifically, the Maxwell displacement
current appearing in Ampere's law is assumed to be negligible: <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi>c</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup><mml:msub><mml:mo>∂</mml:mo><mml:mi>t</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mi>E</mml:mi><mml:mo>≈</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>. This assumption is justified for semiconductors, and is in fact implicit in the
drift-diffusion model due to its use of Poisson's equation for the
static electrical potential.</p>
      <p>The electric current density <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="bold-italic">J</mml:mi><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="bold-italic">x</mml:mi><mml:mo>′</mml:mo></mml:msup><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> acts as the source of
a magnetic field. It may be expressed as the sum of a drift term, involving
the electric field, and a diffusive term, involving the concentration
gradient. The rate of change of the concentration then becomes a continuity
equation that is a function of current density. Explicitly separating the
current and continuity equations facilitates coupling to the magnetic field.
In this form, the current densities are:

              <disp-formula specific-use="align" content-type="numbered"><mml:math display="block"><mml:mtable displaystyle="true"><mml:mtr><mml:mtd/><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="bold-italic">J</mml:mi><mml:mi>n</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mi>n</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">∇</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="bold-italic">n</mml:mi><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">μ</mml:mi><mml:mi>n</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="bold-italic">n</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">∇</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="bold-italic">V</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:mtd></mml:mtr><mml:mlabeledtr id="Ch1.E2"><mml:mtd/><mml:mtd/><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="bold-italic">J</mml:mi><mml:mi>p</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mi>p</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">∇</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="bold-italic">p</mml:mi><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">μ</mml:mi><mml:mi>p</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="bold-italic">p</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">∇</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="bold-italic">V</mml:mi><mml:mo>.</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:mtd></mml:mlabeledtr></mml:mtable></mml:math></disp-formula>

          The continuity equations that describe the change in electron and hole
concentrations are then:

              <disp-formula specific-use="align" content-type="numbered"><mml:math display="block"><mml:mtable displaystyle="true"><mml:mtr><mml:mtd/><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mo>∂</mml:mo><mml:mi>t</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="bold-italic">n</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="bold-italic">R</mml:mi><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="bold-italic">n</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="bold-italic">p</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">∇</mml:mi><mml:mo>⋅</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="bold-italic">J</mml:mi><mml:mi>n</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:mtd></mml:mtr><mml:mlabeledtr id="Ch1.E3"><mml:mtd/><mml:mtd/><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mo>∂</mml:mo><mml:mi>t</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="bold-italic">p</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="bold-italic">R</mml:mi><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="bold-italic">n</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="bold-italic">p</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">∇</mml:mi><mml:mo>⋅</mml:mo><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="bold-italic">J</mml:mi><mml:mi>p</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:mo>.</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:mtd></mml:mlabeledtr></mml:mtable></mml:math></disp-formula>

          The current densities <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="bold-italic">J</mml:mi><mml:mi>n</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="bold-italic">J</mml:mi><mml:mi>p</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> are summed to obtain the
total current density <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="bold-italic">J</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> that acts as a source for the magnetic field.
In a magnetostatic approximation, the solution to the magnetic field on
a domain may be efficiently computed by solving a set of Poisson equations
for the magnetic vector potential. In this case, however, we calculate the
field at an arbitrary point in space, which could be outside the domain.
<?xmltex \hack{\newpage}?> We apply the Biot–Savart law to obtain the
magnetic field at the point <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="bold-italic">x</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>:

              <disp-formula id="Ch1.E4" content-type="numbered"><mml:math display="block"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="bold-italic">B</mml:mi><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="bold-italic">x</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi>t</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mfrac><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">μ</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">π</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac><mml:mo movablelimits="false">∫</mml:mo><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="bold-italic">J</mml:mi><mml:mi>p</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="bold-italic">x</mml:mi><mml:mo>′</mml:mo></mml:msup><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi>t</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="bold-italic">J</mml:mi><mml:mi>n</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="bold-italic">x</mml:mi><mml:mo>′</mml:mo></mml:msup><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi>t</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:mo>×</mml:mo><mml:mfrac><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="bold-italic">x</mml:mi><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="bold-italic">x</mml:mi><mml:mo>′</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mo>|</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="bold-italic">x</mml:mi><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="bold-italic">x</mml:mi><mml:msup><mml:msup><mml:mo>|</mml:mo><mml:mo>′</mml:mo></mml:msup><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">d</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msup><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="bold-italic">x</mml:mi><mml:mo>′</mml:mo></mml:msup><mml:mo>.</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></disp-formula>

        Here, <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>|</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="bold-italic">x</mml:mi><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="bold-italic">x</mml:mi><mml:mo>′</mml:mo></mml:msup><mml:mo>|</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> is the magnitude of the vector from <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="bold-italic">x</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> to
<inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="bold-italic">x</mml:mi><mml:mo>′</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">μ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> is the magnetic permeability. The velocities of the
holes are not sufficiently large for the Lorentz force to be significantly
influenced by magnetic fields so we do not consider the effect of the
magnetic field on the charge carriers.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S5">
  <title>Numerical solution</title>
      <p>The drift-diffusion equations are solved by expressing the partial
differential equations as a system of ordinary differential equations for the
time derivatives <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mo>∂</mml:mo><mml:mi>t</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="bold-italic">n</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mo>∂</mml:mo><mml:mi>t</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="bold-italic">p</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>.
A finite-difference approximation to this system is then integrated using
a fourth-order Runge–Kutta scheme (RK4). Poisson's equation is solved
separately at each timestep using successive over-relaxation
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx14" id="paren.58"/> (SOR) with an adaptive relaxation parameter and open
boundary conditions. For the other PDEs, the Dirichlet boundary conditions
<inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>n</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>p</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> are applied to the boundary of a grid of uniformly spaced
points representing the <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>, <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mi>y</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>, and <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mi>z</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> coordinates over which functions
are evaluated. All spatial partial derivatives (<inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mo>∂</mml:mo><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mo>∂</mml:mo><mml:mi>y</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>,
<inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mo>∂</mml:mo><mml:mi>z</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">∇</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>) of the current and continuity equations are
approximated using a fourth-order central difference approximation.</p>
      <p>At each timestep, the electric potential is determined by solving Poisson's
equation, starting the SOR iteration with the electric potential from the
previous timestep. Using the electric potential and the charge carrier
concentrations, the components of the current vector fields <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="bold-italic">J</mml:mi><mml:mi>n</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and
<inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="bold-italic">J</mml:mi><mml:mi>p</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> are evaluated. From <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="bold-italic">J</mml:mi><mml:mi>n</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="bold-italic">J</mml:mi><mml:mi>p</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, the continuity
equations are integrated, yielding the concentrations of the charge carriers
at the next timestep. The non-negativity constraint on <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="bold-italic">n</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> and
<inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="bold-italic">p</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> is enforced via truncation.</p>
      <p>The magnetic field <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="bold-italic">B</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> is evaluated by applying a discretized
Biot–Savart law to the currents. <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="bold-italic">B</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> is calculated at each timestep
but since the result does not affect the dynamics, it may be evaluated at
a single point.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S6">
  <title>Results</title>
      <p>Since holes are mobile and electrons are immobile, diffusion separates
the two species, creating an electric current that acts as an
electromagnet.  The boundary of a region of excess charge carriers behaves,
essentially, like the <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mi>p</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>-<inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mi>n</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> junction of a diode.  Since only holes may
flow out of this volume, the initial current diffusing across the
boundary is unidirectional, corresponding to forward bias in the
diode.  However, after a delay period during which recombination
reduces the diffusive current, the diode could switch to reverse bias,
whereby the <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mi>p</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>-<inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mi>n</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> junction capacitance generates a reverse recovery
current.  In the case of a recovery current, holes flow back into the
source volume, producing a magnetic pulse that is opposite in polarity
to the initial magnetic field.</p>
      <p>We use the semiconductor model to calculate an example of a unipolar
magnetic pulse.  The electric permittivity and magnetic permeability
are estimated based on the static properties of MgO <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx1" id="paren.59"/>
(<inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">ϵ</mml:mi><mml:mo>≈</mml:mo><mml:mn>16.75</mml:mn><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">ϵ</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">μ</mml:mi><mml:mo>≈</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">μ</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) and
a temperature of <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn>673.15</mml:mn><mml:mspace width="0.125em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">K</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>.  Since electrons are trapped
and immobile in broken peroxy bonds, <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">μ</mml:mi><mml:mi>n</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mi>n</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> are set to <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0</mml:mn></mml:math></inline-formula>.
The mobility and diffusion constant of holes were estimated based on
experimental data from an experiment in which a rapid pressure impulse
to the center of a gabbro tile injected holes that diffused and
drifted away from their source, akin to a Haynes–Shockley experiment.
The parameters used are <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">μ</mml:mi><mml:mi>p</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn>0.063</mml:mn><mml:mspace width="0.125em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Vs</mml:mi><mml:msup><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and
<inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mi>p</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn>8.5</mml:mn><mml:mo>×</mml:mo><mml:msup><mml:mn>10</mml:mn><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup><mml:mspace width="0.125em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.125em"/><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, roughly comparable to
their values in pure undoped Silicon.</p>
      <p>Charge generation is not explicitly considered in this calculation, and
a pre-existing excess concentration of <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mn>10</mml:mn><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">5</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.125em"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">C</mml:mi><mml:mspace width="0.125em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> of
both electrons and holes is an initial condition. These dissociated charges
are initially present only at grid points inside a piriform teardrop surface
of the form <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>z</mml:mi><mml:mo>/</mml:mo><mml:mn>4000</mml:mn><mml:msup><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msup><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>z</mml:mi><mml:mo>/</mml:mo><mml:mn>4000</mml:mn><mml:msup><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msup><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>x</mml:mi><mml:mo>/</mml:mo><mml:mn>2000</mml:mn><mml:msup><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>y</mml:mi><mml:mo>/</mml:mo><mml:mn>1000</mml:mn><mml:msup><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>. This surface
geometry was chosen to avoid cancellation of fields due to spherical
symmetry. The recombination rate is proportional to the product of electron
and hole concentrations, <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:msup><mml:mn>10</mml:mn><mml:mn>22</mml:mn></mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="bold-italic">n</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="bold-italic">p</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>.</p>
      <p>The attenuation of the magnetic field as it passes through the Earth is not
considered, nor are the effects associated with the surface of the Earth.
This is a reasonable approximation at extremely low frequencies. The fact
that very slow (nearly DC) variations in the magnetic field can pass through
the earth is the basis for magnetotelluric surveys. Ultra-low frequency radio
waves are also used for through-the-earth radio communications in mine shafts
due to the fact that lower frequency waves can penetrate the earth much more
effectively than more conventional radio frequencies. This behavior is
typical of most materials: low-frequency waves penetrate more effectively
than high-frequency waves. The characteristic depth scale of penetration of
an EM wave (the penetration depth or skin depth) <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx18" id="paren.60"/> is the
reciprocal of the imaginary part of the wave vector, which, for a conducting
medium, is:
          <disp-formula id="Ch1.E5" content-type="numbered"><mml:math display="block"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>d</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true"><mml:mfrac style="display"><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">ω</mml:mi></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle><mml:msqrt><mml:mrow><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true"><mml:mfrac style="display"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">μ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">ϵ</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle><mml:msqrt><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true"><mml:mfrac style="display"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">ϵ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">ω</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle><mml:msup><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:msqrt><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msqrt><mml:mo>≈</mml:mo><mml:msqrt><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true"><mml:mfrac style="display"><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">μ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">ω</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle></mml:msqrt><mml:mo>.</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></disp-formula></p>
      <p>Here, <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">ω</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> is the (angular) frequency, <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> is the conductivity, <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">μ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> is the magnetic
permeability, and <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">ϵ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> is the electric permittivity.</p>
      <p>Observed and calculated magnetic pulses are illustrated in
Figs. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F1"/> and <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F3"/>. Figure <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F3"/> shows the
value of the <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> component of the magnetic field as a function of time,
evaluated 10 <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">km</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> directly above the center of the simulated volume.
The amplitude, frequency, and shape of the pulse are similar to pulses that
have been observed before earthquakes. Figure <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F1"/> shows several
magnetic pulses observed prior to an earthquake near Lima, Peru. These pulses
were measured over a period of several days by a pair of magnetometers
approximately 25 <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">km</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> away, and the locations of their sources were
triangulated. The sources were clustered within a few kilometers of the
epicenter of an earthquake that occurred 2 weeks after the onset of the
pulses <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx17" id="paren.61"/>. This analysis has been performed prior to
several moderate earthquakes near Lima, with similar results.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F3"><caption><p>A calculated transient magnetic pulse, 10 km from the source
volume.</p></caption>
        <?xmltex \igopts{width=241.848425pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://nhess.copernicus.org/articles/15/1873/2015/nhess-15-1873-2015-f03.png"/>

      </fig>

      <p>The calculated pulse is unipolar and rises faster than it falls, like all but
one of the pulses shown in Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F1"/>. The duration of the
calculated pulse is roughly 5 s, falling within the range of
0.1–10 <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> for observed pulses. The intensity of the calculated pulse
reaches 34 <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">nT</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>, whereas observed pulses have ranged from the noise
floor (around 1 <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">nT</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>) to 200 <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">nT</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> in intensity. Whereas the
calculated pulse (which used a diffusion coefficient estimated using gabbro
at room temperature) in Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F3"/> has a comparatively long
duration and moderate intensity, the pulses shown in Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F1"/>,
have short duration (<inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mo>≈</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>200 <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ms</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>) but high intensity
(80–150 <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">nT</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>). Thus, in addition to having essentially the same form,
the total energy of calculated and observed pulses are similar.</p>
      <p>It is reasonable to expect that different rocks under different conditions
will produce a variety of diffusion coefficient and mobilities, leading to a
variety of pulse amplitudes and durations. If the charge carriers are not
injected instantaneously, as we have modeled here, then different pulse
shapes can result. For example, if charge injection is a continuous process
rather than a rapid impulse, the rise of the pulse can be slower than its
fall, as is the case for one of the pulses shown in Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F1"/>.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S7" sec-type="conclusions">
  <title>Conclusions</title>
      <p>In the model presented here, when a volume of rock enters a semiconducting
state, e.g. from heat or stress, excess holes and electrons are injected. The
mobile holes begin to diffuse out of the source volume, while electrons are
trapped within the source volume and undergo recombination with the holes
that have not diffused out. The flux of holes leaving the source effectively
creates a <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mi>p</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>-<inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mi>n</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> diode: the source volume becomes an <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mi>n</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> type semiconductor
and the surrounding rock becomes <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mi>p</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> type. A depletion region forms between
the two layers of the <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mi>p</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>-<inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mi>n</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> junction and the <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mi>p</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>-<inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mi>n</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> double layer screens
electric fields outside its immediate vicinity.</p>
      <p>After charge injection, a diffusive current of holes flows as a result
of the concentration gradient across the source boundary.  This
corresponds to a forward bias state of the diode, dominated by
diffusion capacitance rather than junction capacitance.  This current
creates a transient magnetic field.  As the hole concentration
gradient decreases, the diffusive current and the magnetic field
decay.  After holes have diffused outward, creating <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mi>p</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>-type and <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mi>n</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>-type
regions, a junction capacitance results from layers of positive and
negative charge separated by a depletion region at the junction.</p>
      <p>After a delay period, the diode may switch to a reverse bias state.
In this case, electron-hole recombination consumes the holes remaining
within the source volume, leaving mostly electrons inside.  The
junction capacitance causes a transient reverse recovery current.  If
the potential drop across the depletion region is sufficiently strong,
reverse-bias electrical breakdown may occur as Coulomb attraction
pulls holes back into the source volume.</p>
      <p>It has been suggested <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx11" id="paren.62"/> that circuit closure is necessary to
produce electric currents and hence sources of magnetic fields. Although this
may be a useful rule of thumb in everyday experience, it is not a law of
physics, and the model developed here illustrates that continuous closed
current loops (i.e. circuits) are not necessary to produce magnetic fields.
The outflow current and subsequent return current associated with a large
number of charge carriers is capable of producing significant magnetic
fields, albeit transient, without formal circuit closure.</p>
      <p>A distinctive form and the ability to pass through the earth at ultra-low
frequencies make magnetic pulses potentially useful for the observation of
pre-seismic shifts in the stress level of rocks that are otherwise
inaccessible due to depth. Preliminary observations suggest that by
triangulating the source of these magnetic pulses, the increased buildup of
stress around future earthquake epicenters might be identified days or weeks
in advance of seismicity.</p>
      <p>In addition to unipolar pulses, other types of electromagnetic precursors or
seismic electromagnetic phenomena might be predicted from semiconductor
models. Oscillatory ULF fields, for example, have been observed immediately
preceding earthquake activity <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx2" id="paren.63"/>.</p>
      <p>The positive hole semiconductor theory modeled here seeks to unify a wide
range of electromagnetic phenomena associated with seismic activity. The
direct coupling of semiconductor drift-diffusion currents and
electromagnetism produces a model consistent with observations of pre-seismic
magnetic pulses as well as laboratory experiments that rapidly load and
unload rock samples. This agreement between theory, experiment, and field
observations supports the hypothesis that pre-earthquake ULF activity might
result from geophysical semiconductor processes.</p>
</sec>

      
      </body>
    <back><ack><title>Acknowledgements</title><p>The authors would like to thank Tom Bleier and Clark Dunson of QuakeFinder
for many informative discussions. The authors would also like to thank
Jiro <?xmltex \hack{\mbox\bgroup}?>Funamoto<?xmltex \hack{\egroup}?> and Kim Johnson for their comments on the manuscript.
This research was funded in part by NASA Earth Surface and Interior Grant
NNX12AL71G (John LaBrecque). <?xmltex \hack{\newline}?><?xmltex \hack{\newline}?> Edited by:
F. Masci<?xmltex \hack{\newline}?> Reviewed by: two anonymous referees</p></ack><ref-list>
    <title>References</title>

      <ref id="bib1.bibx1"><label>Batllo et al.(1991)Batllo, LeRoy, Parvin, Freund, and
Freund</label><mixed-citation>
Batllo, F., LeRoy, R. C., Parvin, K., Freund, F., and Freund, M. M.: Positive
holes in magnesium oxide, Correlation between magnetic, electric, and
dielectric anomalies, J. Applied Phys., 69, 6031–6033,
1991.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx2"><label>Bleier et al.(2009)Bleier, Dunson, Maniscalco, Bryant, Bambery, and
Freund</label><mixed-citation>Bleier, T., Dunson, C., Maniscalco, M., Bryant, N., Bambery, R., and Freund,
F.: Investigation of ULF magnetic pulsations, air conductivity changes, and
infra red signatures associated with the 30 October Alum Rock M5.4
earthquake, Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci., 9, 585–603,
<ext-link xlink:href="http://dx.doi.org/10.5194/nhess-9-585-2009" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/nhess-9-585-2009</ext-link>, 2009.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx3"><label>Bortnik et al.(2010)Bortnik, Bleier, Dunson, and
Freund</label><mixed-citation>
Bortnik, J., Bleier, T., Dunson, C., and Freund, F.: Estimating the
seismotelluric current required for observable electromagnetic ground
signals, Ann. Geophysics, 28, 1615–1624, 2010.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx4"><label>Campbell(2009)</label><mixed-citation>Campbell, W. H.: Natural magnetic disturbance fields, not precursors,
preceding the Loma Prieta earthquake, J. Geophys. Res., 114, A05307, <ext-link xlink:href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1029/2008JA013932" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2008JA013932</ext-link>, 2009.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx5"><label>Dahlgren et al.(2014)Dahlgren, Johnston, Vanderbilt, and
Nakaba</label><mixed-citation>
Dahlgren, R. P., Johnston, M. J., Vanderbilt, V. C., and Nakaba, R. N.:
Comparison of the Stress-Stimulated Current of Dry and Fluid-Saturated Gabbro
Samples, Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 2014.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx6"><label>Duba and Shankland(1982)</label><mixed-citation>
Duba, A. and Shankland, T.: Free carbon &amp; electrical conductivity in the
Earth's mantle, Geophys. Res. Lett., 9, 1271–1274, 1982.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx7"><label>Fraser-Smith et al.(1990)Fraser-Smith, Bernardi, McGill, Helliwell,
and Villard Jr.</label><mixed-citation>
Fraser-Smith, A., Bernardi, A., McGill, P., Helliwell, R., and Villard Jr., O.:
Low-frequency magnetic field measurements near the epicenter of the Ms 7.1
Loma Prieta earthquake, Geophys. Res. Lett., 17, 1465–1468, 1990.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx8"><label>Fraser-Smith et al.(2011)Fraser-Smith, McGill, and
Bernardi</label><mixed-citation>Fraser-Smith, A., McGill, P., and Bernardi, A.: Comment on “Natural
magnetic
disturbance fields, not precursors, preceding the Loma Prieta earthquake”
by Wallace H. Campbell, J. Geophys. Res., 116, A08228, <ext-link xlink:href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1029/2010JA016379" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2010JA016379</ext-link>, 2011.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx9"><label>Freund(2002)</label><mixed-citation>
Freund, F.: Charge Generation and Propagation in Ingneous Rocks, J.
Geodynam., 33, 543–570, 2002.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx10"><label>Freund(2003)</label><mixed-citation>
Freund, F.: On the electrical conductivity structure of the stable continental
crust, J. Geodynam., 35, 353–388, 2003.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx11"><label>Freund(2010)</label><mixed-citation>
Freund, F.: Toward a unified solid state theory for pre-earthquake signals,
Acta Geophys., 58, 719–766, 2010.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx12"><label>Freund et al.(1991)Freund, Masuda, and Freund</label><mixed-citation>
Freund, F., Masuda, M. M., and Freund, M. M.: Highly mobile oxygen hole-type
charge carriers in fused silica, J. Mater. Res., 6, 1619–1622, 1991.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx13"><label>Freund et al.(2006)Freund, Takeuchi, and Lau</label><mixed-citation>
Freund, F., Takeuchi, A., and Lau, B.: Electric currents streaming out of
stressed igneous rocks – A step towards understanding pre-earthquake low
frequency EM emissions, Phys. Chem. Earth, 31, 389–396,
2006.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx14"><label>Golub and Van Loan(1996)</label><mixed-citation>
Golub, G. and Van Loan, C.: Matrix Computations, Johns Hopkins University
Press, 3rd Edn., 1996.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx15"><label>Griscom(2011)</label><mixed-citation>
Griscom, D.: Trapped-electron centers in silica, J. Non-Cryst. Solids,
357, 1945–1962, 2011.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx16"><label>Harris(1998)</label><mixed-citation>
Harris, R.: Nonclassical Physics: Beyond Newton's View, Addison Wesley,
1998.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx17"><label>Heraud et al.(2013)Heraud, Centa, Bleier, and Dunson</label><mixed-citation>
Heraud, J., Centa, V. A., Bleier, T., and Dunson, C.: Determining future
epicenters by triangulation of magnetometer pulses in Peru, in: AGU Fall
Meeting, NH014, 2013.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx18"><label>Jackson(1999)</label><mixed-citation>
Jackson, J.: Classical Electrodynamics, John Wiley and Sons, 3rd Edn.,
1999.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx19"><label>King and Freund(1984)</label><mixed-citation>
King, B. and Freund, F.: Surface charges and subsurface space-charge
distribution in magnesium oxides containing dissolved traces of water,
Phys. Rev. B, 29, 5814–5824, 1984.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx20"><label>Moore(1964)</label><mixed-citation>
Moore, G.: Magnetic disturbances preceding the 1964 Alaska earthquake,
Nature, 203, 508–509, 1964.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx21"><label>Revil et al.(2003)Revil, Naudet, Nouzaret, and Pessel</label><mixed-citation>Revil, A., Naudet, V., Nouzaret, J., and Pessel, M.: Principles of
electrography applied to self-potential electrokinetic sources and
hydrogeological applications, Water Resour. Res., 39, 1114,
<ext-link xlink:href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1029/2001WR000916" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2001WR000916</ext-link>,
2003.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx22"><label>Ricci et al.(2001)Ricci, Pacchioni, Szymanski, Shluger, and
Stoneham</label><mixed-citation>Ricci, D., Pacchioni, G., Szymanski, M., Shluger, A., and Stoneham, A.:
Modeling disorder in amorphous silica with embedded clusters: the peroxy
bridge defect center, Phys. Rev. B, 64, 224104,
<ext-link xlink:href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.64.224104" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1103/PhysRevB.64.224104</ext-link>,
2001.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx23"><label>Scoville et al.(2015)Scoville, Sornette, and Freund</label><mixed-citation>Scoville, J., Sornette, J., and Freund, F.: Paradox of peroxy defects and
positive holes in rocks Part II: Outflow of electric currents from stressed
rocks, J. Asian Earth Sci., in press,
<ext-link xlink:href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jseaes.2015.04.016" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.jseaes.2015.04.016</ext-link>,
2015.
</mixed-citation></ref><?xmltex \hack{\newpage}?>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx24"><label>Selway(2014)</label><mixed-citation>Selway, K.: On the Causes of Electrical Conductivity Anomalies in Tectonically
Stable Lithosphere, Surveys in Geophysics, 35, 219–257,
<ext-link xlink:href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10712-013-9235-1" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1007/s10712-013-9235-1</ext-link>,
2014.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx25"><label>Shluger et al.(1992)Shluger, Heifets, Gale, and Catlow</label><mixed-citation>
Shluger, A., Heifets, E., Gale, J., and Catlow, C.: Theoretical simulation of
localized holes in MgO, J. Phys.: Condens. Matter, 4, 5711–5722,
1992.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx26"><label>Shockley et al.(1949)Shockley, Pearson, and
Haynes</label><mixed-citation>
Shockley, W., Pearson, G., and Haynes, J.: Hole Injection in Germanium –
Quantitative Studies and Filamentary Transistors, Bell Syst. Techn.
J., 28, 344–366, 1949.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx27"><label>Shockley(1964)</label><mixed-citation>
Shockley, W.: “Transistor Technology Evokes New Physics”, Nobel lecture,
Nobel Lectures, Physics 1942–1962, 1964.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx28"><label>Thériault et al.(2014)Thériault, St-Laurent, Freund, and
Derr</label><mixed-citation>
Thériault, R., St-Laurent, F., Freund, F., and Derr, J.: Prevalence of
Earthquake Lights Associated with Rift Environments, Seismol. Res.
Lett., 85, 159–178, 2014.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx29"><label>Thomas et al.(2009)Thomas, Love, and Johnston</label><mixed-citation>
Thomas, J. N., Love, J. J., and Johnston, M.: On the reported magnetic
precursor of the 1989 Loma Prieta earthquakes, Phys. Earth Planet. Int.,
173, 207–215, 2009.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx30"><label>Unsworth et al.(1999)Unsworth, Egbert, and Booker</label><mixed-citation>
Unsworth, M., Egbert, G., and Booker, J.: High-resolution electromagnetic
imaging of the San Andreas fault in Central California, J. Geophys. Res.,
104, 1131–1150, 1999.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx31"><label>Vallianatos et al.(2004)Vallianatos, Triantis, Tzanis, Anastasiadis,
and Stavrakas</label><mixed-citation>
Vallianatos, F., Triantis, D., Tzanis, A., Anastasiadis, C., and Stavrakas, I.:
Electric earthquake precursors: from laboratory results to field
observations, Physics and Chemistry of the Earth, Parts A/B/C, 29, 339–351, 2004.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx32"><label>Varotsos(2005)</label><mixed-citation>
Varotsos, P.: The Physics of Seismic Electric Signals, TerraPub, 2005.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx33"><label>Vasileska et al.(2008)Vasileska, Mamaluy, Khan, Raleva, and
Goodnick</label><mixed-citation>
Vasileska, D., Mamaluy, D., Khan, H., Raleva, K., and Goodnick, S.:
Semiconductor Device Modeling, J. Comput. Theor.
Nanos., 5, 999–1030, 2008.</mixed-citation></ref>

  </ref-list><app-group content-type="float"><app><title/>

    </app></app-group></back>
    </article>
