Emily Brodsky

Disclaimer

This transcript is based on a video-recorded interview deposited at MarE3, JAMSTEC (Yokosuka, Japan).

The transcripts of the research project Oral Histories of Scientific Ocean Drilling are polished representations of oral conversations, and are intended solely for the purpose of preserving and documenting personal accounts and memories. They are not a literary product, and are not intended to exhibit literary qualities.

The primary goal of this transcript is to capture the spoken words and memories of the interviewee as accurately as possible. Minor editing and polishing works have been performed to enhance clarity and readability while maintaining the authenticity of spoken discourse, including non-standard grammar, inconsistencies, repetitions, and pauses.

The reader must be aware that memories of an event can vary between individuals and may evolve over time due to various factors, such as subsequent experiences, interactions with others, and personal emotions.

Use and citation

This transcript is the property of JAMSTEC and is subject to its regulations. Quoting, reproducing, or distributing this transcript for non-commercial purposes is allowed with due attribution.

Please cite the interview as:

Interview of Emily Brosdky by Beatriz Martinez-Rius on 2024 December 10, Washington, D.C. (USA). [link]

BMR: Today is December 10 of 2024. I am Beatriz Martinez-Rius, historian of science at JAMSTEC, and I’m with Emily Brodsky. Thank you. Can you please tell me your name, affiliation and current position?

Emily Brodsky (EB): Emily Brodsky, University of California Santa Cruz. Professor – I’m now Distinguished Professor at planetary sciences.

BMR: What is your research field, right now?

EB: I work on studying earthquakes and other things that failed catastrophically.

BMR: And how did you get into it?

EB: Oh, by accident. I started studying earthquakes because the person who turned to be my graduate advisor was more fun to talk to than anyone else, so… Hiroo Kanamori was studying earthquakes, so I studied earthquakes.

BMR: So, let’s talk first to the background and then we’ll go to undergraduate and graduate studies. First thing – where are you from?

EB: I grew up in the New York area, New York metropolitan area.

BMR: Was anyone in your family related to sciences?

EB: Yes, my father is also a scientist. He is a physicist.

BMR: May I ask you what is or was he studying?

EB: When I was growing up, he worked for IBM research, so I grew up on the environments of IBM research. Later, after I left home, he worked for AIP, the American Institute of Physics, here in D.C.

BMR: Was he an influence for you?

EB: I grew up with scientists in and out of the house all the time.

BMR: So, you kind of got used to the environment of how academia works, how research works…

EB: He was an industry scientist, so not academia, but yes, how science works – it was a very natural evolution.

BMR: What do you wanted to be, when you were a child? Any dream-like aspiration?

EB: I don’t know… For a while I wanted to be a mathematician. Then, I thought better of that. I thought various things at various times… Television production at one point, journalist at one point… But I think I always knew at the back of my head that I was going to be a scientist. It was sort of obvious.

BMR: A scientist in the field of physics, I guess?

EB: That part was not obvious; that part was not at all obvious. I liked fluid dynamics, so that sort of pushed me in that direction, and then I took a nice drive cross-country when I was in school, and I was like, “Oh, this is it, I want to be studying the stuff out here” – going to National Parks, and seeing what it was to see… So, I went back and decided geosciences.

BMR: Let me ask you to expand a bit more on how you got interested especially in geohazards.

EB: I had a pretty good Earth science teacher in high school, and I think that planted the seed. And then, after my first year of college – I was a Math and Classics major, when I first go to college, and neither of those was working out as I wanted them to. So, I did the American thing, drove across the country – that’s what young Americans do when they feel like lost. And got to Yellowstone National Park, Inspiration Point, and – was inspired! And so, first I sort of thought that I was going to be a volcanologist. I was looking out at this volcanic landscape, and I thought, “Oh, I could do volcanology”. I started out that road, and actually went to grad school thinking that I was going to do volcanology; which was pretty funny, because I went to Caltech, and there were no volcanologists there. Various people tried to explain this to me, and I as a little bit naïve about the whole thing. Anyhow. But Hiroo [Kanamori] was very smart. And he said… he didn’t try to persuade me from doing volcanology. He said, “Yeah, yeah; come here, we’ll study volcanoes”. And he sort-of posed the problems for me that were a little bit volcano-like, and had some fluid dynamics in it. But it was also about earthquakes triggering the volcanoes. And, little by little over time, I realized I was actually studying the earthquakes, and not the volcanoes. Eventually I got there.

BMR: There, to the earthquakes.

EB: Eventually, I realized that I was studying earthquakes. But, you know, like a good parent, Hiroo didn’t quite tell me what I was doing until I was already doing it.

BMR: What was his name, again?

EB: Hiroo Kanamori. He is quite famous in the field (laughs). He is very much the inspiration, certainly, of multiple generations of earthquake physicists.

BMR: What kind of research was he doing?

EB: He is still alive. He is an earthquake seismologist, I mean – what is he renowned for? for everything –… Kanamori and [Don L.] Anderson set out the fundamental scaling of how earthquakes work, and what we can tell about observational seismology, and how we can extract processes from it. Hiroo designed the magnitude scale that we use today for earthquakes, Mw. He has worked out how to look at sources that produce earthquakes, like volcanic sources, and landslide sources; Mount Saint Helen’s and the Grand Banks… He looked closely at the pre-cursory behavior of Chile in 1960; he cleaned up a lot of the determination of sizes of large earthquakes, and in a lot of ways, a lot of the driving forces behind [?] source inversion. He is one of the key founders of modern earthquake seismology.

BMR: What kind of research pathway did you got into, with him?

EB: I got interested in earthquake triggering, with him. How one earthquake triggers another. That’s where I started. And then, got more interested into how earthquakes rupture. Sort of the breaks on the process. If you’re going to do physics of earthquakes, you need to know forces on the fault. And if you’ve got to know forces on the fault, the driving forces is kind of reasonable obvious. It’s the plate moving, right? That stores up energy and then gets released. But the friction is actually a lot less obvious. And so, I started thinking at how you can lower the friction at high speeds, and we did some work on the duplication of forces together, as part of my PhD work. After that, I got a little bit more interested in faults and how it might be loaded during earthquakes. And it became progressively more obvious to me, in part because I started working in drilling projects with Jim Mori, Kuo-Fong Ma… Jim Mori is a name you should know, because the way JFAST happened is… Jim, Kuo-Fong and I worked together on a couple of projects…

Well, if we really go back to the beginning, it was the Chichi earthquake in Taiwan, in 1999. I was still a graduate student, and one of the key observations of the earthquake was that, where it slipped a lot, there was not high frequency, not a lot of ground shaking. And where it didn’t slip, there was. It was sort of anti-correlated. Where the slip was less, there was more high frequency. Kuo-Fong Ma, who was a former student of Hiroo’s, but left before I was at grad school and was back in Taiwan, after the earthquake came to visit and basically asked Hiroo, “What should I do about this earthquake?”. And I was walking down the hall, and Hiroo sort of grabbed me. He was like, “Come over here” (laughs) “Kuo-Fong is going to drill this hole, and we need to know what to do about it, and what to…” So, “you need to be involved”. And so, I sort of thought about it, and we realized that we lacked this – where it slipped a lot, it might mean that it got very smooth, it was lubricated, and picked up the asperities; and where it didn’t slip so much, that process didn’t happen. That became part of the impedance behind the Taiwan drilling project. Jim [Mori], Kuo-Fong, and I sort of put that together – well, Kuo-Fong put that together, but Jim and I helped. That was to drill into the fault and take the fault’s temperature. So, I think that we learned a big deal. Jim built that probe with [Yasuyuki] Kano-san to take the temperature in Taiwan, which was probably the second time this was done. The first time was actually in Kobe, which was before my time. But Jim built it there, and I spent a fair amount of time at the drill site. We did some sort of crustal experiments. Mai-Linh Doan, who I think you may have met on the ship (note: Chikyu, during IODP Expedition 405), she was my postdoc for that. Many of the people who you’ve met on the ship were my postdocs. You did realize that, right?

BMR: Yes, I’ve realized a couple of them; Jamie…

EB: …Jamie Kirkpatrick, Christine Rowe, who was on the original expedition but wasn’t there…. Patrick [Fulton] was a researcher working with me; Heather Savage was my postdoc, who is now my colleague…

BMR: Of course.

EB: And Mai-Lin was my postdoc. I’m trying to think if there’s anybody else…

BMR: It’s a pretty significant portion of the onboard crew.  

EB: Anyhow; she (Mai-Linh Doan) and I, we worked on the Taiwan drilling project, we did some crustal hydrology, which ended up being our contribution there, in the Taiwan drilling project. And we measured the hydrologic diffusivity of the fault, but there were a lot of important lessons learned from that temperature data. And then, right afterwards, a few years later, we kind of felt that we sort of understood this problem, and we needed to organize in advance before and earthquake, and not be running down the hall after the earthquake, asking each other what to do. And so, Kuo-Fong, Jim and I organized this Rapid Response Drilling Workshop in 2008, which we held actually in Japan. It was co-sponsored by JAMSTEC, as well. In the [JAMSTEC] Tokyo office.

The whole point of it was to think it through before the earthquake happened. So, it was kind of a crazy workshop. It’s like, “We are going to go drill a hole, to take the temperature of the fault, to figure out the friction on the fault. I can’t tell you where the earthquake is, or even on what country is it. But let’s just think it through, in the abstract”. And so, we put a lot of work into that. And right as we were planning it, the Wenchuan earthquake happened. So, the people who ended up being the PIs of the Wenchuan Drilling Project were like sitting in the front row of the workshop, taking careful notes. That drilling project ended up being informed by that workshop; and Jim and I were helping them out. Actually, I remember… Shortly thereafter, there was another workshop in Japan, and a very senior official at JAMSTEC asked me… At that workshop we had set, you know, “we will do this project on land”. Because it’s impossible to rapid response drilling in the ocean. It couldn’t happen. Who can move a ship around that fast, right? These things are booked out in advance years, decades. And that’s not happening. And I remember talking at the workshop, sort of sitting in the lobby, and somebody asked, “What happen if it would be a magnitude 9 earthquake off of Japan?” And… everybody sort of, “Uhm…” And he said, “the Chikyu would go”. And we all said, “Oh, well, really?” And he was like, “really”. And then we all said, “Oh, but there’s never going to be a M9 earthquake off of Japan, so let’s not worry about it”. This was approximately a year before the [Tohoku] earthquake happened.

BMR: Maybe I can imagine who he was…

EB: It was [Kiyoshi] Suyehiro.

BMR: Your experience in the Taiwan Drilling Project, I understand it was mainland drilling, right?

EB: Yes, all of those were terrestrial. Chichi, Wenchuan and before that, Kobe, were all on land drilling. So, then the earthquake happened, and because we had organized this workshop, we had just finished this report. Jim had gotten translated to Japanese, and it was sitting at every agency desk. Everybody – it had just been delivered. And so, there was this pre-education of all the relevant players. So, when we said, “Hey, we really want to go and drill into this fault”, this was not a confusing proposition. This was not having to educate somebody at some agency from scratch. This was like, “Ooh this is the thing you said you wanted to do after a big earthquake!” And we said, “yes, this is the thing we said we wanted to do after the big earthquake”. And it made all the difference in the world.

BMR: It’s such a coincidence; good luck that it happened just one year later.

EB: One doesn’t want to call an earthquake good luck, but from the point of view of pushing the science forward… The timing was good.

BMR: Well, and there’s nothing like pure good luck, but decisions that are taken because the events happening around you led to take certain decisions, right?

EB: It was good luck in some ways, and actually just plain old had work in the other. Sure, the exact timing turned out to work out. But we had done this on other earthquakes before, and we knew that we needed a different recipe. My phrase at that time was, “I don’t want to do another lousy aftershock deployment”. The thing that people knew how to do just after earthquakes, was to go out and put a bunch of extra seismometers, and record the aftershocks. And that’s valuable data, I don’t want to… But there were more fundamental questions that could only be answered in the aftermath of a major earthquake. And if we were ever going to answer those questions – and not answer the same questions for another 50 years that we’d been asking for the previous 50 years – we needed actually to collect a different kind of data, and do things differently. So, that’s why we did this workshop and that’s why we did this project.

Then, I was actually in Wenchuan when the earthquake happened. Or… I think I flew to Wencheng right after it happened. Jim was supposed to meet me at Wenchuan, to put the instruments in the Wenchuan borehole, in Sichuan, for that drilling project. And Jim called me and said, “There’s no way I can leave Japan at a time like this, just after it [the Tohoku earthquake]”. This was in March 2011. So, I mean, it happened in Sichuan, and then we started moving into high gear… We did a sort of detailed planning workshop that spring, back in the same office where we had done the first workshop on Rapid Response Drilling (laughs). It was literally the same room. We got everybody together to kind of say, “Is this really what we want to do?” And everybody is like, “Yes! This is what we want to do”. It was important to establish that. Then, we kind of went into high gear and wrote the world’s fastest IODP proposal. Much of what was written in my mother in law’s sitting room, while I was doing some family visiting in England. Jim and I more or less wrote it. I mean, with a lot of people helping but… Set that in in July, I think, something around then.

BMR: In July 2011. This was a very new, complex, and at-the-limit operation. What was the reaction of funding agencies, the international community, the people managing Chikyu?

EB: Oh, they all thought we were crazy. Every last one of them. No. some of them believed, obviously. Uhm… but, I mean, Japan, the funding agencies – MEXT felt very obligated to do as much science as they could and sort of be seen doing science, as much as they could, from this catastrophic event. They sort of felt that it was a national obligation. So, the fact that we had something well thought to project beforehand, they viewed very positively.

NSF wanted nothing to do with it. We went to NSF and said, “This is it; this is the thing we’ve been preparing for. It’s 50 meters of slip. We are not going to get a better chance in this, because more slip obviously more friction”. And… Got zero dollars and zero cents out of them. They won’t even fund – like, “Japan is paying for everything here. Would you mind buying some of the temperature sensors?” Won’t do it. So… the Moore Foundation came through. We got Moore Foundation’s money, which we were very grateful for, to do the analysis. That was quite critical to get the money in hurry, to make it happen, and… You know… Earthquake scientists are kind of used to occasionally being viewed as crackpots, and it was a little bit of that category… We were like, “No, really, we want to go to this fault, at a water depth that nobody has drilled before, at a speed that nobody has drilled before, and… stick thermometers on it, and retreat them from a depth nobody’s done before. You’re up for it?” (both laugh). But, I mean, the agency that really deserves a huge amount of credit is MEXT. Because they were very committed, and they understood that this was hard, and that nobody had done it before, and when things did not go well on [IODP Expedition] 343, the original expedition, they were like, “Well, come on back to port, think about it, regroup, and go on back”. That was a level of commitment not every agency would have had. And when we went back in [Expedition] 343T, it was smooth. Very, very smooth. You know, when you do something new, you need a little bit of time to work it out.

BMR: In Japan, the emotional, social, economic impact of the earthquake was very important.

EB: Of course.

BMR: That’s probably one of the reasons.

EB: Absolutely. I then spent the month of October of 2011 in Tokyo, in Japan. I had previously planned it just because I had a sabbatical. I wanted to spend some time working with colleagues there, and I turned into a big, giant JFAST planning month. But it was also, I think, good for me to get some sense of just how ordinary people were reacting to the earthquake and what that impact meant societally. I was in Japan five times that year and, you know, you get a sense. In one of those trips, I think actually was in October, Hiroo and I – and I don’t know if you know Yoshihiro Ito-san; Ito-san is now a professor at Kyoto. He was at that time at Sendai. We drove around the devastation and, I mean, it was something… So that’s how JFAST happened.

BMR: What relation did you have before with IODP?

EB: None. Other than planning this Rapid Response Drilling Workshop; but I get a little seasick so, I never wanted to be on the ship.

BMR: Who bridged to bring scientific ocean drilling into this workshop?

EB: Jim, Jim Mori. Jim had served on various Chikyu panels, and he had chaired a lot of panels for them. And so, I think he had a way to use the resource.

BMR: How was the community, the program and the structure you found there, compared to the programs and collaborations you were used to have, at that time?

EB: Well, you could see – there was a lot of our own team we brought to it, in terms of collaborators. But it was certainly a lot more structured than anything I had had. I mean, ocean drilling is vastly more structured and supported than on land drilling. On land, really, you go find a driller and you kind of negotiate with them, and you try to make it happen. Whereas, the resources in – you know, I go talk to Nobu [Eguchi] and Nobu makes it happen, right? It’s a very different scenario. I just, show up and say, “put the instruments over there”. So, it was pretty cool.

BMR: Did you know about Chikyu before?

EB: I mean, certainly I was aware of it. Yeah, I’m certainly aware of it. We had talked about it; bid the Kochi meeting…

BMR: And what relation did you have with Japan, before the Tohoku earthquake?

EB: Well, I’ve always – because my advisor is Japanese, I’ve always been very networked into the Japanese earthquake community. I started coming to Japan in grad school and visiting regularly; I have many colleagues at Japan. I’ve always enjoyed working in Japan, so that was quite comfortable. With Jim in Kyoto, I would visit there pretty often. This is all DPRI – when I say Kyoto is DPRI, the Disaster Prevention Research Institute. It’s in Uji, actually. It’s a separate campus than the Kyoto campus.

BMR: So, you put together this proposal for JFAST, sent it to the IODP system and it was sort of fast tracked over. I’d like to ask you about the technologies. The sensors you were designing to use in JFAST, how similar or different were they from the sensors you were using in the continental drilling?

EB: There was definitely a learning curve, there. Originally, we were using some – Jim had built this thing with [Yasuyuki] Kano-san, and with Wenchuan we started using some different sensors and… I liked a lot the sensors we used in Wenchuan. So, we then bought literally the same brand, but they needed to be in deeper water, so they need to be titanium. I had some experience with a particular manufacturer. Those were the sensors RBRs that we used for the JFAST, and it was kind of funny, because I almost never bought them myself because I was always doing all these projects, so everybody else… So, it took them a while to figure out that it was the same person buying (laughs), it’s like, “It’s me again”. And they’re like, “Who are you?” I’m like – “Oh yeah, it’s you, who’s been buying…” (laughs). Eventually they worked it out.

BMR: Instrumenting all the holes after an earthquake around the world.

EB: And then actually we bought two brands for JFAST, because it was just another level of redundancy, in case one failed. There was another, something called [batteries?], that other people had had some experience with. I think the RBRs did much better in that environment. But yeah, there was a very clear evolution of our instrumentation, and our thought process, and our experimental design. The key things that we learned, particularly from Taiwan and Wenchuan is, you want spatial density, and you want them to sit there for a long time. So, you know, previous experiments we had done in… Chichi was really just kind of log a sensor. And then, in Wenchuan we had five sensors, but they kept coming in and out of the hole. They would pull them out and download the data, and stick them back in. And, when I was talking to [Shuichi] Kodaira-san about planning this one, we were like, “More, more. We’re going through all this effort and all this expense; Please don’t shortchange us a number of sensors in the hole”. They’re $5,800 each. I mean, really, in the grand scheme of things, that’s not the place… So, we ended up with 55. That was a factor of ten more than anybody had ever put in a hole. And that’s what made the experiment work; was to have the spatial density and to leave them for a long time. So, I mean, that was part of what we had learned from the prior experience.

BMR: How much of a challenge or a difference was, to do it in the ocean?

EB: It was actually easier. I mean, technically there are some pretty significant challenges, and that was why [IODP Expedition] 343 was so hard. But, the level of engineering and logistic support provided by JAMSTEC was so far beyond, and the experience, just knowing what they were doing, that I could speak science and that they could speak engineering… Some of those planning meetings were pretty comical, because I would speak science, and I would say something that was ridiculous that they would all just sort of looking at each other like (laughs), “No, no, no, we don’t do that”.

BMR: In which kind of sense?

EB: It’s like, “Let’s go put cement in there!” They’re like, “No”. I remember Nobu, like jumping up and saying, “Stop. No cement. Can’t be done. Stop”.

BMR: Did you know some of this people before?

EB: No, I never met Nobu before this project. I knew Jim very well from many years of working together, but Nobu was new to me. Most of them were new to me. Kodaira-san, that was the first time we met… We got to know each other quite well through that project. I mean, I feel like by the end we knew each other very well. But there were a lot of people that were new.

BMR: It’s interesting to see how these different communities come together in scientific ocean drilling. As the program grew and evolved, more communities of scientists specialized in different things come together. It’s not obvious that there’s a connection with scientific ocean drilling. In this story of Expedition 343, it’s quite clear that something new was happening.

EB: Yes. It was definitely new. I think another key player was Casey Moore, who’s passed away. He was on 343, and he was my colleague at Santa Cruz. I think he sort of very subtly guided in that direction. But I think… Yeah, there was a whole generation of people who got trained into JFAST, who became drilling people, who would not have otherwise done so.

BMR: What was your role then in the expedition?

EB: I had a two year old child, at that time. So, I decided – that was a personal decision – that I was not going to go shipboard for 343. So, Jim and I decided that Jim and Fred Chester would be doing the co-chiefs. That was a complicated decision, but that was what I decided. So, I was there on the project management team – I think that’s what we were called, PMT. Anyhow, I certainly helped plan the whole expedition. And I sent my people…Christy [Rowe] would joke that I knew more about what was going on that ship than anybody who was on that ship (laughs), because everybody was talking to me (laughs), but I was not actually on the ship.

Then, for the shorter Expedition 343T, I was able to go out. That was really fun. Obviously, that was not the original plan, 343T wasn’t supposed to exist. But what it did come in, Nobu is like, “Emily, do you want to go?” And I’m like, “Yes!” (laughs). So, then Patrick, Nobu, and I went for 343T.

BMR: You got your chance to go on Chikyu.

EB: Yes, right. And it was dead calm, beautiful weather, with heave control on Chikyu – and I was still seasick (both laugh) but that’s okay, it was fine.

BMR: What were the most challenging or difficult parts of the whole operation, from your perspective? And what were the things that you learned from that?

EB: Oh, I mean, there was a lot of challenging parts. I think we were certainly on the scientific end; and I was pretty naive about the level of technical complication of what we were asking. Sure. It was really the technical piece, that was the hardest. The other pieces, there was a lot of willing, a lot of people really wanted it to happen. And I think they, at the drilling, they were pretty happy to be doing something that was sort of serving a different societal need. What could be a clear win for the Chikyu was really taking advantage of the capabilities that – you know, there was no other ship in the world that could do it. When we did that original detailed planning group meeting in May of 2011, the JR [JOIDES Resolution] people came, too. We invited them. And they left halfway through the meeting. They were like, “We can’t do this. We’re out of here”.

BMR: So, the idea was to have…?

EB: No, we didn’t know what ship could do it. We were like, “We want to drill this hole. Who could do it? How are we going to do this? Is this even possible?” And JR was just like, “no, we can’t, do”.

BMR: I thought that you went straight to Chikyu.

EB: No, we went to IODP. There was a question at first – I mean, I think the answer might have been obvious, but you have to at least ask the question, “Who’s going to drill it?” And also, the Chikyu was damaged at the time. Remember, the Chikyu was damaged in the tsunami. So, it had to get repaired. It wasn’t clear that it could.

BMR: Right. Seeing it in retrospect, it might come as a natural answer, that Chikyu was the one doing it… especially because one of the main reasons why Chikyu was built was to study earthquakes.

EB: Yeah, and I mean, there are lots of other key moments of this. Fairly early on, I remember Damien Safer coming. He was sort of in a role a little bit like mine. He was also at the PMT, and sort of advising from shoreline. And because I had no experience observing and installing anything at sea, doing anything at sea, I had no appearance at all. So, very early on, I called up Damien. I was like, “Help”. He flew out to Santa Cruz, we sat at my dining room table, and we basically sketched out what had to happen. Like, sketched out the observatory, and ran some numbers that we just – like, literally ran some numbers and figured it out. That was actually a pretty key visit. That was part of building the proposal.

BMR: In what sense was key, for you?

EB: Technically, what could and couldn’t happen, and what this observatory should look like in broad brush strokes. And before that, as part of the planning process, going back in time, the way I originally met Patrick [Fulton] – Patrick was originally Damien’s student.

[interruption]

EB: Another early piece of this, I think it was planning the Wenchuan project. Around the time of the Rapid Response Drilling workshop, or right before it, I think, I asked Damien for some help in computing what would be observable. This was after Chichi but before the Wenchuan measurements. You know, what would be observable, and how would you instrument it properly? Could we really just model this with the advective flow, and the whole thing? Because the whole issue is whether or not the water would wash the signal away. And I said, “Demian, can we sit down to talk about this?”

Demian was crazy student. He always used to go to the Santa Cruz alumni bar, which was always at the Thirsty Bear in San Francisco. And so, it’s like, “Demian, can you help me out with this?” – There’s a theme here: Demian, can you help me out with this? – And, he brought his student Patrick [Fulton], at the time, and the three of us sat out at this Thirsty Bear. Like, how do you pose the problem? And how do you figure out whether or not this temperature signal is actually observable for realistic permeabilities, or realistic fluid flows? Patrick ended up doing that model, sort of in the abstract. And that was basically our proposal father. That was originally done specifically to motivate the Wenchuan project. And then, that became the backbone of the JFAST proposal, because we knew that computation and then, it gave us enough confidence to actually try to go out and measure it. So, Demian and I scribbling at various tables was an important part of building the JFAST Project.

BMR: This also shows this genealogy of people involved… So, it will be great if we can continue with this conversation, probably through Zoom. Well, thank you for your time.

EB: Thank you.