The question is very complicated. There is no simple answer. To understand the complexity of the question, I will give an example of an earthquake in the subduction zone with a magnitude of: 8.3 on May 24, 2013 in the Pacific region. In the epicenter, the earthquake was almost not felt. However, at a distance of 7 thousand kilometers, "swaying" of skyscrapers was recorded. People were evacuated from the buildings. The video is on YouTube https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VGac5OgIOrI&t=36s.

Thank you. I agree. The question is complex.

Yes, these are interesting paradoxes. The same effect was on March 28, 2025 from the earthquake in Myanmar. After the main shock of magnitude 7.7 (depth of the focus 10 km), a high-rise building in Thailand was destroyed at a distance of more than 1000 km. The possible mechanism of the earthquake focus is a strike-slip.

Great question, Valery,

The complexity of focal mechanism effects on surface intensity becomes evident when examining the February 6, 2023 Turkey earthquake sequence and considering how different focal mechanisms would have affected the same observation points. The devastating M7.8 strike-slip event on the East Anatolian Fault at 17 km depth produced MMI IX intensities in Kahramanmaraş, located approximately 30 km from the epicenter, with characteristic lateral ground displacements and directional amplification along the rupture propagation path. However, if an identical M7.8 thrust earthquake had occurred at the same depth and epicentral distance, Kahramanmaraş would likely have experienced even more catastrophic MMI X intensities due to the efficient upward radiation of P-waves and severe vertical ground acceleration—potentially causing even more widespread building collapse than the already devastating pancake-style failures observed. Conversely, a normal fault mechanism of the same magnitude and location would probably have generated lower MMI VII-VIII intensities in the city, as the downward energy radiation pattern would have been less efficient at transferring seismic energy to the surface. This comparison illustrates how the strike-slip mechanism, while devastating with over 50,000 fatalities, might not have represented the worst-case scenario for Turkey—a sobering reminder that focal mechanism variations can dramatically alter damage patterns even when earthquake magnitude and geometry remain constant.

Dear colleagues. The question is very confusing. I have tried to point out the aspect of physics of the propagation of energy of a seismic event without going into the magnitude and point estimates of an earthquake. I have given a specific example. I would like to draw the author's attention to the fact that this is an extreme manifestation of subduction. I do not think that extremes of physical processes can be classified as paradoxes.

Jamal Assad complicated the discussion by involving the energy of wave effects in the discussion.

At the first stage of the discussion, it was possible to discuss the physics of earthquake energy propagation. Now we need to clarify the difference between the magnitude and intensity of an earthquake. This must be done without fail. The amplitude of a seismic wave is often considered the cause of destruction of buildings. This is a mistake. Resonance destroys buildings. The amplitude of seismic waves does not exceed centimeters, and aseismic tides in the solid body of the Earth with a period of 12 hours have an amplitude of up to 1 m. Destruction of buildings does not occur due to the absence of resonance.

Now about the paradoxes. In the fall of 2005, a series of earthquakes with a magnitude of less than 6 (5-6 points) occurred in the East African Rift. A system of cracks 60 km long and 8 m wide was formed. This is 11-12 points on a 12-point scale. Foto https://portal.azertag.az/ru/node/1653

The discussion is now at a dead end. If we do not simplify the question, the correct answer will become even less likely.

Все зависит от длины волны. И длительности процесса.

Nice question and answer. I also understand it.