Frank Hoogerbeets — 10 December 2025
In the quest to unravel the subtle forces that nudge Earth's restless crust toward rupture, scientists have long scrutinized celestial influences beyond the relentless grind of tectonic plates. Among these, two prominent contenders emerge: the erratic bursts of solar activity—sunspots, flares, and geomagnetic storms — and the rhythmic geometric alignments of planets and the Moon. While solar phenomena have garnered attention for their potential to modulate seismic stress through electromagnetic and thermal pathways, we find that many larger earthquakes occur without notable solar activity — and likewise hightened solar activity without larger earthquakes. In contrast, our studies show that precise configurations of planetary and lunar positions, as quantified by the Solar System Geometry Index (SSGI), offer a far more consistent temporal framework for predicting seismic clusters worldwide.
This article delves into the empirical evidence, drawing on years of research to compare the statistical robustness of these influences. By analyzing hit rates, p-values, and clustering patterns from exhaustive datasets spanning 1940–2025, we illuminate why planetary and lunar geometry stands as the superior indicator—delivering hit rates of 75–95% for moderate-to-major events, with lunar convergence amplifying the signal to near-certainty in critical windows. Far from mere coincidence, these alignments harness tidal and resonant forces that reliably synchronize with global seismicity, providing a testable, predictive edge that solar variability cannot match, most notably, temporal earthquake clusters and larger earthquakes during solar minima.
| Metric / Source | Description | Key Results | Lunar Role |
|---|---|---|---|
| SSGI Convergence Windows (2014–2025, ongoing) SSGI explanation | 2014 example | |
Tests SSGI peaks (planetary + lunar) against global catalogs (USGS/EMSC) for M ≥ 5.5 clusters within 1–5 days of geometry. Baseline: Quakes occur "on average" but cluster non-randomly | Clusters observed in 80–90% of critical windows (e.g., 6 M ≥ 6.0 events within 8 hours on June 23–24, 2014, during 3 planetary + lunar conjunctions). P-values < 0.05 for non-random timing in multiple cases. | Essential for M5.5–6.0 bursts; e.g., lunar peaks alone yield ~50–60% cluster rate, rising to 85%+ when converging with planets. |
| Conjunction Clusters & Majors GitHub repo (planetary) | dense planetary conjunction clusters | Electromagnetic Wave - Earthquake Mechanism |
Binomial tests on planetary clusters (some lunar-extended) vs. M ≥ 7.0 events in 7-day windows. Baseline probability: 12.27%. | Observed: 103 clusters with quakes vs. expected 72 (p = 0.014). For extended windows: 59% observed overlap vs. 49% expected (p = 0.0129, binomial test). | Lunar extensions boost moderate quake detection; e.g., green lunar peaks tied to M ≥ 5.5 clusters in 70–80% of tested windows (e.g., May 9–12, 2024: post-geometry cluster of 10+ events). |
| Venus-Outer Planet Groupings (2015–2023) Full article (87.2% statistic) |
39 M ≥ 7.5 cases checked for Venus conjunctions (±4/2 days); 87.2% linked (34/39). | 46 conjunctions across cases; clustering peaks 1–2 days pre-event. No direct lunar, but SSGI context implies additive effect. | Not core, but FAQs note New/Full Moons with such groupings elevate M5.5+ risk by 20–30%. General Clustering FAQ (2014–Present) |
| General Clustering FAQ (2014–present) Official FAQ (cluster percentages) | YouTube forecast archive |
Observational hit rate for M ≥ 5.5 responses to geometry (any size cluster vs. none). | ~75–85% of critical convergences yield clusters (e.g., M5–6 within 24 hours; larger 1–5 days later). "Usually observed" but not guaranteed if faults aren't stressed enough. | Moon drives immediacy: Standalone lunar geometry ~60% cluster rate; with planets, 85–95% for global M ≥ 5.5 upticks. |
There are several scientific studies that have investigated potential correlations between solar activity (such as sunspots, solar flares, proton density, and geomagnetic disturbances) and earthquake occurrence. Some research identifies statistically significant links — particularly for large earthquakes (magnitude ≥ 6 or ≥ 7). Below are key studies supporting correlations and proposed mechanisms.
The following papers use statistical analyses (e.g., cross-spectral methods, epoch superposition, or time-series modeling) on datasets spanning decades, often from sources like the ISC-GEM earthquake catalog and NASA's Solar and Heliospheric Observatory (SOHO).
| Study | Key Findings | Dataset & Methods | Proposed Mechanism |
|---|---|---|---|
| Marchitelli et al. (2020), Scientific Reports nature | researchgate |
Statistically significant correlation (p < 1 in 100,000) between solar proton density and large earthquakes (M ≥ 5.6–6.5) worldwide; proton flux peaks precede quakes by up to 24 hours in ~33% of cases. | 20 years of SOHO proton data (1996–2016) vs. global earthquake catalog; cross-correlation analysis. | Reverse piezoelectric effect: Solar protons charge the ionosphere, inducing electric currents that stress quartz-rich rocks in the crust, potentially triggering faults. |
| Junqueira Saldanha et al. (2025), Chaos sciencealert.com | thedebrief.org | publishing.aip.org |
Sunspot cycles correlate with seismic activity, with a delayed effect (accounting for heat transfer); including surface temperature data improves shallow quake (M < 10 km depth) forecasting accuracy. Solar maxima increase rock brittleness via ~0.1–0.2°C warming. | Global earthquake data (1900–2020) + sunspot/temperature records; mathematical modeling with lagged time series. | Thermal effects: Solar heat alters atmospheric temperatures, rock properties, groundwater pressure, and precipitation, subtly stressing plate boundaries. |
| Tanyaz et al. (2011), AGU Fall Meeting Abstract harvard.edu | researchgate |
Earthquake frequency rises during solar maxima; decreases during grand minima (e.g., Maunder Minimum, 1645–1710). | 400 years of historical/global quakes (1600–2010) vs. solar cycle data; statistical trend analysis. | Electromagnetic variations from coronal mass ejections (CMEs) and solar wind compress the magnetosphere, inducing ground currents that influence fault stress. |
| Novikov et al. (2024), Geosciences mdpi.com | theweather.com |
Top 50 X-class solar flares (1997–2024) linked to 33% seismicity increase in sunlit zones (within 5,000 km) for 10 days post-flare; strongest in fault-prone areas like Sumatra-Andaman. | Flare data vs. USGS/EMSC catalogs; epoch superposition method. | Geomagnetically induced currents (GICs) from flares generate telluric currents (~10⁻⁶ A/m²) at fault depths, redistributing stress. |
| De Natale et al. (2020), Scientific Reports (related to proton flux) astronomy.com | watchers.com |
Solar proton events precede M ≥ 5.6 quakes; non-random clustering. | SOHO data (20 years) vs. ISC-GEM catalog. | Ionospheric charging leads to piezoelectric stress on crustal rocks. |
Correlations appear strongest for large, shallow quakes in specific regions (e.g., Pacific Ring of Fire) during solar maxima, but they explain only a fraction (~10–30%) of events. Ongoing research, like LSTM models for proton-density classification, suggests potential for hybrid forecasting, but claims should be viewed cautiously to avoid pseudoscience.
The Sorokin & Novikov 2024 paper concludes that solar activity can cause a near 33% increase in magnitude ≥ 4.5 earthquakes in the sunlit hemisphere (within 5000 km of the subsolar point). Stronger earthquakes throughout solar minima and maxima cycles appear much more consistent with specific positions of the planets and the Moon. One key example is June 2014, when two X-class solar flares occurred on the 10th. Stronger (M ≥ 5.5) earthquakes did not occur until the 13th when Earth aligned between Venus and Saturn converging with Full Moon, resulting in clustering of stronger earthquakes from 13 to 16 June, peaking magnitude 6.5 on the 14th. Much more dramatic was the seismic increase on 23-24 June, at the time when three planetary conjunctions converged (Sun-Venus-Uranus, Venus-Mercury-Mars and Mars-Earth-Uranus). No less than six earthquakes ranging from magnitude 6.0 to 7.9 occurred within 8 hours, one of the most dramatic short-term clusters of the past decade. In addition, a meteo-tsunami propagated through the Mediterranean from 23-27 June, due to "high altitude atmospheric forcing." More research is needed, particularly the influence of the Jovian planets on solar activity and how their relative positions influence solar cycle durations.