〖寻正按：中国政府在科学态度上落后于日本，处理问题的方式上粗暴无理，习惯于压制言论，而非提倡正确的科学知识普及，没有旗帜鲜明地反对地震预测术，仍然沉迷在中国在地震预测上走在世界前列的臆想当中，压制了民间地震预测，仍留下了地震局预测的大尾巴，跟伪科学偶断似连，地震局在地震灾难的应对上存在极大失策。此新闻与中国出台地震预告新规定同时登在《自然》杂志上。〗

日本要理解，而非预测，地震

Asako Saegusa, tokyo, tokyo

据日本总理的一个顾问团的建议，日本的地震研究不应当是预测地震，而是集中在理解地震的发生机理，这样的政策转向为发展新的灾难预防技术所必需。

该项研究计划由促进地震研究总部（HERP）在上周发布，其目的是为日本在未来10年的地震研究确定方向，会对国家研究机构从四月开始的1999财务年开始的项目产生影响〖即政府不再资助任何预测研究〗。

成功预测地震可能不现实，这在日本已逐渐成为共识。去年，向教育、科学、运动、与文化部提供资询的地质委员会针对长达30年的试图短期预测地震的政策进行了改变，把重心移向了针对可能发生大地震的地区的长期预告（见1998年《自然》第393期202卷）。

HERP的计划进一步促进了独立于地震预测的灾难预防技术的研究与发展、进一步强调了通过卫星观测对地震发生的基础研究，比如基于全球定位系统的研究。

在1995神户地震以后设立的HERP是为促进政府部门、大学、与研究机构之间的协作，HERP意识到自已的主要目标是寻找减少大地震的后果的方法措施。它试图通过分析与模拟地震性的大地振动与建立收集即时地震数据的体系而实现其目标。

尽管该计划强调某些地震预测研究，比如对地震带的地质物理与地质结构的研究，它呼吁放弃基于数据的技术分析〖即在中国真假地震学家中盛行的数据规律分析方法〗。它宣布依靠现有科技而准确地预告地震时间是“极度困难”的。

“尽管预测项目把重心移到了长期预测上，仍然难以保证此类预测的现实可能性”，东京大学的地震学教授Mitsuhiro Matsuura说，“地震研究的目的不是猜测什么时候一个地震要发生，而是理解其发生的科学机理。”

该计划也呼吁建立一个收集与分析本国地震研究数据的数据中心，其主要目的是为研究人员提供信息，但也要对公众开放。

通过公开信息，HERP希望提供对现有研究更好的回顾，防止以地震研究为名的资金滥用，此类研究常常得到丰富慷慨的资助，据说很容易逃避鉴别性的审查。

许多研究人员担心开放数据会误导公众。“开放研究数据当然对地震研究相关人员有帮助，但可以导致公众误解，”东京大学的罗伯特*盖勒警告说，“比如说，在某一特定地区长期没有地震可能会让当地居民产生假的安全感。”

地震的物理过程，特别是其动态，仍旧需要更细致的研究，Matsuura说，因此公众应得到对地震现象细心的解释，以便他们懂得发生了什么。

下面是原文：

Nature 397, 284 (28 January 1999)

Japan to try to understand quakes, not predict them

Asako Saegusa, tokyo, tokyo

Earthquake research in Japan should focus on understanding the mechanism of earthquakes, rather than predicting them, according to an advisory body to the Japanese prime minister. This shift is needed to develop new disaster prevention technologies.

The research plan was released last week by the Headquarters for Earthquake Research Promotion (HERP). It is intended to shape Japan’s earthquake research for the next decade, and will influence projects at national research institutes from April, when the 1999 fiscal year begins.

There is a growing perception in Japan that successful earthquake prediction may not be realistic. Last year, the Geodetic Council, which advises the Ministry of Education, Science, Sports and Culture, made the first changes in its 30-year-old programme of attempting to predict imminent earthquakes, shifting its focus to long-term forecasts of areas likely to be struck by major tremors (see Nature 393, 202; 1998).

HERP’s plan goes further by promoting research and development in disaster prevention techniques independent of earthquake prediction, and by emphasizing basic research on earthquake processes through satellite observation, for example with the global positioning systems.

Set up in 1995 after the Kobe earthquake to promote collaboration between ministries, universities and research institutes, HERP sees the main aim of its plan as exploring ways to minimize the effects of major earthquakes. It seeks to do this by analysis and simulation of seismic ground motions, and by creating a system to gather real-time seismic data.

While the plan emphasizes some earthquake prediction research, such as studies of the geophysical and geostructural features of seismogenic zones, it calls for a departure from techniques based on data collection. It states that accurately predicting the timing of earthquakes is “exceptionally difficult” with current technology.

“Although the prediction programme has shifted its focus to making long-term forecasts, there is still no guarantee that this is actually possible,” says Mitsuhiro Matsuura, professor in seismology at Tokyo University. “The purpose of earthquake research is not to make a guess when an earthquake will strike, but to understand the scientific mechanism behind it.”

The plan also calls for a new data centre to collect and analyse information related to domestic earthquake research. While its prime objective would be to provide information to researchers, it would also be accessible to the public.

By opening up this information, HERP hopes to give a better view of present research, and to prevent the exploitation of funds in the name of earthquake research, which is often generously funded and is said to be more likely to escape critical review.

But many researchers are concerned that disclosing data could mislead the public. “The disclosure of research data would certainly be beneficial to those involved in earthquake research, but it could cause misunderstanding among the public,” warns Robert Geller, a seismologist at Tokyo University. “For example, the long-term absence of an earthquake in a particular region could give the residents a false sense of security.”

The physics of earthquake processes, especially their dynamics, still requires detailed research, says Matsuura. Therefore the public must be given a careful explanation of seismological phenomena so people understand what happens.