Seismogenic Field in the Ionosphere before Two Powerful Earthquakes: Possible Magnitude and Observed Ionospheric Effects (Case Study)
Jun Chen
Sandip Kumar Chakrabarti
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Comments for author File: 
Comments.pdf
Author Response
Reply is attached
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
Comments for author File: Comments.pdf
Author Response
Reply is attached
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
The paper contains some results of anomalous fields in the earthquake preparation region and the observed data was found to be in the ball park of what is expected. For both the earthquakes the perturbations are similar in magnitude though the extension in which the perturbation was expected was very big and some data within the earthquake preparation zone do contain the deviation.
The paper is an average paper in the sense that if the data obtained from more places and some pattern were detected, it would have a future. However, the scarce data was not that convincing that we can correlate between the cause and the effect. The earthquake preparation zones are so big, that even if the perturbations are detected in future in one or two places, the location of the epicentre cannot be pointed to with any reasonable certainty. Thus the usefulness is doubtful.
On the other hand, the results and the calculations seem reasonable even if the cases are few and detection is a one or two places. The reader may benefit from such studies and more evidences could be gathered before a concrete theory can be made. In that respect I recommend that the paper may be accepted eventually provided it is written in plain, correct, English with universally accepted conventions or notations. This paper does not satisfy this last criteria AT ALL.
In almost every line I find either the sentence is wrong, or strange notations, wrongly placed mathematical symbol etc. They are too many to write here, but I will cut and paste some:
0102 LT July 27, 2021
1.32.4 kV / m
2.93.9 kV/m
illustrated by Fig. 4
1.9210-7 (LB), 3.8510-7 (AV) and 7.710-7 (U)
1.8 310-6 1000
100.439.2 =
This type strange writings, and many more strangely completed sentences flood the article.
Author Response
Reply is attached
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
Please see the attachment
Comments for author File: Comments.pdf
Author Response
Answer is in attached pdf file
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
