The geometry and frictional properties of a fault system are key parameters required to understand its seismic behavior. The Main Himalayan Thrust in Nepal is the type example of a continental megathrust and forms part of a fault system which accommodates a significant fraction of India‐Eurasia convergence. Despite extensive study of this zone of shortening, the geometry of the fault system remains controversial. Here, we use interseismic, coseismic, and postseismic geodetic data in Nepal to investigate the proposed downdip geometries. We use interseismic and coseismic data from previous studies, acquired before and during the 2015 urn:x-wiley:jgrb:media:jgrb53987:jgrb53987-math-0001 7.8 Gorkha earthquake. We then supplement these by processing our own postseismic deformation data, acquired following the Gorkha earthquake. We find that kinematic modeling of geodetic data alone cannot easily distinguish between the previously proposed geometries. We therefore develop a mechanical joint coseismic‐postseismic slip inversion which simultaneously solves for the distribution of coseismic slip and rate‐strengthening friction parameters. We run this inversion using the proposed geometries and find that they are all capable of explaining the majority of geodetic data. We find values for the rate parameter, urn:x-wiley:jgrb:media:jgrb53987:jgrb53987-math-0002, from the rate‐and‐state friction law that are between 0.8 and urn:x-wiley:jgrb:media:jgrb53987:jgrb53987-math-0003, depending on the geometry used. These values are in agreement with results from laboratory studies and those inferred from other earthquakes. We suggest that the limitations of earthquake cycle geodesy partly explain the continued controversy over the geometry and role of various faults in the Nepal Himalaya.
CORE (COnnecting REpositories)
CORE (COnnecting REpositories)