Talk:Ball lightning
From Academic Kids
| Contents |
Ball lightning
some labs managed to produce "sort of ball lightening" based on their own theories, e.g. - ball of plasma produced by microwave interference produced by a lightening - self-sustaining vortex of combustible gas
these should be added to "theories of ball lightening"
Tesla
I read that Nikola Tesla produced ball lightening artificially.
ambiguous
Removed until I can verify it and explain it less ambiguously:
- Direct current passing from the ground to the clouds through an area of high conductivity tends to concentrate in that area (how would this happen? seems to me that the current would be the same all along the bolt, wouldn't it?), forming a pinch in the magnetic field (of the earth? of the lightning bolt? of what? what is a "pinch"?). Lightning passing through that area has enough energy to convert the air from a gas to a plasma (isn't lightning already passing through this area? the air is already ionized if it is conducting, right?). Under the right conditions the plasma is trapped within the magnetic field shaped like a vortex (what is causing a "vortex" shaped field? why would it attract plasma into a ball shape?). The "ball" exists until the plasma cools (Singer, 1971).
I don't understand what this paragraph is supposed to be saying, and cannot find the original source online. I'll just leave it here if someone else wants to put it back in, with clarification. - Omegatron 18:51, May 27, 2004 (UTC)
changes
Reverting the reversion of my changes: Let take this one step at a time.
"(depending on the amount of impurities traces)": If there is no accepted theory of ball lightning, there can no accepted theory of the color of it. In any case, air is pretty uniform, so impurities are very unlikely to be the right explanation.
"Structure is described as a translucent envelope and glowing plasma inside, the whole mass showing signs of internal forces and a burning appearance (Barry, 1980).": What does "translucent envelope" mean in this context. I've never heard ball lightning described that way. It glows, but whether it is a plasma is discussed further down. What sort of internal forces are those supposed to be and how are they made evident? "Burning" adds no information over "glowing".
"Some report claims of the discharge that moves on its own volition.": Whether that is in some reports or not, how can observation of motion alone allow one to conclude whether an object has it own will?
"Although accounts can vary significantly, a generally accepted model can be synthesized.": I dispute this statement.
"These effects may, though, be highly ionized plasma contained by magnetic fields of radiant energy (a popular explanation)." and following: There are sound scientific arguments against a plasma explanation. (I suppose I should take the time to expound upon them.) "magnetic fields of radiant energy" is gobbledygook anyway.
We'll deal with the "Alternative Analysis" another day.
Art Carlson 17:45, 18 May 2004 (UTC)
- Let take this one step at a time? ok ....
- impurities are very unlikely to be the right explanation? very unlikely? what? This _could be_ a likely and valid reason (though others probably exist and could be as valid).
- What evidence is there that impurities play a role? Why should impurities determine the color more strongly than the 79% nitrogen, 21% oxygen, and 1% argon present in air?
- The mediums that are present @ a phenonomena is important.
- What does "translucent envelope" mean in this context? I would suppose it means an outer surface that is not transparent, but clear enough to allow light to pass through ...
- When looking at a glowing object, how can you tell whether the envelope is translucent or is itself glowing? Are you referring to a specific report?
- Pending the situation, I would summize that it would be dependent on the light around the object (eg., a light buld behing the ball). I'll see if i can dig up a specific report.
- plasma is discussed further down? That was removed by you [can't refered to something you removed] ...
- Fair enough. I've added a few words about plasma physics.
- What sort of internal forces are those supposed to be? Electromagnetic, mabey ...
- how are they made evident? From the observational reports ..
- It is important to distinguish between observations and an interpretation of those observations. What exactly did someone see, that they chose to interpret as evidence of internal forces?
- Observation is important, but shouldn't be relied on for thier various interpertations exclusive (interpertations can vary widely). From the various scientific research on the balls, they see evidence of internal forces [see references/ext. links]. I'll see if I can get any other links for that.
- Whether that is in some reports or not, how can observation of motion alone allow one to conclude whether an object has it own will? Observation of motion alone can allow some to conclude whether an object has it own will ... though other explianations are possible (e.g., this may or may not be the case) ...
- If an observer speculates that the ball lightning he observed has volition, then that would not belong under observations but under interpretations (if anywhere). Who made this report and what was it about the motion that led him to make this speculation?
- An interpertation section may be good ... mabey before an analysis sections.
- deal with the "Alternative Analysis" another day? Ok ...
- Now, some specific questions ...
- There are sound scientific arguments against a plasma explanation? Please list them ...
- See the added content.
- Ok ...
- What is your exact "dispute" with the statement of a "generally accepted model can be synthesized"?
- That it is not true. There is no model of ball lightning that is generally accepted. There is no model that is physically plausible and fits (most of the) observations.
- The scientific research does have some general parameters. I'll get some references though (@ later time; i don't have any off the top of my head).
- How is "magnetic fields of radiant energy" is gobbledygook? Please explain.
- Magnetic fields are a well-defined entity and are not made up of "radiant energy" or anything else. Magnetic fields can contribute to the radiation of energy if they are time-varying and associated with electric fields. This is called electromagnetic radiation, or better, depending on the frequency, radio waves, microwaves, light, X-rays, or gamma rays.
- "Radiant energy" is electromagnetics (a more generalized concept though; is acknolwledged by FCC standards). BTW, you fromgot infrared =-]. JDR
ionic plasmas
I condensed the discussion of hydrogen/nitrites/nitrates plasmas quite a bit because I didn't understand it well enough to decide its scientific merit. For example, what is the recombination time? What is the degree of ionization? A reference would help a lot. (I'd also like a reference to that relatively recent theory involving fractal silicon structures.) Art Carlson 20:19, 13 Jun 2004 (UTC)
My experience of ball lightning
I wish I were as lucky in winning the lottery as I was (if not unlucky, but at least in that million-to-one situation) of having experienced ball lightning:
I was staying with relatives at an isolated farmhouse (and watermill) where the foothills of the Thuringian Forest (Germany) run out into a plain. The house was surrounded by alders and elms but other than that was in the flat open countryside. There was a severe thunderstorm, when suddenly lightning struck. (We subsequently found that it had split the chimney above the farmhouse.) It entered the damaged chimney and went on through the ceiling-high old-fashioned tiled stove (Kachelofen) into the living-room, smashing several tiles in the process. By then it had metamorphosed into ball-lightning, and all the time the noise was ear-shattering.
The next thing that happened was that this ball-shaped bright sulphur-coloured object started to hover up and down like a balloon above horizontal surfaces all the while making this most awful noise. The “ball” was about ten inches in diameter and it lasted for about eight to ten seconds. It was then that one of us in the room had the presence of mind to open the door to the corridor and with a sudden “whoosh” it swept out through the half-open house-door. While it was active inside the house, it seemed to be quite self-contained, in other words if it touched anything it certainly didn’t damage anything or impart any of its no doubt immense power to anything in its way. The noise was such that it killed two pigs that died of heart-attacks in the sty along the farmyard. Other than the chimney in the middle of the house-ridge and the tiles of the stove, nothing was damaged. Dieter Simon 00:13, 17 Jun 2004 (UTC)
- This reference to "foo-fighters" in the article, does this look bona-fide to any expert? Or is that some kind of vandalism? Dieter Simon 00:38, 11 Oct 2004 (UTC)
- Apparently not: http://www.unmuseum.org/foo.htm There should be a link in the band name to the ball lightning article. - Omegatron 13:44, Oct 11, 2004 (UTC)
