Talk:Ball lightning
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Physics, which collaborates on articles related to physics. | |
| B | This article has been rated as B-Class on the assessment scale. | |
| Low | This article is on a subject of low importance within physics. | |
|
Comments:
|
||
 |
This article related to meteorology and/or specific weather events is part of WikiProject Meteorology and Weather Events, an attempt to standardize and improve all articles related to weather or meteorology. You can help! Visit the project page or discuss an article at its talk page. |
| B | This article has been rated as B-Class on the assessment scale. |
| Low | This article has been rated as Low-importance within WikiProject Meteorology. |
 |
This article falls under the scope of WikiProject Paranormal, which aims to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to the paranormal on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the attached article, help with current tasks, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and discussions. |
| B | This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale. |
[edit] 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"
[edit] Tesla
I read that Nikola Tesla produced ball lightening artificially.
[edit] 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)
[edit] 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
-
[edit] 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)
- Some collected references from 1990-1995 are at http://amasci.com/tesla/bllinspc.txt I recall that the fractal theory came from Russia.--Wjbeaty 04:52, 1 November 2005 (UTC)
[edit] 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)
-
- My family's microwave was hit by a lightning surge once (yes, unplugging things is a good idea), and after the shower of sparks, a 1' diameter yellow orb floated out, made some unpleasant noises, and disappeared after a few seconds. It floated very slowly. Strangely enough the microwave works much better after - this happened in 1986 and the damn thing still works great. Not that this proves it's existence to anyone else, but come on, the reason science ignores this is because they haven't been able to make one. Interesting they've done research into microwave drills, I assumed the surge we witnessed bypassed the microwave tube, and the ball lightening was caused by the metal housing of the appliance, something like that. Maybe the tube did have a part in it. Rainman420 18:38, 6 May 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Reports
I changed
"or rod-like with no dimension being much larger than the others"
to
"or rod-like with one dimension being much larger than the others"
because the first form didn't seem to be self-consistant. 192.171.162.101 10:06, 3 August 2005 (UTC)
[edit] POV
This article treats the topic as if it were well accepted scientific fact. Regardless of individual belief or opinion on the truth of this phenomenon, more emphasis on the disputed nature of ball lightning should certainly be added to the article. Further analysis and discussion can be added to either support or refute the phenomenon, but it is important to recognize that debate does exist.
The article by Singer (Phil Trans R. Soc. London A (2002) v 360, pp5-9,) might be taken as a good place to start. Text is available on web (at www.journals.royalsoc.ac.uk ). Bob aka Linuxlad 18:22, 14 January 2006 (UTC)
- Is there still a POV problem? 217.196.231.99 20:56, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
- I wouldn't say there is a POV problem anymore. The article clearly conveys the disputed nature of ball lightning's existence. Maybe the tag should be removed? Molimo 01:44, 3 February 2006 (UTC)
- Perhaps an additional section about the disbelief in ball lightning would be helpful, either right before or right after the 'Esoteric explanations' section. 12.158.58.94 19:23, 14 January 2006 (UTC)
- I did that. A section called Disbelief in Ball Lightning now exists, with research through links provided at the bottom of the page. I also removed the POV tag.TrogdorPolitiks 20:35, 18 January 2006 (UTC)
-
-
- I'm really not sure if I just saw ball lightning. I saw basically this: a flashbulb type brightness about 1 foot in diameter in the dead center of the window to my right, after I saw it right on my left. I definately felt it, or at least felt immense fear upon seeing it. I at first thought a car had passed by, but that's actually impossible because it would be at an angle, there's no physical possible way for it to go directly through the house like a shotgun as it just was. We have really big windows, and I went and asked if my sister saw it. She said it was just lightning and described it similar, but didn't see two flashes. I'm thinking she may have saw it while it was to my left (where her window is) and missed the other flash, to the right. It may have been an odd occurrance, or ball lightning (it did have a direct shot if it was so it wouldnt have touched anything). All it did was shock me as it was so unexpected. --TIB [[User_talk:The_Inedible_Bulk|(talk)]] 06:37, 21 January 2006 (UTC)
-
I would say there is still a problem with the article. Even though it claims that the existance of ball lightning is disputed, and admits that there may be several different phenomena at work, it attributes many historical sightings of odd balls of light as "ball lightning" without proof. --208.204.155.241 19:20, 10 May 2006 (UTC)
GREAT BRITAIN
I WITNESSED BALL LIGHTNING LAST YEAR I LIVE IN THE UK IN LONDON AND WHAT I SAW WAS REALLY QUITE AMAZING, IT WAS DURING A THUNDERSTORM THEIR WAS A LOT OF CONVENTIONAL LIGHTNING IT WAS QUITE A SCARY THUNDERSTORM ANYWAY WHILE LOOKING OUT MY PATIO DOOR I SAW A BALL OF FLAMES AT FIRST I THOUGHT IT WAS A PLANE OR HELICOPTER ON FIRE!!! BUT I CARRIED ON WATCHING IN COMPLETE SHOCK MY PARTNER ALSO WITNESSED IT THE OBJECT WAS ABOVE THE CANAL WHICH IS NEXT TO MY APARTMENT QUITE HIGH UP IN THE AIR IT WAS COMPLETELY GOLDEN LIKE A NAKED FLAME FROM A CANDLE WITH FLAMES RIPPLING OFF IT IT SLOWLY DESENDED AND THEN IT WAS GONE IT SEEMED TO DISAPEAR OUT OF REALITY,FROM WHERE I WAS WATCHING THIS OBJECT SEEMED TO BE THE SIZE OF A HELICOPTER BUT I CANT BE SURE.
[edit] israel
hi all. i am from tel aviv, israel, and i sow a Ball lightning. can you people add a piska about Balls lightnings that sow in israel? it can be part of alian in israel
thanks anyway, israel.
- Hi, are you saying you have a photo of a ball lightning you would like to add to the article? Dieter Simon 00:07, 15 January 2006 (UTC)
[edit] new claims 2/2006
A lab in Israel has now claimed to produce ball lightning: http://physicsweb.org/articles/news/10/2/6/1
[edit] Acceptance and sources
Cut from article:
- Although speculation continues, there is now agreement that it is neither mythical nor purely psychological.
Agreement by whom? In other words, who says it's neither mythical nor psychological? Let's name a scientific (or other) source who's willing to go out on a limb and endorse the reality of the phenomenon.
Anecdotes and literary references don't mean much. In 1805, people still thought getting soaked in a chilly rain could cause a "cold", but this was before modern immunology and Pasteur's germ theory of disease. --Uncle Ed 15:21, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
- Plenty of people still believe this, for the record. If ball lightning truly is a rare phoenomenon, would it not be expected that anecdotes would vastly outweigh the evidence? We've been writing history for thousands of years, but have only developed an understanding of electricity (and of course photography) in the last 150... If there had been cameras in 1500 perhaps we would have a photograph by now. I'm a natural skeptic but there's no cause to dismiss this yet. Rainman420 18:45, 6 May 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Image dispute
This image is labelled as a "real photo" but the talk page for the image casts doubt on its reality. Perhaps we should mention something about the "student" who supposedly took the picture, in the article rather than showing the image as if having a picture proves something.
See also Image_talk:Ball_Lightning.jpg. --Uncle Ed 18:48, 1 May 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Image restored
The image is illustrative, even if it is a fake. There is an image of Nessie on the Loch Ness Monster page even though it may be a fake. I added a caption that informs the reader that it may not be a real photo. I believe the photo definitely adds a lot of value to the article. Robartin 20:43, 2 May 2006 (UTC)
[edit] new claim: two labs in berlin
http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn9293-physicists-create-great-balls-of-fire.html
[edit] I've seen ball lightning
Around 1954 in a small town in Western Massachusetts, myself and 2 other people witnessed what I now believe to be ball lightning. It was after a thunderstorm, although the rain had completely stopped and the air was calm and one sensed what I now know to be ionized air that can follow a thunderstorm. There is a railroad track that runs through the center of town and we were about to cross it when we saw 3-4 yellow-orange balls about mid-way between a softball and basketball in size, floating and drifting slowly in unison about 6 feet above one of the track rails about 4-5 feet apart from each other. We were at a distance of about 15 feet from them at first sight. There was no noise and they seemed to be aligned directly above the rail, all at the same height and distance apart. While the balls were quite round, the outer circumference was not smoothly delineated like a basketball outer covering, but was slightly irregular or less well defined. This phenonmeon lasted for 15-30 seconds and then as they got another 20 feet or so further away from us they seemed to sort of dissipate.
[edit] Link to possible ball lightning video
I noticed this clip on Metacafe that might be ball lightning. You can see a pulsating ball on the left near the end of the video. The ball floats for a bit before disappearing in what looks like a bolt of lightning. --Silvaran 01:35, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Ball Lightning Eye Witness
I observed ball lightning in the early morning hour of 2:15 a.m. June 27, 2006 during a windy rain storm while driving on NY State Rte. 23A in Greene County near Lexington. This is a very remote region in the Catskill Mountains. It was a ball of intensly bright white light in the sky just above the trees and lasted for approximately 6 seconds. It hovered in one spot and snuffed out similar to how the moon, over a period of days, slowly turns into a finger nail shape and then fades to black. It was very bright and made no sound that I heard (I was in a car). I was bone sober because I was going to work at a reservoir dam during the storm event. There was no other traffic or distractions. There was no "regular" lightning at the time. the ball was about the size of a basketball. 161.185.1.100 19:34, 30 June 2006 (UTC)
[edit] From "Reports"
The longest dimension observed is between fifteen and forty centimeters.
- That's a pretty wide range. Does this mean that the largest ball of lightning alledgedly observed is somewhere between 15 and 40 cm, or does it mean that all alledged reports of ball lightning is between 15 and 45 cm. Also, do we have a source for this? Ian Manka Talk to me! 09:25, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Stylistic cleanup.
I happened by, thinking of writing an article on ball lighting, when what did I find but a page on it. The introduction had a few too many qualifiers, and the middle about foo fighters didn't read quite as I would have liked it, so I cleaned it up a bit.
--Dranzini 19:34, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Ball Lightning?
There was a storm over our area, a friend of mine and myself were watching TV, When for a fraction of a second, we saw a light out of the corner of my eye, totally white, and suddenly kind of popped or lightly exploded. My friend though that the antenna was hit, as there was a lightning strike very close by at the next second the ball exploded. Is Ball lightning still rare? I'd like to think so, as that was my guess on this unusual phenomena.
[edit] Mangled
Wow, at one time this was a fairly informative article, but it has apparently been hacked to death by those who doubt the phenomena. How much doubt do we really need to interject into the article to get the "neutral" point across? I'd say this article has lost its neutrality and with it its usefulness. Read the Scientific American article in the footnotes if you need to be convinced that this phenomena is not summarily dismissed by the scientific community. It is an unexplained phenomena, but many scientists believe it to be real. Robartin 03:54, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
- What you have seen is what doubters do to those things and people they don't like upsetting their personal applecarts; Charles Fort is a good read for those annoyed by such people. In any case, the phenomena is real, as I once saw it outside my house. --Chr.K. 15:41, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
