Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Scientists uncover mystery of ball lightning

abc.net.au

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–14 of 14 posts

Re: Scientists uncover mystery of ball lightning

#11

Post by rcxb »

chmike wrote: post #8

The full pdf is not accessible and the abstract is too light. Many ball lightning have been witnessed in absence of windows. What's the point of such explanation ? It is a frequent behavior to select one caracteristic of a multi variated phenomenon and derive from it an explanation. Obviously the explanation can't account for all the other caracteristics of the phenomenon. But that seem to be a detail. BTW my father…

The point of this study is to supplament previous studies of ball lightning. The most widely accepted theory is that ball lightning is a ball of silicon gas, resulting from lightning striking the ground. That obviously didn't address the cases of ball lightning appearing in and around aircraft, which is the gap this study fills in.

So now it seems we have one workable theory of ball lightning. To claim it is incomplete, you need to find cases of ball lightning that were both a significant distance away from the ground AND far, far away from any windows.

My doubts about this theory lie in the various behaviors when ball lightning encouters solid objects... Sometimes it burns a hole, while other times witnesses claim it passed right through solid objects without causing any damage. That seems to indicate there may be two very different types of ball lightning, but perhaps the ground versus windows source will prove to generate a sufficiently different type of ball which will suit both observations.

Re: Scientists uncover mystery of ball lightning

#12

Post by chmike »

rcxb wrote: post #11
chmike wrote: post #8

The full pdf is not accessible and the abstract is too light. Many ball lightning have been witnessed in absence of windows. What's the point of such explanation ? It is a frequent behavior to select one caracteristic of a multi variated phenomenon and derive from it an explanation. Obviously the explanation can't account for all the other caracteristics of the phenomenon. But that seem to be a detail. BTW my father…

The point of this study is to supplament previous studies of ball lightning. The most widely accepted theory is that ball lightning is a ball of silicon gas, resulting from lightning striking the ground. That obviously didn't address the cases of ball lightning appearing in and around aircraft, which is the gap this study fills in. So now it seems we have one workable theory of ball lightning. To claim it is incomple…

The silicon gaz is new to me. Never heard of this theory. How would such a gaz not disolve in air ?

How could it explain the explosions reported with some ball lightning ? The plasma bubble explains all the reported facts.

A precision to the discribed model is that ions of opposite charge move in opposite direction radialy. When they crossed each other they slow down due to the attractive force of the opposite charge up to the point they stop and reverse direction. This oscillation of the ions explains the stability of the plasma over a long period.

The plasma bubble layer is very thin. A bubble may contain other bubbles forming then multi layer bubbles.

Re: Scientists uncover mystery of ball lightning

#13

Post by nkoren »

pmjordan wrote: post #10
nkoren wrote: post #6

This might be an explanation for ball lightning, but I'm pretty sure it can't be the explanation. I saw ball lightning once. Got caught in a thunderstorm at 12,000 feet in the Sierras -- well above timberline -- and watched the lightning striking around me while I hid under a boulder. I was essentially in the centre of the thunderhead; things got pretty wild. At one point I saw two or three lighting balls (I thought…

I can't comment on the quality of the theory described here, but I hope you realise there is silicon everywhere - most common minerals contain a substantial proportion of Si.

My impression is that the theory is not just about silicon, but specifically about windows. Seems to require a smooth silicon-based non-conducting material, with air on both sides and a charge differential between them.
Post reply on HN