Comments on: Satisfying non-explanations: an intriguing non-dream about ball lightning

By: Erich Vieth

Erich Vieth — Sun, 22 Feb 2009 06:42:30 +0000

Videos of Ball lightning: http://blog.wired.com/defense/2009/02/great-balls-of.html

Here’s the Youtube: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nmUClLDb2dE&eurl=http://blog.wired.com/defense/2009/02/great-balls-of.html

By: Erich Vieth

Erich Vieth — Sat, 27 Dec 2008 19:52:01 +0000

And now I know a lot more about ball lightning, thanks to Mikhail Shmatov, who works as a Senior Research Fellow at the Ioffe Physical Technical Institute in St. Petersburg, Russia. Mikhail emailed me one of his articles: “New model and estimation of the danger of ball lightning.” (2003)

The first sentence is instructive: “The very important factor of the danger of ball lightning is that its physical nature is not yet established.”

On the other hand, as indicated in the following abstract, we do know some things about ball lighting, enough for me to be glad that I didn’t reach out and try to grab that glowing orb:

A new model of ball lightning is proposed. The main model assumption is that ball lightning has a core consisting of clouds of electrons and totally ionized ions which oscillate with respect to each other. According to the model, ball lightning emits high energy photons that are sometimes dangerous for human beings, and in a number of situations it can kill humans by electric pulses; the ball lightning energy can be of the order of 106 J and even greater. The electric charges that need to be injected into the atmosphere to create ball lightning and the currents, providing the injection of such charges, are estimated. These estimates predict that ball lightning can be created in the experiments with ordinary lightning or powerful electrical installations.

By: Erich Vieth

Erich Vieth — Sun, 12 Oct 2008 14:02:45 +0000

Niklaus: Lucky for you, that others were around to corroborate your sighting.

You and I simply recounted what we saw without any explanatory gloss. I wonder how many times ball lightning has been noticed, yet “explained” by the witness as “God communicated with me” or “an angel visited me”?

It was frustrating to me to not have an explanation. Deep down, I suspect I still don’t have much of one. Before I heard the term “ball lightning” and read the SciAm article, what I saw simply had no explanation. It sat there in my memory as a singularity. Whenever I was reminded of is, I thought “I still wonder what that was all about.”

BTW, when I saw the orb, I wasn’t paying attention to the weather outside. I could have been stormy, but I just don’t know. From the reports of ball lightning you can now read on the internet, many such sightings occurred during storms.

By: Niklaus Pfirsig

Niklaus Pfirsig — Sun, 12 Oct 2008 12:11:49 +0000

In my case there were three witnesses to the event, each with different points of view. All three of us saw the ball enter the house. My grandfather also saw it touch the phone. My uncle, who was closest to the door, saw th entire event.My vantage point allowed me to see everything except the phone, as I could see into the house through the front window, but my view of the phone was blocked by the curtains.

I have studied similar reports over the years and arrived at the conclusion that “ball lightning” or “lightning ball” is a common name given to any of several rare natural phenomena involving a luminescent gaseous bubble.

By: Niklaus Pfirsig

Niklaus Pfirsig — Sun, 12 Oct 2008 08:26:29 +0000

I have also witnessed ball lightning. I think I was 11 or 12 years old. I was visiting at my grandparents who lived in an old farmhouse near the edge of the Barrens plateau close to Beech Grove, Tennessee. The day had been very hot and humid, small thunder shower had popped up. My grandfather, an uncle and I were sitting on the front porch enjoying the cool mist of rain water whipped up by the wind under the porch,
Suddenly the rain stopped and the sun cam out. I started looking for a rainbow,as the conditions were right for it, when lightning hit a tree that was about 25 feet in front of the house. I not only heard th thunder, but I felt it hit me like a giant hot pillow. With my ears ringing, I looked quickly toward my grandfather and uncle, and saw them staring at something. I looked in that direction and saw a glowing ball of light, about the size of a softball.
The ball floated toward the house quickly passing between my uncle and me. It went through the screen door and into the house, leaving a circular hole in the screen that was smaller that the ball. by the time I could get turned around to look into the house, the ball had made its way to the door of the kitchen and seem to be heading toward the massive cast-iron cook-stove.
The phone, which was wall mounted next to the front door, rang and the ball darted to the phone, which stopped ringing. The ball immediately started back toward the kitchen, but at a slower rate. When it got to the middle of the room, it disappeared.
The entire event lasted a few seconds. The telephone repair man came out a few days later to fix the phone. He said the phone was melted on the inside and he replaced it.

By: Dan Klarmann

Dan Klarmann — Sat, 11 Oct 2008 12:57:29 +0000

After doing a bit of related reading, it seems to me that most spontaneous ball lightning observations involve a tired and solitary observer.
Also, all the experiments to try to reproduce the effect require maintaining very high energy gradients, as inside a microwave oven, or show normal material sparks (superheated plasma-emitting burning crumbs of carbon or silicon).

The comforting effect of having authorities offer nomenclature, taxonomy, and/or soothing (albeit unsupported) assertions as to the cause of spooky phenomena is a very interesting point.

Much like how we “know” about gravity. Actually, we only know how it behaves; its effect on everything. Open questions include: Is it transmitted by the Higgs Boson (how does a particle “feel” the mass of another)? Is it inherently linked to inertia, as opposed to coincidentally proportional? And inertia itself is another question.
I mean that even this everyday observation is a spooky phenomenon at its core. We can use it, but so far not reproduce or counter it aside from using matter already containing whatever it is.

By: Planeten Paultje

Planeten Paultje — Sat, 11 Oct 2008 08:10:27 +0000

The supernatural: I define this as a realm of phenomena that do not adhere to the laws of physics to a degree.
My take on it: There is no such realm, never has been, never will be.
There are however phenomena of which we do not understand how they fit into the fabric of natural laws, presumably because we don’t have a full view of this fabric. That’s noting to worry about, at the contrary. It simply means that there are many more discoveries to be made and the thrill of scientific exploration continues.
It also means we can’t be certain and that’s where the real trouble starts. People want certainties to make them feel good and will start making up things to get there. Religion is a case in point imho. But the scientific world is not free from this craving for certainty either. Often discoveries are made that lead away from established insights and scientists may roll over the floor fighting for years about who is right. Plate tectonics anyone? But when Science runs its course, the theory that fits the observable facts best prevails. That’s why I like Science, it’s open-ended and you get real results.
It would be silly to presume that no such battles are raging in our own time.

You are a lucky man Erich to have witnessed a phenomenon that one day will probably lead to new scientific insight.

Anecdote:
Strange things have been seen by many in the sky. Of course when anyone told he’d seen something strange the reaction would be: “You’ve seen them flying”. Scientists often dismiss those reports from “crackpots” as not worth looking at.
One report from Holland was made by a bus driver who, during a night shift noticed something moving overhead. He stopped his bus and got out to look at what it was. He couldn’t make heads or tails from it, and reported it to the police.
He ended up on national television in a panel of three. One person was a lady who could only repeat that ET’s were coming to save the earth and the second was a member of the Dutch Sceptics Society who could only repeat that UFO’s didn’t exist. The only sane person was the bus driver who stuck to his story and the subsequent question: “What was it I saw?”