Talk:Ball lightning/Archive 4

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Epileptic hallucinations

Very unscientific and simply ignorant is the claim that lightning strikes cause hallucinations to occur in the retina or that people suffering from epilepsy see fire balls. That's because a video camera, especially TV cameras that have proven the reality of ball lightning by filming the phenomenon, can't hallucinate or suffer from epilepsy! Make a connotation under that "hypothesis" in the text that this theory does not address anything concerning the phenomenon, however is great as new scientific insight of what can happen to people suffering from a seizure or seeing something due to lightning. sc Benham 94.109.243.46 (talk) 19:50, 6 February 2022 (UTC)

Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source. Sundayclose (talk) 21:24, 6 February 2022 (UTC)

Part of the problem is that there aren't any good videos of ball lightning.

There are a few videos that show reflections or lens flares that people have misinterpreted.

There are a few that are so low-res and blurry that nobody can say WHAT they show.

And there are many, many, many videos that feature ball lightning crudely added by computer-editing techniques.

ApLundell (talk) 23:30, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

EVOs - Exotic Vacuum Objects

There is a growing suggestion that will lightning is connected to or is the same thing as as video shows as proposed by Ken shoulders. Lawrence18uk (talk) 22:50, 27 April 2022 (UTC)

@Lawrence18uk I would argue that this is now scientific consensus.

The collapsing vortex explanation is the most supported by current science, a well known natural example of this is the pistol shrimps ability to snap its claw and create a "miniature ball lightning" that is nearly as hot as the sun. 24.9.67.157 (talk) 20:09, 13 May 2022 (UTC)

Ball Lightning vs. Magnetic Monopole

Is there any discussion anywhere in Wikipedia about a potential relationship between Ball Lightning and Magnetic Monopoles? 50.206.176.154 (talk) 02:46, 7 January 2022 (UTC)

On Wikipedia, discussions are supposed to be on improving articles. So, this is not the type of discussion that should happen here. --Hob Gadling (talk) 11:26, 7 January 2022 (UTC)

Feel free to discuss this issue at WP:Reference desk/Science. Sundayclose (talk) 14:54, 7 January 2022 (UTC)

I don't know if it would "improve" the article in any way, though given the (supposed) subject matter, a point on magnetic monopoles couldn't damage the page much either. But at least it would add additional humor which helps one enjoy a page on a subject that probably doesn't actually exist anyway! So I'd be happy for 50.206.176.154 to post any such material into the article and I'll happily watch the subsequent fireworks from afar ;-) Interferometrist (talk) 18:06, 7 January 2022 (UTC)

I (50.206.176.154) am interested in this topic because of an experience related to me by my grandfather. When I was 17 (about 55 years ago) at a family reunion at the dairy farm owned by my grandfather, we were walking together toward the barn before the afternoon milking, and he stopped at a spot on the walkway and told me that it was the exact spot where he was standing when he was my age when lightning struck a lightning rod on the roof of the barn (about 20 yards from where he was standing). Immediate after the lightening strike, a ball lightning formed and moved from the iron lightning rod to the roof of the barn. From there it slowly moved down the roof to the gutter. It followed the gutter (about two feet) to the downspout then went inside the downspout and slowly moved down inside the downspout (although he said he could tell where the ball lightning was as it went down the downspout). When it reached the bottom it went into a rain barrel that was full of rain water. The ball lightning boiled off all the water in the barrel and then was gone. This story impressed me considerably. I was very good in math, so it surprised my father that I would choose physics for my BS instead of math. I have always thought that there was some relationship between the magnetic monopole and the wrought iron lightning rod and the ball lightening my grandfather saw. I think that it would improve either article (magnetic monopoles or ball lightning) to start a discussion about the potential relationship between them. 50.206.176.154 (talk) 20:14, 10 January 2022 (UTC)

I appreciate your comments, but improving the article does not involve editors discussing their personal opinions or experiences. We start with reliable sources. So unless someone can come up with those sources, any discussion here is not only moot, it's contrary to talk page guidelines. Sundayclose (talk) 03:08, 11 January 2022 (UTC)

I understand the guidelines. That is why I raised the original question. So that the discussion could take place where it provided an opportunity for improving Wikipedia's presentation of knowledge. I related this experience simply to say that there are curiosities which when studied, point toward relationships between otherwise unexplained phenomena that could shed light on the other. So where does Wikipedia want this discussion to take place if not in Talk? 50.206.176.154 (talk) 02:49, 22 January 2022 (UTC)

Maybe I should rephrase the question to "Does anyone know reliable sources that discuss a relationship between Ball Lightening and Magnetic Monopoles?" because I believe that would improve this article. 50.206.176.154 (talk) 02:49, 22 January 2022 (UTC) P.S. I consider my grandfather a reliable source.

@50.206.176.154 l0 24.9.67.157 (talk) 20:11, 13 May 2022 (UTC)

Yes I support the idea, However you need first a new string model as building block for monopoles. such as a north and south magnetic particle, able to merge into a ball lightning. see: the Q-FFF Model. Leo Vuyk (talk) 14:19, 16 July 2022 (UTC)

Active research

Hi, just a note. I've spoken to someone about this, and it seems a certain very famous writer and artist here actually saw one in the 1800s though didn't describe it as ball shaped. I'm trying to locate the original article but as its going into a scientific paper have to be careful. It does suggest that the ion beam explanation by Lowke may in fact be essentially correct at least in some cases. BL may turn out to be several rather than one phenomenon, for which a "Unified Theory" may be needed that covers all observations and effects including the more outlandish ones. I have done some research here and actually investigated a case that suggested CRT TVs can attract these possibly due to the electrostatic field in the tube itself and around the scan coils. Certainly ion beams extending out into the air can result from HV runaway, and this is actually well documented with military equipment, effects at Fermilab, LEP and LHC as well as anecdotal cases in Russia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.190.166.126 (talk) 07:03, 8 June 2022 (UTC)

This story was told to me in August 2009 by one of the Cherepovets investigators, who wished to remain anonymous. I will not add anything on my own, so as not to change the original story. Here is the story recorded from his words:

"It was at the end of August 2001. Together with my father, I went fishing on Lake Gorodenok, which is located in the forest near our village of Zimnik. The village is located 100 km from Cherepovets towards the city of Ustyuzhny. We went to the lake for the night. Around 23:00 it was already quite dark and my father and I were sitting by the campfire. After a while, we saw a sharp glow. An object in the shape of a white-yellow ball hovered over the middle of the lake. When the object hovered over the water, it was in a calm state without visible fluctuations. The balloon hung above the water for about 5 minutes, then abruptly headed towards the forest and hit a tree. We saw sparks and heard a crack. After hitting a tree, the object abruptly flew away and disappeared from view. The tree caught fire at the same time. Weather conditions: clear, stars were visible.

Also, here are some data from the questionnaire of the eyewitness, which were recorded during a more detailed discussion and analysis of this phenomenon:

The diameter of the object is ~ 1 meter;

The height of the object above the water is ~ 0.5 meters;

The eyewitness estimated the distance to the object at 250m;

Place of observation south-east side of the lake;

Impact on an eyewitness: a state of shock; [1]https://cherepovets-kp.ucoz.org/blog/2009-10-13-18 176.65.113.100 (talk) 19:21, 30 July 2023 (UTC)