A theory of ball lightning

Uman, M. A.; Helstrom, Carl W.

doi:10.1029/jz071i008p01975

Cited by 18 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 7 publications

(2 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…They showed that their model can yield ball-like solutions. A similar theory was presented by Uman and Helstrom (1966). Winterberg (1978) proposed an electrostatic theory of ball lightning.…”

Section: ) Constant Size Brightness and Shape For Extended Timessupporting

confidence: 54%

Little black hole model of ball lightning

Rabinowitz¹

ICOPS 2000. IEEE Conference Record - Abstracts. 27th IEEE International Conference on Plasma Science (Cat. No.00CH37087)

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Small, quiescent black holes can be considered as candidates for the missing dark matter of the universe, and as the core energy source of ball lightning. By means of gravitational tunneling, directed radiation is emitted from black holes in a process much attenuated from that of Hawking radiation, P SH , which has proven elusive to detect. Gravitational tunneling emission is similar to electric field emission of electrons from a metal in that a second body is involved which lowers the barrier and gives the barrier a finite rather than infinite width. Hawking deals with a single isolated black hole. The radiated power here is P R ∝ e −2∆γ P SH , where e -2 ∆γ is the transmission probability.away energy and angular momentum." This is quite similar to the model later used by Hawking (1974Hawking ( , 1975 to propose radiation from non-rotating black holes. He also suggested that small black holes in stellar objects such as our sun might help to explain the solar neutrino problem (Hawking, 1971;Kim et al, 1993).Hawking radiation has not been observed after over two decades of searching (Halzen et al, 1991). Scientific papers (De Sabbata and Sivaram, 1992;Balbinot, 1986) have been written offering reasons why it may not be observable. For example, De Sabbata and Sivaram suggest that "Thus one may observe the decay [Hawking radiation] only if one makes an infinite succession of measurements. So in a sense one may never be able to observe the Hawking effect." The radiation described in the present paper differs substantially from Hawking's, and a case is made here that it has already been observed indirectly in ball lightning; and possibly also in the detected gamma-ray background. Gravitational TunnelingA quantum theory of gravity has not yet been developed. Nor has the difficult two-body problem yet been solved in general relativity. There may be an intrinsic incompatibility between general relativity and quantum mechanics as quantum mechanics appears to be antithetical to the equivalence principle (Overhauser, 1975;Rabinowitz, 1990a). Hawking (1974Hawking ( , 1975 boldly circumvented these problems in considering quantum fluctuation virtual particle pair production outside an isolated black hole as the source of Hawking radiation.The tunneling probability is 0 out of the gravitational well of a single isolated body. Two-body systems will also be analyzed, where the tunneling probability ≠ 0.The analysis here mainly relates to uncharged, non-rotating bodies in general, and black holes in particular. Since we shall be dealing mainly with very low tunneling probabilities, the details of the effective potential barrier near the black hole are not critical. Both for Einsteinian and Newtonian black holes, the potential energy far from

show abstract

Section: ) Constant Size Brightness and Shape For Extended Timessupporting

confidence: 54%

Little black hole model of ball lightning

Rabinowitz¹

ICOPS 2000. IEEE Conference Record - Abstracts. 27th IEEE International Conference on Plasma Science (Cat. No.00CH37087)

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The increase in electric field and current density gives the glow discharge and maintains the ball's conductivity. This basic model, due to Finkelstein and Rubinstein (1964) has been investigated in a quantitative way (an unusual exercise for ball lightning theories) by Uman and Helstrom (1966) who showed that a ball of plausible characteristics could be produced. Further refinements in the basic theory have been made by Powell and Finkelstein (1970).…”

Section: Objective Evidencementioning

confidence: 99%

Ball Lightning: The Unsolved Problem

Charman

1982

Weather

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…However, a sufficient number of accounts (usually given by untrained observers) has provoked some workers to speculate upon the nature of the phenomenon. For a recent comprehensive documentation of ball-lightning reports the reader can refer to Dewan (1964), Rand McNally (1966), or Rayle (1966 and for accounts of ball-lightning theories refer to Finkelstein and Rubinstein (1964), Silberg (1965), and Uman and Helstrom (1966).…”

Section: The Phenomenon Of Ball Lightningmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…No single mode will give uniform radiation pressure over a spherical surface, neither have any coupled mode configurations yet been found that will satisfy this requirement. Uman (1969), using calculations of Uman and Helstrom (1966), has shown that the rate of cooling of a lightning channel is a sensitive function of its radius (approximately proportional to Y-". Further calculations, assuming spherical rather than 50 C. D. Stow cylindrical volumes of air, showed a similar behaviour.…”

Section: The Phenomenon Of Ball Lightningmentioning

confidence: 99%

Atmospheric electricity

Stow

1969

Rep. Prog. Phys.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

2.1. Thermoelectric effect . 2.2. Electrification of melting ice . 2.3. Electrification of snowstorms .2.4. Electrification of evaporating ice 3.1. Electrification of freezing water 3.2. Electrification of fragmenting water drops during their freezing 3.3. Charging associated with the disintegration of water drops . 3.4. Electrification associated with the evaporation of water . 3.5. Electrification at the surface of water caused by splashing and . 3. The electrical properties of water . . the release of air bubbles . 4.1. Electrification of sand and dust. 4.2. Electrification of volcanic plumes 5. The electrification of convective clouds . 5.1. Observations of the electrification of convective clouds. . 5.2. Laboratory investigations of electrical processes occurring 5.3. Theoretical models of the growth of cloud electrification . 6.1. Electrical measurements of the lightning flash . 6.2. Optical measurements of the lightning discharge. 6.3. The phenomenon of ball lightning 4. The electrification of dust, sandstorms, and volcanic plumes ..

show abstract

A theory of ball lightning

Cited by 18 publications

References 7 publications

Little black hole model of ball lightning

Little black hole model of ball lightning

Ball Lightning: The Unsolved Problem

Atmospheric electricity

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About