Slashdot Mirror


Ball Lightning Caught On Video and Spectrograph

symbolset writes "Ball lightning has been reported for hundreds of years, and experimentally produced, but for the first time a natural will 'o wisp has been captured on video and amazingly, spectrograph, accidentally by researchers studying ordinary lightning."

120 comments

  1. Error in summary by Carnildo · · Score: 4, Informative

    I'd just like to note that a will o' the wisp is not the same thing as ball lightning.

    --
    "They redundantly repeated themselves over and over again incessantly without end ad infinitum" -- ibid.
    1. Re:Error in summary by VortexCortex · · Score: 2, Interesting

      The latter may be responsible for the stories of the former basing fantasy on bits of unexplained fact, as is often the case with ancient legends, e.g., the Christian's god was probably a volcano.

      What about a Foo Fighter or Saint Elmo's Fire? One thing I find interesting is how many events can have a common cause. As is often the case in science, it's not a stretch to think such disparate things could someday be understood as a variation of "the same thing": A change in static electric charge.

    2. Re:Error in summary by Trax3001BBS · · Score: 1

      What about a Foo Fighter

      The nonsense word "foo" emerged in popular culture during the early 1930s, first being used by cartoonist Bill Holman who peppered his Smokey Stover fireman cartoon strips with "foo" signs and puns.

      Kool.

      Not off subject a bit. :}

    3. Re:Error in summary by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      This actually was ball lightning if you bother reading the article. They just decided to use whatever file photo they could grab when they posted the article but the photo they chose has nothing to do with the actual ball lightning captured on video during a thunderstorm in china. The researchers were originally photographing normal lightning when ball lightning occurred near enough. The actual link to the actual article/video: http://physics.aps.org/article...

    4. Re: Error in summary by fizzer06 · · Score: 0

      What a gyp. I'm thoroughly disappointed.

    5. Re:Error in summary by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 2

      the Christian's god was probably a volcano.
      I always thought it was a burning bush, aka an open oil spring somewhere in the desert.

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    6. Re:Error in summary by LynnwoodRooster · · Score: 3

      It was also the Hebrew god, later adopted by Christianity, and further later by Islam...

      --
      Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
    7. Re: Error in summary by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Could you maybe not make bigoted comments? I'm going to assume that you're very young, and didn't know what you were doing. Google "gyp."

    8. Re:Error in summary by dkleinsc · · Score: 2

      And a great deal of trouble might have been prevented had the god in question had not granted the land between the Euphrates and the Red Sea to all 3 groups!

      --
      I am officially gone from /. Long live http://www.soylentnews.com/
    9. Re: Error in summary by germansausage · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Interesting theory on the origin of the word gyp, but around here gyp no longer has any trace of that connotation, and is in no way associated with any racial or ethnic slur.

    10. Re: Error in summary by geminidomino · · Score: 1

      Wow, the social justice brigade is really stretching it lately, ain't they?

    11. Re:Error in summary by halcyon1234 · · Score: 1

      I'd just like to note that a will o' the wisp is not the same thing as ball lightning.

      Of course not. Those are two entirely different cards. They aren't even the same color!

    12. Re:Error in summary by plopez · · Score: 1

      I think it was meant to be metaphorical. That's the way I took it though. For some reason I seem to be more tuned into language and writing than most of the people I work with which is why "Needs to improve communications skills" rarelyshows up on my job reviews.

      --
      putting the 'B' in LGBTQ+
    13. Re: Error in summary by lgw · · Score: 1

      One day they'll discover the origin of "that's very fair of you" and implode in self-shame. I do look forward to it.

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
    14. Re:Error in summary by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You mean the one group with a lot of in-fighting?

    15. Re: Error in summary by khellendros1984 · · Score: 3, Interesting

      As a further note, avoid all uses of the words "hooligan", "uppity", "peanut gallery", "hip hip hooray", "vandal", "barbarian", "assassin", "spade", "maroon", or any other word, phrase, figure of speech, or expression that has ever been deemed offensive by anyone at any time.

      Also, take care to avoid using the words "hysteria", "orchid", "seminar", "avocado", "mastodon", "manatee", "fundamental", or other words with similarly sexual etymologies around underage people.

      Words come from places and take meanings and connotations that don't match their origins. Get over it.

      --
      It is pitch black. You are likely to be eaten by a grue.
    16. Re: Error in summary by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Interesting theory on the origin of the word gyp, but around here gyp no longer has any trace of that connotation, and is in no way associated with any racial or ethnic slur.

      Just because you didn't know a phrase can be offensive doesn't mean that it is not. See: http://www.npr.org/blogs/codeswitch/2013/12/30/242429836/why-being-gypped-hurts-the-roma-more-than-it-hurts-you

      "Around here" is a quaint notion on the Internet.

      To quote the article: "That's okay. You didn't know but now you do. So stop using it. It may mean nothing to you, but when we hear it, it still hurts."

    17. Re: Error in summary by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What a wonderful view you must get over the rest of us from your high-horse.

      http://www.npr.org/blogs/codeswitch/2013/12/30/242429836/why-being-gypped-hurts-the-roma-more-than-it-hurts-you

      Words come from places and take meanings and connotations that don't match their origins.
      Also, some words come from places and take meanings and connotations that do match their origins. Get over it.

    18. Re: Error in summary by khellendros1984 · · Score: 1

      I don't have a high horse; I just think you need to get the sand out of your ass. A speaker's intent is much more important than the etymology of their vocabulary. Post as yourself. Any further replies as an AC to this thread will go unread.

      --
      It is pitch black. You are likely to be eaten by a grue.
    19. Re:Error in summary by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > It was also the Hebrew god, later adopted by Christianity

      "Adopted" doesn't seem like the right word to me... how about "inherited"?

    20. Re: Error in summary by captainlavender · · Score: 1

      Dude, losing battle. People around here believe it's their god-given right to say the n-word whenever they want, because if you're offended or hurt by it, IT'S YOUR FAULT FREE SPEECH I DON'T HAVE TO DEAL WITH THE CONSEQUENCES OF MY ACTIONS.

    21. Re: Error in summary by captainlavender · · Score: 1

      As a member of the PC brigade, I'm not ashamed of myself. I'm ashamed of you. People who have never experienced racism who talk about how "they're just words". People who have never experiences sexism who talk about "I was just flirting". Just because you can't be prosecuted for saying something doesn't make it okay to say. (The example in this threadis not particularly egregious, but then, I don't think we're talking about that example anymore, are we?). If one person will be annoyed that they don't get to say a certain word, and someone else will feel afraid, unwelcome, and worthless if they say that word? Then shut the fuck up. Your right to say words is not more important than being kind to other people.

    22. Re:Error in summary by cwsumner · · Score: 1

      the Christian's god was probably a volcano.
      I always thought it was a burning bush, aka an open oil spring somewhere in the desert.

      No, it was just a flashlight. The big question is: who's flashlight was it?

    23. Re: Error in summary by cwsumner · · Score: 1

      Most of those words are the "nicer" words that people were supposed to use, so as not to insult various people. See "euphemism".
      The result is the "nicer" word just takes on the bad connotation and gets "ruined", as well as the old one.
      The world goes through a cycle of this several times each generation, but it is futile.

    24. Re:Error in summary by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "The Christian's" god? So, there was only one Christian? Or do you not know how to properly punctuate? Possessive form of a plural noun ending in "s" takes an apostrophe AFTER the "s", not before. But then again, you probably write "women" when talking about one adult female human being. Sigh....

    25. Re:Error in summary by JamieIanMacgregor · · Score: 1

      we've got our own 'burning bush' in New Zealand www.naturalflames.co.nz/ however I don't think anyone worships it.

  2. link to video? by noh8rz10 · · Score: 2

    can anybody find a link to the actual video? I followed the link in the summary but got to a series of other pages about the video, but not the video itself.

    1. Re:link to video? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      It's available here: http://physics.aps.org/articles/v7/5

      Not much to see though.

    2. Re:link to video? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yup:

              https://medium.com/looking-up/b594b6ffea37

      Scroll to the bottom of the page....

    3. Re:link to video? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What a shitty and unconvincing video.

      Wouldn't be surprised to find this was yet another instance of Chinese scientific fraud.

    4. Re:link to video? by Rick+in+China · · Score: 1

      Here's a link to the video on a popular Chinese video sharing website: http://v.youku.com/v_show/id_X... Looks pretty lame to me though. I expected a big nefarious blob, not what looks more like a fart lit on fire.

    5. Re:link to video? by c0lo · · Score: 5, Interesting

      It's available here: http://physics.aps.org/article...

      Not much to see though.

      From the link, with my emphasis:

      That is what Ping Yuan and co-workers from Northwest Normal University in Lanzhou, China, now report. They had set up spectrometers on the remote Qinghai Plateau of northwest China to investigate ordinary lightning, which is frequent in this region. During one late-evening thunderstorm in July 2012, they saw ball lightning appear just after a lightning strike about 900 meters from their apparatus and were able to record a spectrum and high-speed video footage of the ball.

      (groan) ... seems there are publications much slower than /. - this was supposed to be news one year and a half ago.

      --
      Questions raise, answers kill. Raise questions to stay alive.
    6. Re:link to video? by slashmydots · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Except that you can see it clearly start at high energy level on the spectrograph then drop in energy level to lower wavelengths of light closer to red like a mega-hot star quickly burning out. I thought that was fascinating and obvious proof that it's ball lightning.

    7. Re:link to video? by noh8rz10 · · Score: 0

      That video is not helpful at all. Also the site is a blatant rip off of YouTube. I'm sure my computer just got owned.

    8. Re:link to video? by Rick+in+China · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Yes, it's a ripoff of youtube from 2006. It's also one of the largest (the largest perhaps?) video portals on the internet. It's sad that you're stuck in a little bubble of "everything from China is terrible", and that _is_ the video, even though it sucks. Your name is deceiving, "noh8rz", yet your comment reeks of nothing but hate -- someone asked for the video, this is the f'in video, from "the" video portal from the country this article's team is from, I'm being helpful - you're just being a douche bag.

    9. Re:link to video? by AthanasiusKircher · · Score: 5, Insightful

      (groan) ... seems there are publications much slower than /. - this was supposed to be news one year and a half ago.

      To be fair, ball lightning sightings and claims to have photographed it or caught it on video are quite frequent, with a very high rate of hoaxes or mistaking other phenomena for it. (Almost as bad as UFO sightings and "evidence.")

      It wouldn't surprise me at all if a few extra months were added to the researchers' analysis and to the peer review just to substantiate that this is what it says it is, and all the analysis is correct. Ball lightning is just one of those things that so many people have claimed to see, and it seems odd that scientists have so much trouble catching evidence of natural occurrences... so when you finally think you've got it, you want to be sure.

      Not saying it explains the whole delay, but maybe part of it.

    10. Re:link to video? by c0lo · · Score: 2

      Ball lightning is just one of those things that so many people have claimed to see, and it seems odd that scientists have so much trouble catching evidence of natural occurrences... so when you finally think you've got it, you want to be sure.

      Also on the speculative path... I reckon one must be a Chinese scientist to get out on field trips and actually do something with a (2 actually) spectrograph...
      Seems their "westernized" counterparts are busy fighting for grants (i.e. survival) and organizing sneaker nets to smuggle scientific journals

      --
      Questions raise, answers kill. Raise questions to stay alive.
    11. Re:link to video? by SumDog · · Score: 5, Informative

      It takes a long time to get stuff published. They had to take their results, form a paper, get people to analysis it and then it goes under peer review. For us to have all this information a little over a year out is actually quite good. Also, we know it's gone under review. It could still have bad information in it, but it's less likely.

    12. Re:link to video? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually I saw ball lightning across my living room several years ago and couldn't believe it at first. glowing orb drifting in the air, like a jumping jack firework going slowly. It was so surreal and paranormal-like that it shook me (and my ex up). We were really, really scared. We never talked about it outside of family because people like you (no offense) will never believe it until you see it for yourself. -- I never did drugs, smoke, or drink alcohol, no med/psych issues, etc. Was always a science skeptic on a lot of stuff. Now I am open to believe all sorts of stuff after that. Believe what you want.

    13. Re:link to video? by Rick+in+China · · Score: 0

      Not that any of this relates to the post nor the comments, however, enjoy your straw man and presumption filled retort. To be brief - obviously not MUCH is awesome, but that doesn't mean everything is shit; you can make the same trolling comment about anyone's nickname; more than a decade; and same to you - I suppose that's a matter of perspective.

    14. Re:link to video? by Maritz · · Score: 1

      To be fair, ball lightning sightings and claims to have photographed it or caught it on video are quite frequent, with a very high rate of hoaxes or mistaking other phenomena for it.

      There appears to be no universally agreed definition of ball lightening. The reports/anecdotes vary greatly in the properties of the 'ball'. This is unfortunate because people who think they're talking about the same thing are talking about completely different things.

      --
      I do not want your cheap brainburning drugs. They are useless for work. And I am a working man today.
    15. Re:link to video? by jimshatt · · Score: 4, Insightful

      So, just for my understanding, you were science-minded at first, and then you saw something that scientists are actually researching and now you're all into paranormal stuff? Why? Just because something that *you* can't explain, does not mean there is no explanation for it. That's what science is all about!

    16. Re:link to video? by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

      Science never denied the existence of ball lightning as a phenomenon, at least as described in your case (as opposed to the more, shall we say, embellished versions). What was (and remains) very unclear is the exact mechanism for its formation.

    17. Re:link to video? by dbIII · · Score: 1

      Scientists are scheming lying wizards these days in the Fox agenda :(

    18. Re:link to video? by dbIII · · Score: 5, Funny

      There appears to be no universally agreed definition of ball lightening

      A low sperm count?

    19. Re:link to video? by Maritz · · Score: 1

      heheh indeed

      --
      I do not want your cheap brainburning drugs. They are useless for work. And I am a working man today.
    20. Re:link to video? by nhat11 · · Score: 1

      Science is a systematic enterprise that builds and organizes knowledge in the form of testable explanations. Science can not explain everything and is limited because it is created by humans. science didn't create humans, humans created science

    21. Re:link to video? by jimshatt · · Score: 1

      Science can not explain everything and is limited because it is created by humans.

      Religion is created by humans as well, but can *easily* 'explain' everything. I don't see how "created by humans" would be an inherently limiting factor.
      BTW, I wasn't even saying that science can explain everything. I just think that one should not immediately resort to believing in the paranormal, just because there are things you can't immediately explain. That just means science isn't done yet.

    22. Re:link to video? by lgw · · Score: 1

      Sure, a Chinese scientists has so much less to worry about when he publishes. (That's one damn chilling article about stuff still happening today, if you think through the implications.)

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
    23. Re:link to video? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or anything that starts off hot and cools off.

    24. Re:link to video? by c0lo · · Score: 1

      Interesting, but bears the same relevance to the current topic as discussing the situation of Ohio death-row relevance to NASA's 0.5% of GDP budget - both happens in US, but there's no relevance in considering them together.

      --
      Questions raise, answers kill. Raise questions to stay alive.
    25. Re:link to video? by lgw · · Score: 1

      There's very much relevance when some asshat suggests China has a better model of government (unless that was done sarcastically to highlight just how far we've fallen). There's a new trend on /. of love of totalitarian government, and it's a very dangerous idea. While US and Canadian scientists may struggle for funding, that's a far cry from fearing to publish research that could be somehow be taken as some sort of criticism of some government decision.

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
    26. Re:link to video? by c0lo · · Score: 1

      There's very much relevance when some asshat suggests China has a better model of government (unless that was done sarcastically to highlight just how far we've fallen).

      Umm... what to say? Let's examine the cited context:

      on Tuesday January 21, 2014 @12:18AM, AthanasiusKircher wrote:
      Ball lightning is just one of those things that so many people have claimed to see, and it seems odd that scientists have so much trouble catching evidence of natural occurrences...

      I'm raising the question: how one would expect to catch evidence of natural occurrences without taking a field trip?
      Would you suggest... modeling/replicating it in the lab? Like: "Give me the expensive toys otherwise you, the gov or funding body, don't love science"? Is then a wonder the western scientists struggle for budget?

      There's a new trend on /. of love of totalitarian government, and it's a very dangerous idea. While US and Canadian scientists may struggle for funding, that's a far cry from fearing to publish research that could be somehow be taken as some sort of criticism of some government decision.

      Mate, when I was a kid, the admission coming from an American of the fact the Russians in the former USSR were doing science was in no way interpreted as "the admission shows love for communists".
      In my opinion, your invoked relevance of your post to the topic is pure, unadulterated BS... and carries all the risks the "head in the sand" position carry; the Chinese do make science in spite of being led by a totalitarian regime (even if you are inclined to dismiss the science and see only the totalitarian regime).

      Now, mods, feel free to mod me offtopic, 'cause everything in this post has no relevance to the story

      --
      Questions raise, answers kill. Raise questions to stay alive.
  3. Warning: No video or pictures by PapayaSF · · Score: 4, Informative

    Warning: This is another of those annoying website articles that describe a visually fascinating thing, but don't actually include any pictures or videos of said fascinating thing. Not even the the spectrograph, though that seems to be in the paper behind the paywall. The only picture is of some earlier lab-made ball lightning.

    --
    Q: What does the "B." in Benoit B. Mandelbrot stand for? A: Benoit B. Mandelbrot
    1. Re:Warning: No video or pictures by Okian+Warrior · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      Warning: This is another of those annoying website articles that describe a visually fascinating thing, but don't actually include any pictures or videos of said fascinating thing. Not even the the spectrograph, though that seems to be in the paper behind the paywall. The only picture is of some earlier lab-made ball lightning.

      How the heck does someone stutter using a keyboard?

    2. Re:Warning: No video or pictures by dotancohen · · Score: 2

      How the heck does someone stutter using a keyboard?

      Emacs

      --
      It is dangerous to be right when the government is wrong.
    3. Re:Warning: No video or pictures by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How the heck does someone stutter using a keyboard?

      Emacs

      vi is easier just type a number before i and it stutters for you,

    4. Re:Warning: No video or pictures by dotancohen · · Score: 1

      vi is easier just type a number before i and it stutters for you,

      Possibly, but that would result in the entire sentence being repeated. VI mistakes usually have rather unique signatures :) :wq

      --
      It is dangerous to be right when the government is wrong.
    5. Re:Warning: No video or pictures by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

      That is why I changed my vim bindings so I can always end with. :qed

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    6. Re:Warning: No video or pictures by Sockatume · · Score: 3, Informative

      It's in the first-linked article, directly underneath the picture.

      --
      No kidding!!! What do you say at this point?
    7. Re:Warning: No video or pictures by Crudely_Indecent · · Score: 1

      don't actually include any pictures or videos

      Except for the picture...and video that I looked at when I visited.

      --


      "Lame" - Galaxar
    8. Re:Warning: No video or pictures by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I mostly do it if I'm writing a sentence and then decide to rewrite a part of it without successfully removing the remains of what was previously written. Perhaps something similar happens in the brain for a stutterer.

  4. Video by cold+fjord · · Score: 4, Informative

    Ball lightning video

    (Don't complain that it is the Daily Mail, it worked better than the Puffington Hosts.)

    --
    much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don't even know that fire is hot - George Orwell
    1. Re:Video by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Also on youtube. It's the same event, but I don't know if it's the same footage. It's quite underwhelming.

  5. Obligatory Tesla reference by spiritplumber · · Score: 0

    http://theoatmeal.com/comics/t... I have nothing particularly smart to add, other than, if you want to make free-floating plasma balls, you can do so by lighting a match, blowing on it, and dropping it in the microwave while the carbonized part is still smoldering. Try it. It is safe (although running the microwave for more than half a minute isn't recommended).

    --
    Liberty - Security - Laziness - Pick any two.
  6. Congrats guys! by Mashiki · · Score: 0

    You've caught up to Nikola Tesla...

    --
    Om, nomnomnom...
  7. Saw one as a kid by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    In the woods when I was at summer camp. Sometimes I wonder if ball lightning isn't simply an unlucky bird that got turned into instant plasma.

    1. Re:Saw one as a kid by scotts13 · · Score: 2

      In the woods when I was at summer camp. Sometimes I wonder if ball lightning isn't simply an unlucky bird that got turned into instant plasma.

      Maybe sometime, but I've been within five feet of a fair sized ball, and a vaporized bird would not be my first choice for an explanation. It melted the screen in my bedroom window.

    2. Re:Saw one as a kid by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      There's no need for a bird when you've got water vapor to work with.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  8. Big Deal by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yawn...old news. Anyone can make ball lightning using an upturned pyrex dish, graphite from a pencil poked in a piece of cork, then microwave.

  9. Stories by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting

    A grandmother of mine told a story about ball lighting that she saw in her kitchen. During a thunderstorm a bolt of lighting struck near her home and a bright hissing ball jumped out the phone, fell to the floor, moved a little ways across the floor leaving small scorch marks and vanished. This would have been the 1940's and the phone was probably a wall mounted rotary.

    She was a sober and modest person with a sound mind throughout her life. I don't doubt the story.

    1. Re:Stories by cusco · · Score: 4, Interesting

      It wasn't until the 1960s that scientists finally admitted that ball lightning actually existed. Since they couldn't explain how it could exist they declared it an 'old wives tale'.

      My grandmother was terrified of lightning storms, and I used to sit with her during them growing up. She said that in the 1940s lightning hit the telephone pole outside and blew the telephone right off the wall, starting a fire in the wall she put out with a pan of water. Another time my dad, who would have been about 5 years old, and my grandfather were in the barn trying to calm the cattle. Looking out the window she saw a ball of lightning roll in one end of the barn and then out the other without lighting the mounds of straw and hay inside on fire. She could never abide thunderstorms after that.

      --
      "Think about how stupid the average person is. Now, realise that half of them are dumber than that." - George Carlin
    2. Re:Stories by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I was video taping with a digital camera and I believe I actually have ball lighting on tape... I viewed it several times trying to see if it wasn't some glare from lighting [obviously it was dark when the storm rolled thru] I am trying to determine where I should send a copy of the video, with details with elapsed time when they appear and then disappear.

      It tough to know how large they are but they had a multi color glow, I would like to have a University or NOVA to have a look to see these things were just from natural glare [at a distance] or if it is possible they are ball lighting, or some other event that occurs during thunder storms.

    3. Re:Stories by Sockatume · · Score: 1

      It would be fairer to say that there wasn't firm evidence for anything like "ball lightning" until that point. And the stuff that there's evidence for is still a tiny subset of ball lightning's supposed properties, most of which are more likely caused by phosphenes.

      --
      No kidding!!! What do you say at this point?
    4. Re:Stories by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nah. She probably saw a volcano.

    5. Re:Stories by Drethon · · Score: 1

      When I was younger I was watching a lightning storm out the window. About 100 yards away I saw a ball of light above a tree and a moment later there was a flash of lightning so bright I lost my night vision for a few moments and there was instant thunder. I suspect it was a leader for the lightning or something like that rather than ball lightning, but who knows.

    6. Re:Stories by jbeaupre · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I remember reading stories like that as a kid. Never thought I'd see it. Then we moved to a neighborhood where it was common. Yes, common.

      When there were dry thunderstorms, ball lightening would form above a tree down the street. One or two at a time, but dozens during a storm. About 30 to 60 cm in dia, they would drift down from the tree, changing colors until they popped.

      My brother and I would watch it from behind a screen door during at least 3 different storms I can think of. Wild to think it was common enough to recognize the sound and say "The ball lightning is back, let's go watch!"

      The great irony was we were living in family housing at a large research university. The never knew what they had happening on their own campus. I figured they wouldn't believe some kid.

      --
      The world is made by those who show up for the job.
    7. Re:Stories by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You should obviously post it on /. as we are the most competent bunch to determine if this case was indeed ball lightning.

    8. Re:Stories by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > scientists finally admitted that ball lightning actually existed

      No, they have never done that. Since there's not a single picture of the phenomenon, it doesn't make scientific sense to believe that it exists. Even this article that lies and claims it exists with a picture of something that is not ball lightning. I guess scientific illiterates will think that there is finally a tiny bit of evidence that it exists, but in reality, it's just another lie.

      The ball lightning people are just as bad as climate change deniers. They hate science so they make-up their own little fairy tale mixed with stupidity and religion.

    9. Re:Stories by cusco · · Score: 1

      Does it hurt to be that stupid? If not, it should.

      --
      "Think about how stupid the average person is. Now, realise that half of them are dumber than that." - George Carlin
    10. Re:Stories by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It is pretty easy to contact people at a university, as most universities have openly listed contacts for faculty. Just keep things polite when asking a question, and don't take it personal if some don't respond (some faculty members are lazy with email, and don't even respond often to their colleagues, let alone random emails). Usually with a few tries you will find someone who is mildly interested or will take some time to look at it.

      One heads up though, is that in my experience, many digital cameras (and even some film ones) do a horribly job of capturing color related to electrical arcs well. I've had problems with images from experiments and educational outreach demonstrations showing really weird colors because the cameras didn't do a good job of filtering UV or IR.

    11. Re:Stories by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, that was very insulting. Can you then explain why I seem so stupid to you? Is there something wrong about being a skeptic and wanting robust proof about a phenomenon?

    12. Re:Stories by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ...What?

    13. Re:Stories by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      From the Wiki page on ball lightning:

      "most scientists disputed that ball lightning was a real phenomenon"

      I guess you also believe in chemtrails and crystals. The Wiki page admits that scientists are skeptical of the UFO-crowd's claim that it exists. If it did exist, why in the hell is there no proof? No pictures? No videos? Seriously, you believe something with no proof? You sound like an xtianist.

    14. Re:Stories by cusco · · Score: 1

      There are photos extant from almost a century ago until today, and multiple videos (even some on YouTube). There are also a plethora of reliable observations over the years. Did you doubt the existence of giant squid before actual examples were caught?

      --
      "Think about how stupid the average person is. Now, realise that half of them are dumber than that." - George Carlin
  10. Driving me crazy by fermion · · Score: 1

    There was a speculative fiction TV show where ball lighting was a major plot on one episode. I think it was relatively short lived. Can't remember the name or find it using a standard search.

    --
    "She's a scientist and a lesbian. She's not going to let it slide." Orphan Black
    1. Re:Driving me crazy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm pretty sure it was "Probe."
      -041E7B7

    2. Re:Driving me crazy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    3. Re:Driving me crazy by execthis · · Score: 1

      Otenki Oneesan is the series you're thinking of.

  11. Soon on eBay. by ElectraFlarefire · · Score: 0

    Now that they have been caught on video.. I wonder how long until they'll capture one fully..
    And how long until you'll be able to buy knock off ones on eBay..

  12. Not the first time by a long shot by DNS-and-BIND · · Score: 1, Flamebait

    There are plenty of videos of ball lightning on Youtube. There are some stupid fakes on that page, but plenty of real ones. Another Slashdot non-story with piss-poor links and a total lack of research.

    --
    Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
    1. Re:Not the first time by a long shot by wonkey_monkey · · Score: 2

      and [...] spectrograph

      It's just another poorly worded summary.

      --
      systemd is Roko's Basilisk.
    2. Re:Not the first time by a long shot by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 3, Informative

      My understanding is that it's the first time when we have sufficient review to conclude that this is real and is actually of the phenomenon it purports to document.

    3. Re:Not the first time by a long shot by DMUTPeregrine · · Score: 2

      Yep. The ball lightning being caught on video isn't that interesting, it's the spectrograph. That tells us what it's made of due to the emission lines in the spectrum. From this we can conclude that at least one type of ball lightning is caused when soil is heated and becomes a plasma. Getting more spectra of ball lightning will tell us if there are other types formed in nature, since other types have been made in the lab.

      --
      Not a sentence!
    4. Re:Not the first time by a long shot by wonkey_monkey · · Score: 1

      ...all of which would have padded the summary out to a decent length and been highly informative!

      --
      systemd is Roko's Basilisk.
  13. aduket by johnsnails · · Score: 1

    aduket...
    The stuff of streetfighter?

  14. For. Fuck's. Sake. by wonkey_monkey · · Score: 1

    Ball lightning caught on video

    Wow! I sure would like to see that. Luckily this is the internet, where the magic of hypertext means information can be linked to quickly and easily.

    Hmm? There's no link to the video in the summary, you say? Well that's not very good.

    Hmm? There's not even a link to the video in the article? Slashtwats.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v...

    --
    systemd is Roko's Basilisk.
    1. Re:For. Fuck's. Sake. by Sockatume · · Score: 4, Informative

      It's embedded in the first article, on the right hand side, under the picture.

      --
      No kidding!!! What do you say at this point?
    2. Re:For. Fuck's. Sake. by wonkey_monkey · · Score: 1

      Well, whoops :*

      --
      systemd is Roko's Basilisk.
  15. rainbow lightning? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    nyan nyan nyan

  16. Ball Lightning and Will O' the Wisp by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    Are two VERY different things.

    Will O' the Wisp is a B 0/1 Flying regenerating creature
    Ball Lightning is an RRR 6/1 trample haste creature that has to be sacrificed at the end of turn.

    Similar? really???

    1. Re:Ball Lightning and Will O' the Wisp by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Finally; somebody mentions it.

    2. Re:Ball Lightning and Will O' the Wisp by coolsnowmen · · Score: 1

      haha, I want to, but I can't make fun of someone for just saying something I also know. :P

  17. So no transcranial magnetic stimulation or inner e by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So no transcranial magnetic stimulation or inner eye effects then?

  18. boring. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That has to be the most boring pathic video of lightning that I've ever seen. They has to repeat it 3x just to get the length of the video to 30 seconds. AND why not show the actual cloud -> ground strike as well? Pathetic article, pathetic writing, pathetic video.

    Slashdot needs a "top" 100 list for each calendar year for the "best" and the "worst" writeups. (Why not? every other freaking news org does it)

  19. Magnets? Can't explain that... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I didn't realize that Fox News was a hotbed of Juggaloism.

  20. video without video by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Link title ends with "on video" - No video in the link.

  21. not the Christians by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    To be fair, the land was not granted to the Christians who were promised an entirely new universe.

    1. Re:not the Christians by dkleinsc · · Score: 1

      To be fair, the land was not granted to the Christians who were promised an entirely new universe.

      They certainly thought that they had a holy right to it, back when they decided to go and take it from the Muslims starting in 1095, spending the next 200 years trying to gain and maintain control of it.

      --
      I am officially gone from /. Long live http://www.soylentnews.com/
    2. Re:not the Christians by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      That's because they weren't paying attention when their leader told them to stay separate from the world's political affairs. Or more likely because they were greedy, power-hungry idiots using religion as a cover for their ambitions.

    3. Re:not the Christians by wolja · · Score: 1

      That's because they weren't paying attention when their leader told them to stay separate from the world's political affairs. Or more likely because they were greedy, power-hungry idiots using religion as a cover for their ambitions.

      To many words.
      Christian suffices but Organised Religion covers it.

      --
      Wolja Future Tombstone: Shit happened then I died
  22. I'm not saying it's Aliens... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    But it's Aliens.

  23. Finally, an explanation. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Well, sort of, BUT STILL.

    Now we finally have pretty damn good evidence for the cause of many thousands of UFO sightings around the world.
    Watching the way it decayed, it pretty much explains most of the weird sightings as well as the oddly synchronized ones.
    The ones that seem to pulsate are likely due to smaller dim balls in the red spectra, and it isn't until a larger one comes near or gains enough energy to spark up the other ones in succession. And if there are enough of them nearby, they'll all light up in a pattern that seems intelligent-like.

    Still many other things in the skies to be explained, but this finally claimed so many of them, which is great.

    What I wonder though is, there are at least 2 "known" forms of ball lightning, there is a plasma-like one that is actually hot and can burn things, but there is also some "cool" ball lightning that doesn't seem to have any heat to it at all, just all light.
    I wonder what that could be. That one truly hurts the head to think about.

  24. Interesting by agrisea · · Score: 1

    Amazingly enough, a friend and I were talking about very odd weather in our areas just last week. He lives in Reno and I am about three or four hours north of him, in Oregon. Back in the summer of 2003, I had seen four mid-air plasma balls during a huge thunderstorm. I had even spoken to a meteorologist friend who worked for ABC Medford (Oregon) after the storm passed by, who told me I had seen a very rare event. I only wish I had video.

    What had happened was a bunch of thunderstorms had merged in to a super-cell and according to radar, was moving north and would pass through the valley I live in. As I was home anyway, decided to go upstairs to view the approaching storm. My home sits up a bit higher than the rest of town so I get a good view of storms coming up the valley.

    As the storm arrived, the late afternoon light went to pitch black night. Lightning, thunder, lots of rain, wind, typical thunderstorm. But then I saw a ball appear in mid-air, maybe eight blocks south of me. It floated there for I have no idea how long, seconds. I did see colors on it of white, yellow, blue. Then it exploded with a huge noise. It sounded like a bomb, not a lightning crack, and it shook the house.

    I have seen a lot of goofy storms over the years but never a ball of lightning in mid-air that exploded. Over the next few hours, saw three more balls, though much farther south, all of which exploded. After the storm was over, I called the friend who worked for ABC News and found out just what I had seen.

    --
    Agrisea Tsunami - Epyc Servers... https://agrisea.net/products