At 7000 fps.................... ;D
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QUIpltFo_fg
Never seen anything like it, great. Thanks.
I had a bet with Matt that lightning strikes from the ground up. We'd had a few drinks and was sure I saw it somewhere.
Thanks for posting, you can see the charge being pulled from the clouds to the ground and on contact the bolt rises upwards.
Jon, recently I saw a documentary on the TV about lightnings, and they said, that there are lightnings that strike from the ground up, but they seem to be very rare. There was a similar movie shot at high speed.
Hey Hannes, I think what I saw was arguing that the main power event is a reaction from the ground up. Looking at that 7000fps footage, you can see ionised streaks reaching for the ground, and when it touches, the main energy spark travels up those streaks.
Interesting. It's like its searching for a ground connection. The moment one of the tendrils touches the ground then a solid path is established and the other feelers are abandoned. The moment the path is established then there is a brilliant light, presumably by the pent-up energy that suddenly has a low-resistance path to ground.
Quote from: Hetzen on June 10, 2016, 07:58:05 PM..I think what I saw was arguing that the main power event is a reaction from the ground up. Looking at that 7000fps footage, you can see ionised streaks reaching for the ground, and when it touches, the main energy spark travels up those streaks.
Yeah. The direction of ionization path travel is not necessarily the direction of electron flow which may be reverse.
Quote from: Hetzen on June 10, 2016, 05:59:55 PM
I had a bet with Matt that lightning strikes from the ground up. We'd had a few drinks and was sure I saw it somewhere.
Thanks for posting, you can see the charge being pulled from the clouds to the ground and on contact the bolt rises upwards.
Wait, so who won? ???
At the moment I think I have. What do you think Matt?
Doesn't the video show it striking from the top down?
The charge disparity reaches from the top down, but the equalization rises from the ground up.
If you were standing in a field with your finger in the air, and lightning struck you, it would be your foot that felt the pain before your finger.
Can you cite your sources? (since there's a beer in it) ;) I suppose that equalization is too fast for the video to show?
Well if there's a beer in it, time to take this seriously :)
Have a look at this 1000fps footage. Particularly around 20secs. You can see over 3 or 4 frames the 'equalisation' running back up the streak.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eaLAPGAmFtY
There's a node part way up the path, at which it splits into two or more separate paths up to the cloud. At 0:21 to 0:22, on the first bright frame it appears to share the charge between at least 2 paths to the cloud, and then the very next frame it distributes the charge only toward the right path, therefore the right path brightens. Over the next few frames the brightness diminishes overall, without any relative differences along the path, as far as I can see.
EDIT: Looking again, I'm not sure ::) There might be more than one path touching the ground on the first bright frame.
That clip has a weird frame frate, but I grabbed 5 sequential frames. On the 2nd and 3rd I believe you can see the glow move upwards.
Those are the same frames I'm talking about. I don't believe it shows anything moving upward, but rather: A) frame 2 has more energy than frame 3; B) all of the energy is moving along the rightmost path to the cloud in frame 3, but shared amongst a few different paths in frame 2. But that's just my interpretation.
Quote from: Hetzen on September 01, 2016, 04:17:40 PMHave a look at this 1000fps footage. Particularly around 20secs. You can see over 3 or 4 frames the 'equalisation' running back up the streak.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eaLAPGAmFtY
You guys are going to have to define your terms and, therefore, nail down what you mean. To me "equalization" isn't very clear. Ionization is one thing but flow of electrons is another. The video clearly shows the ionization happening but I don't think you can tell the direction of net electron flow from the pictures. Since electrons a very mobile but protons are not, we can be pretty sure that an electric current is flowing mostly in one direction. This is what "equalizes" the charges between the ground and the atmosphere. But then there is a catch. When electrons flow in one direction, electrical conventions say that (mathematically) current is flowing in the other direction. This convention was established as a standard before physicists proved the existence of electrons. Their guess was wrong. So we are forever stuck with a backwards standard. Because of this, both Hezten and Matt can claim they are right. So they each owe each other a beer. If they agree, then they can call it even.
Hey! This is my 1000th post!
For what it's worth.............I have to side with Jon on this one. The original post was at 7000 fps and to me it clearly shows the discharge traveling up. Like I said........for what it's worth. :P
Quote from: yossam on September 01, 2016, 09:19:58 PM
For what it's worth.............I have to side with Jon on this one. The original post was at 7000 fps and to me it clearly shows the discharge traveling up. Like I said........for what it's worth. :P
I do not see this. Can you explain what part shows the discharge travelling up?
Quote from: PabloMack on September 01, 2016, 09:17:09 PM
You guys are going to have to define your terms and, therefore, nail down what you mean. To me "equalization" isn't very clear. Ionization is one thing but flow of electrons is another. The video clearly shows the ionization happening but I don't think you can tell the direction of net electron flow from the pictures. Since electrons a very mobile but protons are not, we can be pretty sure that an electric current is flowing mostly in one direction. This is what "equalizes" the charges between the ground and the atmosphere. But then there is a catch. When electrons flow in one direction, electrical conventions say that (mathematically) current is flowing in the other direction. This convention was established as a standard before physicists proved the existence of electrons. Their guess was wrong. So we are forever stuck with a backwards standard.
It we're talking about the direction of flow of the electrons (or the reverse mathematical convention), then there wouldn't be a debate, because we know that the electrons flow from the cloud to the ground. I think the bet is about something different.
Quote
Because of this, both Hezten and Matt can claim they are right. So they each owe each other a beer. If they agree, then they can call it even.
I don't mind calling it even and buying each other a beer, but we haven't got to the bottom of this thing yet!
Quote
Hey! This is my 1000th post!
Congratulations :)
Quote from: PabloMack on September 01, 2016, 09:17:09 PM
Quote from: Hetzen on September 01, 2016, 04:17:40 PMHave a look at this 1000fps footage. Particularly around 20secs. You can see over 3 or 4 frames the 'equalisation' running back up the streak.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eaLAPGAmFtY
You guys are going to have to define your terms and, therefore, nail down what you mean. To me "equalization" isn't very clear. Ionization is one thing but flow of electrons is another. The video clearly shows the ionization happening but I don't think you can tell the direction of net electron flow from the pictures. Since electrons a very mobile but protons are not, we can be pretty sure that an electric current is flowing mostly in one direction. This is what "equalizes" the charges between the ground and the atmosphere. But then there is a catch. When electrons flow in one direction, electrical conventions say that (mathematically) current is flowing in the other direction. This convention was established as a standard before physicists proved the existence of electrons. Their guess was wrong. So we are forever stuck with a backwards standard. Because of this, both Hezten and Matt can claim they are right. So they each owe each other a beer. If they agree, then they can call it even.
Hey! This is my 1000th post!
Brilliant. I love this stuff.
I have to hold my hands up here and admit my position on this is swayed by something I saw on BBC4, which at the time was counter intuitive to what I had been taught to believe.
I think if we look at any system, there is always feedback. Nothing cuts out to zero. So in my head a series of rocking makes sense.
What i found interesting, is that the main event happens on earth contact and rises a few frames later. This needs to be clarified. And probably will take footage frames to prove.
Something that rings true with me is that we can be positively charged with rubber soles on. It's when we touch metal our finger feels the spark.
You guys are complicating things
*DC ALWAYS flows negative to positive, that's known, Lightning is DC - also known, the Earth is negative, I believe old Nicky Tesla would agree.