Create Artificial Lightning: Tips & Fixes

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter mtanti
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Lighting
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the possibility of creating artificial lightning by boiling water in a closed container and the underlying mechanisms of natural lightning formation. Participants explore theories, share experiences, and question existing knowledge about both artificial and natural lightning phenomena.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant suggests that evaporated water creates a negative charge that could potentially lead to artificial lightning if boiled in a closed, insulated container.
  • Another participant questions the feasibility of generating sufficient potential difference in a kitchen pot, noting that the metallic nature of the pot would drain any accumulated charge.
  • A participant mentions that artificial lightning has been produced for years and references a personal experience with a high voltage capacitor bank used by the Navy for testing purposes.
  • There is a discussion about the lack of understanding regarding the natural mechanisms of lightning, particularly how charge separation occurs.
  • One participant shares a personal anecdote about their belief in the existence of ball lightning and invites others to share their experiences or knowledge on the topic.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the mechanisms of lightning and the feasibility of creating artificial lightning in a kitchen setting. There is no consensus on the understanding of natural lightning phenomena, with some participants highlighting gaps in knowledge.

Contextual Notes

Participants reference various assumptions about charge generation and the conditions necessary for lightning, but these assumptions remain unresolved within the discussion.

Who May Find This Useful

This discussion may be of interest to those exploring the physics of lightning, artificial lightning generation, and individuals curious about anecdotal experiences related to ball lightning.

mtanti
Messages
172
Reaction score
0
I read that lighting happens bcoz evaporated water contains a net negative charge and when it gathers in bulks (clouds) it would create a -ve charge large enough to turn air into plasma and therefore conduct electricity to the ground etc etc... So is it possible to boil water in a closed container which has it's top with a low temperature and insulated and allow lots of water to evaporate and etc etc... would it make artificial lightning? Any equations and fixes are welcome...
10x!
 
Science news on Phys.org
mtanti said:
I read that lighting happens bcoz evaporated water contains a net negative charge and when it gathers in bulks (clouds) it would create a -ve charge large enough to turn air into plasma and therefore conduct electricity to the ground etc etc... So is it possible to boil water in a closed container which has it's top with a low temperature and insulated and allow lots of water to evaporate and etc etc... would it make artificial lightning? Any equations and fixes are welcome...
10x!
If nothing new has been presented in last 10 years, then it is still true that no one really understands why lightning exists. The fundamental problem that needs to be explained is how does the charge get separated. If anyone has a reasonable answer, I would sure like to hear it.
 
Billy,
Double check your calendar, it probably has been 40yrs since your read anything about lighting.

They have been producing artificial lighting for sometime now and actually know some stuff. I do not think that you will be able to generate sufficient potential difference in a kitchen pot to get a static discharge. First of all since your pot is a metallic conductor any charge generated in the steam will be drained off as fast as it accumulates.
 
Integral said:
Billy,
Double check your calendar, it probably has been 40yrs since your read anything about lighting.

They have been producing artificial lighting for sometime now and actually know some stuff. I do not think that you will be able to generate sufficient potential difference in a kitchen pot to get a static discharge. First of all since your pot is a metallic conductor any charge generated in the steam will be drained off as fast as it accumulates.
I was responding to his idea that negative charged water drops were the cause of lighting. I do know a few things about artificial lighting - About 15 years ago I visited a US navy installations just off the chesapeake bay where there was hugh high voltage capacitor bank and ability to put large (lighting magnitude) currents down vertical conductor (only about 15 or 20 meters). Navy could bring ships near it and test their resistance to EMP (Electro Magnetic Pulse thought to be a killer of electronics that might be produced by high altitude nuclear weapon)

Although this did not produce atmospheric breakdown as lightning does, several large companies (like GE etc.) that are concerned with the electric power industry do make artificial lighting routinely to test insulators, lighting shorts, etc. for the power industry. (They also make ozone and noise that you will never forget.) That is, artificial lighting is not very interesting or new. Hence I was trying to point out that no one understand the natural one - to me that is interesting.
 
You guys mean lightning, not lighing right? (I am familiar with the
artifical lighting business.)
 
Balls of fire

Antiphon said:
You guys mean lightning, not lighing right? (I am familiar with the artifical lighting business.)
Yes - good guess. I am dyslexic and a poor typist - I read what I want to see, reverse order of letters, leave them out, etc. Even if i use spell checker the times my typing does produce a word go unnoticed.

I worked two summers at LASL and spent at least an hour once there talking to a technician who had seen "ball lightning." - He was a serious person, and I have come to believe it does exist and does, by means difficult to understand, persists for seconds (not just a retinal after image persisting.) If anyone here has any personnel (first hand) knowledge about Ball Lightning, I hope you will share it. I am especially interested in details that may help rule out the retinal after image explanations.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
6K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
5K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
5K
  • · Replies 152 ·
6
Replies
152
Views
12K
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
10K