10.1098/rsta.2001.

0922
On the energy characteristics of ball lightning
By A. V. Bychkov
1
, V. L. Bychkov
1
and John Abrahamson
2
1
Institute for High Temperatures, Russian Academy of Science,
Izhorskaya 13/19, Moscow 127412, Russia
2
Chemical and Process Engineering Department, University of Canterbury,
Private Bag 4800, Christchurch, New Zealand
Published online 4 December 2001
A compilation of 17 observations of ball lightning showing the most energetic eects
is presented along with estimates of their energy content. These observations were
chosen from several thousand for the much stronger interaction of each ball lightning
on its surroundings, and the method of energy estimation outlined. The case is put
that some of the observations show a higher energy than self-contained chemical
energy could provide.
Comments have been added to the paper, arguing that the energy estimations
themselves should be consistent with whatever model is used for ball lightning. For
example, the presence of reacting nanoparticles releasing chemical energy may bring
about the same observed eects with lower estimated energy.
Keywords: ball lightning; high energy; observations; strong eects
1. Introduction
During the last decade several publications (Smirnov 1988; Barry 1980; Stenho
1999; Abrahamson & Dinniss 2000) consciously or unconsciously implied that ball
lightning (BL) could not be an object containing high energy. One of the rst who
voiced such an opinion was Smirnov. He stated that all strong eects associated
with BL are in reality connected with the action of linear lightning, and that BL
creates some sort of a route for atmospheric currents. The same position is taken in
the book by Stenho (1999). A more balanced position was expressed by Stakhanov
(1979). He supposed that the energy density of an average BL is about W 20
30 MJ m
3
. He considered an estimate of energy density W 100 MJ m
3
, which
came from the observation of a hole made by BL in a glass sheet, to be too high
without any explanation. He expressed the opinion that BL can take o charges that
are induced on surfaces of dierent objects under thunderstorm conditions, and then
carry them producing high-energy eects. However, Stakhanov (1979) also presented
data on a BL burning a hole in an iron part of an aeroplane seat in the apparent
absence of this circumstance (see the appendix). Estimates based on evaporation of
the metal gave W 450 MJ m
3
for BL energy density. In personal discussions with
Stakhanov it became clear that he believed in a very high energy density of BL, but
he was unable to support it from the point of view of his theory, which attributes
the formation of BL to ionized complex water clusters. It is a plasma theory, and
Sections 13 written by Bychkov & Bychkov, 4 written by J. Abrahamson.
Phil. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. A (2002) 360, 97106
97
c 2001 The Royal Society
98 A. V. Bychkov, V. L. Bychkov and J. Abrahamson
it considers the energy required for the ionization and dissociation and for possible
chemical reactions, so for the same mass density it gives a maximum energy density
about an order of magnitude greater than that solely from chemical energy.
Egely (1987, 1993), by the analysis of BL observations, came to the conclusion that
BL can have a very high energy density W > 10
3
MJ m
3
and that this can occur
in the absence of thunderstorms. We came to the same conclusions by the analysis
of BL observations and explained this by our polymer composite theory (Bychkov
1994; Bobkov et al . 1996; Bychkov et al . 1996).
However, these opinions stay unheard, since in most cases it is practically impos-
sible to validate immediately the existence of a BL eect without the possible eect
of associated linear lightning.
2. Ball lightning energy from observations
The following focuses on BL with evidence of unusually high energy. We collected
such data on BL energy content from dierent literature sources and made necessary
estimations when they were absent in the references. These data and estimates are
presented in table 1, and the energy densities also given in g. 1 of Bychkov (2002).
The observation cases require the following comments, listed under the case number
used both in table 1 and in the gure.
1. (Grigorev 1990, no. 22) A BL was formed from a self-wound luminous lament,
which entered the room through the hole in the wall for electric wires. Then it
exploded 1.5 m from the observer. The observer was a demolition expert later
during his service in the army, and he compared the sound of the explosion
with the explosion of 250300 g of toluene.
2. (Egely 1987, no. 270c) A group of observers watched an irregular potato-shaped
red object. This BL left a trace of melted sand of plan area 100 mm 700 mm,
with the depth of a few cm. For estimates we used the depth of the sand layer
d = 310 mm and density of sand 10001300 kg m
3
and calculated the energy
necessary for melting of the quartz sand.
3. (Egely 1987, no. 222) The BL had fallen down into a pit holding ca. 120 l of
water. No water was splashed onto the walls. Water disappeared from the pit
leaving no trace behind. Estimates were made for the energy necessary for
water evaporation starting from room temperature.
4. (Egely 1987, no. 58) A BL disc touched the front steel part of a tram carriage
resulting in a hole (of 50 mm diameter, and of 1.5 mm thickness) with smooth
boundaries. The energy estimate was made for energy necessary to heat the
hole sized steel plate from room temperature up to boiling point for steel.
5. (Egely 1987, no. 4) A BL came inside a house through a window pane via a hole
of 100 mm diameter made by the BL. An estimate was made for the energy
necessary to melt glass 2.02.5 mm thick.
6. (Stenho 1999, the case of 1981, p. 65) A blue ball of large marble size damaged
an electric stove ring. Stenho made estimates for energy necessary to melt
nickelchromiumiron alloy of 1.4610
7
m
3
. For energy density estimates we
considered BL with 1520 mm diameter, because it did not leave traces on two
Phil. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. A (2002)
On the energy characteristics of ball lightning 99
metallic strips on each side of the damaged part of the ring (each strip lay at
about 8 mm from the damaged part, whose size is also ca. 8 mm).
7. (Singer 1971, ch. 2, the case of 1749; Kozlov 1978) A BL of millstone size had
broken the mainmast and main topmast of the ship Lizard. The energy nec-
essary for its destruction was obtained by calculations accounting for water
heating inside the wood and with consequent expansion and bursting of la-
ments. The equation of state for the watervapour mixture and typical wood
strength data were used. The diameter of the wooded topmast was assumed to
be 600900 mm.
8. (Dmitriev et al . 1981) The BL left a trace of melted and charred soil with plan
area of 1.5 m diameter, 200250 mm thick. Estimates were made on the basis
of energy measurements necessary to melt the same soil by microwave electric
eld radiation.
9. (Barry 1980) Goodlets case. Estimates represent the energy density necessary
for heating water from 20 to 60

C when a BL (100150 mm diameter) fell into
a bucket with ca. 18 l of water.
10. (Stakhanov 1979, no. 30) A BL melted a hole in a glass pane (50 mm diameter,
2.5 mm thickness). A comparison was made with the energy required for laser
radiation melting of the same sized hole in glass.
11. (Stakhanov 1979, no. 33) This focused on the action of a BL on an iron tube
(5060 mm in diameter, 700800 mm long) turning it into a loop. In the esti-
mate it was assumed that a 50 mm length of the tube had to be heated from
room temperature up to 700

C.
12. (Stakhanov 1979, no. 34) A BL burnt a hole in a pipe in a metals factory. The
energy estimate allowed for the 45 mm wall thickness of the iron pipe and
heating this from room temperature up to its melting temperature.
13. (Stakhanov 1979, no. 35) A BL burnt a hole in an aeroplane seat (ca. 3 cm
3
or
ca. 24 g of iron had disappeared). Alternative estimates for melting of the iron
or boiling were considered in the energy estimates.
14. (Imianitov & Tikhii 1980) A BL explosion pulled out a board (2 m long, 25 mm
thick, and 150 mm width) from a wall to which it was nailed by six nails (each
150 mm long). Estimates were made for the work necessary against the friction
force.
15. (Barry 1980, ch. 4.2, case 2; Singer 1971) A BL split a big oak tree. The energy
necessary for splitting was obtained by accounting for the heating of water
inside the wood with a following fast expansion and bursting of bres.
16. (Wittman 1971, 1993) A large BL had separated into 812 smaller BLs. Each
of them left a melted trace on wet asphalt. Estimates were made for the energy
necessary to make the circular patches of melted asphalt and for evaporation
of a water layer on the asphalt.
Phil. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. A (2002)
100 A. V. Bychkov, V. L. Bychkov and J. Abrahamson
Table 1. Estimates of ball lightnings energy (E) and energy density (W)
D
min
D
max
case (m) (m) E (J) W (MJ m
3
) location conditions
1 0.1 0.13 1.11.3 10
3
0.962.5 indoors after a thunder-
storm
2 0.1 0.1 0.261.1 10
6
0.52.1 10
3
outdoors during a
thunderstorm
3 0.25 0.25 2.8 10
8
3.4 10
4
outdoors no thunderstorm
4 0.18 0.2 2.0 10
5
4865 in a tram during a
thunderstorm
5 0.16 0.17 4.36.3 10
4
1729 outdoors/
indoors
during a
thunderstorm
6 0.015 0.02 6.0 10
2
1.43.4 10
2
indoors no thunderstorm
7 0.6 0.9 1.3 10
8
0.341.15 10
3
outdoors unknown
8 1.5 1.5 1.1 10
9
6.2 10
2
outdoors strong rain with-
out any lightning
9 0.1 0.15 3.0 10
6
1.75.7 10
3
outdoors unknown
10 0.05 0.06 1.02.0 10
4
0.883.1 10
2
outdoors/
indoors
unknown
11 0.2 0.3 0.801.0 10
5
5.724 outdoors after a thunder-
storm
12 0.2 0.2 1.52.0 10
5
3648 outdoors unknown
13 0.08 0.08 0.181.2 10
4
6.745 in an
aeroplane
no thunderstorm
14 0.06 0.08 1.0 10
3
3.78.8 indoors a thunderstorm
without any
lightning
15 0.15 0.15 1.5 10
5
85 outdoors no thunderstorm
16 0.12 0.15 1.9 10
4
1121 outdoors during a
thunderstorm
17 0.06 0.09 2.7 10
8
0.72.4 10
6
indoors unknown
17. (Imianitov & Tikhii 1980, the case of 1962 in Zakarpatie) A BL of tennis ball
size fell into a rectangular trough of plan size 0.3 m 2.5 m lled by a 150 mm
layer of water. Almost all the water was vaporized, and the frogs in the trough
were cooked. Estimates were made for heating the water from 10 to 100

C and
for its vaporization.
Four of these observations which have been published in Russian or Hungarian
(cases 1, 3, 8, 13) have been translated into English, and these translations are
provided in the appendix.
3. Discussion
From the data of table 1 one can see that in eight cases we can denitely say that BL
energy is not connected with linear lightning eects (cases 1, 3, 6, 8, 11, 13), and in the
Phil. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. A (2002)
On the energy characteristics of ball lightning 101
cases 3, 6, 8, and 13 the energy density lies in the range 10
2
< W < 310
4
MJ m
3
.
So our analysis of the observational data leads us to the same conclusion as that of
Egely (1987, 1989, 1993), Bychkov et al . (1996) and Bychkov (1994).
The maximum values correspond to the cases 3, 9 and 17. In all these cases esti-
mates were made by the analysis of water heating or heating and vaporization after
the BL had fallen into a tank containing water. Dierent reasons for these results
could be found. The rst one could be connected with the unreliability of observa-
tions, and general discussion of this can be found in Barry (1980) and Stenho (1999).
The second one could be connected with some sort of electric and chemical process
that is generated by BL in water tanks, since in this case a metallic tank, water and
the BL could possibly represent a non-equilibrium electrochemical generator.
A possible explanation of the high energy content of ball lightning is presented in
the appendix of Bychkovs article in this issue (Bychkov 2002).
4. Smaller estimates from these ball lightning observations,
and consistency with the oxidation of metal nanoparticles:
comments from John Abrahamson
(a) Interaction models
The energies of BL estimated above all use implicit models of interaction familiar
to the observer or to the authors. Thus, the sound of the explosion was related to
an equivalent sound of a military explosive, and the removal of water from a trough
or other container is related to a normal method of heating the water through the
surface of a submerged hot body (perhaps of similar size to the BL). Yet there
are aspects of these BL observations which do not match the characteristics of the
interaction models used. The explosion did not have noticeable heat associated with
it, and no mass was observed emanating from it. The removal of water from the
troughs was apparently fast, much faster than could be achieved by boiling through
a hot surface. The glass hole left in the sheet was not stated to have round edges
consistent with melting. In fact, Turner (1997) has noted that there appears to be
no case of BL interaction with a glass sheet with clear evidence of melting, taking
into consideration the survey of 43 cases by Grigorev et al . (1992). To be valid, the
interpretation (the model of interaction) of all these observations should be consistent
with the model of BL being proposed, which should be able to explain these otherwise
puzzling aspects. This consistency may also alter the estimates of energy, as seen in
the example presented below.
(i) Interaction with water
If we take the BL model as a cluster of nanoparticles of metal being oxidized by
the surroundings (as in Abrahamson & Dinniss 2000; Abrahamson 2002), then the
interaction with water is expected to be very dierent from that of a heated solid
sphere of the same size. The water and the hot particle network will interpenetrate,
with water and steam (reacting with the particles) surrounding the hot network
strands. This is expected to produce a ne froth, which will disperse into the air,
and fully vaporize later. The highest energy estimate for this process is that where
all the water is brought to the boiling point, and then sucient water is boiled o
to provide a reasonable vapour volume to provide the froth. This is then a closely
Phil. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. A (2002)
102 A. V. Bychkov, V. L. Bychkov and J. Abrahamson
parallel situation to that commonly observed in microwave ovens, where a glass of
water can be uniformly heated until it is superheated just above the boiling point.
If then some nucleating particles are added, sudden vapour evolution occurs around
each particle, and the whole mass is dispersed rapidly upwards out of the container
in a foam. This method of water removal uses much less energy than if all was
evaporated, and is also rapid. For comparison, the whole phenomenon of case 3
apparently including the water removal lasted only 810 s.
In estimating the energy requirement for water removal by foam, the assumption
will be made that all the water present is heated at least to 100

C. The energy
requirement for a rise from 15 to 100

C, plus vaporization to provide say 0.95 of
the froth volume in vapour (leaving 0.05 as liquid), comes to 380 kJ kg
1
of water,
of which only 25 kJ kg
1
is for vaporization. This is much less than that required for
full vaporization (2610 kJ kg
1
). Then in case 3, in order to match the 380 kJ kg
1
for froth formation for 120 kg of water, 46 MJ is required, and for the 250 mm diam-
eter ball, the energy density is then 5600 MJ m
3
, compared with 34 000 MJ m
3
in
table 1.
(ii) Interaction with glass
The interaction of BL with solid dielectric materials has for energy estimation
been assumed to be one of heating to the melting point. However, the penetration
of thermal energy through the material by conduction from one side is too slow
for this mechanism to be likely. Taking a glass pane as an example, the observed
contact times of BL before penetration are all less than 1 s. If we assume (for the
most rapid penetration) that the contact surface is immediately raised to boiling
point (2230

C) (and stays there) and energy passes to the remainder of the glass by
conduction (conductivity k = 1.0 W m
1
K
1
, specic heat 730 J kg
1
K
1
, density
2250 kg m
3
), the penetration from the heated surface of the lowest likely softening
point temperature (565

C) in 1 s is only 1.1 mm (see Perry et al . 1984). This is much
less than the thickness of most panes of glass (36 mm), indicating that thermal
conduction is too slow to be a valid mechanism of interaction leading to removal
of a section of pane. Another possibility for a highly charged solid network ball
is an electrical interaction. With the network touching one side, and with a water
condensate layer on the other providing electrical conduction to earth, sucient
potential may be generated across sheet materials, e.g. a glass pane, to cause electrical
breakdown (this requires around 90 kV for borosilicate glass of 5 mm thickness (Clark
1962)). As shown in Abrahamson (2002), this potential is achievable for a normal-
sized BL charged to a level where a corona appears on their surface. This method
of breaking down the structure of the glass is expected to require much less energy
than its removal by thermal means, as assumed previously. For example, a 300 mm
diameter ball charged to air breakdown (eld E
0
= 3.3 MV m
1
) has from eqn (A3)
in Bychkov (2002) an energy density W
el
= 3
0
E
2
0
/2 = 140 J m
3
, which is much
smaller than the values given in table 1 for cases 5 and 10.
(iii) Explosion model
Now we discuss the explosion model used in the paper. Taking again the BL model
to be a cluster of metal nanoparticles, its terminal explosion is expected to have
Phil. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. A (2002)
On the energy characteristics of ball lightning 103
a dierent character from that of a normal explosive. Nanoparticles of aluminium,
when mixed with traditional secondary explosives, increase the rate of detonation
(Tepper 1999). The temperature rise for a suspension of nanoparticles is expected to
have the same rate over most of the BL volume, with rapidly accelerated oxidation
occurring almost simultaneously over the volume. Oxidation of intact nanoparticles
will result in solid product, and a drop in air pressure from the loss of oxygen, causing
an implosion. Very shortly after, the temperature will have risen above the melting or
even boiling point, with further fast oxidation of metal vapour and thus an explosion.
With these considerations, it is doubtful whether an energy scaling between the two
on the basis of perceived sound intensity or energy is reliable.
(b) Nanoparticle model implications
BL developed from a lightning strike on a metal structure may carry high concen-
trations of metal nanoparticles on cooling below the condensation point if the heated
surface is sheltered from mixing currents (described in more detail by Abrahamson
(2002)). For example, aluminium vapour evolved from the metal at the boiling point
(2740 K) carries 120 g Al m
3
, which can contract to much higher values by removal
of most of the vapour through condensation to solid. These sheltered situations are
likely to be rare. In case 3, in order to supply the 46 MJ estimated for froth removal
of the water, allowing for the heat of combustion, 730 g of aluminium nanoparticles
is required. Thus the mass density of the ball needs to be 90 kg m
3
. This may be
compared with the measured density of 50 kg m
3
for the remains of 5 mm glow-
ing balls described by Bychkov (2002), resulting from erosive discharges with metal
electrodes and acrylic plastic walls. The ball lightning in case 3 was observed (Egely
1987, appendix) to move quickly from the roof to ground level (with velocity 3
5 m s
1
; see the appendix). The estimated velocity of a 250 mm diameter ball of
density 90 kg m
3
falling freely in air is 23 m s
1
. The ball was observed to run
along the lightning conductor, presumably electrically attracted to it, so an addi-
tional drag force was in operation, and this may have been enough to reduce the
velocity to below 5 m s
1
, as observed. If the metal evaporated was iron, the other
likely contender, the scenario becomes less realistic. Then the mass density of the
iron ball is 380 kg m
3
, and the free fall velocity is 100 m s
1
, which is far from the
observed values.
It can be seen that the conventional models used in interpreting the observed
eects of BL, as used in this paper, have not taken seriously the model of the BL
being proposed (whether it be plasma, or suspended particle, etc.). In particular,
the oxidizing metal particle model suggests lower energies for many of the appar-
ently higher-energy cases listed. Some of these possibilities can easily be checked
by experiment. Case 17 stands out from all the others in its high estimated energy
density, even using the frothing estimates suggested here. One possible explanation
along these lines is that the sh pond that the BL fell into had plant matter sus-
pended in the water, from which other gases (e.g. CO
2
) could evolve under heating,
causing frothing with less energy expenditure than by steam. Putting case 17 aside,
there seems to be considerable evidence that BL can have energy densities up to the
range 10005000 MJ m
3
. Also, the extreme values of energy density expected from
oxidation of dispersed metal structures are in this range.
Phil. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. A (2002)
104 A. V. Bychkov, V. L. Bychkov and J. Abrahamson
Appendix A. Four accounts from Russian or Hungarian publications
1. A. I. Grigorev (1990) Case 22. Observer: A. F. Pryakhin
The end of July 1968. Settlement Kuzminovka of Oktyabrsky district of the Orenburg
oblast.
The strong thunderstorm with a shower already began to stop, but the rain was
still going. My sister, my brother and I were sitting by the table, standing near a
window in the room. Suddenly over our heads we heard the loud and strange sound of
whistle, buzz and hissing simultaneously. We looked up, and found that the sound was
coming from the hole of 15 mm diameter, through which the electric wires pass into
the house (straightly over the window). About ve seconds later a luminous braid-
type mass slowly began to emerge from this hole. This mass was almost cylindrical
and was of about 30 mm in diameter. At the time when the front end of this braid
was inside the room, something resembling a body was coming from the hole. The
motion of the head was not linear, but it had a spiral trajectory, with other parts of
the braid repeating the motion of the front particles. It was easily noticed how bright
points were moving over complex trajectories inside the braid with high velocities,
and there were also strips, and luminous bunches of dierent tints. They appeared in
the front or in the end or in the middle of the braid. Everything was moving inside
the braid with great velocity but could not get out of its boundaries.
The whole length of the braid proved to be 600700 mm when it came out of the
hole. It ew from the wall about 1.5 m, then it began to twist itself into a tangle
with high velocity (it was well noticed). First the front end of the braid was bent
like the handle of a walking stick, and starting from this the braid twisted into a
tangle. A quickly rotating ball of 100130 mm diameter was formed. The ball was
crackling, whistling and hissing, and then blew out with a loud bang 1.5 seconds after
its formation. All of us were deafened. The explosion took place about 1.5 m over
our heads. No sparks or sprays were observed during the explosion. It was simply a
sharp ringing bang, and nothing more. All this observation covered about 5 s.
Later in the army I was serving as the demolition expert and observed explosions
of dierent force. That very explosion of the ball lightning was approximately equal
to 250300 g of toluene. But in case of the toluene explosion usually heat eects take
place, and the material ies to dierent sides. In this case we did not feel the heat.
We also did not notice any waves or the masss scatter. But only hearing was spoiled
a little, when we shared our impression we had to shout (the ringing was in our ears).
Our hearing came back to normal by the next morning.
3. G. Egely (1987) Case 222. Observer: Pecs. Salyi Janos
It happened in clear, bright, sunny weather in July, 1972. At noon most of the
workers of our factory were having lunch but several of them stayed in the factory
building. Suddenly they caught sight of a bright sphere of the size of a football
rolling along the lightning conductor. It was accompanied with a hissing sound and
was coloured transient between pink and yellow. It had come through the long glass
window on the roof. Then it vanished in the water-pit with a tremendous crack,
at the outer corner of the building, next to the lightning conductor. Afterwards
the air felt rich in ozone. The water disappeared from the pit, leaving no trace
behind. Though already totally dry the pit was still steaming after half an hour. The
Phil. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. A (2002)
On the energy characteristics of ball lightning 105
phenomenon was seen by about 30 people for approximately 810 s. The velocity of
the bright sphere was about 35 m s
1
. The sound it emitted was similar to that of
a supersonic plane, that is it was a hissing, whistling sound. The pit had originally
contained about 120 l of water since it had not been full, only up to 2/3 part. My
colleagues examined it thoroughly but no water was splashed on the walls, and all
the water evaporated. It was noted that it was steaming even a long time after the
event. None of my colleagues felt either any heat radiated or perceived an impulse.
The windows did not vibrate though a bad ringing was in their ears because of the
blast of the explosion. One of my colleagues, called Bela Trischler, was just looking
out of the window when the ball lightning fell into the water-pit and he saw not only
the steam but also that some leaves of grass round the pit caught re and burned
down eventually. The ground cable was not damaged at all.
8. M. T. Dmitriev, B. I. Bakhtin and V. I. Martynov (1981).
Ball lightning was observed at 11.20 p.m. on 24 August 1978 in the city Khabarovsk
in the area of Khasan street during a strong rain. Suddenly a sharp whistle was heard.
It resembled the sound of a jet engine and was accompanied by a strong crackling.
It became very light as during a day. Then over the building of the cinema theatre
Zarya appeared a ball lightning of 1.5 m diameter with bright-orange colour. Sparks
were coming out of it. Then the ball lightning began to descend, went to the Earths
surface through the branches of a tree, then for a moment it was shining over some
area of the soil and ascended. It ended with a strong explosion, then it became dark
and quiet. The ball lightning existed totally about 1 minute. It was observed by
many people, including one of the articles authors. The possibility of taking the ball
lightning for usual lightning was practically excluded.
At a distance up to 100 m the electric circuit was destroyed. In spite of the large
amount of water on the soil and the strong rain the soil was charred and melted in
a region of 1.5 m diameter and 200250 mm depth. The whole volume of the region
lled with slag was ca. 0.4 m
3
. The slag consisted not only of the crust, but of many
pieces of irregular form with average size 5060 mm mutually bound together. The
total number of these pieces was over 1000. Near the place where the ash was
observed the surface vegetation did not appear again.
13. I. P. Stakhanov (1979) Case 35. Observer: R. E. Kuznetsov
The pilot Kuznetsov met a ball lightning in the autumn of 1967 in his aeroplane
at an altitude of 7000 m near the city of Riga. The clouds covered 0.50.6 of the sky.
A ball lightning of tennis ball size of bright-white colour with a small halo covered
the 1.52 m distance from the inlet of the antenna to the middle of the pilots seat
during a time of 2030 s. Though it was at a distance less than 1 m from the observer,
he did not feel heat. After that it blew out and burnt part of the metallic surface
(about 3 cm
3
). The explosion deafened and blinded all the people present in the
cockpit. The protection circuits of the aeroplanes radio stations did not work after
the explosion. After landing, the observer found out that black strips were burnt
on all forward-pointed antennas. He did not detect thunderstorm discharges either
visually or by locators.
Phil. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. A (2002)
106 A. V. Bychkov, V. L. Bychkov and J. Abrahamson
References
Abrahamson, J. 2002 Ball lightning from atmospheric discharges via metal nanosphere oxidation:
from soils, wood or metals. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. A360, 6188.
Abrahamson, J. & Dinniss, J. 2000 Ball lightning caused by oxidation of nanoparticle networks
from normal lightning strikes on soil. Nature 403, 519521.
Barry, J. D. 1980 Ball lightning and bead lightning. New York: Plenum.
Bobkov, S. E., Bychkov, V. L. & Stadnik, S. A. 1996 Fire balls in gas discharges with polymer
additives and their connection with natural ball lightning. In Contrib. 18th Summer School
and Int. Symp. on the Physics and Ionization of Gases, 26 September, Yugoslavia, pp. 421
423.
Bychkov, V. L. 1994 Polymer ball lightning model. Physica Scr. 50, 591599.
Bychkov, V. L. 2002 Polymer-composite ball lightning. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. A360, 3760.
Bychkov, V. L., Bychkov, A. V., Vasiliev, M. N. & Klimov, A. I. 1996 Evaluation of possible
ball lightning energy by analysing an event involving damage to a metal pot. J. Meteorol. 21,
7781.
Clark, F. M. 1962 Insulating materials for design and engineering practice, p. 1007. Wiley.
Dmitriev, M. T., Bakhtin, B. I. & Martynov, V. I. 1981 The thermal factor of ball lightning.
Zh. Tekh. Fiz. 51, 25672572.
Egely, G. 1987 Hungarian ball lightning observation. Central Research Institute Physics, Hun-
garian Academy of Science, Budapest, KFKI-198710/D.
Egely, G. 1989 Hungarian ball lightning observations in 1987. In Science of ball lightning (reball)
(ed. Y. H. Ohtsuki), p. 19. Singapore: World Scientic.
Egely, G. 1993 Analysis of Hungarian ball lightning observations. In Prog. Ball Lightning
Research, Proc. VIZOTUM (ed. A. G. Keul), p. 22. Salzburg, Austria: The VIZOTUM
Project.
Grigorev, A. I. 1990 Fiery killers. Yaroslavl: Debiut. (In Russian.)
Grigorev, A. I., Grigoreva, I. D. & Shiryaeva, S. O. 1992 Ball lightning penetration into closed
rooms: 43 eyewitness accounts. J. Scient. Explorat. 6, 261279.
Imianitov, I. & Tikhii, D. 1980 Beyond the edge of scientic laws. Moscow: Atomizdat. (In
Russian.)
Kozlov, B. N. 1978 Maximum energy liberation by ball lightning. Sov. Phys. Dokl. 23, 4142.
Perry, R. H., Green, D. & Maloney, J. O. 1984 Perrys chemical engineering handbook, 6th edn,
g. 105, p. 1011. McGraw-Hill.
Singer, S. 1971 The nature of ball lightning. New York: Plenum.
Smirnov, B. M. 1988 Problem of ball lightning. Moscow: Nauka. (In Russian.)
Stakhanov, I. P. 1979 The physical nature of ball lightning. Moscow: Atomizdat. (In Russian,
CEGB Translation, CE 8244.)
Stenho, M. 1999 Ball lightning. New York: Kluwer Academic/Plenum.
Tepper, F. 1999 Metallic nanopowders produced by the electro-exploding wire process. Int. J.
Powder Metall. 35, 3944.
Turner, D. J. 1997 The interaction of ball lightning with glass window panes. J. Meteorol. 22,
5264.
Wittman, A. D. 1971 In support of a physical explanation of ball lightning. Nature 232, 625.
Wittman, A. D. 1993 More on the Neustadt multiple ball lightning case. In 1993 Progress in Ball
Lightning Research (ed. A. Keul), pp. 110114. Salzburg, Austria: The VIZOTUM Project.
Phil. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. A (2002)