 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| HomeDiscussion GroupsSpace ScienceAstronomyAmateur AstronomySpace FlightSpace StationShuttleSpace HistorySpace PolicySETI SpaceKB.com Contact UsLink To UsSearch & Site Map |
Space Forum / Shuttle / May 2004Megalightning - stranger than fiction
A TV documentary to be shown here next week is described thus "Investigating a form of lightning which strikes from the clouds up into space. Thousands of times more powerful than ground lightning, could it have been a cause of the Columbia space shuttle disaster?" Is this credible?  SignatureSave the Hubble Space Telescope! Remove spam and invalid from address to reply. > A TV documentary to be shown here next week is described thus > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > Is this credible? About as credible as using Kellogs cornflakes as a heat shield on a spacecraft, I'd imagine. Are we talking Sprites here, or just lightening. Like if it goes up, what is the other end of the strike anyhow? I mean, otherwise it would just be a field. Think we would have noticed this by now if it were a hazard! Brian SignatureBrian Gaff....Note, this account does not accept Bcc: email. graphics are great, but the blind can't hear them Email: briang1@blueyonder.co.uk ____________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________ >> A TV documentary to be shown here next week is described thus >> [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >> >> Is this credible? > About as credible as using Kellogs cornflakes as a heat shield on a > spacecraft, I'd imagine. I was compelled to do the experiment. It took a surprising time to char through. I wonder if damp with milk, frozen to cryogenic temperatures, they might not suit. > Are we talking Sprites here, or just lightening. Like if it goes up, what is > the other end of the strike anyhow? I mean, otherwise it would just be a > field. AIUI, the "shoots into space" bit is due to the atmosphere being rarefied enough where the "strike" terminates, that electrons can be accellerated upwards by the powerful field. It's certainly worthy of having a TV documentary made about it. Beats "When animals attack magicians III" > Think we would have noticed this by now if it were a hazard! nope. Almost all of the very little we know about weather above 100k feet is data gathered from returning shuttle missions. Right after Columbia there was speculation (just no so sensationalist as this one here) that some really weird weather phenomena might have contributed to the accident. That's when I learned how little meteorologists know about what exactly happens in the atmosphere above the normal cruising level of militray aircraft. SignatureTerrell Miller millerto@bellsouth.net "At one point we were this Progressive edgy group and we can't really equate that with Brother Bear so I don't know really." -Tony Banks > Right after Columbia there was speculation (just no so sensationalist as > this one here) that some really weird weather phenomena might have > contributed to the accident. That's when I learned how little meteorologists > know about what exactly happens in the atmosphere above the normal cruising > level of militray aircraft. and that goes for their knowledge of the atmosphere below it too... i wash my car, it rains... weather man is proven wrong once again ;) > A TV documentary to be shown here next week is described thus > [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > Save the Hubble Space Telescope! > Remove spam and invalid from address to reply. Blue and pink jets of light going from the clouds - up? Yes, happens all the time. But a contributing cause of the Columbia accident? No. | > A TV documentary to be shown here next week is described thus | > [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] | But a contributing cause of the Columbia accident? | No. Are not these the phenomenon called sprites? In another reply it was ventured that yes, there could be actual lightening at high altitudes. Well, if there is, then the polarity must be different as otherwise, if the ground were the opposite polarity, the shorter distance downward ought to make it impossible. Of course, as has been said, high level weather has not had the research of 'ordinary' weather, so I guess anything is possible. I often wonder with the charged particle density in an aurora, why some lightening is not generated by it, which is why I was sceptical about it happening at other latitudes. Brian -- Brian Gaff....Note, this account does not accept Bcc: email. graphics are great, but the blind can't hear them Email: briang1@blueyonder.co.uk ____________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________ >| > A TV documentary to be shown here next week is described thus >| > [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] >| No. >Are not these the phenomenon called sprites? Yes, sprites were mentioned in an article about this programme - and the highly contrived acronym to justify the name :-) >In another reply it was ventured that yes, there could be actual lightening >at high altitudes. Well, if there is, then the polarity must be different as [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] >aurora, why some lightening is not generated by it, which is why I was >sceptical about it happening at other latitudes. Isn't the air density too low, rather than the charged particle density? Very, very, roughly it's like the difference between a neon tube and a spark gap. >> A TV documentary to be shown here next week is described thus >> [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] >But a contributing cause of the Columbia accident? >No. I've just watched the programme, and it mentioned the "lightning photograph" that is now thought to be a product of camera movement, and the work of Alfred Bedard. He says he recorded an infrasonic event just before Columbia broke up. > I've just watched the programme, and it mentioned the "lightning > photograph" that is now thought to be a product of camera movement, and > the work of Alfred Bedard. He says he recorded an infrasonic event just > before Columbia broke up. It's not camera movement, as the streak left by the Shuttle remains perfectly straight throughout the exposure. If the camera had moved, the streak left by the shuttle would also show an identical streak/pattern to the purple one. Ive seen it on many timed exposures of objects - stars when ive bumped the camera during long exposures and also a few while capturing the Mir space station flying over. |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.