Re: Tesla Coils & Ball Lightning

["Tesla list" <tesla@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Original poster: William Beaty <billb@xxxxxxxxxx>

On Tue, 2 Aug 2005, Tesla list wrote:

> Original poster: "Chris Rutherford" <chris1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>
> Hi Brett,
>
> It's hard to convince sceptics, an investigator with long experience
> in lighting and high voltage work published a paper claming that out
> of thousands of photographs studied there was no indication of ball
> lightning.  "Berger, K (1973).  Ball lighting and lighting research".
> It is consequently unlikely that a lightning professional would risk
> ridicule and due criticism through being associated with a subject
> such as BL, one might as well study witchcraft.

Worse still, when researchers witness BL themselves, they self-censor the
evidence.  A lie of omission rather than a lie of comission.  We could
easily argue that "if BL was real, all sorts of lightning researchers
would be reporting having seen it."  But take a look at what happens
instead:

  "During the summer of 1937 several technical observers on duty at 500
   5th Ave, during the Empire State Building lightning program, saw what
   might be interpreted as ball lightning, not once but four times.  One
   of the engineers, now the chief technical executive of a large power
   company, saw a bluish luminescence slowly descend the 38-foot tower of
   the Empire State Building after four of the ten or eleven strokes that
   hit the tower that evening.  Fearing that his colleagues would regard
   him as a lightning-ball "quack", he was hesitant to speak about what
   he had seen, but decided to mention it anyway.  Suprisingly several of
   the others admitted seeing the same things.  These observations were
   omitted from the technical reports since they did not appear on the
   recording cameras nor on the oscillograph records."  THE LIGHTNING
   BOOK, P. Viemeister

"Witchcraft" is just the right topic, or rather witch-hunts.   If
scientists fear accusations of heresy made by colleagues, then science
becomes corrupt.  All sorts of new discoveries could lie around
uninvestigated, if discussing the evidence gets one "exposed as a witch."


> Some Tesla quotes on BL
>
> http://www.hackinghardware.com/tesla/balllite.txt
>
> Thanks
>
> Chris R
>
> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Tesla list" <tesla@xxxxxxxxxx>
> To: <tesla@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Sent: Tuesday, August 02, 2005 8:00 AM
> Subject: Re: Tesla Coils & Ball Lightning
>
>
> >Original poster: Brett Miller <brmtesla2@xxxxxxxxx>
> >
> >Malcolm,
> >
> > > Who knows? He doesn't exactly spell it out.
> > > Moreover, if one takes at
> > > least some eyewitness accounts of ball lightning at
> > > face value, and
> > > taking into account that there is far more energy
> > > behind lightning
> > > events than has ever been put into manmade sparks,
> > > it would appear
> > > unlikely that his speculation re the destructive
> > > nature of manmade
> > > fireballs if they exist or can be produced is true.
> > >
> > > Malcolm
> >
> >I agree.  It would be interesting if someone was able
> >to interview people who research lightening for a
> >living, in order to take a survey of how many people
> >in that line of work have reported ball lightning
> >sightings.  Scientists have been able to artificially
> >direct strikes of natural lightning during a
> >thunderstorm by launching rockets which trail a
> >grounded wire.  I would like to know how many (if any)
> >of those events are associated with ball lightning
> >sightings.
> >
> >What about large Marx banks and similar impulse
> >generators?  Would this be a good starting point for
> >someone who was trying to stumble upon a method for
> >replicatable ball lightning production?  It would seem
> >to be a more reasonable way to reproduce the
> >conditions found in a natural ground strike, rather
> >than a tesla coil.  Any comments?
> >
> >-Brett
> >
>