Talk:Lightning

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Lightning article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Lightning was a good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There may be suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
October 31, 2005	Peer review	Reviewed
October 16, 2006	Good article nominee	Not listed

Current status: Former good article nominee

Physics Mid‑importance

	Physics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Physics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Physics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PhysicsWikipedia:WikiProject PhysicsTemplate:WikiProject Physicsphysics
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Weather: Thunderstorms / Tornadoes Top‑importance

	Weather portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Weather, which collaborates on weather and related subjects on Wikipedia. To participate, help improve this article or visit the project page for details. Articles Requested Project Resources Become a Member Project Talk Assessment A-Class Alerts WeatherWikipedia:WikiProject WeatherTemplate:WikiProject WeatherWeather
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.
	Tornadoes portal This article is supported by WikiProject Severe weather (assessed as Top-importance).

Upward Streamer Photo

The upward streamer photo looks like a reflection of the main bolt in the lens of the camera (a lens flare), not a positive leader. It even seems to be obscured by an object, just like the main bolt is partially obscured by a tree. Please review the description of that photo since it might be inaccurate. 88.220.51.36 (talk) 14:16, 22 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Here's what a lens flare may look like on an iPhone 8 Pro: https://i.imgur.com/6GtLxxm.png 185.238.206.92 (talk) 15:30, 22 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that the "upward streamer" appears to be a camera artifact, either caused by a lens flare/reflection or the camera sensor being oversaturated which can create a similar artifact as explained here: https://ztresearch.blog/2017/05/16/blinded-by-the-light/

Upward connecting leaders are generally only seen within around 50m of the main discharge, and they emanate from the tops of pointed objects, and not from a flat object some distance away from the main bolt. PurpleDiana (talk) 04:00, 20 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I also agree that this is not an upward streamer. I get these "ghost" lightning bolts all the time when filming lightning. It's just lens flare. On top of being too far from the main bolt and not being from a pointy object, the streamer in question looks too curved. Styro.drake (talk) 01:39, 16 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 13 December 2023

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

There is an informational error under flashes and strikes: discharge: return stroke: last paragraph. Article states "The core temperature of the plasma during the return stroke may exceed 50,000 K." Unit of measure is wrong. Please change 50,000 K to 50,000 F. (Source: https://www.weather.gov/safety/lightning-science-thunder#:~:text=The%20lightning%20discharge%20heats%20the,the%20surface%20of%20the%20sun.) 66.29.208.159 (talk) 05:42, 13 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Done I've also added the Celsius equivalent via the convert template. Thanks, Lewcm Talk to me! 13:45, 15 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Featured picture scheduled for POTD

Hello! This is to let editors know that File:Port and_lighthouse_overnight_storm_with_lightning_in_Port-la-Nouvelle.jpg, a featured picture used in this article, has been selected as the English Wikipedia's picture of the day (POTD) for January 16, 2024. A preview of the POTD is displayed below and can be edited at Template:POTD/2024-01-16. For the greater benefit of readers, any potential improvements or maintenance that could benefit the quality of this article should be done before its scheduled appearance on the Main Page. If you have any concerns, please place a message at Wikipedia talk:Picture of the day. Thank you! — Amakuru (talk) 15:04, 8 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Lightning is a natural phenomenon formed by electrostatic discharges through the atmosphere between two electrically charged regions, either both in the atmosphere or one in the atmosphere and one on the ground, temporarily neutralizing these in a near-instantaneous release of an average of between 200 megajoules and 7 gigajoules of energy, depending on the type. The three main types of lightning are distinguished by where they occur: either inside a single thundercloud (intra-cloud), between two clouds (cloud-to-cloud), or between a cloud and the ground (cloud-to-ground), in which case it is referred to as a lightning strike. Lightning causes thunder, a sound from the shock wave which develops as gases in the vicinity of the discharge heat suddenly to very high temperatures. It is often heard a few seconds after the lightning itself. Thunder is heard as a rolling, gradually dissipating rumble because the sound from different portions of a long stroke arrives at slightly different times. This photograph shows strokes of cloud-to-ground lightning hitting the Mediterranean Sea close to Port-la-Nouvelle in southern France.

Photograph credit: Maxime Raynal

Recently featured:

Semi-protected edit request on 11 December 2024

It is requested that an edit be made to the semi-protected article at Lightning. (edit · history · last · links · protection log)

This template must be followed by a complete and specific description of the request, that is, specify what text should be removed and a verbatim copy of the text that should replace it. "Please change X" is not acceptable and will be rejected; the request must be of the form "please change X to Y".

The edit may be made by any autoconfirmed user. Remember to change the |answered=no parameter to "yes" when the request has been accepted, rejected or on hold awaiting user input. This is so that inactive or completed requests don't needlessly fill up the edit requests category. You may also wish to use the {{ESp}} template in the response. To request that a page be protected or unprotected, make a protection request.

This information,

"The process of going from charge as ions (positive hydrogen ion and negative hydroxide ion) associated with liquid water or solid water to charge as electrons associated with lightning must involve some form of electro-chemistry, that is, the oxidation and/or the reduction of chemical species.[23] As hydroxide functions as a base and carbon dioxide is an acidic gas, it is possible that charged water clouds in which the negative charge is in the form of the aqueous hydroxide ion, interact with atmospheric carbon dioxide to form aqueous carbonate ions and aqueous hydrogen carbonate ions,"

listed at the bottom of the electrification section, is not supported by the reference source. The reference article details electrolysis of water into hydrogen and oxygen gas over time periods far greater than could occur in a lightning strike. The unreferenced commentary in the latter part of the section does not seem to make sense from a chemical standpoint as CO2 forms carbonic acid in aqueous solutions regardless of electrification. Beyond chemical inconsistencies the information is at best tangentially relevant, so I think it should probably be deleted. Thanks Jameshoww (talk) 00:48, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed major restructure

I consider the structure of the page to be a mess. There are section headings such as "General considerations" which gives no clue to the section content, and there are sections which belong with other sections (e.g. "injuries and deaths" and "effects on animals" are clearly talking about the same things.

My PhD was on the topic of lightning and I have written several papers on these topics. Therefore I share my expert review of the structure of the article below, and propose my idea for new section headings. The proposed new structure should be able to accommodate all existing content, but to me would be more useful for people coming to the page, and presents a more logical order. I very much welcome criticism and suggestions. I will come back to check responses in due course and will (eventually) find time to make changes.

Review of the structure:

• Electrification

 → to “Electrification of a cloud”

• General considerations

 → “The typical cloud-to-ground lightning flash culminates” are facts that should be with other discharge or frequency info
 → Remove “Lightning primarily occurs when warm air is mixed with colder air masses,[26] resulting in atmospheric disturbances necessary for	polarizing the atmosphere.[27]” Most storms form this way, lightning or no.
 → “Lightning can also occur during dust storms, fo” is probably all covered elsewhere or can be

• Distribution,frequency and extent

 → generally correct, but jumps all over the place and could do with being made more coherent
 → I don’t	think “extent” in the section title means anything

• Necessary conditions

 → Most of this could be wrapped into electrification of a cloud I think (the electric field part is the culmination of the electrifcation

• Flashes and strikes

 → I suggest change to “Components of lightning discharge” or “Lightning discharge”
 → Are we missing a section on “triggering”?
   → If we get the structure in order then we could ask a relevant expert to chip in to such a standalone section or it could come at the beginning of this section

• Types

 → I think the	postive and negative aspect could be covered in a discharge section the CG-CC-IC part could be covered in the “distribution” section as it is relevant there, and is basically the distribution within the cloud system.

• Effects

 → The chemistry part of this would be better focused initially on the dissociation of air molecules as a result of the extreme heat in the lightning channel. Other things follow that, such as N and O atoms reform to	Nitric Oxide which then goes on to have various chemical effects in the atmosphere, which would hopefully be found by following a link to the chemical's wiki page, but can be mentioned that it indirectly goes on to affect ozone and methane concentrations and nitrates

• Radio

 → might be better as Electromagnetic radiation this can begin by saying that in addition to the light (EM rad) that we	see, there are many other frequencies produced too and these propagate through the atmosphere, and can be detected – then	link to section on detection ozone and nitrogen oxides should be merged with nitrates into a atmospheric	chemical composition subsection in effects
 → “High energy radiation” can be merged with Radio into an EM rad effects section. Don’t need to go into loads here about detection as that should have its own section

• volcanic, fire (pyrocumulus part) and human-related sections

 → are all	“drivers of electrification conditions in clouds”. I think maybe there needs to be a section on that which would include	meteorological stuff like cumulonimbus etc
 → alternatively something like “Conducive atmospheric conditions”, or a section each for “related meteorology” and “aerosol influence”.

• I think extraterrestrial probably does warrant its own section, otherwise it would go in a distribution section

• Scientific study

 → Silly section title? Surely the scientific information is either of general	interest in which case it should be built into relevant sections, or it’s not, in which case it doesn’t belong on the page.
 → Properties bit can be integrated into previous sections and is largely covered
 → Detection and	monitoring – I think this deserves a section in its own right.
 → I think the	artificially triggered part could stay in detection section, or it could have its own mini section
 → magnetism looks to be something to go in effects sections
 → solar wind etc is to go in the currently non-existant triggering sections
 → Lightning and climate change I think would be better of joining the fire lightning section (wildfire part) in a “Lightning in the Earth system” section which would allow expansion beyond the direct	effects (i.e. temperature, energy, dissociation of air moelcules)		to talk about large-scale influences. e.g. that it can modify climate, forest and grassland ecology, landscapes). The lightning and climate change section also needs a content improvement to cover more of the literature (sorry, I think I might written this some years ago)

• I think having a section on culture and mythology is good

• injuries and deaths section should be in effects on animals sections

Proposed section structure:

1. Electrification

1a. Charge separation and formation of an electric field

1b. Conducive meteorological conditions

1c. Influence of aerosol

2. Discharge

2a. Triggering

2b. Lightning strike components

3. Effects (this would be focused on immediate, direct effects in the vicinity of the lightning channel)

4. Detection and monitoring

5. Distribution and frequency

6. Effects within the Earth system (probably need a non-expert to decide best title here, maybe just “wider effects in the atmosphere and ecosystems”)

7. Culture and Mythology

8. Extraterrestrial (maybe comes before “culture” section or maybe a subsection in “distribution”) DecFinney (talk) 09:05, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

"lightning prediction" is probably a worthwhile new section that could come between the distribution and earth system effects sections. DecFinney (talk) 09:41, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]