On Thu, 7 Feb 2008 00:38:46 -0500 Chris McCormick chris@mccormick.cx wrote:
On Thu, Feb 07, 2008 at 05:37:06AM +0000, Andy Farnell wrote:
On Wed, 06 Feb 2008 23:27:32 -0500 Martin Peach martin.peach@sympatico.ca wrote:
Andy Farnell wrote:
On Wed, 6 Feb 2008 21:58:49 -0500 Chris McCormick chris@mccormick.cx wrote:
Yes, we're clear on that. I was responding to Chris suggesting that maybe there's some nuclear interactions at work in lighning (which I am open minded about but sceptical), and he mentioned sonoluminesence, which I believe has a rather more established explanation (ie it isn't fusion or anything weird)
Hey Andy,
I didn't mean to imply that. I thought you were saying that you didn't think a vacuum could be created without a chemical reaction. I was saying that I think a bubble of vacuum can be created in a medium using purely physical forces like in sonoluminescence.
Best,
Chris.
Oh, okay. That's quite interesting. Sorry I got the wrong end of that. But it would violate causality? (as I see it)
In the model that makes sense to me:
The current flow causes heating, which causes expansion of gasses, which then cool leaving a low pressure volume which then rapidly collapses again.
How could the discharge create physical force without going through a thermodynamic step?
In the thinking that preceded Mershons electrolysis theory, there seems to be an idea that somehow the bolt just annhilated the air. The sudden appearance of a low pressure zone would make sense if a chemical reaction took place leading a lower volume, and Mershon makes that an exothermic recombination of electrolized H + O2.
I don't know what experimental evidence says that _doesn't_ happen. If one was brave enough to fly a plane with sensitive detectors through a storm and find traces of uncombined H2 then there might be some life in it. But you'd have to be quick because hydrogen doesn't hang around.
hmmm, sorry, we've turned this into the physics forum today haven't we :) a.