Close
today i learned (til)

It’s a ghost… it’s a UFO… It’s… Ball Lightning?

December 2, 2018

Lightning is a phenomenon that we are all familiar with. Everyone has seen it, and some people have been hit by it. What you may be less familiar with is it’s spherical sibling. Ball lightning has fascinated people for centuries. There are plenty of eyewitness reports of ball lightning, and many give conflicting reports. People have claimed that ball lightning has flown through their homes or other buildings. One specific eyewitness report was an unusual case in which the ball lightning floated down the aisle of a plane in flight, from front to back, before dissipating. (Jennison, 1969)

 

The reason most people have never heard of, or seen ball lightning, is that it is a phenomenon that is easily mistaken for an optical illusion, an extraterrestrial encounter, or someone messing around in the woods. Ball lightning is usually low to the ground, and while it can last for a long time relative to streak lightning, it still only lasts around 10 seconds. (Abrahamson, 2000) Ball lightning has been proven to be a true phenomenon and not an optical illusion, due to the quantifiable physical aspects such as heat and voltage, and the fact that the lightning after image effect cannot hold for the length of time that ball lightning exists.  An illusion doesn’t make noise, nor does it explode and have a chance of hurting surrounding people or damaging planes. (Doe, 2013)

 

Ball lightning has an incredibly variable reported physical characteristics. Most ball lightning is spherical, however some can have a fractured appearance. Ball lightning dies by explosion, slow decay, or fractal decay. (Smirnov, 1993)  The diameter of natural ball lightning can extend from 1mm to 150 cms in extreme cases. (Smirnov, 1993) Ball lightning has been seen ranging from red to yellow and blue to white. Different reports claim different spectrums of light for ball lightning. (Cen, 2014) Some reports say that ball lightning spans the entire visible spectrum; the most stereotypical image of ball lightning is that of a blue-white sphere. According to one study, the color of the ball might result from it being created by streak lightning hitting soil with different chemical compositions. The chemicals in the soil burn different colors when hit, producing a spectrum of ball lightning colors. (Abrahamson, 2000)

 

Ball lightning generally forms around thunderstorms, tornadoes (St, 2006), and other natural phenomena, and there have been correlations between increased ball lightning appearances and increased solar activity. (Arabadji, 1976) Some people have reported heat coming from ball lightning, some people said no heat comes from ball lightning. All of these differences have led people to theorize that there may be more than one kind of ball lightning. (Cen, 2014)

 

Lab trials have been conducted to approximate ball lightning, but none have been able to fully recreate all of the characteristics. One of the main difficulties is that we do not know whether or not the energy to sustain ball lightning comes from an internal source or external source. There have been multiple experiments of both types, but nothing that has been able to replicate every nuance of natural ball lightning. And even among people who agree whether the source is internal or external, the actual composition of ball lightning has multiple models such as: electromagnetic waves inside of a plasma ball, combustion, and cosmic rays of antimatter to name a few. (Doe, 2013)

 

One experiment explored ball lightning as a hydrated plasma. Hydrated plasma is formed when positive and negative ions enters water vapor or humid air. The ions move closer to each other and their movements slow down and produce light. What physicists did to emulate ball lightning is they filled a cup with water and put a copper ring at the bottom and had an electrode with quartz in it over the cup and sent a current through it. The resulting plasma ball lasted for a fraction of a second on average. (Egorov, 2004)

 

Personally, I think that ball lightning is one of those phenomena that humans will never fully understand. The occurrences are fairly random and don’t last long which is bad for data collection, and different instances of ball lightning have different characteristics. It would be interesting to see how well heat, atmospheric, and luminosity measuring instruments as well as video recording is enhanced in the pursuit of finding the truth of ball lightning. I look forward to seeing what theories develop in the future surrounding the phenomenon, and if the scientific community will be able to come to a consensus about what ball lightning really is and how it forms.

 

Abrahamson, J., & Dinniss, J. (2000). Ball lightning caused by oxidation of nanoparticle networks from normal lightning strikes on soil. Nature, 403(6769), 519.

Arabadji, W. I. (1976). On the problem of ball lightning. Journal of Geophysical Research, 81(36), 6455-6456.

Cen, J., Yuan, P., & Xue, S. (2014). Observation of the optical and spectral characteristics of ball lightning. Physical review letters, 112(3), 035001.

Doe, R. K. (2013). Ball lightning: an elusive force of nature. In Forces of Nature and Cultural Responses (pp. 7-26). Springer, Dordrecht.

Egorov, A. I., Stepanov, S. I., & Shabanov, G. D. (2004). Laboratory demonstration of ball lightning. Physics-Uspekhi, 47(1), 99.

Jennison, R. C. (1969). Ball lightning. Nature, 224(5222), 895.

Smirnov, B. M. (1993). Physics of ball lightning. Physics Reports, 224(4), 151-236.

St, W. (2006). A unified theory of ball lightning and unexplained atmospheric lights. Journal of Scientific Exploration, 20(2), 215-238.

0Likes
DJ Baker
About Author

DJ is a third-year Computational Media Major at the Georgia Institute of Technology. They are a Science Fiction Research Fellow, a campus radio host and board operator, and the host of the Sci-Fi Lab Podcast. DJ is a writer, artist, web designer, animator, researcher, and programmer.

You May Also Like

today i learned (til)
From Flaky to Fabulous
today i learned (til)
The Paleo Phenomenon
today i learned (til)
Stress Tapping: What it is & How to do it
today i learned (til)
Bananas Are Dying. Again.

Your journey starts here! Let’s talk!

ThemeRex © 2026. All rights reserved.
  Timothy Durham was convicted of rape when a test showed his DNA genotype matched the DNA recovered from the crime scene. Eye witnesses testified that Durham was in a different state at the time of the incident, but he wasn’t exonerated from his 3000 year sentence until follow up DNA analysis showed that the preliminary forensic analysis used in the trial was misinterpreted (Thomas et al.). DNA testing serves an invaluable part in our criminal justice system, but it comes with complications and bias that can lead to wrongful convictions and misinformed juries.  

Background:

Forensic genetics aims to identify the origin of a biological sample. It can be traced back to Karl Landsteiner who discovered human ABO blood groups. With blood groups, suspects could be eliminated based on their blood type. For example, if a suspect had type A blood and there was type B blood left at the scene by the perpetrator, the investigators could rule out the suspect. Unfortunately, the reverse didn’t work. If the suspect and perpetrator both had the same blood type, it can’t be concluded that the suspect was guilty. Blood identifiers evolved into 8 distinct categories which improved the ability to eliminate suspects, but could only conclude that (if the system matched) it might be the perpetrator or this person might be related to the perpetrator (Jobling and Gill). The field evolved in the 1980s with the discovery of Minisatellites, lines of repetitive DNA that don’t encode proteins. Minisatellite patterns in DNA create what we know today as the DNA fingerprint, and it has a much higher accuracy rate than previous methods (Augustyn et al.). Around the same time, a breakthrough for victims of sexual assault was discovered. In the case of assault, bodily fluids of both the victim and the assaulter can get mixed. A process called differential lysis was created which could selectively increase the concentration of sperm in a fluid sample thereby allowing for accurate DNA testing (Jobling and Gill). Forensics evolved to use single-locus probe testing after several years because of its ease of interpretation. It looked at specific minisatellites that had high variability between subjects. This was the first DNA-based method to be used in a criminal investigation. Two murder homicides from several years apart were connected using DNA evidence. The evidence was then used to exonerate an innocent man, and the guilty party was found when he tried to evade mandatory DNA testing for all men in the small town. His guilt was then reinforced when the DNA profiles matched, and he gave a confession (Jobling and Gill). Finding DNA at a crime scene doesn’t guarantee that you’ll find a murderer. There are issues with non-pure samples and limited samples that make DNA work difficult, and accreditation of facilities and new techniques and take time (Jobling and Gill).  

Subjectivity of DNA Interpretation:

In a 2009 publication, the National Academy of Science discusses the possibility for subjective influence in lab based forensics. The interpretation bias happens in complex cases where, for example, there could be a mixture of DNA. A study published in 2011 looked specifically at this issue. A gang rape happened in Georgia, and the mixture in DNA from the case was used to prosecute one suspect after another suspect took a plea bargain to testify against him. With DNA mixtures, there are three possible conclusions: suspect excluded, suspect cannot be excluded, and inconclusive. If the suspect is excluded, it means that there’s little to no possibility that his DNA is part of the sample. If the suspect cannot be excluded, it means that there’s a possibility that his DNA is part of the sample. In the trial, the DNA examiners who knew the context of the case concluded that the suspect being prosecuted could not be excluded. The 2011 study gave the DNA evidence from this case and the DNA profiles of the suspects to 17 forensic examiners. These examiners had no context of the case, and they all worked independently. Of the 17, only 1 came to the same conclusion (suspect cannot be excluded) as the examiners who knew the context of the case. Twelve of the 17 concluded that the suspect who was prosecuted and convicted had no relation to the DNA found in the sample. Not only does this show that subjectivity occurs due to the context of the case, but the 17 examiners came up with different findings based on their past experiences meaning that not all DNA analysis is objective. Some organizations like the Scientific Working Group on DNA Analysis Methods say that quantitative statistical evidence should be presented with every categorical conclusion, but the US doesn’t require this (Dror and Hampikian).

False Positives:

There are two categories that cause wrongful identification in a DNA report: coincidental matches and false positives. Coincidental matches are DNA matches between two unrelated people. The probability of these matches is about 1 to 500,000 for white individuals and about 1 to 350,000 for black individuals. This small probability of coincidental matches makes people feel confident in DNA evidence. False positives, on the other hand, are matches between DNA and test DNA that result from issues in the forensics lab. There have been multiple cases of forensics labs accidentally switching victim and suspected rapist DNA which lead to convictions that were later overturned when the lab realized the error. There are also cases of misreading or misunderstanding a sample. In a case from 1993, a man was convicted of rape because someone interpreted a mixed sample of victim and perpetrator DNA as an individual sample. The conviction was again overturned. To prevent false convictions, retesting DNA is allowed, but it’s not an efficient solution. Many people are pushing for statistical information on the probability of false positives, so that the jurors can make accurate judgements based on DNA evidence (Thomas et al.).  

Conclusion:

DNA analysis is a useful tool for the criminal justice system, but subjectivity can be an issue in forensic testing. To combat wrongful convictions, there are organizations like The Innocence Project who use DNA testing to free the innocent, but reformed forensic testing standards should be put in place to prevent subjectivity and to ensure juries are correctly informed during trials. https://www.innocenceproject.org/    

Citation:

Augustyn , Adam, et al. “DNA Finerprinting.” Encyclopedia Britannica , 26 Apr. 2018, www.britannica.com/science/DNA-fingerprinting#ref153186. Dror, Itiel E., and Greg Hampikian. “Subjectivity and Bias in Forensic DNA Mixture Interpretation.” Science & Justice, vol. 51, no. 4, 2011, pp. 204–208., doi:10.1016/j.scijus.2011.08.004. Jobling, Mark A., and Peter Gill. “Encoded Evidence: DNA in Forensic Analysis.” Nature Reviews: Genetics, vol. 5, no. 10, Oct. 2004, pp. 739–751., doi:10.1038/nrg1455. Thompson, William C, et al. “How the Probability of a False Positive Affects the Value of DNA Evidence.” Journal of Forensic Sciences, vol. 48, no. 1, Jan. 2003, pp. 1–8., doi:10.1520/jfs2001171.