Introduction
A well-known phenomenon, line lightning between a thundercloud and the ground, is believed to be purely electrical in nature. It is believed that the mechanism for the formation of such a lightning is, in general terms, the same as the mechanism for the formation of a long spark, namely: an avalanche breakdown of air at a breakdown electric field strength.
However, lightning sprouting is fundamentally different from long spark sprouting. First, the conduction channel for a lightning strike is formed under conditions when the electric field strength is much less than that required for an avalanche breakdown. Secondly, this channel is not formed at once for the entire length between the cloud and the ground, but through successive build-ups - with significant pauses between them. Within the framework of traditional approaches, both of these circumstances have not yet found reasonable explanations, therefore, even how lightning is possible in principle remains a mystery.
In this article, we will try to fill these gaps. We will try to show that gravity plays an important role in ensuring the possibility of an electrical discharge between a thundercloud and the earth. The role of gravitation is here, of course, not in the gravitational effect on free charged particles, but in the influence on the operation of the programs that control the behavior of these particles, i.e. programs providing electromagnetic phenomena. This influence of gravitation is felt when the vertical scale of the electrical phenomenon is quite grandiose, and cloud-to-earth lightning is just such a phenomenon. Free charged particles between a thundercloud and the ground are controlled according to a standard algorithm: particles with a charge of the same name with an excess charge in the lower part of the cloud are electrically "repulsed" from it, and particles with a charge that is different from that charge,"Attracted" to him. But gravity makes this standard algorithm work in a completely paradoxical way. The presence of gravitation leads to the fact that for particles separated by a sufficiently large difference in height, the same name or dissimilarity of charges is not a property that is constant in time. The frequency with which the sign of the charge of this particle changes cyclically with respect to the sign of the excess charge depends on the height difference between the excess charge in the cloud and the free charged particle. Accordingly, each such particle experiences alternating force influences - "to the cloud - from the cloud." This facilitates the formation of a conduction channel for a lightning strike, since the type of electrical breakdown of air is not avalanche, but high-frequency (HF). The stepwise build-up of the conduction channel (the movement of the step leader) also finds a natural explanation.
The impotence of traditional approaches
Until now, there is no reasonable explanation of how lightning occurs at the existing electric field strengths.
Frenkel, having illustrated the glaring inadequacy of the electric field strength for an avalanche breakdown of air between a thundercloud and the ground, put forward a hypothesis that the tip of the growing breakdown is a strength amplifier due to the strong inhomogeneity of the field near the tip. In spite of the external plausibility of this model, it, in our opinion, has a serious drawback. The tip enhances the field strength when there is an excess charge on this tip. But, as we will see below, the channel with ionized air is formed under conditions when the charges from the cloud have not yet managed to advance to the end of this channel, and there is still no excess charge at this end. How does this channel grow if the field amplification is not working yet? And where does the first section of the conduction channel come from,the first point? Here is what modern authors write about the electric field strengths in a thunderstorm: “It is clear that at the point of lightning start the electric field should be sufficient to increase the electron density as a result of impact ionization. In air of normal density, this requires Ei"30 kV / cm; at an altitude of 3 km above sea level (this is the average height of the start of lightning in Europe) - approximately 20 kV / cm. Such a strong electric field has never been measured in a thundercloud. The highest figures were recorded during rocket sounding of clouds (10 kV / cm) … and when flying through a cloud of a specially equipped laboratory aircraft (12 kV / cm). In the immediate vicinity of a thunderstorm cloud, when flying around it on an airplane, it is intended to be approximately 3.5 kV / cm … Figures from 1.4 to 8 kV / cm were obtained in a number of measurements similar in terms of the methodology. If these numbers are not too high, they still fall far short of the value required for an avalanche breakdown - even where lightning starts. “Even with megavolt voltages of laboratory generators, streamers only grow up to several meters in air. Voltages in tens of megavolts,provoking lightning strikes are able to increase the length of streamers, at best, up to tens of meters, but not up to kilometers, over which lightning usually grows, "the authors write. They offer an amazing way out of the impasse: "The only thing that can be prevented … the disintegration of air plasma in a weak electric field is to raise the temperature of the gas in the channel … to 5000-6000K" - and then give fantastic accounts of how the temperature of the Sun's surface could would be achieved and maintained in the forming conduction channel - until the main current shock. In this case, the authors bypass the question of how the air would glow at such a high temperature - after all, no intense glow is observed at the forming conduction channel.on which lightning usually grows”- write the authors. They offer an amazing way out of the impasse: "The only thing that can be prevented … the disintegration of air plasma in a weak electric field is to raise the temperature of the gas in the channel … to 5000-6000K" - and then give fantastic accounts of how the temperature of the Sun's surface could would be achieved and maintained in the forming conduction channel - until the main current shock. In this case, the authors bypass the question of how the air would glow at such a high temperature - after all, no intense glow is observed at the forming conduction channel.on which lightning usually grows”- write the authors. They offer an amazing way out of the impasse: "The only thing that can be prevented … the disintegration of air plasma in a weak electric field is to raise the temperature of the gas in the channel … to 5000-6000K" - and then give fantastic accounts of how the temperature of the Sun's surface could would be achieved and maintained in the forming conduction channel - until the main current shock. In this case, the authors bypass the question of how the air would glow at such a high temperature - after all, no intense glow is observed at the forming conduction channel.this is to raise the temperature of the gas in the channel … to 5000-6000K "- and then fantastic layouts are given on the topic of how the temperature of the Sun's surface could be reached and maintained in the forming conduction channel - until the main current shock. In this case, the authors bypass the question of how the air would glow at such a high temperature - after all, no intense glow is observed at the forming conduction channel.this is to raise the temperature of the gas in the channel … to 5000-6000K "- and then fantastic layouts are given on the topic of how the temperature of the Sun's surface could be reached and maintained in the forming conduction channel - until the main current shock. In this case, the authors bypass the question of how the air would glow at such a high temperature - after all, no intense glow is observed at the forming conduction channel.
Promotional video:
We add that there were earlier attempts to propose a mechanism that would play an auxiliary role in the formation of the conduction channel and facilitate avalanche breakdown. So, Tverskoy gives a link to Kaptsov, who expounds the theory of Loeb and Mick. According to this theory, the head of the growing conduction channel contains excited ions - with excitation energies exceeding the ionization energies of atoms. These ions emit short-wavelength photons that ionize the atoms - which contributes to the formation of the conduction channel. Without denying the existence of this mechanism, we note that here, again, the kinetic energy of electrons is spent on the excitation of ions - which otherwise would go directly to the ionization of atoms. Indirect ionization, through the excitation of ions and the emission of short-wavelength photons, is less effective than direct ionization by electron impact. Therefore, this indirect ionization does not facilitate avalanche breakdown, but, on the contrary, complicates it, giving energy losses during the formation of an avalanche - especially if we take into account that ionizing photons, having no charge, should scatter in all directions, and the conduction channel grows in the preferred direction. Finally, it is a fact: "emitted ions" do not help long streamers to form under laboratory conditions.
But not only is the growth of the conduction channel itself a mystery at the existing electric field strengths - the discontinuity of this growth, with significant pauses between successive build-ups, remains no less a mystery. Schonland writes: “The length of the pause between successive steps for a step leader varies surprisingly little … In 90% of the many leaders studied, it falls in the range between 50 and 90 m sec. Therefore, it is difficult to accept an explanation of the pause that does not include a fundamental gas-discharge mechanism. Thus, the pause can hardly be associated with any property of the charge in the cloud, which feeds the leader, since this should give a wide scatter of pauses from flash to flash. For the same reason, any interpretation should be discarded.based on oscillations in the channel between the cloud and the leader's tip or on impulses moving along this channel. From such explanations, an increase in the duration of the pause as the length of the channel grows, but such an increase is not observed”(our translation). But a reasonable explanation of the pauses, based on the "gas-discharge mechanism of a fundamental nature," has not yet been proposed. Human writes: “In order to completely mislead the reader, in the literature on the“theory”of lightning, laboratory data, many of which are contradictory, are often extrapolated to“explain”the phenomena of lightning. The general deplorable state is illustrated by various theories of the step leader … In most of the literary sources on the lightning of the wordFrom such explanations, an increase in the duration of the pause as the length of the channel grows, but such an increase is not observed”(our translation). But a reasonable explanation of the pauses, based on the "gas-discharge mechanism of a fundamental nature," has not yet been proposed. Human writes: “In order to completely mislead the reader, in the literature on the“theory”of lightning, laboratory data, many of which are contradictory, are often extrapolated to“explain”the phenomena of lightning. The general deplorable state is illustrated by various theories of the step leader … In most of the literary sources on the lightning of the wordFrom such explanations, an increase in the duration of the pause as the length of the channel grows, but such an increase is not observed”(our translation). But a reasonable explanation of the pauses, based on the "gas-discharge mechanism of a fundamental nature," has not yet been proposed. Human writes: “In order to completely mislead the reader, in the literature on the“theory”of lightning, laboratory data, many of which are contradictory, are often extrapolated to“explain”the phenomena of lightning. The general deplorable state is illustrated by various theories of the step leader … In most of the literary sources on the lightning of the word“To completely mislead the reader, in the lightning 'theory' literature, laboratory data, many of which are contradictory, are often extrapolated to 'explain' lightning phenomena. The general deplorable state is illustrated by various theories of the step leader … In most of the literary sources on the lightning of the word“To completely mislead the reader, in the lightning 'theory' literature, laboratory data, many of which are contradictory, are often extrapolated to 'explain' lightning phenomena. The general deplorable state is illustrated by various theories of the step leader … In most of the literary sources on the lightning of the word pilot-leader and streamer replace explanations of the physical meaning of phenomena. But to name does not mean to explain. " Finally, here is one more quote: “Numerous hypotheses about the step leader mechanism are so imperfect, unconvincing, and often just ridiculous that we will not even discuss them here. Today we are not ready to offer our own mechanism”.
These are, in short, the modern views of science on the physics of lightning. Let us now present an alternative approach.
How gravity interferes with electromagnetic phenomena
The dynamics of free charges is well studied for cases when the involved charged particles are in approximately the same gravitational potential. But if the involved particles are sufficiently widely dispersed along the height, then the nature of the dynamics of free charges turns out to be radically different.
According to the concept of the "digital" physical world, an elementary electric charge is not an energy characteristic, being just a mark for a particle, an identifier for programs that provide electromagnetic phenomena. The charge label for a particle is physically implemented quite simply. It represents quantum pulsations at the electron frequency f e, the value of which is determined by the de Broglie formula hf e = m e c 2, where h is Planck's constant, m eis the mass of an electron, c is the speed of light. The positive or negative sign of an elementary charge is determined by the phase of quantum pulsations at the electron frequency: pulsations that identify charges of one sign are in phase, but they are antiphase to pulsations that identify charges of a different sign.
It is clear that only ripples that have the same frequency can constantly be exactly in phase or antiphase. If the frequencies of the two pulsations differ, then their phase difference changes with time, so that the states of their in-phase and antiphase are alternately repeated at the difference frequency.
Now let us recall that gravitation, according to our model, is organized in such a way that the masses of elementary particles and the corresponding frequencies of quantum pulsations depend on the gravitational potential - increasing as they rise along the local vertical. So, for the near-earth space, the relation is valid.
where R is the distance to the center of the Earth, f ¥ is the frequency of quantum pulsations "at infinity", G is the gravitational constant, M is the mass of the Earth, c is the speed of light.
Comparing the criterion for identifying the same-name-dissimilarity of charges and the dependence of the electron frequency on the gravitational potential, we get paradoxical consequences. The electron frequencies of particles in the same gravitational potential are the same, therefore, opposite charges located at the same height must always be of the same name, and the same charges must be of the same name. But a different situation should take place for two particles separated by the height difference DH. The relative difference between their electronic frequencies, as follows from (1), is
where g is the local acceleration of gravity, f e = 1.24 × 10 20 Hz is the local value of the electron frequency. For these two particles, the states of in-phase and antiphase of electronic pulsations are cyclically repeated, and the repetition period is 1 / D f e. This means that for programs that control charged particles, the charges of our two particles, relative to each other, should alternately turn out to be of the same name, then unlike.
Such an approach, at first glance, contradicts the concept of the absolute sign of the elementary charge inherent in a particular particle. But this contradiction is apparent. An electron at any height therefore behaves like the owner of an elementary negative charge, because for each gravitational potential, in addition to the value of the electron frequency, two current opposite phases of pulsations at this frequency are also programmed, setting two signs of the electric charge - and the current phase of pulsations for the electron always corresponds to a negative charge. In this sense, the negative sign of the electron charge is absolute. The switchability of the charge signs is of a relative nature; it manifests itself in pairs of free charged particles, which are sufficiently spaced in height.
Before explaining what “sufficient height spacing” means, note that under conditions of a vertical gradient of electron frequency, even with a negligible height difference separating two electrons, their electron frequencies differ, and the phase difference of their electron pulsations changes over time. If for a pair of such electrons the same-name-dissimilarity of charges in relation to each other would take place only at the moments of exact in-phase-antiphase of their electronic pulsations, then their mutual "repulsion-attraction" would be provided only at these separate moments of time. So, with a height difference of 1 cm, two electrons would “feel” each other for a short time with a periodicity, according to (2), of about 7 ms. And this is not observed in experience: they "feel" each other constantly.
From this we conclude: special measures have been taken to ensure that charged particles, which are in different gravitational potentials and have different electronic frequencies, continuously show their charges in relation to each other. It is logical to assume that the same-name-dissimilarity of charges is determined not for the exact in-phase-antiphase of electronic pulsations, but for wider phase corridors. Namely, charges are considered to be of the same name if the phase difference for the corresponding quantum pulsations at the electron frequency falls in the interval 0 ± (p / 2) - and unlike if this phase difference falls in the interval p ± (p / 2). As a result of such a definition of the same-name-dissimilarity of charges, practically all charged particles located at different heights will be constantly covered by the program control,responsible for electromagnetic phenomena.
But, as it seems to us, the operation of these programs is radically simplified by eliminating the need to work out mutual changes in the signs of charges separated by small differences in altitude. For this, through software manipulation of the phases of quantum pulsations at electronic frequencies, adjacent horizontal layers are organized - with a thickness of approximately several tens of meters - in which these pulsations, despite a small frequency spread, occur quasi-in-phase. In each of these layers, which we will call quasi-inphase layers, the current phase of pulsations at the height of the layer center is the reference, and pulsations occurring above and below the center of this layer are pulsed in phase so that they remain in the 0 ± (p / 2) with pulsations in the center of the layer - as shown schematically in Fig. 1. Such phase manipulations do not violate the frequency gradient that provides gravitation, but they set a constant uniformity of charges for all free electrons located within one quasi-in-phase layer. At the same time, cyclic changes of the same-name-dissimilarity of charges in free electrons occur only for those of them that are in different layers of quasi-in-phase - with a frequency equal to the difference of electronic frequencies at the heights of the middle of these layers.equal difference of electronic frequencies at the heights of the middle of these layers.equal difference of electronic frequencies at the heights of the middle of these layers.
Figure: 1
If our model is correct, then the excess space charge in the atmosphere, located within one layer of quasi-inphase, should lead to cyclic force effects "up and down" on the free charged particle under it. If the area of excess charge covers several layers of quasi-inphase, then the charges of each layer should lead to an effect at its own frequency - and the frequency spectrum of the total effect should be, accordingly, wider. Then static space charges in the atmosphere - by the mere fact of their presence - should generate broadband noise in electronic equipment, and, moreover, especially effectively in radio receiving equipment. So, when the upper boundary of the overcharge region is 3 km above the radio receiver, the upper frequency of the band of noise that could be generated in the receiver isshould be around 40 MHz. Are there such noises in practice?
Noises do occur
It is very well known that radio reception at medium and especially at long wavelengths is interfered with, in addition to the so-called. whistling atmospherics, and other characteristic interferences, which acoustically manifest themselves as noise (rustle) and crackling. These interferences increase sharply as a local thunderstorm approaches and weaken as it recedes, but it is clear that they are not caused by local lightning discharges. In fact, having a pulse character, individual discharges give, respectively, separate short-term disturbances - while the noise in question is characterized by continuity in time. An ingenious explanation, which was included in almost all textbooks, declares this noise to be the result of lightning discharges occurring all over the globe at once - after all, according to some estimates, about 100 lightning strikes the surface of the Earth every second. But a ridiculous question remains open as to why interference due to lightning, remote at huge distances, sharply increases when a local thunderstorm approaches.
The rich experience of radio amateurs can be supplemented by the sad experience of aviators. Instructions and orders regulate the actions of the crew when the aircraft enters the zone of increased atmospheric electrification - due to the danger of damage to the aircraft by a discharge of static electricity. The term “damage to aircraft by electrical discharges outside the zones of thunderstorm activity” is typical here. Indeed, in a significant percentage of cases, especially in the cold season, zones of increased atmospheric electrification are formed in the absence of thunderstorm clouds, and if the space charge regions do not have sharply defined boundaries, then they do not give rise to flares on the screens of onboard and ground radars. Then the hit of the aircraft in the zone of increased electrification of the atmosphere is not predicted, but is determined by the pilots in fact, the most important sign of which is the appearance of strong radio interference,which appear, again, as noise and crackling in the pilots' headphones. The reason for this noise and crackling is the strong electrification of the aircraft, i.e. excess charge on it. It can be assumed that the discharge of static electricity from the aircraft (corona) generates noise and crackling in the used radio frequency band. But remember that completely similar noises and crackles - in completely similar conditions of increased electrification of the atmosphere - are also produced by ground-based radio receivers, of which it is inappropriate to talk about strong electrification.that completely analogous noises and crackles - in completely analogous conditions of increased electrification of the atmosphere - are also given by ground-based radio receivers, of which it is inappropriate to talk about strong electrification.that completely analogous noises and crackles - in completely analogous conditions of increased electrification of the atmosphere - are also given by ground-based radio receivers, of which it is inappropriate to talk about strong electrification.
Comparing the experience of radio amateurs and aviators, we come to the conclusion that the main cause of the above-mentioned noises in both ground and on-board equipment is in fact the same, and that this reason is unknown to science, being not associated with any lightning discharges on the whole globe, nor with the electrification of the aircraft. We associate this reason with local volumetric charges in the atmosphere, the mere presence of which is sufficient for alternating force effects on free charged particles, according to the above mechanism.
About the current of electrons along a long vertical conductor
If the above model is correct for the frequency-phase behavior of quantum pulsations for free electrons distributed along the height, then the traditional concepts of the potential difference - for electrical phenomena involving large elevation differences - lose their meaning. For example, let a vertical conductor stretch through several layers of quasi-in-phase. Then it makes no sense to say that some constant potential difference is applied to its ends. Indeed, what kind of constant potential difference can we talk about if the signs of the electron charges at the upper and lower ends of the conductor turn out to be of the same name, then unlike - with a frequency of, say, 1 MHz? In this case, it is correct to speak simply about the concentration of an excess amount of electrons at one of the ends of the conductor - i.e. use the conceptual apparatus,on which the logic of the programs is built, which eliminate the named inhomogeneity in the charge distribution, moving excess electrons along the conductor.
But even when using the correct terminology, an explanation is required: how, for example, do power lines work between points with large elevation differences - i.e. like a current of electrons (especially a constant one) flows through a conductor, in the neighboring sections of which the charges of electrons are not always of the same name, but switch between states of the same name and dissimilarity at a radio frequency.
Let us consider the case of such a length of a vertical conductor at which the acceleration of gravity g can be considered constant. Then, as it can be assumed, the thicknesses of the involved quasi-inphase layers are the same, and, therefore, the differences df e between the frequencies of the reference pulsations in the adjacent layers are the same. With equal p widths of the phase corridors, which give the identification of the same or opposite charge (see above), two states in the conductor will replace each other with a periodicity of 1 / df e. Namely, the half-period will last through the same name of the electron charges in all layers, and the other half-period signs of the electron charges will alternate from layer to layer - in this case, any of the layers can be taken as the reference.
We are interested in the question: if, say, a constant excess of electrons is maintained at the upper end of our conductor, then what will be the nature of the resulting current of electrons in the conductor? At time intervals with the end-to-end identity of charges, it is obvious that electrons will move downward along the entire conductor. On time intervals with layer-by-layer alternating signs of electron charges, the situation will be more complicated. In layers where the charges of electrons will be of the same name with the excess charge at the top, electrons will move downward, and in layers where they will be opposite, they will move up. Note that the current of "negative" electrons downward and the current of "positive" electrons upward are equivalent. And any detector will detect, in our problem, the same direct current anywhere in the conductor - if we neglect the condensation and rarefaction of free electrons,which will be obtained at the junctions of the layers for each time interval with layer-by-layer alternating charge signs. And these condensations-rarefactions will, indeed, be negligible, since the speed of advancement of electrons in conductors, even with strong currents, is only a few centimeters per second.
Thus, the discrepancy in the signs of the charges of electrons, which our model speaks of, practically does not affect the process of movement of excess electrons along a long vertical conductor. But lightning strikes through air, which under normal conditions is not a conductor. For a lightning strike to become possible, a conduction channel must be formed in the air, i.e. channel with a sufficiently high degree of ionization.
How conditions for high-frequency breakdown of air are created under a thundercloud
In the lower part of the thunderstorm cloud, from under which the formation of a conduction channel for a lightning strike begins, an excess charge is concentrated - as a rule, negative. The vertical length of the area of concentration of this charge can be 2-3 km.
It would seem that this powerful concentration of charge should cause an electric drift of free charged particles present in small quantities in the impenetrable air between the cloud and the ground. Static force action on free electrons would be more effective than on ions - in comparison with which, electrons have less inertness and higher mobility. But in the literature on atmospheric electricity, we did not find any mention of the drift of atmospheric electrons under a thundercloud to the ground - and this drift could not go unnoticed. And none of the authors asked the question: why is there no such drift?
Our model easily explains this paradox by the fact that the powerful concentration of the charge in the atmosphere does not lead to a static force effect on the free charged particles underneath, but to an alternating sign - moreover, in a wide frequency band determined by the vertical length of the charge concentration. With such an impact, in the resulting movement of atmospheric electrons there is no component corresponding to a direct current - as in a conductor with an excess charge at one end - these electrons experience only a high-frequency "bumpiness".
But this "bumpiness" of atmospheric electrons ensures, in our opinion, the formation of a conduction channel for a lightning strike. If the kinetic energy of free electrons as a result of high-frequency exposure is sufficient for impact ionization of air atoms, then an electrodeless high-frequency breakdown occurs. It is well known that HF breakdown occurs at much lower field strengths than avalanche breakdown, all other things being equal. This explains the mystery of the formation of a conduction channel for a lightning strike at voltages that are far from sufficient for an avalanche breakdown.
It is pertinent to add that N. Tesla shocked his contemporaries with the spectacle of long discharges in the air, caused by him artificially - he was even called the "lord of lightning." It is known that Tesla's secret consisted not only in the use of very high voltages, but also in the alternation of these voltages, at frequencies of tens of kHz and higher. Thus, the type of air breakdown in Tesla's lightning was undoubtedly high-frequency.
But let us return to the HF breakdown of air, which forms the conduction channel for a cloud-to-ground lightning strike. It is clear that, with the same density of free electrons at the entire height between the cloud and the ground, the HF breakdown will first of all occur where, due to the HF action, the electrons have the maximum kinetic energy. Between the cloud and the ground, the energy of atmospheric electrons turns out to be maximum in the region immediately adjacent to the "bottom" of the cloud: firstly, there is the maximum intensity of HF exposure, and, secondly, the air density is minimal there, which favors the acceleration of electrons. That is why, in our case, the HF breakdown starts from under the bottom of the thundercloud. But it does not sprout at once to the entire height between the cloud and the ground - it sprouts only the length of one step at the “step leader”.
What determines the length of the leader step
So, the conduction channel for a cloud-to-ground lightning strike begins to grow from the area adjacent to the “bottom” of the thundercloud. It would seem that the HF breakdown developing from the cloud to the ground could grow the conduction channel at once for the entire length that the intensity of the HF exposure allows - this intensity would be enough to ensure the required degree of air ionization. But this approach does not take into account the specific conditions that exist at the boundaries of the quasi-inphase layers.
Indeed, let us consider a free electron, which, at the accelerating stage of the RF action, crosses the boundary between adjacent quasi-inphase layers. If, at the moment of crossing the boundary, in these neighboring layers there is the same name of the charges of electrons, then nothing special will happen to our electron - the accelerating stage of the RF impact will continue. But if the transition of the boundary falls on the difference in the charges of electrons in neighboring layers, then the result of such a transition of the boundary will be an immediate phase inversion of the HF effect: the accelerating stage will change to a decelerating one. In this case, the electron will not be able to perceive the HF effect in full, unlike the electrons that oscillate within one quasi-in-phase layer or cross the border between them when the electron charges in them are of the same name.
It follows from this that at the boundaries between neighboring layers of quasi-in-phase there are boundary layers in which some of the free electrons have kinetic energies that are much lower than that provided by the HF action for the remaining electrons. Since the reduced kinetic energy of the electron also means its reduced ability to ionize air, then in the boundary layers the ionization efficiency is reduced - approximately by half. Therefore, there is a high probability that the HF breakdown, having reached the region with a reduced ionization efficiency in the boundary layer, will not be able to pass through this region, and the development of the HF breakdown will stop there.
Then the steps of the overwhelming majority of step leaders should begin and end at the boundary layers between the layers of quasi-inphase. And by the average length of the leader step, one can judge the thickness of the quasi-in-phase layers - taking into account that if one step falls on one quasi-in-phase layer, then the step length should increase when the step deviates from the vertical direction. Unfortunately, we did not find any data in the literature that would allow us to confirm or refute the thesis about the increase in the length of the leader step when it deviates from the vertical. However, there are indications that almost horizontal linear lightnings are formed more freely - without those rigid restrictions on the lengths of the leader steps, which are in place for "cloud-to-ground" lightnings. Indeed, despite the fact that the length of the "cloud-to-ground" lightning is on average 2-3 km, "the length of the lightning,what happened between the clouds, reached 15-20 km and even more.
If our reasoning is correct, then the thickness of the quasi-inphase layers should be slightly less than the average length of the leader step. Different authors give slightly different values for the average step length - as an approximate value we will call the figure of 40 m. If this figure is not far from the truth, then we will not be much mistaken if we call the value of 30 m as an approximate value for the thickness of the quasi-in-phase layers.
What happens in the pauses between the build-up of the conduction channel
Experience shows that after the next build-up of the conduction channel by the length of one stage of the leader - which takes about 1 ms - there is a pause before building up the next stage; these pauses last approximately 50 ms. What happens during these pauses?
The answer suggests itself: during these pauses, free electrons move from the cloud along the entire formed conduction channel, with the filling of a new enlarged section to its very end, so that at this end the concentration of excess electrons is sufficient for the breakdown of the boundary layer between adjacent quasi-inphase layers. We find confirmation of the thesis about the advancement of electrons along the conduction channel in the pauses between the buildup of the leader steps in Schonland, who writes about the coincidence of the speed of the step leader with the drift speed of free electrons - given the air density and electric field strength. Here Shonland speaks about the average speed of a stepped leader, but this leader advances with short throws, and overwhelmingly the rest of the time he “rests”. And if the resulting average speed of the step leader is equal to the speed of electron advancement, this means that electrons move along the new build-up sections of the conduction channel precisely during the following pauses - after all, with their drift speed, they simply would not have time to advance along the new section during its formation.
And, indeed, HF breakdown forms a new section of the conduction channel only through an increase in the degree of air ionization in it - the number of free electrons and positive ions in this case increase, but remain equal to each other. Therefore, initially, there is no excess charge in the new section of the conduction channel - and it takes time for its inflow. That is why, in our opinion, the Frenkel model of field amplification at the tip of the growing breakdown is inoperative. For such an enhancement of the field, an excess charge is required at the tip. But we see that the build-up of the conduction channel occurs in the absence of excess charge at the tip of the growing breakdown - these excess charges flow in with a significant delay.
Let us emphasize that it is the model of the movement of electrons from the cloud along the conduction channel during pauses between successive build-ups of this channel that gives the simplest and logical answer to the question of how a high degree of ionization is maintained in the channel during these pauses - when the mechanism that provided the rapid breakdown, can no longer cope with the loss of ions as a result of recombination and diffusion. In our opinion, it is the advance of excess electrons that creates additional ions through impact ionization and thus contributes to maintaining the conduction state in the channel.
We add that the movement of free electrons in the pauses between the build-ups of the conduction channel occurs not only along the channel that reaches the ground and through which the main current shock will occur, but also along all the branching dead-end channels. This is visually evidenced by the complete similarity of the growth of many channels at once - when it is not yet clear which of them will be the channel of the main current shock.
Main current shock
When the conduction channel between the thundercloud and the ground is fully formed, the main current shock (or several current shocks) occurs along it. Sometimes in the literature, the main current shock is extremely unsuccessfully called a reverse current shock or reverse discharge. These terms are misleading, giving the impression that in a reverse discharge, electrons move in the opposite direction to that in which the conduction channel grew and in which they moved as they grew. In fact, in a "reverse discharge", electrons move in a "forward" direction, moving out of the cloud - i.e. from the area of their excessive concentration - on the ground. The "reverse" of this discharge manifests itself exclusively through its observed dynamics. The fact is that immediately after the formation of a conduction channel between the cloud and the ground,filled with excess electrons, the main current shock develops in such a way that, first of all, electrons begin to move in the channel sections closest to the ground, then - in higher sections, etc. At the same time, the edge of the zone of intense glow, which is generated by these powerful motions of electrons, moves from bottom to top - which gives other authors a reason to talk about "reverse discharge".
The glow during the main current shock has interesting features. “As soon as the leader reaches the Earth, the main discharge immediately arises, spreading from the Earth to the cloud. The main discharge is much more intense in luminescence, and it has been observed that as the main discharge moves upward, this luminescence decreases, especially as it passes through the branching points. An increase in the glow was never observed as the discharge moved upward. We explain these features by the fact that, at the initial stages of the main current shock, the electron current in the main conduction channel, stretching from the cloud to the ground, is fed by the electron currents from dead-end branches - just like a river is fed by streams flowing into it. These currents, feeding the current shock in the main channel, are really "reverse":the electrons then return from the dead-end branches to the main channel.
Video recordings of a cloud-to-ground lightning strike in slow motion are freely available on the Internet. They clearly show, by a weak propagating glow, the dynamics of the advancement of electrons along the growing conduction channels - with abundant branching. Finally, a brightly luminous discharge occurs along the main channel, at first accompanied by a glow in the side branches - which dies out much faster than the glow in the main channel, since electrons from the cloud now do not enter the side branches, but move along the main channel into the ground.
Conclusion
We do not claim to fully cover the phenomena that occur when lightning strikes. We have considered only the case of a typical cloud-to-ground linear lightning. But for the first time we have given a systemic explanation of the physics of such lightning. We have solved the riddle of the very possibility of lightning at electric field strengths that are far from sufficient for an avalanche breakdown of air - after all, the breakdown here turns out to be not avalanche, but high-frequency. We have named the reason for this RF breakdown. And we explained why this breakdown sprouts in successive segments, with significant pauses between them.
All these explanations turned out to be direct consequences of our ideas about the nature of electricity and about the organization of gravitation - however, with some clarifying assumptions. The key role was played by the idea of the organization of gravitation, because lightning appears to us as a gravitational-electric phenomenon. Strikingly, the phenomenon of lightning between a thundercloud and the earth turns out to be an important evidence of the correctness of two basic concepts of the "digital" physical world at once, about the essences of electricity and gravitation - after all, lightning finds a reasonable explanation on the basis of stitching these two concepts.
We add that the above physics of linear lightning between a thundercloud and the earth can serve as a starting point for explaining the nature of other types of lightning. For example, the regularity of the arrangement of layers with special conditions of air ionization can play a key role in the formation of the so-called. beaded zipper.
Author: A. A. Grishaev, independent researcher
