Cold Heat from Canada, a documentary.

[paul cotter]

I have two daughters, 38 and 40-  in ~20years they will be older than me, with this stunningly effective antiaging protocol.

[Electrodynamic]

When the object collapses the plasma fragments into three distinct smaller balls before completely collapsing.

Want to know what I see when I view in slo-mo?

1) The 'sphere' collapses to, very briefly, reveal a typical powerline electrical arc shape - a 'snake'
2) Right at the very end, there are indeed three bright spots, very, very briefly. THREE

Know what else comes in three's? The line conductors, in your run-of-the mill overhead polyphasic AC distribution line system.

I like the comment "it could be anything" which begs the question like what exactly?. I mean a giant ball of fucking plasma floating in some farmers field could be similar to what exactly?.

Exactly what I told you above. And others have said in their online analysis. The visual similarities are unmistakable, if you're being objective. As an explanation, it hasn't (at least to my knowledge) been discredited as a possible cause. No one seems to have definitively identified the location and gone out there to check whether it does coincide with overhead lines. Until / unless someone does, it's a perfectly viable explanation and very much more likely.

Interesting observations, considering there are no power lines visible anywhere in the video.

In Alberta power lines run next to roadways with the exception of large HV lines having very large towers which can run through grazing pasture. As we can clearly see in the video this is seeded farmland with no power lines visible. They seldom if ever build power lines in fields because they get in the way of big equipment like a 60' cultivator or seeder.

Do you see any large power lines in the video?, I don't. Nice try though.

[NE666]

Do you see any large power lines in the video?, I don't.

What *can* you see in the video?
[Semi-rhetorical question. I think I know what you see and that's only what you want to see. But I've got a cold beer beside me and 5 mins to spare before dinner, so let's do this anyway and spell out the objective observer's case]

Because of the flat topology and openness of the landscape there's no good frame of reference for the distances involved, or for the size of the vegetation on the horizon. They might be large shrubs, or they could be trees. If the latter, then the distance is probably several hundred meters or more.

Regular 11kv or 33kv distribution line conductors are probably in the order of an inch in diameter, maximum. The camera would no more see those against a dark background at a distance of several hundred meters than it would how many fingers I was holding up at the same distance.  But if I were running my plasma cutter or MIG welder you'd see the arc from that for sure. The same kind of lines wouldn't be on transmission towers just regular poles and again, at that distance you may not easily see those against the horizon either.

And no, they wouldn't have to be located in the field and probably wouldn't be in your country. The view is across a very flat area and therefore could easily have line of sight over a road which itself isn't visible in the video because of the camera's small angle of declination relative to it.

That's all before we consider the prevailing 'gloomy' lighting conditions (looks like storm clouds, rain, possibly mist). Oh, and the massive plasma discharge which must be affecting the camera's exposure / white balance/ dynamic range / whatever.

Am I saying that there ARE powerlines in that location? No, absolutely not what I'm saying.

I AM saying that we (and that includes you) cannot reasonably exclude the possibility that there are *on the basis of these images alone*. The image quality and information content of what has been presented is insufficient. Anything else is just confirmation bias and a personal need for this to be a rare and exotic event, rather than a genuine desire to understand what it really was.

[SteveThackery]

Anything else is just confirmation bias and a personal need for this to be a rare and exotic event, rather than a genuine desire to understand what it really was.

AMEN.

Nail on the head.

[Electrodynamic]

NE666

What *can* you see in the video?
[Semi-rhetorical question. I think I know what you see and that's only what you want to see. But I've got a cold beer beside me and 5 mins to spare before dinner, so let's do this anyway and spell out the objective observer's case]

Because of the flat topology and openness of the landscape there's no good frame of reference for the distances involved, or for the size of the vegetation on the horizon. They might be large shrubs, or they could be trees. If the latter, then the distance is probably several hundred meters or more.

What do I see?, first I spent a great deal of time doing oil field work in central Alberta which is identical to the picture. Those aren't shrubs in the picture they are stands of 30' spruce, pine and poplar trees. It may help to view an overhead picture of the area shown below. I also love to hunt/fish and was a hunting guide for a few years. I was paid to read the landscape and distances to help put people on deer. For example, the difference in bullet drop at 300 yards vs 1000 for a .270 rifle is 25 feet. It's not a little off it's a country mile off and judging distance/MOA of elevation is what determines whether we hit or not. So I can say with some amount of certainty the object but more important ground illumination below it is at least a half mile out.

That's all before we consider the prevailing 'gloomy' lighting conditions (looks like storm clouds, rain, possibly mist). Oh, and the massive plasma discharge which must be affecting the camera's exposure / white balance/ dynamic range / whatever.

What did I see, my first impression?. The first thing I noticed was the ground illumination and thought WTF that can't be right. Yes a bright object can appear larger in a camera due to the exposure but the ground illumination tells us the actual distance more than anything. How would you explain a smaller/closer object illuminating the ground much further behind it as a camera artifact?.

I get where you coming from in the UK but here in Alberta everything is really big and flat. You claim, the flat topology and openness of the landscape allows no good frame of reference for the distances involved but fail to realize this is where I live. I see it daily and have no issue with estimating distances. Hell, my dog ran away last week and I can still see the little bugger running, lol.

 

[Electrodynamic]

Anything else is just confirmation bias and a personal need for this to be a rare and exotic event, rather than a genuine desire to understand what it really was.

AMEN.

Nail on the head.

Of course the alter ego is the innate fear of change which is demonstrable and well known in psychology.

The main drivers behind a fear of change are loss of control, loss of identity, comfort in routine and fear of failure. Imagine being an older person who spent their whole lives building type writers only to find they have no future and were replaced by a computer. Even today many who say they cannot be replaced by AI soon will be and are effectively unemployable. The grand delusion is that nothing can change and yet it always does, change is inevitable. Even as an older person I find most people my age delusional. Everyone seems to think their age is as good as it gets and can be no better or smarter yet they are always proven wrong. I found most people reek of fear of any change.

Take comfort in the fact your grandchildren will know and understand more than you can even imagine. I find it kind of fucked up than anyone would suppose 200 years from now nobody could know more than them. That nothing would or could change and we would all be doing the same things as we are now. I like Elon Musk's take on this of 100% signal and zero percent noise. If you are no better than all the other people just like you then you are useless and fired on the spot. Kevin Oleary said if you have nothing new or better to offer Musk just walks away and your fired on the spot. He has no time for losers trying to hold the status quo which is why he will probably become a the first trillionaire. In effect, we are only as good as the next new thing we can discovery otherwise we are useless in business and no different than millions of other people mired in repetition. Yet many seem to revel in their normalcy as if it was exceptional which is anything but the case.

It begs the question, if were no different than a billion other people what good are we?.

[Xena E]

Anything else is just confirmation bias and a personal need for this to be a rare and exotic event, rather than a genuine desire to understand what it really was.

AMEN.

Nail on the head.

Of course the alter ego is the innate fear of change which is demonstrable and well known in psychology.

The main drivers behind a fear of change are loss of control, loss of identity, comfort in routine and fear of failure. Imagine being an older person who spent their whole lives building type writers only to find they have no future and were replaced by a computer. Even today many who say they cannot be replaced by AI soon will be and are effectively unemployable. The grand delusion is that nothing can change and yet it always does, change is inevitable. Even as an older person I find most people my age delusional. Everyone seems to think their age is as good as it gets and can be no better or smarter yet they are always proven wrong. I found most people reek of fear of any change.

Take comfort in the fact your grandchildren will know and understand more than you can even imagine. I find it kind of fucked up than anyone would suppose 200 years from now nobody could know more than them. That nothing would or could change and we would all be doing the same things as we are now. I like Elon Musk's take on this of 100% signal and zero percent noise. If you are no better than all the other people just like you then you are useless and fired on the spot. Kevin Oleary said if you have nothing new or better to offer Musk just walks away and your fired on the spot. He has no time for losers trying to hold the status quo which is why he will probably become a the first trillionaire. In effect, we are only as good as the next new thing we can discovery otherwise we are useless in business and no different than millions of other people mired in repetition. Yet many seem to revel in their normalcy as if it was exceptional which is anything but the case.

It begs the question, if were no different than a billion other people what good are we?.

Very nicely crafted summary of the commercial value of the human race, and the progress of knowledge, (ignoring the current trend toward ignorance and idiocracy within society in general however).

But what the actual fuck has it to do with a debate on the exact nature of phenomena such as ball lightning and arc plasma?

[SteveThackery]

Of course the alter ego is the innate fear of change which is demonstrable and well known in psychology.

The main drivers behind a fear of change are loss of control, loss of identity, comfort in routine and fear of failure.

Eh? Have you posted to the wrong thread?

[paul cotter]

Yep, refile in the psychology subforum.

[NE666]

But what the actual fuck has it to do with a debate on the exact nature of phenomena such as ball lightning and arc plasma?

It's all just affectation and swagger to distract from the lack of a cogent argument, or to avoid having to address one properly. Quickly shutdown a discussion which won't easily acquiesce to their own ideas. More suited to the priesthood than science or engineering.

So let's do some facts together. I too know, within a few meters, where that video was shot.

https://maps.app.goo.gl/AUXUsmPZAQrkWiEp7

Something to take from it - look at the amount of detail visible on the antenna tower in 'normal daylight' conditions. You can just about see some distinct elements and definitely the large microwave reflector at the top.  Then note how much is lost on the day in question in the video presented, in the prevailing weather conditions. It's almost not visible at all in the latter.

It's just not being honest to say that it would be utterly impossible for much lower, smaller structures at similar distance to be 'lost' from sight in the images.

[NE666]

Take a look at the observer's location relative to confirmed locations of power lines, looking NNE across either Range Road 31, or Township Road 564.
[I've marked powerlines in white, the transmitter tower in yellow, and the observer's location in blue. With a possible range of sighting angles (guesswork)]

They do look quite far away I'll grant. But my *opinion* is that this is what is being overlooked - there isn't good range data. An arc can be immensely bright and cast a reflection over the surface of water or damp surfaces for a long way. And it's a damp looking day, with a damp crop and damp trees.

My *opinion* is that we're looking at a fault on Range Road, possibly where the supply branches to the 'Pure Farm Fresh' site.  Then again, I've honestly no idea how rural churches and cemetery's work in Canada - do they have mains power? If so,  maybe there are also lines running as far as that? Maybe it's further out and on Township.

IF the ball is much closer to the observer than that, well, it does bring ball lightning into play as a possibility. But there's no proof I've seen, yet, that is the case. And if it is more distant than it may appear due to the viewing angle, weather, lens flare etc., then you just can't rule out the more regular possibility.

[paul cotter]

Excellent detective work, NE666.

[SteveThackery]

IF the ball is much closer to the observer than that, well, it does bring ball lightning into play as a possibility.

Just a point of order here: the very existence of ball lightning is not established scientific reality. Nevertheless, I think there is enough anecdotal evidence to convince me that there is something in it.

Unfortunately some of the reported behaviours - the ball passing through a glass window, a house wall, and once the wall of an aircraft and then floating down the passenger aisle - strain scientific credibility to the point where it undermines the claims.

"It's plasma, obviously" is repeated so often people begin to assume it's an established fact. It might be, we don't know, but whatever it is, there seems to be more to it than "just plasma".  There are two oft-reported phenomena that need explaining. Firstly, how and why it maintains a ball shape (there is nothing in plasma physics that says plasma will naturally take on a ball shape and maintain that shape over time). Secondly, if it is plasma, how it can sustain itself over periods of up to 90 seconds without any apparent energy source (plasma radiates a LOT of energy by heat and light).

Fortunately, it turns out Electrodynamic is an expert in the fields of psychology, Power Engineering and high energy physics (plus several others I can't remember - I'm sure he'll remind us). In an earlier thread he told us he "knows" it is a ball of plasma, although so far he hasn't furnished us with explanations for the two anomalous phenomena I mentioned.

We are lucky to have him.

[SteveThackery]

Yep, refile in the psychology subforum.

I believe it is properly called the "cod psychology" subforum. 😄😉

[NE666]

Excellent detective work, NE666.

It's a shame really that the local news station didn't even try to do some basic research, including their 'expert'. There was a time when journalism at local rags still had some semblance of being investigative.

I guess "but it could have been those nearby powerlines" doesn't 'sell newspapers' or draw clicks.

[NE666]

Just a point of order here: the very existence of ball lightning is not established scientific reality.

I had wondered about that. Honestly, I don't know and I'm not claiming to. I'm happy to read what others have to say on the matter and the arguments you present seem like good starting questions. Although I'm expecting 'vacuum energy' or 'extra dimensional' to turn up in the replies.

What I'm not prepared to do is accept off the bat that exotic states of matter and high energy physics are the only explanation for this particular event, before all of the simpler everyday ones have been properly and robustly dismissed.

[SteveThackery]

Just a point of order here: the very existence of ball lightning is not established scientific reality.

I had wondered about that. Honestly, I don't know and I'm not claiming to. I'm happy to read what others have to say on the matter and the arguments you present seem like good starting questions. Although I'm expecting 'vacuum energy' or 'extra dimensional' to turn up in the replies.

I wouldn't normally do this, but I highly recommend the Wikipedia article:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ball_lightning

It is one of the best I've ever read. Amongst a lot of other fascinating information, it describes 17 theories for what ball lightning is, which must be the very definition of NOT a scientific consensus! Yes, the usual caveats apply, but it is exceptionally well referenced - 114 references - so you can follow up anything you have doubts about.

What I'm not prepared to do is accept off the bat that exotic states of matter and high energy physics are the only explanation for this particular event, before all of the simpler everyday ones have been properly and robustly dismissed.

Absolutely agree - that's how we do science.

[paul cotter]

I had seen that Wiki article before and I decided to refresh my memory. Not one of those theories would stand up to scrutiny, IMHO.
PS: Bob Grenyer, whose name came up previously is obsessed with ball lightning and the more wacky theories associated with it.

[SteveThackery]

I had seen that Wiki article before and I decided to refresh my memory. Not one of those theories would stand up to scrutiny, IMHO.

Actually I agree, and that makes it all the more interesting to read. I like the way the theories cover the full range from "Yeah, maybe" to "Ridiculous!". I think the article gives an excellent summary of the current state of play with ball lightning, which is to say, pretty much nowhere. The unwritten Theory 18 is "None of the above".

All very fascinating and extraordinary. I love scientific mysteries.

[Xena E]

All very fascinating and extraordinary. I love scientific mysteries.

Exactly.  It's "something' but the journey of investigation is often more interesting than realisation of what "something" actually is.

[Electrodynamic]

NE666
I also went through the area on google maps, due diligence, but unfortunately your not even close.

In reply #235, picture #2 in a yellow border you outline a cell/microwave tower yet in the original picture #3 of the ball lightning we see an outline from the ground to the bottom of the clouds?. Would you have us believe the supposed tower in picture #2 is thousands of feet tall?, I think not. As well in picture #2 we see a clear depression as a slough completely missing in picture #3 of the ball lightning.

I could go on but the details in picture #2 on the horizon are not even reasonably close to the original picture #3 of the ball lightning. I mean the fence line, the shrubs to the left, the slough in center, the gap in the trees center right, the tree line under the tower?. Who do you think your trying to fool here because this is amateur. At first I thought, I don't care enough to bother and it could be true but what you posted is nonsense imo. I almost bought your nonsense, some fancy pictures and maps but no what you posted is complete bs.

[SteveThackery]

In reply #235, picture #2 in a yellow border you outline a cell/microwave tower yet in the original picture #3 of the ball lightning [...] ball lightning [...] ball lightning.

You are doing it again: assuming the phenomenon is ball lightning without questioning it. If you want to be taken seriously you need to be much more neutral and do less of the blind acceptance. The current state of the science is:

1/ We don't know for sure that ball lightning exists as a real physical phenomenon, although there is anecdotal and photographic evidence in support of its existence.

2/ If ball lightning does exist as a physical phenomenon, it appears to display features which cannot be reconciled with our current understanding of physics. Examples of currently unexplainable features are: maintaining a ball shape over time; sustaining itself for up to 90 seconds with no apparent source of energy; the reported ability to pass through solid materials such as glass and metal.

So clearly we need to be much more circumspect about making assumptions.

[NE666]

NE666
I also went through the area on google maps, due diligence, but unfortunately your not even close.

In reply #235, picture #2 in a yellow border you outline a cell/microwave tower yet in the original picture #3 of the ball lightning we see an outline from the ground to the bottom of the clouds?. Would you have us believe the supposed tower in picture #2 is thousands of feet tall?, I think not. As well in picture #2 we see a clear depression as a slough completely missing in picture #3 of the ball lightning.

I could go on but the details in picture #2 on the horizon are not even reasonably close to the original picture #3 of the ball lightning. I mean the fence line, the shrubs to the left, the slough in center, the gap in the trees center right, the tree line under the tower?. Who do you think your trying to fool here because this is amateur. At first I thought, I don't care enough to bother and it could be true but what you posted is nonsense imo. I almost bought your nonsense, some fancy pictures and maps but no what you posted is complete bs.

It walks very much as a duck walks. It quacks very much as a duck quacks. And it was observed in the vicinity of duck ponds.

You can believe it captures the rebirth of a phoenix if you so wish. But it should be clear to you by now that you're the only one discussing it here who's prepared to believe that based on the evidence presented, and especially so without any proof at all that it wasn't the duck.

The questions you should be asking yourself are: Why do do think that you are the only one who interprets the images and maps in that way? Why do think no one else is jumping to the same conclusions? In a work context having your conclusions, data or findings so at odds with a consensus would be cause for at least some retrospection and checking.

At first I thought, I don't care enough to bother

Au contraire, Mon Ami. It appears to me that it bothers your ego a great deal to have your opinions challenged. Which is why you are the one always reaching for insults, derogation and ad hominem.

[Randy222]

I believe in cold heat.

-65F in Canada, -20F in Fargo, I want that Fargo heat. 

[paul cotter]

Trouble with this "cold heat" is that it is neither cool enough for the air conditioning nor warm enough for heating purposes- ie useless. It really should be called "tepid from Canada".