arXiv blog

Magnetically Induced Hallucinations Explain Ball Lightning, Say Physicists

Powerful magnetic fields can induce hallucinations in the lab, so why not in the real world, too?

kfc 05/11/2010

  • 32 Comments

Transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) is an extraordinary technique pioneered by neuroscientists to explore the workings of the brain. The idea is to place a human in a rapidly changing magnetic field that is powerful enough to induce currents in neurons in the brain. Then sit back and see what happens.

Since TMS was invented in the 1980s, it has become a powerful way of investigating how the brain works. Because the fields can be tightly focused, it is possible to generate currents in very specific areas of the brain to see what they do.

Focus the field in the visual cortex, for example, and the induced eddys cause the subject to 'see' lights that appear as discs and lines. Move the the field within the cortex and the subject sees the lights move too.

All that much is repeatable in the lab using giant superconducting magnets capable of creating fields of as much as 0.5 Tesla inside the brain.

But if this happens in the lab, then why not in the real world too, say Joseph Peer and Alexander Kendl at the University of Innsbruck in Austria. They calculate that the rapidly changing fields associated with repeated lightning strikes are powerful enough to cause a similar phenomenon in humans within 200 metres.

To be sure, this is a rare event. The strike has to be of a particular type in which there are multiple return strokes at the same point over a period of a few seconds, a phenomenon that occurs in about 1-5 per cent of strikes, say Peer and Kendl.

And the observer has to be capable of properly experiencing the phenomenon; in other words uninjured. "As a conservative estimate, roughly 1% of (otherwise unharmed) close lightning experiencers are likely to perceive transcranially induced above-threshold cortical stimuli," say Peer and Kendl. They add that these observers need not be outside but could be otherwise safely inside buildings or even sitting in aircraft.

So what would this kind of lightning-induced transcranial stimulation look like to anybody unlucky enough to experience it? Peer and Kendl say it may well look like the type of hallucinations induced by lab-based tests, in other words luminous lines and balls that appear to float in space in front of the subject's eyes.

It turns out, of course, that there are numerous reports of these types of observations during thunder storms. "An observer reporting this experience is likely to classify the event under the preconcepted term of "ball lightning"," say Kendl and Peer.

That's an interesting idea: that a large class of well-reported phenomenon may be the result of hallucinations induced by transcranial magnetic stimulation.

A difficult idea to test, to be sure, but no less interesting for it. And it raises an important question: in what other circumstances are ambient fields large enough to trigger hallucinations of one kind or another?

Ref: arxiv.org/abs/1005.1153: Transcranial Stimulability Of Phosphenes By Long Lightning Electromagnetic Pulses

l

TRSF: Read the Best New Science Fiction inspired by today’s emerging technologies.

Print

Close Comments

To comment, please sign in or register

Forgot my password

qraal

12 Comments

  • 642 Days Ago
  • 05/11/2010

Electrical fields and God

Makes one wonder about the association between electric fields, which congregate around high points in a landscape, and the visions of god that people have reported & relied upon in mountainous settings.

And Elijah's "still small voice" he heard in a mountain cave - could he have been hearing "static" by some kind of natural electrical sensitivity causing an auditory hallucination?

Of course theologians can always say that God uses electrical fields to communicate with humans - but that raises the curious thought that telecommunications is a kind of prayer...

Reply

DJTal

154 Comments

  • 642 Days Ago
  • 05/11/2010

Re: Geoplasma and God

It is possible that electromagnetic fields created by ball lightning and geoplasma, which rises up out of the ground, could have caused hallucinations by stimulating the God spot in the brain.  I doubt that ordinary lightning could have ever done this.

Reply

ziroarc

2 Comments

  • 524 Days Ago
  • 09/06/2010

Re: Geoplasma and God

i was touched by ball lightning was thy most beautiful feeling in the world i see aura now cant die and can connect with the dead that are in limbo.

Reply

pha7env@yahoo.com

1 Comment

  • 641 Days Ago
  • 05/12/2010

Re: Electrical fields and God

I think you might not be on the right track. If you feel that you need to explain God away then that means you might just believe. Hope to see you much later. God Bless!

Reply

ZephirAWT

299 Comments

  • 642 Days Ago
  • 05/11/2010

A nice hypothesis, but...

At first, so far I saw only various photos or ball lightning - so I don't think, they originated from magnetic hallucinations of camera.

At second, no simmilar hallucinations were experimentally induced by external magnetic field for experimentees.

At third, the need of such permanent and intensive source of (spherical) magnetic field doesn't explain this phenomena anyway - it just brings another complications into situation.

Reply

bildan

39 Comments

  • 642 Days Ago
  • 05/11/2010

Interesting

I swear I've heard a "click" in my head before the crash of thunder when a lightning bolt struck nearby.

It idea that lightning induced magnetic fields can have neurological effects is an interesting one.

Reply

Tomahto

1 Comment

  • 641 Days Ago
  • 05/12/2010

Re: Interesting

did it sound liek "click click" and then "boom" ??
http://www.kewego.com/video/iLyROoafteco.html

Reply

Advertisement

minorwork

1 Comment

  • 641 Days Ago
  • 05/12/2010

Re: Interesting

I'm 59. I've kept track of hearing the crackle of a seen lightning bolt and the delay to the "boom."
I'd wondered what I was hearing or even if I was hearing with the ears or some internal response to changing magnetic or static fields.  Research using a recording of air sounds at the time show an actual crackling, a "click" at the same time as the lightning bolt is seen.  The phenomena is due to being around some long conductor or even power wires nearby.  In my first instance, we had an 80 meter half wave dipole with a choke coil at its center to allow it to function fairly well in the 40 meter band. This was within 20 feet of me when the phenomena presented most noticeably.  Later at a drop zone while skydiving we watched a storm come in and again the crack at the same time as a bolt then 5 seconds later the boom.  The bolt had been a mile away.  We had a lot of power transmission lines at the north end of the airstrip. 

It is a real phenomena and is due to the static field induced by the lightning on the wires in close proximity to the listener affecting the crackling noise as the static charge dissipates into the air close enough that a person can hear it.  I later tested this by moving near an electric substation when there was lightning and again the phenomena presented.  I am satisfied with the explanation.

Reply

UncleAl

409 Comments

  • 642 Days Ago
  • 05/11/2010

Proximity is not causality

http://jlnlabs.online.fr/plasma/gmr/index.htm
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2007/01/070122-ball-lightning_2.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ball_lightning

Magnetic dipole intensity varies as 1/r^3.  An individual magnetically hallucinating is plausible.  Doing a crowd is unlikely.

Reply

tfernsle

2 Comments

  • 642 Days Ago
  • 05/11/2010

Re: Proximity is not causality

The magnetic field would be induced by current flow of the lightning strike and not dipoles, so field strength would still drop off ~1/r^2. It seems more likely that a crowd would all see it than not, since they were in the same field.

Reply

tfernsle

2 Comments

  • 642 Days Ago
  • 05/11/2010

Plot?

What's that plot have to do with the story? It shows electric field strength, not magnetic, and doesn't describe what the colored plots represent nor what event zero time corresponds to.

Reply

melior

3 Comments

  • 635 Days Ago
  • 05/18/2010

Re: Plot?

That blue thing after the word "Ref:" at the bottom of the blog post is what's known as a "link" to the journal article. You can move your mouse and click on it; it can be very informative when you are tempted to ask idiotic questions.

FIG. 1: Electric field transcranially induced at various observation points (from bottom to top: 20 - 100m distance from strike point) by the time derivative of the lightning magnetic field during the decline phase of an average negative cloud-to-ground subsequent return stroke. Phosphene perception can be expected for induced fields above 20 V/m. Long duration repetitive stimulation of phosphenes up to seconds can be caused by higher multiplicity strokes.

Reply

  • 641 Days Ago
  • 05/12/2010

and Just how much did this cost?

So, didn't we nearly already know this?

What else is life all about? People are getting paid for these "discoveries". Think I'll apply for a grant to find out why we get wet while taking a shower. I already think I know, and it has a lot to do with water.

S.

Reply

queenofromania

1 Comment

  • 641 Days Ago
  • 05/12/2010

Pressing The Lever

James Olds did a famous study in the 1950's about rats and the 'pleasure centers of the brain'. Because rat brains had been mapped, Olds could accurately implant an electrode into the rat brain's pleasure center and condition the rat to press a lever to receive 'pleasure'. Once the rats caught on, they would depress the lever until they exhausted themselves and fell into unconsciousness. Once rested, the rats would start pressing the lever again to receive 'pleasure'. I'm wondering if the same thing can happen with these magnetically-induced stimuli, It might shut up a lot of otherwise vocal abusers.

Reply

Advertisement

citizenfish

1 Comment

  • 641 Days Ago
  • 05/12/2010

Ball Lightning

My father served in Germany at the end of world war two and he and group of soldiers observed a ball of light enter their mess hall and disappear through the next wall. They all hit the floor, many thinking what they observed was some German supper weapon. One soldier, from Texas, comely sat at his dinner spot and said mater of factually “Ball Lightning.” Dose this sound like a shared hallucination? 

Reply

Oldpcguy

1 Comment

  • 641 Days Ago
  • 05/12/2010

Re: Ball Lightning

My father was piloting a B-52 when the plane was struck by lightning shortly after takeoff. Immediately after strike 4 crew-members all saw and heard an incident of 'ball lightning' travel slowly through the plane, turn down a gangway, and disappear. Each crew-member was in a different location, yet saw exactly the same thing, but from a different perspective. My father, not in a position to SEE the ball lightning, HEARD it.. exactly as the others had heard it as it traveled through the plane's passageways. Further, some of the crew looked away, then back, seeing it again where it had been, moving through the plane. This would seem to indicate it wasn't "spots in their eyes" (or their brains?).

The fact that scientists can stimulate images in the brain doesn't seem like reason to 'explain' images we may 'see' yet can't explain.

Reply

Brian H

60 Comments

  • 630 Days Ago
  • 05/23/2010

Re: Ball Lightning

That would be "calmly", unless he was really pretty.

Some people are just more clam, clue, and corrected than others. }:P

Reply

ziroarc

2 Comments

  • 524 Days Ago
  • 09/06/2010

Re: Ball Lightning

no halucination its something special turned blue on half my body at first, but eperience was touched by something much beyond me ,can bring it up at will.cant die or do and come back on a time delay ,can also correspond with the dead that are in limbo,dale earndheart ,kurt kobain ,farley,the ones that died young,and werent supposed to go they are waiting 4 me to bring them back,out ov the media ,middle earth since it is hollow in part of thy core,ask the new breed.

Reply

WesleyCarter

1 Comment

  • 641 Days Ago
  • 05/12/2010

Nope

They're ignoring the fact that ball lightning has been witnessed be several people at a time several times, that the ball lightning acted the same way to all witnesses of a particular event and that it has killed people.

Reply

  • 641 Days Ago
  • 05/12/2010

ball lightning hallucinations

Ignus fatuus. False fire. Sailors have reported seeing them on the seas. Hunters describe them as "jack o lanterns" in the swamp, which scientists label naturally occuring methane gases that spontaneously ignite.
The cover story for the Living section (Times Picayune 10/31/9) which I penned includes an interview with Greg Gypin a gator hunter, and his encounters with balls of light.
The late Greg Gypin stated, "on a coon hunt after they'd cleared a swamp, that's when we'd see them. They'd play in the limbs like squirrels. But the dogs would hide under that truck." In south Louisiana they are called "fi' folle." Cajun ignus fatuus.
Same phenomenon or does the methane gas explanation suffice?

Reply

veronykah

1 Comment

  • 641 Days Ago
  • 05/12/2010

Atomic Bomb Survivors?

Could this explain the glowing balls of different colors that survivors of Hiroshima and Nagasaki saw as well?

Reply

Advertisement

garylynn

44 Comments

  • 641 Days Ago
  • 05/12/2010

hallucinations

Something to factor into this is the interpretive nature of the brain and visual cortex-- the mind likes to see what it thinks it sees rather than a strict mapping of what it "really there". There are neurons that trigger only on very complex inputs like a hand or a tiger or whatever. Trigger some of those and you could hallucinate George W. Bush supporting basic scientific research...

Reply

magguy

3 Comments

  • 641 Days Ago
  • 05/12/2010

Magnetically induced hallucinations

As an early investigator of magnetically induced phosphenes (flashes of light) and one very familiar with transcranial magnetic stimulation, I feel quite confident in calling this article and the lightning-induced hallucinatio hypothesis a bunch of bunk.

First of all, TM stimulators do NOT use superconducting magnets, but ordinary electromagnetic coils with large peak currents (~10,000 Amps) generated by rapid capacitative discharge (typically 100-500 microsec.).  The coils are right up against your skull, not dozens of meters away.  These will indeed generate peak magnetic fields on the order of .5-1.0 Tesla a few centimeters under the coils, which can produce flashes of light if placed over the visual cortex.  You can forget it if you use fields much smaller than this.

Now compare with a lightning superstroke of 200,000 amp (about 10 times greater than a typical lightning bolt), with each stroke lasting maybe a msec or so.  Use the formula for a straight wire of Mag field = 4*PI*10^-7*Current(Amps)/2*PI*Distance(m) to approximate a linear lightning bolt.

Even at 1 meter, this generates a magnetic field of only .04 Tesla, much too small to produce any sort of phosphene.  Of course, at that distance, magnetically-induced phosphenes are going to be about the last thing you are going to experience. Try death or coma instead.

Since the field falls off as 1/r, at 100 m the field would be only .0004 Tesla, or 4 Gauss, which will induce zero neurological response of any kind.  This is like sticking your head over an electric stove coil--anybody ever experience "ball lightning" or any other "hallucinations"?

Also, I (nor anybody else) have never produced anything remotely resembling ball lightning "hallucinations" or any other type of true "hallucination" with TMS.  One gets VERY BRIEF flashes of light, typically sectors or amorphous blobs of light.  Nobody ever experiences 3D balls of light floating out in the world that lasts for seconds. 

The guys who dreamed up this theory are obviously not very familiar with the TMS field.

Reply

Torbjorn_Larsson_OM

175 Comments

  • 640 Days Ago
  • 05/13/2010

Likely correct hypothesis, but errors in comments

Ah, I hadn't thought of that. Not only is it a valid prediction, in this case where we can't even observe or reproduce the putative phenomena it is the best prediction.

But, you guys really need to read the paper before discussing it or the research:

@ Oldpcguy, WC:

"TThey're ignoring the fact that ball lightning has been witnessed be several people"

No, they are not. They are specifically addressing a subclass of ball lightning which includes single observers.

However, I feel that your comment at the same time is relevant and irrelevant. It is something that the research have to address. At the same time we know that these type of phenomena, like drowsing and séances, affects groups so that they can converge on the same description by way of communicative suggestions. So this is easy to address with a known general mechanism.

In the end, plural of anecdote isn't data. We need actual empirical observations. If these guys are correct we can now start to reproduce these phenomena and test their hypothesis.

@ magguy:

Wrong, wrong and wrong.

First, it is the article that mentions superconductors.

Second, their model is specifically neither a general TMS one nor a magnetic one. It is for known amount of stimulation to induce phosphenes only and it is an electric coupling model.

Third, they have already exactly addressed your concern, which is an old one:

"Other authors have in Ref. [15] cursorily dismissed the phosphene hypothesis with an erroneous argument considering only magnetic field strengths (and not indeed their time derivative) and only the short pulses of single stroke flashes."

Reply

magguy

3 Comments

  • 639 Days Ago
  • 05/14/2010

Re: Likely correct hypothesis, but errors in comments

"Wrong, wrong and wrong."

No, right, right, right.

"First, it is the article that mentions superconductors."

OK, so they are wrong, not you.  All commercial TMS devices use conventional, not superconducting, electromagnets.  You can easily achieve the necessary ~1 Tesla peak fields with conventional electromagnets.  No doubt superconductors could be used, but it would just add additional complexity and expense.

"Second, their model is specifically neither a general TMS one nor a magnetic one. It is for known amount of stimulation to induce phosphenes only and it is an electric coupling model."

OK, so I'll have to read the paper to know exactly what they are saying.  But it sounds like they are talking about magnetic fields inducing electric ones in the brain (which is how TMS devices work).  If so, then my arguments still stand.

"Third, they have already exactly addressed your concern, which is an old one:

'Other authors have in Ref. [15] cursorily dismissed the phosphene hypothesis with an erroneous argument considering only magnetic field strengths (and not indeed their time derivative) and only the short pulses of single stroke flashes.'"

I have already taken this into account.  The induced electric field in the brain is proportional to the time derivative of the magnetic field.  The peak magnetic field of a lightning superstroke even at 1 meter is already about 2 orders of magnitude too small to produce phosphenes and 4 orders of magnitude too small at 100 m (add another order of magnitude for a typical smaller stroke). 

The pulse width of commercial TMS devices is on the order of 70-500 microseconds (usually 70-100 microsec), compared to a lightning stroke pulse width of ~1 msec.  So that doesn't help the lightning stroke hypothesis either, since the pulse width of the lightning stroke is still larger than the TMS devices.  In fact, compared with the more effective TMS devices that use ~100 microsec pulses, the time derivative of a lightning stroke is decreased by another order of magnitude necessary to produce phosphenes.

Thus we still end up with lightning strokes induced electric fields in the brain at least 3 to 5 orders of magnitude too small to produce phosphenes even with a very close lightning bolt.  Add to this the physiological and neurological absurdity of a brief lightning stroke producing a prolonged seconds to tens of seconds vivid "hallucination" of ball lightning floating around in the real world.  Nobody has ever produced anything remotely like this is a laboratory setting with TMS stimulators.  If you get phosphenes with TMS stimulators, they are never balls of light, never last longer than the length of the stimulation, and never seem part of the outside world, i.e., nothing like true hallucinations.

Reply

magguy

3 Comments

  • 639 Days Ago
  • 05/14/2010

Re: Likely correct hypothesis, but errors in comments

"In the end, plural of anecdote isn't data. We need actual empirical observations. If these guys are correct we can now start to reproduce these phenomena and test their hypothesis."

That's exactly another of my objections.  If these guys were right, we would have already seen these things during the last ~20 years of empirical use of TMS stimulators.  Nobody has, not even close.  And that is with real stimulators that produce at least several orders of magnitude greater induced electric fields in the brain than a nearby lightning bolt.

Reply

Torbjorn_Larsson_OM

175 Comments

  • 637 Days Ago
  • 05/16/2010

Re: Likely correct hypothesis, but errors in comments

@ magguy:

"OK, so they are wrong, not you."

It was you who claimed the paper was based on superconductors. That doesn't make me wrong, but you.

Your continuing exposition on this particular point seems misguided at best, crackpot as worst.

"If so, then my arguments still stand."

You are correct in your interpretation, but not in the consequence. As I mentioned, the paper already address your concern.

"I have already taken this into account."

Your original model looked at the amplitude of the magnetic field and how it induced ("produced") phosphene experiences. It did not take the time derivative into account.

Your new model still does not consider the time derivative of the magnetic field (that gives the induced current) but the magnetic field magnitude ("magnitude too small to produce phosphenes").

Again, the paper already address these models.

After this you mention that the lightning stroke pulse width is longer than TMS pulse widths. That is an essential point in the paper, since that is the requirement for ensuring a neural effect.

"we would have already seen these things during the last ~20 years of empirical use of TMS stimulators."

Not necessarily, you yourself mention how TMS doesn't emulate lightning strokes well.

Reply

Torbjorn_Larsson_OM

175 Comments

  • 640 Days Ago
  • 05/13/2010

Missed some:

@ tfernsle:

Oh, and the "need to read the article" and "electric coupling" comments goes for your two comments as well.

Reply

Advertisement

jeffb1

1 Comment

  • 634 Days Ago
  • 05/19/2010

close encouters with lightning

In the mid-70s I had two close encounters with lightning. First one was during summer, clear skies, little wind, pretty nice day. As I walked around a corner onto my street I could hear what sounded like bacon frying near by. Then a bolt of lightening struck the top of a telephone pole with an intense shockwave of thunder. I was about 15 feet from the pole. I jumped vertically about 3 feet.

The second incident occured when a horizontal bolt of lightning entered a picture window in front of the house, and exited another picture window in the dining room. I had left the room about 2 or 3 seconds before the event. There was no sound effect. The bolt traveled in a straight line. My brother was in the kitchen and saw the whole thing happen. Had I not stopped practice on the piano and continued to play, I would have been in the path it took.

Reply

James Tanenbaum

1 Comment

  • 607 Days Ago
  • 06/15/2010

BL Video

I found this BBS from a link on http://skeptoid.com.  Good BBS with only a little BS.  Current BL discussion on skeptoid has a report of BL which lasted 30 seconds.  Even if an intense EMF can produce visual phenomena, that won't explain all the reports.  There is a YouTube video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=036hpBvjoQw of a jetliner being struck by regular lightning where a glowing ball leaves the rear of the aircraft. The glow is not from a piece of the aircraft melted off it, because it remains the same color as it fades away, rather than shifting to the red end of the spectrum as a cooling object would. There are multiple reports of BL inside aircraft (which would shield against the field's electric component but not the magnetic) where it leaves through the rear. I have posted more extensive comments on the JREF Forum at http://forums.randi.org/forumdisplay.php?f=77

James Tanenbaum, Los Angeles, CA

Reply

AKT

453 Comments

  • 524 Days Ago
  • 09/06/2010

What?

I was told that the light balls etc were photographed.

Best regards,

AKT

Reply

amclighting

1 Comment

  • 492 Days Ago
  • 10/08/2010

lighting

At AMC Lighting.com we are all about value. Browse our top departments of Indoor Outdoor Lighting | Ceiling Fans | Chandeliers | Murry Feiss | Quoizel and save.

Reply

Bio

The Physics arXiv Blog produces daily coverage of the best new ideas from an online forum called the Physics arXiv on which scientists post early versions of their latest ideas. Contact me at KentuckyFC @ arxivblog.com

Follow The Physics arXiv Blog on Twitter

Subscribe to the arXiv blog RSS Feed

Advertisement
Advertisement

Facebook

Advertisement