Is it possible to transform an electric thunderstorm into an EMP storm?

In summary, the concept of transforming an electric thunderstorm into an electromagnetic pulse (EMP) storm is theoretically intriguing but practically infeasible. Thunderstorms generate natural electrical discharges, while EMPs are typically produced by nuclear detonations or specific non-nuclear devices designed to release a burst of electromagnetic energy. The mechanisms, scales, and effects of these phenomena are fundamentally different, making direct transformation unlikely.
  • #1
Aurora Program
4
1
TL;DR Summary: Do not get confused with the title, standard thunderstorms are not generally classified as EMP storms because they don't have the power, the scale and nature of the electromagnetic energy involved are greatly different compared to a nuclear EMP detonation, that's exactly the point of this.

I know some of you are going to get confused with the title as it is not standard literature, but I'm asking what if electrical thunderstorms were transformed into super powerful EMP storms through massive energy enhancement that could make the unusual thunderstorm disable an entire town or country's electricity? is this possible?

Electrical thunderstorms are not classified as EMP storms as I read into, and they don't have the power to disable an entire city because they don't have the energy, so if we had the energy enhancement just like a nuclear weapon's EMP could it be this exaggerated?

How could this energy enhancement occur though? Could it be similar to how nuclear fission happens?
 
Earth sciences news on Phys.org
  • #2
Aurora Program said:
is this possible?
Have you done any research on your own? Seems like you have just come up with a random thought and want us to figure it out for you.
 
  • Like
  • Haha
Likes Tazerfish, davenn and hutchphd
  • #3
I suppose it might be possible. Now, what do we do?
 
  • Like
Likes Whopperone
  • #4
Aurora Program said:
what if electrical thunderstorms were transformed into super powerful EMP storms through massive energy enhancement
By what process does this "enhancement" occur? It sounds kind of like magic.
 
  • Like
Likes Tazerfish and russ_watters
  • #5
I would be more concerned about another Carrington event.
 
  • Like
Likes russ_watters, pinball1970 and davenn
  • #6
Well this seems impossible. Naturally it is impossible ofcourse. Even if we are talking MAKE-BELIEVE if you combine the energy of all lightnings on earth at once by some method , still i think most of the energy would translate to equivalents of some "X" nuclear bombs(this was covered by a author randall munroe) it might be possible then.

Aurora Program said:
How could this energy enhancement occur though? Could it be similar to how nuclear fission happens?
lightning does break N2 molecules but causing fission is a bit too much .To cause fission you need a unstable large atom like f-block elements . You generally do not find Uranium and Thorium atoms in atmosphere(if you do find ...well its been nice knowing you) so it will not be something like fission and no you cannot "enhance" the energy of lightning
 
  • #7
  • Like
Likes PhysicsEnjoyer31415
  • #8
hutchphd said:
starfish nuclear test series produced very interesting and I guess truly shocking data (ha ha) regarding antipodal effects of very high altitude detonations of megaton warheads.
https://apps.dtic.mil/sti/citations/AD0680983
These effects are really global, not provincial, so thunderstorms seem unlikely
Yes exactly .....but OP is trying to do something with lightning and wants to "magically" "enhance" the energy like a radioactive ore enhancement to mimic nuclear detonation.
 
  • #9
Lordy. Thread moved from the technical forums to the SciFi Writing forum for now.
 
  • Like
  • Love
Likes SammyS and davenn
  • #10
  • #11
berkeman said:
Lordy. Thread moved from the technical forums to the SciFi Writing forum for now.
I agree with the Lordy. I don't think the SciFi Writing section should become the dustbin for substandard threads. (Which was my concern when it was opened)
 
  • Like
Likes Klystron and DeBangis21
  • #12
Vanadium 50 said:
I agree with the Lordy. I don't think the SciFi Writing section should become the dustbin for substandard threads. (Which was my concern when it was opened)
I agree. I think this thread belongs into "Earth" on level "B". Not everybody is a physicist, or geologist or has even studied something at all. It would be a good idea for us (sounds better in German: "es stünde uns gut zu Gesicht") to give curious people, often kids, a little more freedom.
 
  • Like
Likes weirdoguy, pinball1970, Klystron and 1 other person
  • #13
Well, okaaayyy. Make it so. :wink:
 
  • Like
Likes pinball1970 and DeBangis21
  • #14
berkeman said:
Well, okaaayyy. Make it so. :wink:
Done. Unfortunately, there isn't a level-system here. A little more feedback from @Aurora Program would also be appreciated. That would keep us all from guessing what might be the background of the question.
 
  • Like
Likes pinball1970, PhysicsEnjoyer31415 and Vanadium 50
  • #15
fresh_42 said:
A little more feedback from @Aurora Program would also be appreciated
More than that - I think it's necessary. And even so, the answer is probably "no" as the total enegy in lightning isn't that great. It looks like it takes around a day of lightning - worldwide - to match the energy of even a small nuclear device.
 
  • #16
The trick is to delay all the minor strikes that will occur during a storm, until the last possible moment. The first UV flash will then trigger breakdown between the cloud and the ground over a large area. That makes it a parallel Marx current pulse generator.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marx_generator

I believe that such an atmospheric event can happen naturally, but will be limited in area and will be very rare. One requirement is that the weather be very still and calm, and that there be a temperature inversion to oppose the electrostatic attraction that would normally lead to a small early 'spoiler' strike.

There was one occasion when such a thing seems to have happened throughout our regional valley. During two independent phone calls, the flash, tick, crack, and operator scream, of a close strike occurred synchronously. The distances involved were 20 km and 10 km, making the phenomenon extend over 30 km. There were many local breakdowns, at the same time, triggered at the speed of UV light. The resulting EMP would have radiated from the trigger, like from a travelling wave antenna. The following thunder heard by all four listeners rumbled on for over a minute. That is a difficult experiment to repeat. We had no unusual reports of electronic equipment failure following the 'event'.
 
  • #17
Baluncore said:
I believe that such an atmospheric event can happen naturally,
I do not. The atmosphere is continuously bombarded by cosmic rays, which ionize the air and provide a low resistance path to ground.
 
  • Like
Likes PhysicsEnjoyer31415
  • #18
Vanadium 50 said:
I do not. The atmosphere is continuously bombarded by cosmic rays, which ionize the air and provide a low resistance path to ground.
I agree, such massive buildup will result in lightning
 
  • #19
Vanadium 50 said:
I do not. The atmosphere is continuously bombarded by cosmic rays, which ionize the air and provide a low resistance path to ground.
Then lightning could not occur as the atmosphere would discharge quickly at a low voltage. It takes a meteor to leave an ionisation trail sufficiently long to reach the ground.

PhysicsEnjoyer31415 said:
I agree, such massive buildup will result in lightning
It does, and the UV from the first strike triggers the nearby parallel breakdown.

Baluncore said:
We had no unusual reports of electronic equipment failure following the 'event'.
The observed size possible in the atmosphere, is limited to below the destruction of electronic systems, so is orders of magnitude less than a nuclear EMP.
 
  • #20
It was interesting to me because the production of intense and relatively remote production of electromagnetic effects from thermonuclear explosions at 150 km from surface was another of those unpleasant (pleasant to some) surprises from these darling devices. Between Starfish Prime and Castle Bravo we should be thankful there was not another larger "gotcha' lurking in the weeds. I guess "Tsar Bomba" would have revealed it!
 
  • #21
Baluncore said:
The observed size possible in the atmosphere, is limited to below the destruction of electronic systems, so is orders of magnitude less than a nuclear EMP.


If it is magnitudes lesser , then it cannot cause a nuclear emp.

You cannot have a emp unless you use UNSCIENTIFIC MAGIC (OP suggestion)o merge every lightning strike(atleast enough strikes to be equivalent to one or more than one than one nuclear detonations) to even replicate a emp.

My opinion about the UV light is , yes it is true that the UV breaks down nearby molecules but given the density of molecules of air in a certain volume and the inverse square law of light ,it will not be enough to cause anything even close to nuclear detonation.(i think so , correct me if im wrong)

About the low voltage thing , yes the charges start discharging quickly which ionizes the air at breakdown voltage , which indeed causes a dielectric breakdown leading to a lightning strike .it will not keep leaking on low voltage .Once the air is ionized the capacitance will increase opening a low resistance path through which all charges will rush through(also think so but feel free to correct me people👍)
 
  • #22
PhysicsEnjoyer31415 said:
If it is magnitudes lesser , then it cannot cause a nuclear emp.
It cannot be a "nuclear" EMP, but is can produce an EMP that interferes with radio reception.

PhysicsEnjoyer31415 said:
Once the air is ionized the capacitance will increase opening a low resistance path through which all charges will rush through(also think so but feel free to correct me ...
The atmospheric charge is stored in the electrostatic capacitance between separate parcels of air. Ionisation of the intermediate insulating air, increases the conductivity, which discharges the capacitance as a lightning strike. The capacitance does not change, but the capacitor insulation fails.

Marx generators are triggered by UV radiation from a spark gap, that sympathetically triggers nearby gaps, causing a synchronous cascade breakdown.
 
  • Informative
Likes Klystron
  • #23
Baluncore said:
It cannot be a "nuclear" EMP, but is can produce an EMP that interferes with radio reception.


The atmospheric charge is stored in the electrostatic capacitance between separate parcels of air. Ionisation of the intermediate insulating air, increases the conductivity, which discharges the capacitance as a lightning strike. The capacitance does not change, but the capacitor insulation fails.

Marx generators are triggered by UV radiation from a spark gap, that sympathetically triggers nearby gaps, causing a synchronous cascade breakdown.
Agreed, the spark gaps are quite close and also why would lightning take a different path if the first one is already ionized right?...so that would make lightning strikes very closeby prettymuch impossible thus proving the OP wrong i guess?...
 
  • #24
Baluncore said:
Then lightning could not occur as the atmosphere would discharge quickly at a low voltage. It takes a meteor to leave an ionisation trail sufficiently long to reach the ground.
It doesn't have to reach the ground. It just needs to reach the next ionized segment.

The electric fields in clouds are an order of magnitude too small to spark. The two theories are that lightning is triggered by electric avalanches caused by a) cosmic rays, b) ionized particles of ice. Both are known to exist.

Cosmic rays explain why lightning forks. It explains why x-ray detectors see x-rays before the strike - which is itself somewhat controversial. It explains why the starting point of the lightning in the cloud is well-localized. And, as someone who has looked at many, many electromagnetic showers, they look very similar. Additionally, one can build a model of this in the lab - called a spark chamber.

I know less about ionized ice than cosmic rays, so I will not speak to that

This is not a new theory - it's been around for almost a century t least: one can find papers from the 1930's. (e.g. Tandberg Nature 132, 712 (1933)) It's also not all or nothing - there is no reason both can't contribute.
 
  • Informative
  • Like
Likes pinball1970 and PhysicsEnjoyer31415
  • #25
By the way, what defines an EMP? I don't really have a clue what we are discussing.....not too unusual!
For the OP: what differentiates an EMP storm from just a big thundertstorm.
 
  • #27
hutchphd said:
By the way, what defines an EMP? I don't really have a clue what we are discussing.....not too unusual!
For the OP: what differentiates an EMP storm from just a big thundertstorm.
Hypothetically I was suggesting a variation of a thunderstorm but with large EMPs and I'm pretty sure any weather man wouldn't be calling them standard thunderstorms, right? I was asking if there was someone with in-depth knowledge in high energy physics if they believe it is possible to alter the energy from a thunderstorm to make such massive naturally impossible EMP emissions with advanced technology.
 
Last edited:
  • #28
I am asking this here because my knowledge of physics is limited and this takes me way way beyond my limit.
 
  • #29
Vanadium 50 said:
More than that - I think it's necessary. And even so, the answer is probably "no" as the total enegy in lightning isn't that great. It looks like it takes around a day of lightning - worldwide - to match the energy of even a small nuclear device.
What kind of feedback would you need? my question is where would the massive energy come from to make massive EMP emissions, and if it even possible to make such an energy process?
 
  • Like
Likes hutchphd
  • #30
This sounds a lot like magic.

You need some magic process to pump more energy into thunderstorms than there is - not by a factor of 2, but by af actor of many thousands.

Then you need a 2nd magic process to keep this energy from discharging before you want it to.
 
  • Like
Likes Astronuc
  • #31
Because of low signal-to-noise, this thread is closed.
 
  • Like
Likes Bystander
Back
Top