4.7 Article

First Experimental Verification of Opacity for the Lightning Near-Infrared Spectrum

Journal

GEOPHYSICAL RESEARCH LETTERS
Volume 49, Issue 13, Pages -

Publisher

AMER GEOPHYSICAL UNION
DOI: 10.1029/2022GL098883

Keywords

optically thin; near-infrared spectrum; tall structure lightning; continuing discharge; singly ionized lines; neutral lines

Funding

  1. National Natural Science Foundations of China [42005065]
  2. Open Grants of the State Key Laboratory of Severe Weather, China Academy of Meteorological Sciences [2020LASW-B14]
  3. Key Laboratory of Middle Atmosphere and Global Environment Observation, Chinese Academy of Sciences [LAGEO-2019-07]
  4. Undergraduate Innovation Project of NUIST [XJDC202110300018]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The study uses spectral data from the Guangzhou Tower to experimentally verify the optical thickness of lightning neutral nitrogen and oxygen radiation in the near-infrared spectrum. It also reveals the spectral evolution characteristics of the lightning discharge process.
Using the spectral data of a lightning continuing discharge process observed on the 600-m-high Canton Tower, experimental verification of the optical thickness of lightning neutral nitrogen (NI) and neutral oxygen (OI) radiation in the near-infrared spectrum is presented first by comparing the measured relative intensities of two NI multiplets with theoretical values. For the first time, the spectral evolution characteristics of the tall structure lightning continuing discharge process show that visible band singly ionized lines were apparent for approximately 320-400 mu s. The ionized lines with higher excitation energies and the neutral lines with lower excitation energies coexist for approximately 240-320 mu s, which means that there is a hot region radiating ionized lines in a radial direction from the lightning channel, but at the same time there is also a cold region radiating neutral lines.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available