Researchers Simulate the Branching Behavior of Sparks

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


Scientists have determined that, contrary to expectations, the forerunners of electrical sparks can split, according to a new study. The findings, published in the April 29 issue of Physical Review Letters, could help explain a recently observed lightning flash that reached an altitude of 70 kilometers.

As electrons move through an electric field, they liberate electrons from surrounding gas molecules and create an ionized gas, which in turn generates its own electric field. Previous research had suggested that such a situation would create streamers (precursors to visible sparks) having a tube-like channel with a fixed diameter. But when Manuel Array¿s and colleagues at the Center for Mathematics and Computer Science in Amsterdam simulated streamers moving through nitrogen gas at 50,000 volts--twice the electric field strength utilized in previous studies--they observed spontaneous splitting. As the streamers grew, their leading edges expanded and attenuated, the researchers found. Once a streamer thinned, bulges in its leading front caused the electric field to focus around them, which in turn increased the speed of ionization and caused the bumps to grow faster than the rest of the front. Branching followed.

This mechanism mirrors a process that can occur in coral reefs: if one section of the organism moves ahead of the rest, it has access to more food and grows ever faster. And because recently observed blue jets tens of kilometers above the earth appear to branch in much the same way that sparks closer to the ground do, the new work could shed light on the forces underlying those elusive flashes.

It’s Time to Stand Up for Science

If you enjoyed this article, I’d like to ask for your support. Scientific American has served as an advocate for science and industry for 180 years, and right now may be the most critical moment in that two-century history.

I’ve been a Scientific American subscriber since I was 12 years old, and it helped shape the way I look at the world. SciAm always educates and delights me, and inspires a sense of awe for our vast, beautiful universe. I hope it does that for you, too.

If you subscribe to Scientific American, you help ensure that our coverage is centered on meaningful research and discovery; that we have the resources to report on the decisions that threaten labs across the U.S.; and that we support both budding and working scientists at a time when the value of science itself too often goes unrecognized.

In return, you get essential news, captivating podcasts, brilliant infographics, can't-miss newsletters, must-watch videos, challenging games, and the science world's best writing and reporting. You can even gift someone a subscription.

There has never been a more important time for us to stand up and show why science matters. I hope you’ll support us in that mission.

Thank you,

David M. Ewalt, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe