Doesn't Fit

[amashilu]

So many knowledgeable people on this site, who are so good with memory and details, I want to mine those brains by trying this approach: how does Theory X NOT fit? What particular details rule it out?

Starting with the plasma ball theory (posted under the heading Lightning strike / Ball lightning). (https://forum.dyatlovpass.com/index.php?topic=1714.0) I don't think in 1959 there was much understanding of plasma balls, if they had even heard of this phenomenon back then, and I don't think anyone was aware of the tectonic fault or the magnetic anomaly at that location, so we have to examine this theory in a kind of retrospect, from today's knowledge base.

Three things in its favor are:
1) The balls were witnessed and documented by many people all over the area on the night of Feb 1-2, 1959;
2) They could account for the hikers leaving the tent if one got into their tent; and
3) They account for shock wave injuries and burns. And of course other things.
But what details might rule this theory out?

After that, I'd like to take on the slab slip theory. But let's focus on the plasma balls first.

[Axelrod]

I will try to express my thoughts so that it is clear.

If there are some developments (I hope this word will be clear in English), this does not mean that all of them should be used.
Moreover, this does not mean that every development should be used.

From the point of view of mathematical analysis, we are dealing with an unlimited space, and not with some set from which the desired option must be selected.

The solution to the problem may be beyond the existing set. That is, none of the options available at the moment is suitable.

There is some opinion that is repeated many times. This does not mean that this opinion should be listened to.

For example, one person told me how he was writing a dissertation, and he had to throw out large chapters from the dissertation.
This was a lost volume that had to be compensated for by more useful text. Why did he waste time writing unnecessary etc.? This is a question for him.
But this text was superfluous for the dissertation.

[amashilu]

I will try to express my thoughts so that it is clear.

If there are some developments (I hope this word will be clear in English), this does not mean that all of them should be used.
Moreover, this does not mean that every development should be used.

From the point of view of mathematical analysis, we are dealing with an unlimited space, and not with some set from which the desired option must be selected.

The solution to the problem may be beyond the existing set. That is, none of the options available at the moment is suitable.

There is some opinion that is repeated many times. This does not mean that this opinion should be listened to.

For example, one person told me how he was writing a dissertation, and he had to throw out large chapters from the dissertation.
This was a lost volume that had to be compensated for by more useful text. Why did he waste time writing unnecessary etc.? This is a question for him.
But this text was superfluous for the dissertation.

Okay, thanks, but just for now, let's focus on this topic and see where it leads.

[GlennM]

I think that what ball lightning does is as critical as how it generates. Commonly it originates in electrically stormy weather, though it can be induced from electrical machinery. Ranging in size from a pea to a man's head  they have mobility. Reportedly it may be harmless, but it can also be fatal. Can we ascribe any of the burn injuries to ball lightning? The autopsy findings give no hint that the burns sustained by the DP9 were unusual. Are we thinking Zolo and Dubina were struck?  Was there a detectable smells of ozone or sulfur on the tent or clothes? Is it feasable that the lightning lit up within the tent and scared the wits out of the hikers who then slashed the tent and ran for their lives? The trouble is that these great balls of fire are transient. Without a witnesses testimony or physical evidence on people or things, it can not be proven, nor ruled out. Knowing the weather that night might help. Knowing if the ski poles were metallic would help.

[Arjan]

A very brief comment on ball plasma/lightning.

In physics 'ball plasma/lighting' is an electromagnetic phenomen.

Tiny ball plasma/lighting is seen when e.g. an apparatus is switched on: these sparks are innocent in usual settings, but these sparks are very hazardous in a so-called 'ATEX environment' (explosive, dusty, and/or inflammable vapour environment):

Considerable ball plasma/lightning may occur in nature during 'thunderstorms'; or man-made during high voltage and high current settings.

Henning Kuersten has described and elaborated this phenomen in his book 'The Dyatlov Pass Mystery - NOT a Cold Case'.

The Post Mortem photos in the mortuary show Yuri Dor and Yuri Kri with pronounced 'main vains' on arm (Yuri Dor) and leg (Yuri Kri).
The Post Mortem report of Zinaida states: 'There is a very pronounced venous system on the legs and feet.', while this is not visible on a photo of Zinaida in Swimming suit.

The Google search on keywords 'lightning, strike, victim skin' show many examples of skin injury of victims after being struck by lightning. One example:



These victims show skin injury to the main vains and to the tiny vains, while the photos of Yuri Kri and Yuri Dor show skin injury or malfunctioning of only 'main vains'.

It is far more likely that the skin injury or malfunctioning of the main vains of Yuri Kri and Yuri Dor had been caused by a high speed pressure wave, that had damaged or 'anesthetised' the valves in these main vessels in arm and leg (preventing the blood being pumped upwards in the body by use of moving muscles).

In theory an enormous ball/plasma strike may cause a high speed pressure wave at some distance, but in daily life a low energy pressure wave (audible as thunder or low rumbling) is heard from (ball) lightning that strikes far away.
The normal thunder caused by lightning travels with the speed of sound (330 m/s), while the high speed pressure wave travels with a speed well above the sound barrier.

A high speed pressure wave may fracture ribcages, while I am not aware of a pressure wave caused by lightning causing fracturing ribcages.

 A study of being struck by lightning mentiones only micro fracturing of bones and no macro fracturing of bones as seen in four group members. See further: 'Harnessing Thor's Hammer: Experimentally induced lightning trauma to human bone by high impulse current'
https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8710840/

[Ziljoe]

I'm not sure about the existence of ball lightning, in the context of a wondering blob of light, the information about the phenomenon is very vague . I know there's anecdotal evidence but it seems to get confused with old stories and assumptions like glowing clothes because they're radio active .

A bolt of lightning hitting in , or around the tent leaving some kind of ball of light to discharge maybe occured but I don't think it would last any length of time or force them to leave without more clothing/equipment. The burns seem to be quite moderate and tie in with the fire at the ceder and singed socks and clothing . 



Three things in its favor are:
1) The balls were witnessed and documented by many people all over the area on the night of Feb 1-2, 1959;

I can't remember the exact dates of the documented lights or balls in the sky. I think there's only one that matches that date, the other reports are outside of February 1-2, the added problem of reported lights in the sky is that there are always reports of lights in the sky . When an incident occurs , especially unexplained, people will report that they saw some unexplained lights in the sky , in good faith of course but my guess would be they are not linked in this instance..

2) They could account for the hikers leaving the tent if one got into their tent; and

I don't think there's any scientific evidence that this can happen , I know there's some detailed stories of ball lightning but they are poorly investigated . If the light ball could burn clothes and flesh , then why did it not burn the tent

3) They account for shock wave injuries and burns. And of course other things.
But what details might rule this theory out?


I don't think they are shockwave injuries, ( there's discussion somewhere here and other sites that explain why). The burns are small and I don't know of weather conditions that occur that explode to the point of shock wave injuries . If there was a blast , or shock wave at the tent that caused the the fractures ,then I would suspect more injuries. There's very little evidence for ball lightning, shock waves , burning people and everything else , if there was such a thing , I'm sure our governments would have invented some horrid weapon by now.

[GlennM]

Anybody willing to go out on a limb for this last expeditiin photo?

[Warrior]

Anybody willing to go out on a limb for this last expeditiin photo?

Hi Glenn and all,

I’m just a lurker on this site, but appreciate all the excellent research and theories put forth by everyone. However, I have to chime in on this photo.

This is a photo of a man holding a flashlight and shining it on the person that took the photo. I glanced at it, and I immediately saw the silhouette. It’s one of those things that if you look too closely, it makes no sense until you stand back and then it is very clear.

Let me help for you to see what I see.

The round ball of light is the flashlight bulb, the large, longer light is the man’s hand holding the flashlight with his index finger and thumb. You can see the stem of the flashlight extending behind the bulb.

The man’s right eye is partially covered by the flashlight bulb. His left eye is is about 3/4 inch to the right of the bulb at 2 o’clock if looking at the photo.

His nose is at 1 to 3 o’clock to the right of the bulb, lips are 1/2 inch to the right of the bulb at 5 o’clock.

Expand the photo a bit and see if you see what I see.

[GlennM]

Warrior, the forum and I would appreciate you posting a markup of this image. Then we can appreciate the detail you refer to. It will be helpful.

For me, the center white light is an octagonal pattern created by the stopped down lens aperture. If you have evidence it is a flashlight, that is as good as anything I could propose. That said, it would be unusual for me to take a nighttime photo of a flashlight switched on and directed at me.

There is a corresponding outer glow ring on the left side of the image. I thought it was a halo artifact of the light in the center of the photo.  I feel the long white image to the left is too rectangular to be considered ball lightning. The strobing effect which is the trail of that rectangular glow might be explained as camera shake and a slow shutter.

Putting your interpretation aside for a second, what on that expeditiion is going to generate two geometrically different nighttime light sources? Ifnthe photo was deliberately taken and not accidental, then it was a hurry up and shoot, no time to focus situation of something. I like the idea that it was a photo taken of something on the other side of a glass window with a rectangular reflection of light eminating behind the photographer. It was a hail Mary type of shot to capture a transient effect.

Again, please consider posting the marked up image.

[Ziljoe]

From warrior's description , I think he means something like this( my apologies warrior, if I'm wrong)

[GlennM]

Ziljoe, thanks for the mark up. Honestly, I can not see this in the original photo.

[Warrior]

From warrior's description , I think he means something like this( my apologies warrior, if I'm wrong)

Thank you for your efforts, Ziljoe, but that’s not it. Unfortunately, I don’t know how to mark up the photo. I will find out and make an effort soon. Basically, the face is the two blotched light spots above and below below the octagonal flashlight bulb. You can see the man’s left eye staring back at you. His right eye is partially covered by the flashlight bulb. The forehead is the light blotch above the flashlight bulb, the chin the one below. The eyes and nose in between. Again, his left eye is staring back at you. Look at it close, then stand back. Once you see it, it is clear. And chilling.

[Ziljoe]

Thanks , Ill try again. I know it looks a bit cartoonist , just trying to find the basic area of what you describe.

[Ziljoe]

I'm also getting confused with what photos are original and what has been tampered with.

The three heads(no,1) photo on the main Dyatlov pass site , under zolos photo films seems to be the same as photo( no,34) under Krivonischenko. They are the same photo or a sequence of two photos.

https://dyatlovpass.com/camera-zolotaryov

Three heads photo below , from Zolo's alleged camera .

https://dyatlovpass.com/resources/340/gallery/Zolotaryov-camera-01.jpg

The frame 34 , that Glennm submitted , from krivonischenko camera film . This is claimed to be a technician finishing off the film . ( Although Glennm's copy and the Dyatlovpass copy seem to be cropped differently.)  The three heads photo is the bottom right off frame 34 ?

https://dyatlovpass.com/resources/340/gallery/Krivonischenko-camera-film1-34.jpg

[GlennM]

I have spent some time with frame 34. I rotated the image 90 degrees counter clockwise, putting the rectangular light source at the top. I added a slight yellow filter. Sprocket holes are visable on either side of the frame. Curiously, on the left edge about a third of the way up from the bottom there are two black circles, one more visible than the other. This partial circle is fringed with lighter grey. I can look at this and see the circle as a wide opened mouth with a chin below and the vague outline of a face ( except for the ear) in subtle shades of grey. The impression I get is that of a left handed person holding a rectangular light. The person is shining the light into the camera and the person holding the light is calling out loudly.

The octagonal center white spot and the surrounding glow are some artifact of the shutter and lens,

When I tried to manipulate the image to bring out more detail, it does not work. All the shading is in the graininess of the photo, so cleaning it up eliminates it.

I believe this finding is pareidolia on my part.

[GlennM]

To locate the face, pinch zoom in on that portion of the photo and find the balck circle. That is the opened mouth. The rest of the face can be imagined relatice to it.