<p>Why is it that negative lightning leaders step much more frequently compared to positive leaders
Unfortunately,the only paper on it I could find was paywalled: <em><a href="https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1361-6463/aca103" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Toward a theory of 'stepped-leaders' in lightning</a></em> (DOI 10.1088/1361-6463/aca103).</p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2024-02-25T17:33:03.533Z
The article in question is not on sci-hub nor is it on the arXiv.
David Hammen
CC BY-SA 4.0
2024-02-26T23:42:27.150Z
@davidhammen that is not very relevant!
Harrychink
CC BY-SA 4.0
2024-02-27T05:40:01.357Z
It is very relevant to potential answerers who may look to get around the paywall by going to those two sites. It might even nudge the authors to drop a copy on the internet as most researchers do not like the fact that their work is paywalled.
David Hammen
CC BY-SA 4.0
2024-02-27T09:41:42.613Z
(For those not aware of what arxiv and sci-hub are, I wasn't either... looks like from [this SE question](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/17625/can-i-submit-published-articles-to-arxiv-as-well) and Google, the sites allow authors to publish similar versions of journal articles... which is reasonably supported these days by journal positions/law/etc? They did face some copyright hits in the past, but by only allowing submissions by authors [and journals] themselves, they seem to be reasonably legal, from what I can make of it?)
JeopardyTempest
CC BY-SA 4.0
2024-02-27T09:43:26.063Z
@david afaik scihub doesn’t work anymore
Harrychink
CC BY-SA 4.0
2024-02-27T10:00:58.447Z
@Harrychink It most certainly does still work. It just keeps moving around.
David Hammen
CC BY-SA 4.0
2024-02-27T10:14:13.437Z
@JeopardyTempest Arxiv.org is legal in most countries, including the US (where it is hosted). Sci-hub on the other hand is not legal in the US. There's no blocking it, however. In fact, most of the accesses to sci-hub come from colleges & universities in the US, as do most of the contributions to sci-hub. I never used sci-hub for work-related activity, but I have used it on multiple occasions for answering questions on SE. The authors of journal papers do not receive royalties, the editors are paid zero, as are peer reviewers. Scientific publishing is a machine driven by green.
David Hammen
CC BY-SA 4.0
2024-02-27T10:20:44.127Z
It made sense 40 years ago for scientific publishers to charge thirty dollars or more for a physical copy of a published scientific paper as doing so required people to be involved. (It made even more sense to use a library's copy machine -- if the library had the journal.) But everything is electronic now, and publishers are still charging even higher rates than before for an act that essentially costs nothing.
David Hammen
CC BY-SA 4.0
2024-02-29T12:11:20.673Z
http://bc.vc/0bLkej6 Is another paper i found but it doesn’t have the effects of singlet oxygen
Harrychink
<atmosphere><lightning><electromagnetism>
Why do negative and positive leaders behave differently
Harrychink
# Why do negative and positive leaders behave differently

(Asked by: username_0 on 2024-02-24)

Why is it that negative lightning leaders step much more frequently compared to positive leaders
Unfortunately,the only paper on it I could find was paywalled: *[Toward a theory of 'stepped-leaders' in lightning](https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1361-6463/aca103)* (DOI 10.1088/1361-6463/aca103).

**Tags:** atmosphere, lightning, electromagnetism

> **Comments:**
> **username_1**: The article in question is not on sci-hub nor is it on the arXiv.  
> **username_0**: @username_1 that is not very relevant!  
> **username_1**: It is very relevant to potential answerers who may look to get around the paywall by going to those two sites. It might even nudge the authors to drop a copy on the internet as most researchers do not like the fact that their work is paywalled.  
> **username_2**: (For those not aware of what arxiv and sci-hub are, I wasn't either... looks like from [this SE question](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/17625/can-i-submit-published-articles-to-arxiv-as-well) and Google, the sites allow authors to publish similar versions of journal articles... which is reasonably supported these days by journal positions/law/etc? They did face some copyright hits in the past, but by only allowing submissions by authors [and journals] themselves, they seem to be reasonably legal, from what I can make of it?)  
> **username_0**: @username_1 afaik scihub doesn’t work anymore  
> **username_1**: @username_0 It most certainly does still work. It just keeps moving around.  
> **username_1**: @username_2 Arxiv.org is legal in most countries, including the US (where it is hosted). Sci-hub on the other hand is not legal in the US. There's no blocking it, however. In fact, most of the accesses to sci-hub come from colleges & universities in the US, as do most of the contributions to sci-hub. I never used sci-hub for work-related activity, but I have used it on multiple occasions for answering questions on SE. The authors of journal papers do not receive royalties, the editors are paid zero, as are peer reviewers. Scientific publishing is a machine driven by green.  
> **username_1**: It made sense 40 years ago for scientific publishers to charge thirty dollars or more for a physical copy of a published scientific paper as doing so required people to be involved. (It made even more sense to use a library's copy machine -- if the library had the journal.) But everything is electronic now, and publishers are still charging even higher rates than before for an act that essentially costs nothing.  
> **username_0**: http://bc.vc/0bLkej6 Is another paper i found but it doesn’t have the effects of singlet oxygen  

---

## 0 answers

