> It's 2017, and a thunderstorm shoots off a lightning bolt. ... . It sets a new world record, besting the previous title holder — a 477-mile (768-km) bolt from 2020
So the previous record holder never should have held it at all (an earlier one beats a later one)? How was that missed? Is there that much data to sift through? Why is that not addressed in the article?
From the linked paper[0], "In 2024, the entire GLM data record was reprocessed with new computational methods whose improved efficiency allowed difficult portions of the data record to be examined. This reprocessing inspired a reevaluation of the 2017 megaflash[...] after it identified a hitherto-overlooked discharge"
So the previous record holder never should have held it at all (an earlier one beats a later one)? How was that missed? Is there that much data to sift through? Why is that not addressed in the article?