“Lightning does not strike a point, it strikes an area,” said John Jensenius, a lightning safety specialist with the National Weather Service. “The physical flash you see strikes a point, but that lightning is radiating out as ground current and it’s very deadly.”
That's interesting. I have seen lightning split a tree and then follow wires into a house blowing out the wall all long the path of the wires. I have also seen it lift up decking when following underground wires.
But if lightning hits with no lightning rod and ground is equally everywhere I guess I could imagine this result.
You make an interesting point; Lapland is known for being relatively flat, often stony and pretty much treeless. I'm sure that contributed to an increased radius.
I did, and I suppose you did as well which would have shown you what I meant and the differences between the Lapland of Finland and the general Sápmi region which is not often referred to as Lapland any more.
I read somewhere that the induced electical field shift near a lightning strike is - while orders of magnitude calmer than the strike itself - still powerful enough to burn, maim and kill.
I think it's what Wikipedia calls "side splash" in the article on lightning injury?
Part of the problem is that we have two feet. When lightning strikes the ground nearby, it creates a difference in electric potential between the foot that's closest to the impact point and the more distant one. If that potential is great enough, then an electric currect can jump through one's shoe, go up into the body then down the other leg and back to ground.
Laying down only increases the surface area in contact with the ground, so the best thing to do is get inside.
Feet have non-zero surface area so there's still room for an electric potential between the near and far side of the foot. It'd be smaller so that isn't an entirely terrible idea, but it is by no means foolproof.