So from your latest posts it seems that your improved situation might not have anything to do with glass. More that you just had a crap setup with poor light coverage.
If you're right, great, but science tends to claim otherwise from everything i've read. Have you actually attempted a side by side study to see if it was the glass that was the issue, or your hood and as such light coverage. Seems daft to make the statements you arte making when ignoring such important variables.
going at this from another angle. The idea of light being absorbed by glass, it is not a new notion, and there have been tests, and studies, across all fields whether it cannabis or otherwise. It would seem VERY odd that despite knwoing of this possbile issue for so long, noone else would have attempted what you state, noticed the difference, and then "published" the results in a scientific manner. But no, despite this knowledge, for some strange reason, growers continue to work on the basis of more light is better, and the closer the light (taking into account the coverage and temperatures, and inverse square law) the better.
Don't you just find it a bit odd that we have known about this for so many may years, yet for some reason we continue to do things counter to your ideas, and that people continue to get better yields using methods contrary to your opinion?
Hell, have you even run this in any kind of scientific manner? From your OP is seems that you didn't even use the same genetics when making your comparisson, simply that a haze turned out better than an indica. By this i mean i havn't read anything from you to even suggest that this is a better method. It sounds little different from say "i put a nail in the stem of this plant and it gave me a much better yield than that random plant i grew 12 month back. It must be the nail, i can't think of any other reason. That is not how one arrives at a scientific conclusion.
