IlovePlants
Well-Known Member
This is why someone on the led forum needs a brix tester. It allows you a rough estimate of the amount of sugar being produced if you take enough samples. It would be easy to tell whether or not certain lighting enhanced the amount of sugars saturated in the tissues. Wine makers use brix testers to test and determine a host of things. They range from $89 to around $300 for a really nice digital version.
With two identical grows; one with 660nm reds, the other without the 660s but identical wattage to the first, you would be able to make a develop a theory. Take samples 1 week apart each week of growth, boom you would get a rough estimate of sugars produced over time. Incorporate CO2 after the baselines have been established and then monitor the brix again. This would allow you to see a difference in brix for a specific amount of CO2 ppm in the air. With enough testing anyone can make standards, and as long as the instrumentation and implementation are done correct you would have viable data.
One thing that pisses me off, being a statistician, is how little fact checking actually goes on in modern science. It's almost as though people feel that more accurate instruments replaces more accurate data. An assumable theory can be applied after 100 points of data, but no true assumptions until 150 points of data, because in the spectrum of 100% if you don't have enough data a single outlier can destroy a graph/mean estimate.
At 200 points of data you will get the general idea of what you are testing, but in my opinion the scientific studies that stick in my mind have thousands of points of data from hundreds of people. This gives them a base to remove outlier data before coming to conclusions. Whenever you read those stupid polls in the news paper, remember that they usually only ask 150 people to represent an entire metropolis of voters! It's huge bullshit, and yet people will swollow any lie if it is accepted enough. Find your own truth and you will have a base of knowledge from which to build.
I think that anything that exceeds the PAR curve too drastically (at a 40w/sqft standard) can have an adverse effect on growth. In my experience with Spectras, too much 660red will drive plants into the light because it's got what plants crave, in the end you have burnt out photocells that are totally useless to you. As soon as I added Kelvin lighting it got much better, although there is an abundance of data suggesting that once you max out what a photocell can absorb, green wavelengths are then what determines growth for the plant. I think of the mid band nm's as fiber, you need more of it if your diet is extremely rich, you can get away without using it if you know what you are putting into yourself, but it helps to keep you regular.
I wish Hans would double the size of his light, replace the blues with 6500k diodes, remove 6 630s, add 4 2000k diodes, and add another 2 660nm diodes. That is more of the spectrum that I'm going to be growing with. Although, I have some theories that I hope to expand on once my light is done. This solid R/B panel has been great for postulating theories, I'm glad someone decided to buy them and test them out
I PSU will someday have a closet setup using 2 of the Hans' panels with that inda-grow in the midde. That would probably workout much better than using them by themselves, I've found that mixing those two types of lighting to be very beneficial.
Sincerely,
ILovePlants
P.S. Sorry for the wall of text, but I felt it relevant to the conversation. Keep up the awesome grow PSU!
With two identical grows; one with 660nm reds, the other without the 660s but identical wattage to the first, you would be able to make a develop a theory. Take samples 1 week apart each week of growth, boom you would get a rough estimate of sugars produced over time. Incorporate CO2 after the baselines have been established and then monitor the brix again. This would allow you to see a difference in brix for a specific amount of CO2 ppm in the air. With enough testing anyone can make standards, and as long as the instrumentation and implementation are done correct you would have viable data.
One thing that pisses me off, being a statistician, is how little fact checking actually goes on in modern science. It's almost as though people feel that more accurate instruments replaces more accurate data. An assumable theory can be applied after 100 points of data, but no true assumptions until 150 points of data, because in the spectrum of 100% if you don't have enough data a single outlier can destroy a graph/mean estimate.
At 200 points of data you will get the general idea of what you are testing, but in my opinion the scientific studies that stick in my mind have thousands of points of data from hundreds of people. This gives them a base to remove outlier data before coming to conclusions. Whenever you read those stupid polls in the news paper, remember that they usually only ask 150 people to represent an entire metropolis of voters! It's huge bullshit, and yet people will swollow any lie if it is accepted enough. Find your own truth and you will have a base of knowledge from which to build.
I think that anything that exceeds the PAR curve too drastically (at a 40w/sqft standard) can have an adverse effect on growth. In my experience with Spectras, too much 660red will drive plants into the light because it's got what plants crave, in the end you have burnt out photocells that are totally useless to you. As soon as I added Kelvin lighting it got much better, although there is an abundance of data suggesting that once you max out what a photocell can absorb, green wavelengths are then what determines growth for the plant. I think of the mid band nm's as fiber, you need more of it if your diet is extremely rich, you can get away without using it if you know what you are putting into yourself, but it helps to keep you regular.
I wish Hans would double the size of his light, replace the blues with 6500k diodes, remove 6 630s, add 4 2000k diodes, and add another 2 660nm diodes. That is more of the spectrum that I'm going to be growing with. Although, I have some theories that I hope to expand on once my light is done. This solid R/B panel has been great for postulating theories, I'm glad someone decided to buy them and test them out
I PSU will someday have a closet setup using 2 of the Hans' panels with that inda-grow in the midde. That would probably workout much better than using them by themselves, I've found that mixing those two types of lighting to be very beneficial.Sincerely,
ILovePlants
P.S. Sorry for the wall of text, but I felt it relevant to the conversation. Keep up the awesome grow PSU!
and tied her down yesterday..... The bitch is looking lovely
