Spoken like a true engineer. LOLYou are a dick!!
power, work, heat, energy. Units of measure????????????
You are a dick!!
I did not say that power, work, heat or energy are units of measure. I said your examples are units of measure.
Can a light get too efficient
- Thread starter Uncle Reefer
- Start date
I did not say that power, work, heat or energy are units of measure. I said your examples are units of measure.
Does the following not define a troll?
1212ham said: ↑
Just to be clear, I was asking the OP.
GLR said: I know, but I do not like you. It was an attempt to annoy you. Mr. Holier than Thou.
GrowLightResearch
Well-Known Member
You are still a dick.
name another pigment in cannabis besides chlorophyll or a carotenoid??
Trolls, nothing but trolls. Ignorant trolls.
I can live with that. And just to prove it, I'll behave like you.
Can you name the different types of watts?
GrowLightResearch
Well-Known Member
Yep:
Watts: power, work, heat, energy.
Examples:
energy density (joule per cubic meter)
entropy (joule per kelvin)
heat capacity (joule per kelvin)
heat flux density, irradiance (watt per square meter)
molar entropy (joule per mole kelvin)
molar heat capacity (joule per mole kelvin)
power density (watt per square meter)
radiance(watt per square meter steradian)
radiant intensity (watt per steradian)
specific heat capacity (joule per kilogram kelvin)
specific energy (joule per kilogram)
thermal conductivity (watt per meter kelvin)
GrowLightResearch
Well-Known Member
Units of measure were in parenthesis. What would you call the terms preceding the parenthesis?
GrowLightResearch
Well-Known Member
You are very likely smarter than these other twits. They may be smart (doubtful) but it is looking less likely the more they say. The problem is they are ignorant. They decide to ignore the facts and not verify what they think is wrong. Ignorant.
I have posted the sources of my understanding. The can only respond that I am wrong and offer NOTHING to support their claims.
I am a stubborn old man with issues.
These dicks will never win. Unless they do the requite fact checking.
I have even given them the text as attached.
Over your head.
GrowLightResearch
Well-Known Member
You are too predictable.
You cannot answer, and instead sling mud. Mr. Ad Hominem.
The terms before the units of measure are called quantities or derived quantities.
You must have delusions of adequacy. Are your parents siblings?
Attached is the SI system of units PDF, educate yourself.
BTW what were you expecting as an answer for your question: What kind of watts are there?
I do not want to be ignorant, I want to know. Doubtful a pompous dumbass like you would even know the answer to their own question. But I try.
nfhiggs
Well-Known Member
This is true, UV is damaging to plant cells and does not contribute (AFAIK) to photosynthesis. Photosynthesis requires 680 and 700 nm photons - higher energy photons (orange, yellow, green) are used by the plant downconverting them through fluorescence. They cannot yield up energy to far red photons to utilize them in photosynthesis - that would be an endothermic reaction that would freeze the plant.
GrowLightResearch
Well-Known Member
I like you.
I have been waiting on you to chime in on this one.
Although the photochemical quantum yield under optimum conditions is nearly 100%,...
I purposelessly left off the next step which you previously call em out on.
..the efficiency of the conversion of light into chemical energy is much less. (27%)
uhhhh that does NOT answer the question. What you posted is wrong Photosynthesis occurs for light all the way from UVA through Far Red.
how in blazes does green light or UV light or far red light drive photosynthesis ?
chl a and chl b do not absorb green light. but yet you say "Green Light does"
so how does the plant absorb the energy from green light ?
but wait isn't chl the only light absorbing pigment that drives photosynthesis ?
GrowLightResearch
Well-Known Member
Provide a citation. Dumbass!
It does not. See also Emerson red drop effect.
Through chlorophyll.
Yes it is, disregarding carotenoids. See also photoreceptor proteins.
Fireball is kicking in, out the door to shoot pool and sing karaoke. One of these days...
Last edited:
wietefras
Well-Known Member
So if Chlorophyll absorbs green light and drives photosynthesis from that, why doesn't it show in the action chart? Or more importantly, why bother posting the Chlorophyl charts when that is clearly not how the plant as a whole responds to light?
The point is that even you must be able to understand that you are wrong in something this obvious.
DesertPlants
Well-Known Member
Be careful reading some things in this thread. I gave up arguing a while back, but there are a couple people on this site that state things as fact that are either misunderstood or just plain wrong. I think they googled the term “thermodynamics” and now pretend to be experts.
the action spectrum for photosynthesis shows response from the UVA range (as low as 350nm all the way to the far red range (750nm).
Attachments
Rahz
Well-Known Member
Leaving out the high 600s might be a mistake, not so much an issue with vegetative growth but less effective than a 3 band lamp assuming electrical characteristics are similar. I've seen blurple with 630/660 reds but don't remember which brand it was. In addition to component quality and overall efficiency issues most red/blue lamps will only have 630nm emitters.
BTW, 610nm causes more photosynthesis per radiant watt than red or blue. Orange ftw.
BTW, 610nm causes more photosynthesis per radiant watt than red or blue. Orange ftw.
I was citing you dumbass as you so happily posted the chl a and chl b (isolated in a testtube) absorption chart which started this argument
It took a lot of posts but i have just led you in a full circle like a bull with a ring in its nose.
SSGrower
Well-Known Member
You will thank yourself in the morning.
