Most Efficient LED Light

I understand if you enclose both lights in a sphere height won't matter(matter cannot be created nor destroyed so all the photons are there) , but we don't grow weed in a sphere you put that cob as high as a DE and it won't be very good at growing plants. Photon density matters.
 
Last edited:
In any case, everyone here is going to see how much 3 COBs are going to yield. Guaranteed, it is going to yield what I said it's going to yield. And when it does, you are all going to be quiet and never say a word to me again, out of embarrassment. Except @Rahz who has $615 worth of my money.

I'm used to shooting from the hip up a defilade. I'm still alive, despite all odds. I'll yield that of a 600w HPS. And in the end, you'll all be between embarrassed and impressed. So watch and learn.
 
Last edited:
Rahz said:
So the drive current/s is what?

That information is useless without knowing the input current. It's likely the cobs and diodes are on separate circuits each using a different current.
Click to expand...

The cobs are 100w. That's all they care about anyways. The diodes average 50% their capacity. Said 100X over.
It doesn't matter. No matter what, they want a good par-meter reading.
And still no contenders when I'm the one that was challenged. Now I have a $500 par-meter coming, a $400 meter on the desk w/ no side by side. Bummer.
 
Yodaweed said:
The readings will be low for COBs when they are placed as high as the DE is placed, what do you not understand.....it's like talking to a brick wall, hang that cob fixture 3 foot high and your plants would stretch like crazy.
Click to expand...

I guess what I don't understand is, if the photon density is the same, and the light frequency is the same, then why would LEDs be less intense? If you have the same frequency, and the same number of photons, then if you apply all that in Planck's equation, do you not come out with the exact same amount of energy? The same frequency light at the same photon density should have the exact same energy fall off, regardless of the emitter chosen.
 
Yodaweed said:
The readings will be low for COBs when they are placed as high as the DE is placed, what do you not understand.....it's like talking to a brick wall, hang that cob fixture 3 foot high and your plants would stretch like crazy.
Click to expand...

It's like talking to a brick wall when someone things the inverse square somehow magically makes photons disappear.
 
Rahz said:
It's like talking to a brick wall when someone things the inverse square somehow magically makes photons disappear.
Click to expand...

I've just done a ton of research in my addled state to back up what I thought I already knew. I'm 99.9% certain this guy may actually be a brick wall.
 
Rahz said:
It's like talking to a brick wall when someone things the inverse square somehow magically makes photons disappear.
Click to expand...
Problem is, people think the concept of the first of the 3 Laws is broken by those with the LED assertion. They don't realize the difference between incandescence (which HID uses) and electroluminescence.

Don't you worry. I'll teach them. And anyone else who doubts me.
 
shadow_moose said:
New Jack, huh, that's a fresh one. I wasn't talking to you bud, I'm pretty sure you and I are on the same page. I was talking to yoda.

But consider me embarassed, if that will avert any conflict.
Click to expand...
I apologize, then. I have Yoda on block and can't see his bullshit. Hope you'll accept my apology.
 
Olive Drab Green said:
Fuck you, New Jack. I will embarrass you, as well.
Click to expand...
You'll be pretty embarrassed if you don't yield a 1/2 plate.
Either way. It shouldn't come to that. None of this would be going on if you didn't doubt me. Take some time & read through my thread. Most poeple enjoy it anyways.
The results are probably within the first 10-15 pages. It doesn't matter really. Nobody said cobs or Olive sux. Just you saying your Tastys could out yield my SunCloak. Kind've funny cuz nobody, not even the cob fanatics will back that play.
It is what it is. I paid big bucks for my light to yield 1/2 plate per 150w used. It's not for everybody & me nor anyone else is saying it is.
Just chill & be happy you're not wasting your time on Burple lights anymore.
BTW, all the ppfd in the world isn't going to help those Vipers.
It takes a proper spectrum as well as a good photon output to do well. Never mind all the rest.
Sorry you got so upset over it all.
 
Hybridway said:
You'll be pretty embarrassed if you don't yield a 1/2 plate.
Either way. It shouldn't come to that. None of this would be going on if you didn't doubt me. Take some time & read through my thread. Most poeple enjoy it anyways.
The results are probably within the first 10-15 pages. It doesn't matter really. Nobody said cobs or Olive sux. Just you saying your Tastys could out yield my SunCloak. Kind've funny cuz nobody, not even the cob fanatics will back that play.
It is what it is. I paid big bucks for my light to yield 1/2 plate per 150w used. It's not for everybody & me nor anyone else is saying it is.
Just chill & be happy you're not wasting your time on Burple lights anymore.
BTW, all the ppfd in the world isn't going to help those Vipers.
It takes a proper spectrum as well as a good photon output to do well. Never mind all the rest.
Sorry you got so upset over it all.
Click to expand...
Jesus, shut the fuck up. You are calling me out for the same shit you are doing, except all your shit is proprietary.
 
shadow_moose said:
I guess what I don't understand is, if the photon density is the same, and the light frequency is the same, then why would LEDs be less intense? If you have the same frequency, and the same number of photons, then if you apply all that in Planck's equation, do you not come out with the exact same amount of energy? The same frequency light at the same photon density should have the exact same energy fall off, regardless of the emitter chosen.
Click to expand...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inverse-square_law
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inverse-square_law#Light_and_other_electromagnetic_radiation
read up

More generally, the irradiance, i.e., the intensity (or power per unit area in the direction of propagation), of a spherical wavefront varies inversely with the square of the distance from the source (assuming there are no losses caused by absorption or scattering).

For example, the intensity of radiation from the Sun is 9126 watts per square meter at the distance of Mercury (0.387 AU); but only 1367 watts per square meter at the distance of Earth (1 AU)—an approximate threefold increase in distance results in an approximate ninefold decrease in intensity of radiation.
 
Last edited:
shadow_moose said:
New Jack, huh, that's a fresh one. I wasn't talking to you bud, I'm pretty sure you and I are on the same page. I was talking to yoda.

But consider me embarassed, if that will avert any conflict.
Click to expand...
He lashes out quickly , don't be embarassed he also doesn't understand logic.
 
Rahz said:
It's like talking to a brick wall when someone things the inverse square somehow magically makes photons disappear.
Click to expand...
No you don't understand the fact they are less dense the further from the light source they are.....read up for fuck sakes stop your arguing and read . You don't understand when you place both lights in a sphere you capture everything possible, not intensity(thats why blurple lights kill in sphere readings). Intensity is based on the initial point source value and the distance from that source. The more blue in the light (blurple has a ton) the more higher the sphere values are, has NOTHING to do with the lights intensity at all or how high that light can be hung. It's just a reading of what that light outputs total photon wise. A LED with all quality 1w blue diodes will have the HIGHEST ratings of any light, that doesnt mean it's good to grow with. 1w diodes are the most efficient is why and blue light has the highest par. Efficiency isn't always the end all of growing lights, sometimes you must sacrfice a little for more power, that'swhy cobs are enticing, they use a more powerful single point that is less efficient.
 
Last edited:
Olive Drab Green said:
Jesus, shut the fuck up. You are calling me out for the same shit you are doing, except all your shit is proprietary.
Click to expand...
That wasn't very nice! Geesze! I wasn't calling you out on anything Olive. Just reiterating how this nastiness even got started. It wasn't me. I just posted facts to share w/ the community.
There's nothing hidden here bud. I've put it all out there. To much even.
I'll get back to growing & building. No need to further embellish in this delinquency of the facts.
 
Hybridway said:
That wasn't very nice! Geesze! I wasn't calling you out on anything Olive. Just reiterating how this nastiness even got started. It wasn't me. I just posted facts to share w/ the community.
There's nothing hidden here bud. I've put it all out there. To much even.
I'll get back to growing & building. No need to further embellish in this delinquency of the facts.
Click to expand...
And I'm telling you your facts are missing factors. Look 'em up.
 
Yodaweed said:
That's simply wrong, if you hang a 1000w DE light at 12 inches your plants will fry but you can hang a 1000w COB fixture at 12-18 inches.
Click to expand...
thats nonsense. with similar optics the cob would likely put out more PAR (less IR tho). assuming youre trying to do it with 1 or 2 chips youd be running them pretty hard and efficiency would dip

4 larger cobs at 250-275W each in the tight space of a DE would beat a DE on par. thats just math. pure umols. no "photon density" pseudoscience.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top