LED and BUD QUALITY

[Normannen]

IR is photons. Hot air isn't. Hot air won't excite a molecule to the same degree. The hot air fitting your model of conduction. While the light particles are a much lower grit paper. Higher spikes. Greater momentary interactions. Only after dissipation, does the picture get more like you describe. Both may put a joule into the leaf, but one does it by encasing the leaf, and the other does it from one side. Using something like twice the energy, in photons.

This is different for the leaf. As it would be for you, standing with the sun on one side, or in a warm dark room.

This is just logical thinking though. Showing two different routes, getting to the same point. Explaining how there could be differences there, if there actually were any. Reasons like water movements within the leaf, which would tie in with morphology, more than most other explanations.




I don't think growing plants ourselves, is the foremost way of designing lights for everyone else. It would be knowledge limited by how many trails we did, and their complexity. If we want lots of trails, on other peoples plants, then the papers are there for us to read. However we ourselves are not there.
It's such a vast amount that's been published now, that you really can make a light, before you have grown with it. It's really quite hard to grow with it before you have made it. So reading all the papers, to make an informed decision, is surely how you also made your lights, before growing with them.


Are you regretting the geek comment yet?

it's likely it's gonna go through him like a neutrino

 

[Ca++]

Korma (cor, ma!)
Passanda (fart combined)
Vindaloo (and quickly)
Neutrino (no! no! I'm going behind that tree)

 

[johnnyla]

If i recall correct you did some fairly great work with HPS back in the days, some fantastic looking plants. I dont wanna call anyone a retard for various different reasons only pointing out that saying a light is retard proof is maybe not the best advertisement for the user who use/need it.

But it gets my goat when i see people banging on leds and praising HPS as the eternal sunshine of God with bad reasoning, condemning it in 2 lines of text without really having any argument for it and betraying their lack of really trying to get it to work.

Some years ago the led growing community was different, there was bad lights, blurples and such and then there was DIY. People with a habit of DIYing had a habit of trying, then reading then trying again, looking for better results. Today when led has made more of a break thru its become a game of highest nrs of par at the least amount of $, DIY has sorta gone together with the idea of continuing improvements and development of grow practices. The "Leds cant ever create the same quality" people seem to overlap a bit with this phenomenon; its usually people who dont want to adapt to new lights or improve their practices, just hang new lights, get bud in 8 weeks.

No offense meant in any direction. I think both will work depending on the application, but there is no doubt that you can get quality and quantity with leds if you know what youre doing

I said more in two lines than you did in a novella.

90%+ jumped on the led bandwagon and switched. Ya’ll are now what they call “committed to the pot”. Imagine if is was right, what would that mean?

I don’t know why the quality of commercial weed has gone down, but I blame it on mass production and sinking suspicion it could also be LED lights that are so common now.

Do you really think plants express themselves d the same under sun vs HPS vs MH, Mercury vapor, LED?

What are the implications?

What about the fact that light from traditional horticultural bulbs is created by heat and combustion like the sun compared to LED light created by electricity from a diode. What are the implications?

 

[zachrockbadenof]

all good questions

 

[JKD]

The sun produces light through nuclear fusion.

HPS through ionisation of gas.

LED through electroluminescence.

Light as electromagnetic radiation is constant across different sources, but its characteristics - such as wavelength, intensity, coherence, directionality, spectral composition, and polarisation can vary depending on the source.

 

[greyfader]

The sun produces light through nuclear fusion.

HPS through ionisation of gas.

LED through electroluminescence.

Light as electromagnetic radiation is constant across different sources, but its characteristics - such as wavelength, intensity, coherence, directionality, spectral composition, and polarisation can vary depending on the source.

a beautiful, elegant reply. simple, direct, and quite accurate.

i'm about to inject a write-up into this thread as soon as i can complete it.

i'm in the middle of a move to my new forever home and i'm short on time.

 

[Prawn Connery]

speak for yourself #idgafifyoudontlikemyjokes

I was!

 

[Prawn Connery]

IR is photons. Hot air isn't. Hot air won't excite a molecule to the same degree. The hot air fitting your model of conduction. While the light particles are a much lower grit paper. Higher spikes. Greater momentary interactions. Only after dissipation, does the picture get more like you describe. Both may put a joule into the leaf, but one does it by encasing the leaf, and the other does it from one side. Using something like twice the energy, in photons.

This is different for the leaf. As it would be for you, standing with the sun on one side, or in a warm dark room.

This is just logical thinking though. Showing two different routes, getting to the same point. Explaining how there could be differences there, if there actually were any. Reasons like water movements within the leaf, which would tie in with morphology, more than most other explanations.




I don't think growing plants ourselves, is the foremost way of designing lights for everyone else. It would be knowledge limited by how many trails we did, and their complexity. If we want lots of trails, on other peoples plants, then the papers are there for us to read. However we ourselves are not there.
It's such a vast amount that's been published now, that you really can make a light, before you have grown with it. It's really quite hard to grow with it before you have made it. So reading all the papers, to make an informed decision, is surely how you also made your lights, before growing with them.


Are you regretting the geek comment yet?

So we're re-writing the rules of physics now? It takes "twice the energy" to transfer one unit of energy with IR compared to convective transfer?

Clearly, I do not regret my "geek" comment.

Yes, you can build a light before you have grown with it. And all those shitty plants being grown by so-called LED experts is testament to that approach.

Do you think the Chinese LED manufacturers do any research and development on cannabis? Or do you think they just copy what everyone else is doing and that's the reason why their spectra all look the same?

I designed this spectrum below four years ago. Other manufacturers are only now putting the same levels of far red in their lights. I did it because I had been increasing FR levels and observing the outcome in real grows. You can put 10% far red in your lights, but unless you balance it with UVA on the other side, you start to see internode elongation due to shade avoidance.

Theorise all you want, you won't know this until you do it.

 

[woolybear]

Just harvested some nicely chunky, greasy juicy fruit flavored buds from my homemade LED cob bars. I made the bars a couple of years ago, have no idea the wattage but they get much hotter than the LED light bars I bought last year.

This plant in particular I screwed up and saved the wrong cuts, trying to reveg the mom.

However, this plant was one of two. The other gets me high, but doesn't smell like juicy fruit, is airy vs nicely chunky. Like a complete night and day experience despite having the same genetic background.

So FWIW as someone whose grown with LEDs for ten years, heck yeah you can grow ultra chunky greasy nugs.

I'm just popping in.

 

[Prawn Connery]

The sun produces light through nuclear fusion.

HPS through ionisation of gas.

LED through electroluminescence.

Light as electromagnetic radiation is constant across different sources, but its characteristics - such as wavelength, intensity, coherence, directionality, spectral composition, and polarisation can vary depending on the source.

This is true.

But a 555nm photon is still a 555nm photon – regardless of how it is created.

And in any case, all photons are created exactly the same way: when an electron falls to a lower state, a photon of corresponding energy is released.

So, it doesn't matter whether the sun or an HPS or a fluorescent bulb make a green 555nm photon – it is still the same photon that travels at the same speed in a vacuum, has the same wavelength, and carries the same amount of energy.

Clearly this is true, because we can grow plants under myriad sources of artificial light – not just the sun.

 

[Prawn Connery]

it's likely it's gonna go through him like a neutrino

Aren't you the guy who wrote the following? Did you know that photons can also pass through glass houses? Not all of them, mind you. You might have to live in a glass house to know that. Do you live in a glass house?

You're confusing radiation wih energy transfer, heat radiation is not heat. And plants "know" that.

 

[JKD]

This is true.

But a 555nm photon is still a 555nm photon – regardless of how it is created.

And in any case, all photons are created exactly the same way: when an electron falls to a lower state, a photon of corresponding energy is released.

So, it doesn't matter whether the sun or an HPS or a fluorescent bulb make a green 555nm photon – it is still the same photon that travels at the same speed in a vacuum, has the same wavelength, and carries the same amount of energy.

Clearly this is true, because we can grow plants under myriad sources of artificial light – not just the sun.

Nitpicking, but most photons in sunlight have not been produced by electron transitions.

While a photon of a specific wavelength (like 555nm) remains consistent in its basic properties regardless of its source, the conditions under which it is generated and the accompanying characteristics (like coherence, spectral composition, and polarisation) can still differ.
- not particularly relevant in terms of plant growth, where it matters little, but in terms of the accuracy of the statement, these differences can matter in scientific and technological applications, where not just the wavelength, but also the quality and nature of the light can play a role.

 

[Normannen]

Aren't you the guy who wrote the following? Did you know that photons can also pass through glass houses? Not all of them, mind you. You might have to live in a glass house to know that. Do you live in a glass house?

indeed I did, you just seem convinced plants are biologically unable to discern the type of heat they are exposed to.

from Wikipedia

The fundamental modes of heat transfer are:

Advection Advection is the transport mechanism of a fluid from one location to another, and is dependent on motion and momentum of that fluid. Conduction or diffusion The transfer of energy between objects that are in physical contact. Thermal conductivity is the property of a material to conduct heat and evaluated primarily in terms of Fourier's Law for heat conduction. Convection The transfer of energy between an object and its environment, due to fluid motion. The average temperature is a reference for evaluating properties related to convective heat transfer. Radiation The transfer of energy by the emission of electromagnetic radiation.

 

[Prawn Connery]

Nitpicking, but most photons in sunlight have not been produced by electron transitions.

While a photon of a specific wavelength (like 555nm) remains consistent in its basic properties regardless of its source, the conditions under which it is generated and the accompanying characteristics (like coherence, spectral composition, and polarisation) can still differ.
- not particularly relevant in terms of plant growth, where it matters little, but in terms of the accuracy of the statement, these differences can matter in scientific and technological applications, where not just the wavelength, but also the quality and nature of the light can play a role.

I like nitpicking. As long as it's in good humour.

OK, so how does the spectral composition of a 555nm photon created from electron transitions (LED for example) differ compared to a fusion-generated gamma ray that, er, causes electron transition when it collides with other atoms to eventually leave the sun as a 555nm photon?

Don't artificial light photons also have polarity?

And are not sunlight and LED light both regarded as incoherent?

Which is to say, if we take two 555nm photons with exactly the same properties, can you tell me which one was created by the sun and which one was created by a light emitting diode?

 

[Prawn Connery]

indeed I did, you just seem convinced plants are biologically unable to discern the type of heat they are exposed to.

from Wikipedia

The fundamental modes of heat transfer are:

Advection Advection is the transport mechanism of a fluid from one location to another, and is dependent on motion and momentum of that fluid. Conduction or diffusion The transfer of energy between objects that are in physical contact. Thermal conductivity is the property of a material to conduct heat and evaluated primarily in terms of Fourier's Law for heat conduction. Convection The transfer of energy between an object and its environment, due to fluid motion. The average temperature is a reference for evaluating properties related to convective heat transfer. Radiation The transfer of energy by the emission of electromagnetic radiation.

I didn't say plants were unable to discern the difference between irradiated energy transfer and convective transfer – I even gave examples of a person standing in the sun and feeling IR vs the thermal currents of a warm wind vs touching a piece of metal warmed by the sun (three different experiences of energy transfer perceived as "heat" in different ways).

But what I did question was how this affected the plant once leaf temperatures had stabilised.

In other words, if the ambient temperature is ideal (lets say 28C) and the leaf temperatures has stabilised to around that temperature, what advantage does raising the leaf temperature even further through IR achieve?

That's really all I'm asking. Does it matter how a leaf reaches a certain temperature? Or does it matter more that the leaf is maintained at an optimal temperature?

 

[Ca++]

So we're re-writing the rules of physics now? It takes "twice the energy" to transfer one unit of energy with IR compared to convective transfer?

Clearly, I do not regret my "geek" comment.

Yes, you can build a light before you have grown with it. And all those shitty plants being grown by so-called LED experts is testament to that approach.

Do you think the Chinese LED manufacturers do any research and development on cannabis? Or do you think they just copy what everyone else is doing and that's the reason why their spectra all look the same?

I designed this spectrum below four years ago. Other manufacturers are only now putting the same levels of far red in their lights. I did it because I had been increasing FR levels and observing the outcome in real grows. You can put 10% far red in your lights, but unless you balance it with UVA on the other side, you start to see internode elongation due to shade avoidance.

Theorise all you want, you won't know this until you do it.

View attachment 18941890

I'm not rewriting physics, but look at your special values. You are just inventing some units, miscalculating others, and others are just downright backwards. That's quite a collection.

If warm air puts 2 units into a leaf, by encasing it, that is a unit from each side.
If you want IR to put that in from one side, than both units are coming through the light receptive part of the plant. The transpiration side non.

 

[greyfader]

"That's really all I'm asking. Does it matter how a leaf reaches a certain temperature? Or does it matter more that the leaf is maintained at an optimal temperature?"

well, Prawn, may i shrimply say both matter. some large greenhouse operations have discovered that their non-IR heating systems, while adequately heating the entire space, are failing to precisely control the temperature at the canopy within optimum parameters.

some have installed supplementary IR systems targeting the canopy that creates a more stable microclimate in the canopy that increases yield and enhances phenol production.

phenols are secondary metabolites, of course.

with any plant, we have a finite temporal span in which to grow the plant. the more time during that span that conditions are kept within an ideal band of parameters the better the end product will be.

Effects of Infrared Radiation on Eggplant (Solanum melongena L.) Greenhouse Cultivation and Fruits’ Phenolic Profile

The implementation of Infrared (IR) radiation in heated greenhouses possesses the advantage of high directional control and focused compensation of energy losses, appropriate for creating local microclimate conditions in highly energy-consuming systems, such as greenhouses. Moreover, it can...

www.mdpi.com

editing to say that before someone says eggplants are not cannabis that I've already experienced that epiphany.

 

[Crooked8]

"That's really all I'm asking. Does it matter how a leaf reaches a certain temperature? Or does it matter more that the leaf is maintained at an optimal temperature?"

well, Prawn, may i shrimply say both matter. some large greenhouse operations have discovered that their non-IR heating systems, while adequately heating the entire space, are failing to precisely control the temperature at the canopy within optimum parameters.

some have installed supplementary IR systems targeting the canopy that creates a more stable microclimate in the canopy that increases yield and enhances phenol production.

phenols are secondary metabolites, of course.

with any plant, we have a finite temporal span in which to grow the plant. the more time during that span that conditions are kept within an ideal band of parameters the better the end product will be.

Effects of Infrared Radiation on Eggplant (Solanum melongena L.) Greenhouse Cultivation and Fruits’ Phenolic Profile

The implementation of Infrared (IR) radiation in heated greenhouses possesses the advantage of high directional control and focused compensation of energy losses, appropriate for creating local microclimate conditions in highly energy-consuming systems, such as greenhouses. Moreover, it can...

www.mdpi.com

We just want our final product to not be scampi or skimpy excuse me.

 

[greyfader]

We just want our final product to not be scampi or skimpy excuse me.

your crustaceanous remark really sticks in my craw, dad!

 

[Crooked8]

your crustaceanous remark really sticks in my craw, dad!

Awe grey you so Cray……fish