LED and BUD QUALITY

[CharlesU Farley]

Well it's believed by many physicists and philosophers that the past, present and future co-exist. That is, everything that ever could possibly happen has already happened, and that by moving forward in time, we are merely tracing a path through this combined existence.

I am not a physicist, and do not have advanced technical knowledge in this subject, but I know for a fact the above paragraph is entirely correct.

If you take a left turn, it takes you down a different path to a different set of possibilities and so on and so forth. Every possibility already exists, but we can only experience one possibility at a time. At least in our human form.

Correctamundo, yet again.

If you believe in a truly omnipotent and immortal being, then what a boring existence it would be knowing you would live forever! But if you decided to split yourself up into infinite other beings that could each experience one of an infinite number of possibilities (or set of possibilities = a mortal lifetime), then you could entertain yourself forever!

I do and this is my exact definition of heaven and/or becoming part of God. You gain the power to create everything that's ever been or ever will be, created. Time, matter and distance cease to exist, until they are created.

Outdoor pot farmers in the 70s and 80s knew this and would always harvest at dawn. They believed this was the best time to harvest "peak" cannabinoids before sunlight started to break them down. There was method to their madness because it had a scientific basis.

The Farmers Almanac is all about the peak time to plant _and_ harvest.

It is my strong belief there's not a whole lot you're going to be able to do, in the last 2 to 3 weeks, that's going to have a _big_ difference on the total THCa content of the plant, especially by altering only _one_ variable.

Like most who have grown for decades, I've tried a lot of varying light strategies at the end of flowering and just haven't noticed that big of a difference. I used to read a lot about people who would put their plants in 24 hours of darkness before harvest and I used to do just the opposite. For the last couple of days before harvest, I'd flip them back to the normal 16/8 light cycle I keep them on. I wanted the plant cells in maximum production mode.

Again, anecdotally, I noticed absolutely no difference... whatsoever.

 

[I Care]

 

[Prawn Connery]

That's an awful comparison. For starters, we don't even know what the "full spectrum" LED was. So many companies describe their LEDs as "full spectrum" but they are not. They have almost no light below 440nm – which is right in the Chl A and B absorption range.

There is a big difference in spectrum between CRI70, 80 and 90, so we don't know what the actual spectra of any of these bulbs is. Nor do we know their efficiencies. The "full spectrum" bulb is advertised as 800lm for 8.5W (94lpw), which is less than half the lpw for a typical 3000K CRI80 LED grow light.

Also, as someone in the YouTube comments mentioned, the 5000K light pot was being warmed up from underneath by the "full spectrum" light, while the poor old 3000K lamp didn't even have a proper reflector, as it is leaking light everywhere!

The commenter mentioned that he had done the same experiment and the warm light (3000K) won – which is what I would expect.

And why did the 5000K plant get a bigger pot? The YouTuber said towards the end of the grow the seedlings were starting to yellow and outgrow their pots, so clearly that made a difference.

And finally, these plants were from seed, not clone, so there is no guarantee the 5000K plant wasn't a more vigorous seedling to begin with.

Sorry, but if you're going to do a comparison, you need to level the playing field.

 

[Prawn Connery]

OK, the same guy did an earlier comparison of the "full spectrum" LED bulb vs the 5000K bulb over tomatoes and got the opposite result. However, there is a lot of overlapping light, so I'm not sure how you determine the overall winner when you place the plants and lights so close to each other. I mean, why would you?

 

[Ca++]

Just no science. At 2:20 he gives the 5000K a short flood, then the 3000K & full spectrum get a splash. Literally.

TBH the barely 'meh' presentation said it all in an instant. The most interesting experiment I found, was playing the vid at x1.5 speed, then 1.25, which sounds natural. At normal speed, it sounds retarded.

Giving the results, without saying they were different last time. That really highlights his analytical skills. I hope he doesn't start trying to edit wiki

 

[I Care]

I didn’t catch that he used a larger square there for the 5000k.

The only science there is that bigger pots grow bigger plants… thanks for catching that, I was either too high or not high enough. Maybe he did it just to get ripped in the comments. For sake of monetization.

I thought his results were impressive so I bought a 50w 5000k LED flood light to see what a twenty dollar light will offer in a 7.11 sq ft tent. I chose this over spending much more on CFL bulbs and fixtures.

Sansi 50w 5000k Flood is what I bought and they have a 50% off deal with free shipping in the US.

Even if it’s not the best spectrum, I’m interested to see what 30 bucks into a veg tent running under 60 watts will do compared to the light scattering away from the 6500k tubes on my table.

 

[Ca++]

50w over 7 foot is a very low 7w per foot. Though it sounds like you have another 10w in there, it's still not great. TBH myself and others have been surprised how little LED light can sustain a plant, and edge it forward slowly. Which for mums isn't that bad, but to establish strong plant's to flower, you might want to stick to plants right under it. Time will tell. However it's biggest difference to a grow light, is that it probably uses a smart cob, with ~100lm/w.

The US news carries stories of a much stricter set of rules from 2028

• 
  Integrated Omnidirectional Short General Service Lamps: Minimum efficacy of 124.6 lumens per watt (lm/W) for a typical 810-lumen lamp.
  
• 
  Integrated Directional General service lamps: Minimum efficacy of 96.0 lm/W for a 1200-lumen output.
  
• 
  Non-integrated Omnidirectional Long General Service Lamps: A significant 195.4 lm/W for lamps emitting 1625 lumens.
  

It's a bit of a joke really. Your garden light will still be fine. Though it will be over 10 years out of date. The 1500lm house lamp will be 12w or less, which is about the current norm in the EU supermarkets. The 195 is interesting though. It's talking lights with lamp and driver as individual components. We see most lights in commercial settings made this way. I imagine the future won't be 195lm kit everywhere though. It will be more tubes with internal drivers, or fittings that are riveted shut. Effectively, the new regs, are going to be complied with, mostly as China won't be making anything worse.
124.6 is a very low bar, for 4 years time. It's todays 'E' rated lamp. The 'A' rating is 210lm+. Achieved by things like the Philips Master Ultra-Efficiency lamp
In Dubai, all domestic new builds must use 200Lm/w lamps, which has been the case for years.

 

[whiteberrieS]

Recently I grew some plants under Electric Sky V3, HLG 350R, and HPS . The HPS buds are great as usual. The Electric Sky buds are nice and aromatic, close to the HPS. And the HLG buds
are less aromatic and less taste but still pretty decent. It seems like the extra far red spectrum of the electric sky really did help the quality. Have you guys noticed similar results??

My LED has a couple rows of red nodes so the problem has been understood just need new LEDs or go with 3000k

 

[whiteberrieS]

HPS is like 2500-3000?

 

[I Care]

It’s actually more like 2200 for horticulture HPS

@Ca++ not sure what this thing is. I was actually thinking two of them just because cost for lumens and wattage exceeds the efficiency of the more expensive CFL set up.

Just need something to get be by until I want to spend money for a tight fitting and modern spider array.

 

[Prawn Connery]

Just no science. At 2:20 he gives the 5000K a short flood, then the 3000K & full spectrum get a splash. Literally.

TBH the barely 'meh' presentation said it all in an instant. The most interesting experiment I found, was playing the vid at x1.5 speed, then 1.25, which sounds natural. At normal speed, it sounds retarded.

Giving the results, without saying they were different last time. That really highlights his analytical skills. I hope he doesn't start trying to edit wiki

He had to water the 5000K plant more because it sits above another lamp that is heating it from below. Hence, the pot dries faster. More importantly, the roots get a nice dose of metabolic warmth that would have helped them grow. Luckily, they had a bigger pot to expand into!

 

[Cerathule]

I think when Einstein says nothing can travel faster than the speed of light, he is referring to normal energy. No amount of matter (mass) can travel at the speed of light.

But the universe is made up of only a fraction of normal energy and matter. When we look into the vacuum of space, we still don't know what it is we're looking at.

What is a "true" vacuum"? It can't be "nothing". There are sparse atoms in the vacuum of space, but what is the empty space in-between? Indeed, what is the empty space between sub-atomic particles, such as the space between electrons and protons/neutrons?

Nothing that we know travels faster than light, but the universe itself is made up of things we don't know, and it is expanding into "something" that not only acts against gravity (otherwise, why wouldn't all the matter in the universe simply stick together?), but is also "pulling" the universe at faster than the speed of light.

Or simply, the "stuff" the universe is expanding allows travel faster than light.

It's space itself that apparently expands faster than the speed of light. The observation of specific white dwarf supernovae presents strong evidence to back the theory of an unknown form of energy that in our present timescale dominates the macroscopic universe and drives matter apart, and increasingly. Einstein's formulation of general relativity doesn't prohibit such a scenario. The inflatory expansion of space of the very early universe may be also present such a case.

It's true there may be no totally empty space devoid of anything given there's still radiation and gravity everywhere. Maybe even sterile particles exist which we cannot ever detect when they don't interact with our tools with which we observe the universe - mostly photons. Dark matter may be -partially- such a culprit.

Concering the timelessness of the photon - it's just its own time, as IF it would carry a clock with it around, the time wouldn't move at the speed of light. But for the outside observer of said photon, time would still run in the normal sense which is a necessary precondition to actually be able to measure this speed of light.

 

[Prawn Connery]

It's space itself that apparently expands faster than the speed of light. The observation of specific white dwarf supernovae presents strong evidence to back the theory of an unknown form of energy that in our present timescale dominates the macroscopic universe and drives matter apart, and increasingly. Einstein's formulation of general relativity doesn't prohibit such a scenario. The inflatory expansion of space of the very early universe may be also present such a case.

It's true there may be no totally empty space devoid of anything given there's still radiation and gravity everywhere. Maybe even sterile particles exist which we cannot ever detect when they don't interact with our tools with which we observe the universe - mostly photons. Dark matter may be -partially- such a culprit.

Concering the timelessness of the photon - it's just its own time, as IF it would carry a clock with it around, the time wouldn't move at the speed of light. But for the outside observer of said photon, time would still run in the normal sense which is a necessary precondition to actually be able to measure this speed of light.

Yes, that's how I understood it. The fabric of space is expanding faster than light; to wit, what lies beyond the universe is allowing the fabric of space to expand into it at that rate.

One theory I subscribe to is that on the other side of the universe are other universes that are contracting – like bubbles in a milkshake. As one bubble expands, the surrounding bubbles collapse. If you have ever seen bubbles expand and then "pop", you may have noticed they "pop" faster than they expand.

Of course, the universe is not a milkshake, but if something on the other side were collapsing at a rate faster than light, you might expect it to "pull" our universe along with it. If the universe was surrounded by other universes collapsing around it, this in turn would pull our universe in all directions (expansion) at faster than light.

Perhaps this is what happens when a universe is born and dies. One Big Bang expands into to the collapse of another Big Contraction – this is called "Big Bounce" theory.

I think science now believes the "empty" vacuum of space is full of energy – dark energy and possibly dark matter – that we can't detect because it doesn't (as far as we know) interact with our own realm.

If we start with the assumption that, in the beginning there was "nothing" – A Big Fat Zero – then the only way to make "something" out of "nothing" is to make "negative-something" at the same time.

To start and end with 0 we need to create 1 plus -1 = 0. We can create as many positive integers as we like, so long as we have the negative integers to cancel them out so that we are left with 0 = "nothing".

Positive and negative integers are both "something" but when placed together form "nothing".

I'm sure it is much more complicated (or even much more simple) than that, but that's all my poor human brain can come up with at this point.

I get what you're saying about photons having their own "time" but Special Relativity tells us they don't experience time or space – to the photon, it is everywhere, all at once. It is in all places at all times. It is something about the speed of light that breaks down all spacetime so that we no longer recognise it.

 

[I Care]

It's space itself that apparently expands faster than the speed of light. The observation of specific white dwarf supernovae presents strong evidence to back the theory of an unknown form of energy that in our present timescale dominates the macroscopic universe and drives matter apart, and increasingly. Einstein's formulation of general relativity doesn't prohibit such a scenario. The inflatory expansion of space of the very early universe may be also present such a case.

It's true there may be no totally empty space devoid of anything given there's still radiation and gravity everywhere. Maybe even sterile particles exist which we cannot ever detect when they don't interact with our tools with which we observe the universe - mostly photons. Dark matter may be -partially- such a culprit.

Concering the timelessness of the photon - it's just its own time, as IF it would carry a clock with it around, the time wouldn't move at the speed of light. But for the outside observer of said photon, time would still run in the normal sense which is a necessary precondition to actually be able to measure this speed of light.

I feel like the idea of time is synthesized. Same as distance. Because both of these things are man made ideas there really no way way to have any accuracy. Also there is no positive or negative beyond the philosophy of mankind. There is only infinity and beyond

 

[whiteberrieS]

It’s actually more like 2200 for horticulture HPS

@Ca++ not sure what this thing is. I was actually thinking two of them just because cost for lumens and wattage exceeds the efficiency of the more expensive CFL set up. View attachment 18998652 Just need something to get be by until I want to spend money for a tight fitting and modern spider array.

I can't say enough about these CrazyFarmer 320s. It's equal to the HLG 320w but half price

 

[whiteberrieS]

@geeklight

 

[whiteberrieS]

Shipping can be a nuisance

 

[I Care]

Only satisfying thing I find when I google crazy farmer 320 from tue US is a guy getting naked and going through a hay bail compound.

Not sure when I’ll be ready for an investment, but the desire is to get an array set up. An improved rig with the same idea as my 20x36inch 50x90cm) but with a 32x32in (80x80cm).

Am I wasting my time and investment on anything not LM301b diodes?

 

[Ca++]

Ceramic pixel heatsink, sounds like advertising talk for couldn't afford alloy, so used clay lol
Ceramic can cover a few things, but is usually an insulator. In respect of their claims, an explanation is really needed. Pixel doesn't fit this statement either. Assuring a google search won't confirm or deny their claim. Google will just look confused, I expect.

There isn't a huge need for 301s, but you know what you are getting. The 281B+ is it? is a fair item. You must get the plus though, and they will try to let that slip. It's not the highly efficient 0.2w package, but the best they are doing in a 0.5w package. You will see 288 boards with them, and see there is no way there are 288 chips on there. Though don't do the maths on that, because they overdrive everything. Nobody, not a single supplier, drives the chip at it's design power.
Shitizen do perfectly good chips, and China does have unknown brands, making most of the worlds chips, with no issues at all. The problem is, venturing off the path, you can stumble upon anything.

 

[CocoNut 420]

Only satisfying thing I find when I google crazy farmer 320 from tue US is a guy getting naked and going through a hay bail compound.

Not sure when I’ll be ready for an investment, but the desire is to get an array set up. An improved rig with the same idea as my 20x36inch 50x90cm) but with a 32x32in (80x80cm).

Am I wasting my time and investment on anything not LM301b diodes?

I've grown with lm301H, Sannan and no name Mars chips all have grown good weed.
My 1st led grow was a Mars tsl 2000 it made a nice enough job to convert me to led.

If I was looking for a light I'd like lm301 but i wouldn't rule out lm281b for less than 50p a watt from phlizon.

Good luck