shaggy2dope
Active Member
UV and IR have to do with growth and trich production. As the phosphor filters the UV and that means it puts out very little so back to my question.
But I do like the Dim Bulb
But I do like the Dim Bulb
The Future; Induction Lighting?
- Thread starter Serapis
- Start date
420God
Well-Known Member
HPS do not put out UV rays and everyone still grows with them.
Serapis
Well-Known Member
infrared lighting has nothing to do with growing weed.... as for UV, the spectrums we care about, 2700k and 6500k are represented in the 400-720 nm range. That information is in just about every induction lighting page that I've viewed.... As I stated several posts ago, do some reading or research... It's very appearant that you haven't done as much as you think you have. 
infrared....
roflmao
infrared....
roflmao
Serapis
Well-Known Member
Correct for $500!
Some people do supplement with UVB bulbs... Marijuana has it's own UV protection, resin. If the plant is in the sun, or exposed to other sources of UV rays, it'll produce more resin, so the story goes.
shaggy2dope
Active Member
Guess i need to hit the books again. F%^kin alytimers
Serapis
Well-Known Member
It is how we all learn.... There is nothing wrong with being new to growing... the amount of resources hidden in these forums is tremendous. Better than any book you can buy on growing herb....
Welcome to RIU.
shaggy2dope
Active Member
Well i got the jorge cervantes bible and a few others and also using the web. The web is i think why i get so turned around cause to many opinions not enough fact. As in my own. More so when it come to the new lights. I've grown plenty times before (600wlumatek w/6 hydrofarm buckets for 2 years.) but that was in 2003-2005 memory comes and goes. That's why i don't like log-in and passwords. Never remember them.
Serapis
Well-Known Member
Beautiful, clean looking grow!!
420God
Well-Known Member
Thank you so much! I'm still learning the finer arts of growing.
dunit
Active Member
Hey Serapis in reference to you IR comment could you comment on the below information that I'm quoting from an article by Ed Rosenthal in Canabis Culture. I have always been under the impression that IR was involved in flowering but not in photosynthesis so didn't quite understand why. Your comments are counter to the below article and you're not exactly new at this game so I'd like to hear your opinion.
The plants use red and infrared light to regulate stem growth and flowering response. Plant cells produce a chemical called a phytochrome, which has two versions. One version, PR, is sensitive to red light (660 nm). Red light converts PR into PFR. PFR signals the plant to grow short stocky stems and also helps the plant grow into specific shapes. The plants also use red and infrared light to measure uninterrupted darkness. As far as plants are concerned in terms of flowering, if there's no red light, it's dark.
PFR is sensitive to infrared light (730 nm), which converts it into PR. When PR levels build to a critical amount, scientists hypothesize that a hormone called floragen becomes active and induces the plant to flower. The reason floragen is called hypothetical is that researchers can see its effects, but they haven't found it yet.
PFR reverts to PR naturally. For PFR to be present, it must be renewed continuously by the presence of red light. When plants are shaded, they get less of the needed red light. In the absence of red light, the PR version predominates and the stem stretches to reach the light. Lower side branches shaded by leaves from above have PR and grow longer until they reach the light. Then they modify their growth in the presence of PFR.
Outdoors during the day, there is more red light than infrared. However, at dawn and dusk the first and last light from the sun isn't the visible red of the rising or setting sun, but infrared, which is at the far end of the electromagnetic spectrum. The infrared converts the PFR to PR and the critical dark-time begins or ends its countdown.
The plants use red and infrared light to regulate stem growth and flowering response. Plant cells produce a chemical called a phytochrome, which has two versions. One version, PR, is sensitive to red light (660 nm). Red light converts PR into PFR. PFR signals the plant to grow short stocky stems and also helps the plant grow into specific shapes. The plants also use red and infrared light to measure uninterrupted darkness. As far as plants are concerned in terms of flowering, if there's no red light, it's dark.
PFR is sensitive to infrared light (730 nm), which converts it into PR. When PR levels build to a critical amount, scientists hypothesize that a hormone called floragen becomes active and induces the plant to flower. The reason floragen is called hypothetical is that researchers can see its effects, but they haven't found it yet.
PFR reverts to PR naturally. For PFR to be present, it must be renewed continuously by the presence of red light. When plants are shaded, they get less of the needed red light. In the absence of red light, the PR version predominates and the stem stretches to reach the light. Lower side branches shaded by leaves from above have PR and grow longer until they reach the light. Then they modify their growth in the presence of PFR.
Outdoors during the day, there is more red light than infrared. However, at dawn and dusk the first and last light from the sun isn't the visible red of the rising or setting sun, but infrared, which is at the far end of the electromagnetic spectrum. The infrared converts the PFR to PR and the critical dark-time begins or ends its countdown.
chazbolin
Well-Known Member
alot less wattage and heat. I've been using them for over a year now. Just found this other thread going on them too.
https://www.rollitup.org/grow-journals/401594-blue-dream-800w-induction-lights.html
Ronjohn7779
Well-Known Member
Future nothing. That thing looks like a compact florescent/CFL. I'm pretty sure CFLs use induction lighting...i.e. a plasma of sorts.
Serapis
Well-Known Member
CFL, like Fluorescent lights, uses electrodes to excite the gasses. They also contain Mercury. Plasma technology and induction lighting are not based on the same technology.
Infra-red light causes the stems to stretch. the exact reasons are cited in the quote from Ed's book. I knew when I made that comment about IR, it was going to come back and cause a big scientific discussion of UV and IR light. Both are beneficial and both are natural by-products of our sun. We are able to bring both types inside as well. No one that I know of is concerned with how much 730 nm light spectrum their light emits and very few growers actually use UV bulbs. That was my reason for making the comments that I did. In theory, yes, we need IR light, or our nodes would be on top of each other with no spacing, but you are not going to go out and buy an IR light or concern yourself with how much IR a light produces (appearantly one person was
)
Ronjohn7779
Well-Known Member
Actually from the sounds of it; it should work like a CFL... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electrodeless_lampCFL, like Fluorescent lights, uses electrodes to excite the gasses. They also contain Mercury. Plasma technology and induction lighting are not based on the same technology.
Infra-red light causes the stems to stretch. the exact reasons are cited in the quote from Ed's book. I knew when I made that comment about IR, it was going to come back and cause a big scientific discussion of UV and IR light. Both are beneficial and both are natural by-products of our sun. We are able to bring both types inside as well. No one that I know of is concerned with how much 730 nm light spectrum their light emits and very few growers actually use UV bulbs. That was my reason for making the comments that I did. In theory, yes, we need IR light, or our nodes would be on top of each other with no spacing, but you are not going to go out and buy an IR light or concern yourself with how much IR a light produces (appearantly one person was
Seems like a sales men spin is all. It works nearly the same as a clf. Actually the magnetic technology is based off of CFL technology and is some sort of minor separation but work functionally the same exact way. It seems to me they threw in some salesmen spin/puffery and now they can charge you 650 bucks (or whatever the price is) for something they should charge 60-100 for. If you want to waste your money or believe whatever hype is thrown at you go ahead. From the sound of it they want you to pay 350 bucks for something that works like a CFL and performs no better. It just seems induction lighting is a slight alteration to CFL technology i.e. thats why they think they can charge hundreds more for something that functions nearly the same as a CFL. The technology for this type of lighting setup is nearly the same as a CFL in construction and function. Especially the magnetic versions.
If you don't believe me go spend the money...You'll most likely justify the purchase based off some spin/hype and the fact you got con'ed into giving up so much cash.
I'm thinking this is a case of does it smell like a duck, walk like a duck, look like a duck...guess what? It is a duck.
Serapis
Well-Known Member
You provided a link to a wiki regarding the lighting..... did you bother to read it first? The list of pros for induction lighting is long..... They are not similar to CFL, other than they both use a phosphorous coating. The induction lighting has no moving parts or electrodes in the bulb. There is also no mercury. As for induction lighting performing no better than a CFL, that statement alone made me aware that you do not know what you are talking about. You can stick with your CFL grows... when these come down in price, I'll take yours.
Serapis
Well-Known Member
They have more efficient lumen then any other light type out there.
Ronjohn7779
Well-Known Member
I'm starting to think you didn't bother to read it. It clearly says it works functionally like a clf. I'll just quote one part, "Aside from the method of coupling energy into the mercury vapour, these lamps are very similar to conventional fluorescent lamps."
In any case I wouldn't waste my time with CFL's, LEDs, or this outrageously priced crap. I'll stick with my 1000w'ers for now.
dunit
Active Member
So IR light has nothing to do with growing weed, or it is beneficial and we need it?
Your responses are hard to follow.
Cheers