# Understanding the pH - Research - Am I on to something?



## oscarmiya (Jan 4, 2009)

So , as I was finishing up a bowl, I starting thinking about how people/studies say Soil pH should be around 6.8 while Hydro should be 5.8. 

That got me wondering *WHY* soil changes the level at which a plant uptakes nutrients differently.

Since pH is the "*p*otential for *H*ydrogen" (ratio of acid to base particles), based off what I see, it must mean- The more Hydrogen available, the lower number on the pH scale. Since water is H20, H for the hydrogen, it seems that when you fill your pot with soil, your not using AS MUCH water, so your pH rises due to not AS MUCH Hydrogen being available. Or your soil just has a lesser value of hydrogen available..... My interpretation anyway.



From what I can figure out and tell, the above statement may be correct. With that said, Since Hydrogen is the "Acid" to pretty much anything... When you test your pH, you are measuring the balance between Hydrogen particles to "bases". The lower your pH is than 7 (neutral), the more acidic your soil is. The pH scale is in multiples of 10 so a pH of 5 has 10x more Hydrogen (acidic particles) than a pH of 6. A pH of 4 has 100x (10 x 10) more "Acidic" (hydrogen) particles than a pH of 6. That should paint a pretty picture.

Now to my next thought which is where all this bullshit might start to make sense and get interesting. Hydroponics have been known to produce quicker and with larger yield than soil. IF Hydro growers are pH to 5.8 and Soil growers to 6.8, that means us Hydro growers have 10x more Hydrogen than soil growers. Plants use a number of things to grow however 3 of the MAIN "things" are *Carbon, Hydrogen, and Oxygen*. The plants use these to manufacture starches and sugars. This makes me ask, Co2 is supplemented and we all know that increases growth like no1's biz... We supplement Oxygen to support healthy roots (in turn increasing growth)... Now, what about Hydrogen? Hydrogen is present in almost all carbon compounds that make up most plant material including enzymes, DNA, RNA, chlorophyll, fats, secondary compounds, and carbohydrates, such as cellulose and sucrose.

So why aren't we supplementing Hydrogen as well? Good question because *IF* my theory is correct, we have been missing out!


*Theory*:
Plants seem to like a BALANCE. There can't be TOO much Co2, There can't be TOO much Nitrogen, Phosphorus, or Potassium, There has to be enough Oxygen (in correlation with the amount of Hydrogen "part of my theory"). I think the limiting factors may be associated with the availability of Hydrogen, as long as you BALANCE the Hydrogen (acid) with enough base, N-P-K, Co2, o2, blah blah.. the whole number. 

A plants main goal is to grow and really has no Genetic pre-determined height.. I mean you can VEG weed for a long ass time right? With that said and a plants simplicity, it seems provided balanced Hydrogen, base, Nutes, Co2, Oxygen the plant would attempt to adapt to the abundance of everything and STRIVE rather than stress and die... Hydrogen is one of the last elements to complete a Beyond-PERFECT environment that I have yet to read anyone supplementing.

Earlier I mentioned Hydro users have about 10x more Hydrogen available than soil users, in result could be a possibility to why Hydro grows a little quicker and larger. In-case this was not clear, my theory pretty much explains this happens because 10x MORE Hydrogen cells are available to bind with other nutrients to make the plants compounds. Makes sense when Hydrogen is part of almost all plant material compounds...

*Possible Solution for HYDRO*
When Gas prices hit crazy prices, everyone started making these DIY hydrogen fuel cells and putting plans up online. There extremely easy to make and one could make a hell of one out of house hold current. Using a similar method with a regulator on it (to get a consistent feed to balance everything else), lead the extracted Hydrogen through a tube, in your Res. RIGHT next to your air stone. I am pretty sure the Hydrogen will combine with the Oxygen and form a higher Hydrogen content in your Res. Balance this out with a little more base but be sure to pH the water before adding any Up or Down or Nutes. If your pH is 4.8, your plant should be able to take up 100x, pH=3.8 - 1000x more nutes than soil. I'm not sure if this works, it is just what I hope to test out soon. I'm not sure if there is a limit or anything at all really. I do think that supplementing Co2 will help this effect even more.


I hope this attracts serious people as I some what think I may be on to something. Please don't thread shit with "it wont work" or any other jackass remarks unless you have info to back it up. I've posted a lot of information, most of which I have researched myself so it should be pretty accurate. I welcome any correction/suggestions/ideas/comments because I really do think SOME kind of Hydrogen supplementation would help and I am sure there are others who will after reading this. Lets gets some experiments rolling! Damn I hope I'm right on this.


----------



## desertrat (Jan 4, 2009)

you get points for creativity and motivation. i do have a few thoughts about your conclusions.

1. adding hydrogen is the same as lowering the pH with an acidic additive. it's easier to use the additives than to use straight hydrogen.

2. i believe (but don't know without research) that the reason hydro works better than soil is the increased amount of oxygen that reaches the roots compared to soil.


----------



## oscarmiya (Jan 4, 2009)

desertrat said:


> you get points for creativity and motivation. i do have a few thoughts about your conclusions.
> 
> 1. adding hydrogen is the same as lowering the pH with an acidic additive. it's easier to use the additives than to use straight hydrogen.
> 
> 2. i believe (but don't know without research) that the reason hydro works better than soil is the increased amount of oxygen that reaches the roots compared to soil.


Thank you for chiming in! Ok, Here are my responses to your 2 things.

1.) Adding Hydrogen is not the same as adding pH down with an acidic additive. A single ****KEY**** FREE FLOATING ****KEY**** (combined with oxygen "H20") hydrogen atom is what is usable to a plant. Not H3PO4 which is Phosphoric Acid, common for hydro and is what GH uses in their pH down. Besides, if that was usable to the plant, your pH would change dramatically as your plant would be using the Hydrogen from the pH Down. Instead your Hydrogen/Oxygen level stays ABOUT the same in the water when grown correctly- Keeping your pH adjusters working... Because the plant DOESN'T use them.

2.) I believe that as well but I believe that because no one has ever made sense other wise. If you believe its because more Oxygen then why do you not CONSIDER maybe its the increased amount of Hydrogen (Hydrogen is pretty much the element of life) that your plants getting instead!! Or possibly, like my theory says, a BALANCED mixture of Oxygen to Hydrogen.

Good points though


----------



## oscarmiya (Jan 4, 2009)

Just to further make point of this. 

I don't know about you guys but when my pH does change and I am running high PPM.. My pH always goes more BASE and my Nutes never seem to make me Acidic. Meaning that More HYDROGEN is being used VS. other elements.

The correlations makes more and more sense the more I think about it. Its trying to use more nutes but since the Nute uptake is Dependant on available Hydrogen and there is a limited amount of Hydrogen to Oxygen ratio.. Bam you get burns- because.. POSSIBLY it uptakes the nutrient without binding to the proper amount of Hydrogen atoms.


----------



## desertrat (Jan 4, 2009)

god do i love a good chemistry discussion (admission - i am a geeky chemical engineer).

1. anyway, any acidic additive will create a free hydrogen atom when added to water. actually, relatively free as the hydrogen atom is lightly bound to the basic component of the molecule. if you added completely free hydrogen it would just combine with other hydrogen atoms to form inert h2.

2. granted, it could be oxygen and hydrogen the roots use. if you look around you'll probably find some info on plant biology that tells you what compounds are absorbed by roots.


----------



## oscarmiya (Jan 4, 2009)

desertrat said:


> god do i love a good chemistry discussion (admission - i am a geeky chemical engineer).
> 
> 1. anyway, any acidic additive will create a free hydrogen atom when added to water. actually, relatively free as the hydrogen atom is lightly bound to the basic component of the molecule. if you added completely free hydrogen it would just combine with other hydrogen atoms to form inert h2.
> 
> 2. granted, it could be oxygen and hydrogen the roots use. if you look around you'll probably find some info on plant biology that tells you what compounds are absorbed by roots.


ok Lol.. I am no Chemical Engineer but I am an Engineer... A very analytical one at that.

*Response,*
I looked for a while earlier and I just looked again and I can't find jack on the absorption rate of Oxygen, Carbon, and Hydrogen. I do believe there is a direct relation to Hydrogen/Oxygen just as important as Carbon/Oxygen is. Maybe when both are dialed in properly and balanced we can push the boundaries even more.

For some reason I was thinking when 2 Hydrogen atoms are introduced to Oxygen H20 is Formed. Yes Hydrogen would bunch together but if dialed in properly the Oxygen would attract 2 Hydrogen per Atom to complete its "charge" Correct? I mean there may be an abundance of Hydrogen at first but eventually it could be dialed in pretty accurate and besides, you could play it safe and give it WAY more Oxygen than Hydrogen to see if there is any difference in results. People manage pretty well with C/O2 and I think that would be harder to manage.


----------



## desertrat (Jan 4, 2009)

oscarmiya said:


> For some reason I was thinking when 2 Hydrogen atoms are introduced to Oxygen H20 is Formed. Yes Hydrogen would bunch together but if dialed in properly the Oxygen would attract 2 Hydrogen per Atom to complete its "charge" Correct?


don't forget the oxygen is in the form of o2, does not easily break apart into two atoms, and does not need the hydrogen to complete its charge because the other oxygen atom does that.


----------



## eza82 (Jan 4, 2009)

HYDROGEN - recycling lost evolved H2 thought it may be of intrest


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Appl Environ Microbiol. 1979 March; 37(3): 582-587



Hydrogen Evolution from Alfalfa and Clover Nodules and Hydrogen Uptake by Free-Living Rhizobium meliloti 
Tomás Ruiz-Argüeso, Robert J. Maier and Harold J. Evans 
1 Laboratory for Nitrogen Fixation Research, Oregon State University, Corvallis, Oregon 97331 


ABSTRACT

A series of Rhizobium meliloti and Rhizobium trifolii strains were used as inocula for alfalfa and clover, respectively, grown under bacteriologically controlled conditions. Replicate samples of nodules formed by each strain were assayed for rates of H2 evolution in air, rates of H2 evolution under Ar and O2, and rates of C2H2 reduction. Nodules formed by all strains of R. meliloti and R. trifolii on their respective hosts lost at least 17% of the electron flow through nitrogenase as evolved H2. The mean loss from alfalfa nodules formed by 19 R. meliloti strains was 25%, and the mean loss from clover nodules formed by seven R. trifolii strains was 35%. R. meliloti and R. trifolii strains also were cultured under conditions that were previously established for derepression of hydrogenase synthesis. Only strains 102F65 and 102F51 of R. meliloti showed measurable activity under free-living conditions. Bacteroids from nodules formed by the two strains showing hydrogenase activity under free-living conditions also oxidized H2 at low rates. The specific activity of hydrogenase in bacteroids formed by either strain 102F65 or strain 102F51 of R. meliloti was less than 0.1% of the specific activity of the hydrogenase system in bacteroids formed by H2 uptake-positive Rhizobium japonicum USDA 110, which has been investigated previously. R. meliloti and R. trifolii strains tested possessed insufficient hydrogenase to recycle a substantial proportion of the H2 evolved from the nitrogenase reaction in nodules of their hosts. Additional research is needed, therefore, to develop strains of R. meliloti and R. trifolii that possess an adequate H2-recycling system. 

And check out.....

Journal of Experimental Botany:

Brief exposure to low-pH stress causes irreversible damage to the growing root in _Arabidopsis thaliana_: pectin&#8211;Ca interaction may play an important role in proton rhizotoxicity


----------



## oscarmiya (Jan 4, 2009)

desertrat said:


> don't forget the oxygen is in the form of o2, does not easily break apart into two atoms, and does not need the hydrogen to complete its charge because the other oxygen atom does that.


I was thinking this could be done with an electrical current and a couple aluminum dohickies... When you seperate the Hydrogen from the Oxygen, I think it reverse's the charge on the Hydrogen atom or does something to it allowing it to recombine with oxygen once it comes in contact again... Much much how the Fuel cells work these people are posting everywhere. Either way though, wouldn't HO2 be Hydrogen Peroxide? It might take twice as much as straight H2O but I'll take a 50% better growth rate if thats what it means.




eza82 said:


> HYDROGEN - recycling lost evolved H2 thought it may be of intrest
> 
> 
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> ...


Thanks for posting in man. From what I read, it looks like someone tried to supplement straight Hydrogen, 2 Combined Hydrogen atoms and had bad results... IMO I think that would only suffocate a plant more than Sitting Water. By that I mean, you would need proper Oxygen to Hydrogen, much like CO2 to Oxygen or you suffocate your ladies. The plant Breathes/absorbs O2 and Uses C and H to metabolize into cells.


----------



## desertrat (Jan 4, 2009)

oscarmiya said:


> I was thinking this could be done with an electrical current and a couple aluminum dohickies... When you seperate the Hydrogen from the Oxygen, I think it reverse's the charge on the Hydrogen atom or does something to it allowing it to recombine with oxygen once it comes in contact again... Much much how the Fuel cells work these people are posting everywhere. Either way though, wouldn't HO2 be Hydrogen Peroxide? It might take twice as much as straight H2O but I'll take a 50% better growth rate if thats what it means.


and the score is 16 to 14 if you aren't watching. seriously, and this about exhausts my knowledge on the subject, i think an electrical current in a fuel cell separates 3 oxygen molecules, making two ozone molecules. the ozone is extremely unstable and combines with h2 to form water and energy. but i could be hallucinating. btw, hydrogen peroxide is h2o2


----------



## oscarmiya (Jan 4, 2009)

Below is the chemical equation of how a plant emits O2 and metabolizes.

6CO2 + 6H2O (+ light energy) --> C6H12O6 + 6O2

6 Carbon dioxide molecules plus 6 water molecules plus energy (6 H2O) are remade into 1 glucose sugar molecule and 6 gaseous oxygen molecules.

Looking at that it even seems clear. People are supplementing CO2 with great results. It Takes 6 - CO2 *AND* 6 - H20 to make 1 glucose sugar molecule. If your Supplementing CO2 and seeing an increase WITHOUT adding extra Hydrogen, just think of how many more Glucose Sugar Molecules you could be producing with extra Hydrogen!!!


----------



## oscarmiya (Jan 4, 2009)

desertrat said:


> and the score is 16 to 14 if you aren't watching. seriously, and this about exhausts my knowledge on the subject, i think an electrical current in a fuel cell separates 3 oxygen molecules, making two ozone molecules. the ozone is extremely unstable and combines with h2 to form water and energy. but i could be hallucinating. btw, hydrogen peroxide is h2o2


Haha, Don't love a good ole Chem Discussion that much huh? I hear ya tho bro, I'm gonna go burn one and watch a couple movies. Man I hope more people chime in the meantime. I took a lot of time researching this shit and it makes a whole bunch of sense so I hope people discuss it a little. I will try it, maybe this week or later however will be a process that is more than just a week.

Either way, H2O2 is still Hydrogen and Oxygen, actually even possibly better since its just more Oxygen.


----------



## Hedgehunter (Jan 4, 2009)

very interesting read, should take it to one of those inventor shows ! 

good luck with this


----------



## oscarmiya (Jan 4, 2009)

Hedgehunter said:


> very interesting read, should take it to one of those inventor shows !
> 
> good luck with this



Hahah, I'm more of a thinker, bad entrepreneur lol. Someone else can take the credit, I just want better/more WEED! Glad somebody else thinks this is interesting too, I was beginning to think "I hope I'm not one of those dipshits who says something real stupid and no1's even wants to comment" lol. If I came across this thread I would have been real interested because I am pretty sure the points I am making are Valid, yet outside the box.. Thanks for commenting tho man. I will try and build one this week if I get around to it. If it works how I expect, after the Hydrogen Cell is constructed, it will be as easy as hooking up to your existing air line or separately ran tube just like your air line.


----------



## mindphuk (Jan 4, 2009)

Interesting thought but I don't think the plant is utilizing the H- (hydrogen anion). Yes, plants need hydrogen but they get it from water (inside of the plant cells) along with the carbon from CO2. Remember the photosynthesis equation 6 CO2 + 12 H2O + photon energy &#8594; C6H12O6 + 6 O2 + 6 H2O. Hydrogen is not the limiting factor here CO2 and light are. 

I do believe that the pH that plants uptake nutrients most efficiently is species specific. Also different nutes are absorbed more efficiently at different ranges so 5.8 is not a hard and fast rule either.
However, for the difference between soil and hydro, my first assumption is that it has something to do with the buffers in soil that require a higher pH.


----------



## aknight3 (Jan 4, 2009)

i just read this whole thread....im smarter now thanks guys


----------



## oscarmiya (Jan 4, 2009)

mindphuk said:


> Interesting thought but I don't think the plant is utilizing the H- (hydrogen anion). Yes, plants need hydrogen but they get it from water (inside of the plant cells) along with the carbon from CO2. Remember the photosynthesis equation 6 CO2 + 12 H2O + photon energy &#8594; C6H12O6 + 6 O2 + 6 H2O. Hydrogen is not the limiting factor here CO2 and light are.
> 
> I do believe that the pH that plants uptake nutrients most efficiently is species specific. Also different nutes are absorbed more efficiently at different ranges so 5.8 is not a hard and fast rule either.
> However, for the difference between soil and hydro, my first assumption is that it has something to do with the buffers in soil that require a higher pH.


6CO2 + 6H2O (+ light energy) --> C6H12O6 + 6O2 is the correct Photosynthesis Equation, just as I posted at the top of Page 2. In your equation and in mine (the correct one)  lol idk, more so in yours, Hydrogen could still be a limiting factor. 
I don't understand your reasoning though. In your equation your saying for every 12 H2O there has to be 6 CO2's- Which makes even more sense to supplement Hydrogen.. because it is needed TWICE as much as Carbon to make a glucose sugar molecule.. which is whats used for energy. I know the plant gets Hydrogen from water, thats why you put MORE hydrogen in the water... According to the equation, Hydrogen is JUST as important as CO2 and Lights, how could you say differently? Think of it, Water gives life to everything. Would your seeds have sprouted with Just Light and CO2??? They NEED the HYDROGEN atoms to build cellular structure! It seem's simple yet no one ever seems to say anything about Hydrogen, when it is just as important as Carbon..


----------



## oscarmiya (Jan 4, 2009)

aknight3 said:


> i just read this whole thread....im smarter now thanks guys


Haha, I know what ya mean! I'm following this shit though.. Too Focused- Stoner in action! I have a good feeling I am on to something.


----------



## mindphuk (Jan 4, 2009)

oscarmiya said:


> 6CO2 + 6H2O (+ light energy) --> C6H12O6 + 6O2 is the correct Photosynthesis Equation, just as I posted at the top of Page 2. In your equation and in mine (the correct one)  lol idk, more so in yours, Hydrogen could still be a limiting factor.
> I don't understand your reasoning though. In your equation your saying for every 12 H2O there has to be 6 CO2's- Which makes even more sense to supplement Hydrogen.. because it is needed TWICE as much as Carbon to make a glucose sugar molecule.. which is whats used for energy. I know the plant gets Hydrogen from water, thats why you put MORE hydrogen in the water... According to the equation, Hydrogen is JUST as important as CO2 and Lights, how could you say differently? Think of it, Water gives life to everything. Would your seeds have sprouted with Just Light and CO2??? They NEED the HYDROGEN atoms to build cellular structure! It seem's simple yet no one ever seems to say anything about Hydrogen, when it is just as important as Carbon..


Yes, the equations are identical. The water produced as a result of photosynthesis just cancels out the water that was used in the first place. I skimmed some parts and missed that you posted the equation earlier.

Anyway, what I'm saying is *intracellular *water is what is used in photosynthesis. Increasing hydrogen anions at the roots only affect pH, it will not do anything to the water in the leaves where the photosynthesis is taking place. The best way to make sure a plant has enough hydrogen is to make sure it has a good healthy root system and the ability to uptake as much water as it needs.


----------



## mindphuk (Jan 4, 2009)

BTW, I found a good explanation over on gardenscure.com


> It has to do with nutrient solubility and cation exchange capacity(CEC). In hydroponics the plants rely on the solution to supply the needed nutrients, so you have to maintain the solution pH at a point where the best balance of nutrients are soluble, while preventing precipitation, and thus availible to be taken up by the plant. In soil some of the nutrients are actually held and later released by clay particles, cation exchange, thus the pH at which the nutrients are most soluble, the ones that are only availible to the plants via the solution , is a bit higher.
> 
> If your substrate has a high CEC you can and arguably should irrigate with a slightly higher pH solution, to provide the plants the best opportunity to take up the nutrients that it can only get via the irrigation. Allowing the CEC of the substrate to provide the cation elements as the plant needs them.


----------



## Eddie McPot (Jan 4, 2009)

Google the "Garrett water carburetor"


----------



## eza82 (Jan 4, 2009)

I think you are better off ...doing you hormone study first giving you better than genetic capabilities - root uptake stem size and capacity etc, then introduce a concept such as more hydrogen.


----------



## oscarmiya (Jan 4, 2009)

mindphuk said:


> Yes, the equations are identical. The water produced as a result of photosynthesis just cancels out the water that was used in the first place. I skimmed some parts and missed that you posted the equation earlier.
> 
> Anyway, what I'm saying is *intracellular *water is what is used in photosynthesis. Increasing hydrogen anions at the roots only affect pH, it will not do anything to the water in the leaves where the photosynthesis is taking place. The best way to make sure a plant has enough hydrogen is to make sure it has a good healthy root system and the ability to uptake as much water as it needs.


In my equation, I am saying there are 6 H2O's needed, in your equation you say there are 12 H2O's needed... How is that the same? Am I missing something? Your plants do NOT get Hydrogen Intra-cellular. It uptakes through mainly the roots and leaves. It HAS to pull Hydrogen from either the atmosphere or more commonly Water as it is 2 Hydrogen 1 Oxygen... Do a little search, I'm not pulling this out of my ass. 



mindphuk said:


> BTW, I found a good explanation over on gardenscure.com


This doesn't explain anything but what Nutrients are Uptaken at different pH levels, which are widely known. Give me a chart at which Plant absorb Hydrogen, Carbon, and Oxygen and I will bow to you... and they DO absorb all 3 of those from either Roots or Leaves.


----------



## aknight3 (Jan 4, 2009)

i actually think it makes sense ill be interested to see what happens when u try it (if)


----------



## oscarmiya (Jan 4, 2009)

Eddie McPot said:


> Google the "Garrett water carburetor"


That looked like info on a similar electrolytic fuel cell. Pretty much what I am talking about to separate/combine the Hydrogen to the Oxygen.



eza82 said:


> I think you are better off ...doing you hormone study first giving you better than genetic capabilities - root uptake stem size and capacity etc, then introduce a concept such as more hydrogen.


Did they do Hormone studies or mess with genetic capabilities before they figured out Carbon rockets MJ or any plant at that? Nah, Stoney McClown pry popped a Regulator on his CO2 Tank back in the 60's and blew his plants up instead of Balloons. or whatever lol.. nah- Hydrogen is complex but in this case it seems simple. Simple as Carbon, we all know that increases growth. I'm def. doing this but I am still curious if anyone can debug this theory before I try. Or if anyone thinks it may work... very curious to see peoples opinions on this.


----------



## panhead (Jan 4, 2009)

This topic is over my head but im subscribing,it will take me a week to digest all the info contained so far but i will,hopefully this topic yeilds some sort of consensus.

Plus rep for all of you contributing to this topic.


----------



## mindphuk (Jan 4, 2009)

oscarmiya said:


> In my equation, I am saying there are 6 H2O's needed, in your equation you say there are 10 H2O's needed... How is that the same? Am I missing something?


My equation is 6 CO2 + 12 H2O + photon energy &#8594; C6H12O6 + 6 O2 + 6 H2O
I never said 10 H2O. The extra 6 on the left side of the equation cancel out the 6 produced on the right giving us 
6 CO2 + 6 H2O + photon energy &#8594; C6H12O6 + 6 O2
which is completely identical to yours. 



> Your plants do NOT get Hydrogen Intracellular. It uptakes through mainly the roots and leaves. It HAS to pull Hydrogen from either the atmosphere or more commonly Water as it is 2 Hydrogen 1 Oxygen... Do a little search, I'm not pulling this out of my ass.


I didn't say plants get hydrogen intracellularly, I said that is where the photosynthesis is taking place so that's where the hydrogen is coming from during the act of photosynthesis, off of the water molecule. 


> This doesn't explain anything but what Nutrients are Uptaken at different pH levels, which are widely known. Give me a chart at which Plant absorb Hydrogen, Carbon, and Oxygen and I will bow to you... and they DO absorb all 3 of those from either Roots or Leaves.


Relax, I'm not trying to argue, but explain. I'm not sure what kind of chart you want about absorbing carbon oxygen and hydrogen. Roots absorb oxygen and water, whereas leaves absorb the CO2 for the carbon. There is no H+ on the left side of the equation, it is all bound by water. Increasing hydrogen ions does nothing to increase water intake of the plant, only lowers pH, what more can I say. 
The reason I included the chart is because it went along with the post that I quoted above about CEC. It explains why plants need a pH 5.8-6.2 in hydro and 6.5-6.8 in soil which started off your thinking (and also why hydro is less forgiving). What he is saying is that the plant does absorb best at pH 5.8 but first has to have a cation exchange with the clay in the soil. So basically, what I said before about having something to do with the buffer capacity of soil is the reason for the difference.


----------



## oscarmiya (Jan 4, 2009)

panhead said:


> This topic is over my head but im subscribing,it will take me a week to digest all the info contained so far but i will,hopefully this topic yeilds some sort of consensus.
> 
> Plus rep for all of you contributing to this topic.


Thanks Panhead, good to see you here. I hope this works as well.. If you don't already understand it, reading back this thread should at least give you a good idea of where I'm coming from.



mindphuk said:


> My equation is 6 CO2 + 12 H2O + photon energy &#8594; C6H12O6 + 6 O2 + 6 H2O
> I never said 10 H2O. The extra 6 on the left side of the equation cancel out the 6 produced on the right giving us
> 6 CO2 + 6 H2O + photon energy &#8594; C6H12O6 + 6 O2
> which is completely identical to yours.
> ...


Yea man, I'm not getting short... I am just more blunt when I debate or try to prove something. I typo'd n said 10 I corrected to 12 but I still don't understand how your equation is the same as mine when your's requires twice as much H20 to get the same Sugar Molecule?.. Hydrogen HAS to be absorbed by either roots or through leaves.. the plant doesn't just create Hydrogen itself.. well maybe some plants but not WEED. "Intra-Cellular" or in the leaf or whatever is where photosynthesis takes place... But the stem carries the Nutrients, Hydrogen, Oxygen, and Carbon through the roots and leaves to deliver to the "stations" to create glucose molecules. Your right and previously we talked about adding JUST hydrogen atoms. You bind the Hydrogen extracted from one Res. tank to Oxygen being fed through a normal air line, this can be done by electrolysis or whatever. The Hydrogen atoms should reattach to the oxygen in the air line, then a Hydrogen Rich Oxygen mixture will be delivered to your plants roots.

Again I'm not getting short or anything and sorry for coming off that way. I don't dis-belive what your saying in the bottom paragraph as nutrients are readily available for the roots to absorb anytime but soil buffers and released timely as well... Hydrogen could be just as big of a factor, no one ever questions its use... Maybe because not many people knew of Hydrogen Fuel cells until recently even though the information has been right in our faces for years???


----------



## mindphuk (Jan 4, 2009)

oscarmiya said:


> Thanks Panhead, good to see you here. I hope this works as well.. If you don't already understand it, reading back this thread should at least give you a good idea of where I'm coming from.
> 
> 
> Yea man, I'm not getting short... I am just more blunt when I debate or try to prove something. I typo'd n said 10 I corrected to 12 but I still don't understand how your equation is the same as mine when your's requires twice as much H20 to get the same Sugar Molecule?.. Hydrogen HAS to be absorbed by either roots or through leaves.. the plant doesn't just create Hydrogen itself.. well maybe some plants but not WEED. "Intra-Cellular" or in the leaf or whatever is where photosynthesis takes place... But the stem carries the Nutrients, Hydrogen, Oxygen, and Carbon through the roots and leaves to deliver to the "stations" to create glucose molecules. Your right and previously we talked about adding JUST hydrogen atoms. You bind the Hydrogen extracted from one Res. tank to Oxygen being fed through a normal air line, this can be done by electrolysis or whatever. The Hydrogen atoms should reattach to the oxygen in the air line, then a Hydrogen Rich Oxygen mixture will be delivered to your plants roots.
> ...


I'm not a botanist but I don't think you are correct. Plants need oxygen for respiration, but roots don't 'take in O2' and transport it any more than it does carbon. It only takes in and transports H2O and nutrients from the roots up the stems and leaves. Both oxygen and hydrogen are bound in the water molecule. Your comment


> "_Hydrogen HAS to be absorbed by either roots or through leaves.. the plant doesn't just create Hydrogen itself_"


just doesn't make sense. It gets all of the hydrogen it needs from water. The plant is 80% water by weight, I think that's plenty of both hydrogen and oxygen. 
Think of this, we 'need' hydrogen too, should I just chug some muriatic acid?
All of the hydrogen we need for our biochemical cycles can be cleaved off of the water molecule just like the plant does. 

You also said:


> The Hydrogen atoms should reattach to the oxygen in the air line, then a Hydrogen Rich Oxygen mixture will be delivered to your plants roots.


You are describing watering your plants.  
This is the whole crux of what I'm saying. Hydrogen and oxygen are needed by the plant. It gets most of both from water. Roots need oxygen to respire so the energy created can be used to transport nutes and water. I have looked and cannot find any H+ on the left side of any of the chemical reactions that plants use. Your idea began from the difference between soil and hydro pH and I think the CEC answers that pretty well. 

As for the equation. I'm not sure how to explain it any better than is that yours is a simplified version of mine. In order to complete 'one cycle' 12 molecules of water are needed but there are 6 left over after the cycle. If you cancel 6 water molecules from each side of the equation, mine turns into yours. 
Here's and excerpt from Wikipedia:A commonly used slightly simplified equation for photosynthesis is:
6 CO2(g) + 12 H2O(l) + photons &#8594; C6H12O6(aq) + 6 O2(g) + 6 H2O(l)
carbon dioxide + water + light energy &#8594; glucose + oxygen + water
The equation is often presented in introductory chemistry texts in an even more simplified form as:[3]
6 CO2(g) + 6 H2O(l) + photons &#8594; C6H12O6(aq) + 6 O2(g)​By the way. You might take a look at the Calvin Cycle. 
In that cycle, 2 hydrogen ions are produced:
3 CO2 + 6 NADPH + 5 H2O + 9 ATP &#8594; C3H5O3-PO32- + 2 H+ + 6 NADP+ + 9 ADP + 8 Pi

It got those ions from water too.


----------



## oscarmiya (Jan 4, 2009)

mindphuk said:


> I'm not a botanist but I don't think you are correct. Plants need oxygen for respiration, but roots don't 'take in O2' and transport it any more than it does carbon. It only takes in and transports H2O and nutrients from the roots up the stems and leaves. Both oxygen and hydrogen are bound in the water molecule. Your comment just doesn't make sense. It gets all of the hydrogen it needs from water. The plant is 80% water by weight, I think that's plenty of both hydrogen and oxygen.
> Think of this, we 'need' hydrogen too, should I just chug some muriatic acid?
> All of the hydrogen we need for our biochemical cycles can be cleaved off of the water molecule just like the plant does.
> 
> ...


*I know Hydrogen and Oxygen can form to be several different things but depending on the buffer plate things you use for the electrolysis it will do what you want. Whatever the equation is.. it still proves that 3 Elements are CLEARLY needed to create a glucose molecule, Oxygen, Hydrogen, and Carbon. All 3 can be artificially created and supp'd correctly should speed growth dramatically.... in theory*


----------



## mindphuk (Jan 4, 2009)

oscarmiya said:


> *I know Hydrogen and Oxygen can form to be several different things but depending on the buffer plate things you use for the electrolysis it will do what you want. Whatever the equation is.. it still proves that 3 Elements are CLEARLY needed to create a glucose molecule, Oxygen, Hydrogen, and Carbon. All 3 can be artificially created and supp'd correctly should speed growth dramatically.... in theory*


No question that all 3 are necessary. My point is that in order to supply enough oxygen and hydrogen that plant needs to to give it water. Think about DWC where the roots are constatly imersed in water. Water, thus hydrogen is not a limiting factor in plant growth unless you underwater, then you can stunt growth because water is necessary for all of these biochemical reactions to take place. Nutrients, light and CO2 are all limiting factors. Water is quite abundant in the plant making any attempt to introduce additional hydrogen futile. I'm sorry if what I'm saying is a bummer because I know you seem dedicated to this but if plants could uptake hydrogen in any form except water (assuming it was necessary in the first place), don't you think some botanist would have figured it out by now? You say that hydrogen cells are new but hydrogen production and electrolysis have been around for quite some time. 

More from wikipedia on photosynthesis:
Further experiments to prove that the oxygen developed during the photosynthesis of green plants came from water, were performed by Robert Hill in 1937 and 1939. He showed that isolated chloroplasts give off oxygen in the presence of unnatural reducing agents like iron oxalate, ferricyanide or benzoquinone after exposure to light. The Hill reaction is as follows:
2 H2O + 2 A + (light, chloroplasts) &#8594; 2 AH2 + O2where A is the electron acceptor. Therefore, in light the electron acceptor is reduced and oxygen is evolved. Cyt b6, now known as a plastoquinone, is one electron acceptor.
Samuel Ruben and Martin Kamen used radioactive isotopes to determine that the oxygen liberated in photosynthesis came from the water.​ Now since the oxygen liberated from photosynthesis comes from water, doesn't it follow that the hydrogen used to reduce the electron receptors also came from the water?


----------



## oscarmiya (Jan 4, 2009)

Explain to me please why when your water level of your Res. Tank goes down, your pH level does not go more ACIDIC. Because the Hydrogen is being uptaken with the water by the roots. There is Hydrogen in the water, Correct-o-mundo but there are 2 Hydrogen 1 Oxygen being uptaken by the plant in the form of H2O!! That tells me there is a Ratio that the plant needs Oxygen to Hydrogen. Just as there is a certain ratio kept for the PPM of Carbon to Oxygen.
What your saying IS NOT a bummer, it is frustrating. It is a KNOWN fact that a plant NEEDS hydrogen. It seems pretty clear plants survives pretty well when it receives 2 Hydrogen molecules wrapped with 1 Oxygen molecule. btw, the plant is also CLEARLY taking UP single O2 molecules as well. If it wasn't, there would be no need for straight Air Supply to your roots. Roots are otherwise submerged in water, have you ever tried giving just the roots more Hydrogen with the correct amount of Oxygen using electrolysis? If you have never tried it, I just don't see how you can say it will be of no benefit, knowing that Supp'd Carbon helps a ton! The SAME amount of Hydrogen is needed of Carbon to make a Glucose Sugar Molecule! There should be plenty of Carbon in the air but for some reason when we supplement it, the plants grow better as well. 

Ok I just did a search quick, here maybe this will HELP drive my point home.

*"Let's look at the first process - the electrolyser. This is the process of breaking water (H2O) into hydrogen (H2) and oxygen (O2). When a chemical charge is applied to water, the charge breaks the chemical bond between hydrogen and oxygen and creates charged particles called ions. In this case, positively charged hydrogen ions and negatively charged ions are formed. An electrolyte, also called an electrolytic conductor, is a conducting medium in which the flow of current is accompanied by the movement of matter in the form of ions. An electrolyser has 2 electrodes where the ions form. One electrode, called the anode, is positively charged, and attracts the negatively charged oxygen ions. The other electrode is called the cathode and attracts the positively charged hydrogen ions. But to break the bonds of water requires energy.
The second process is the fuel cell, or reverse electrolysis. This is the process of turning the hydrogen (chemical energy) into electricity to power our car. The PEM fuel cell consists primarily of four components, the anode (negative electrode), the cathode (positive electrode), a catalyst and an electrolyte. Hydrogen gas pumped into the anode strikes the catalyst (a thin layer of platinum) and splits into hydrogen protons and electrons. On the opposite side of the fuel cell, oxygen enters the cathode. Sandwiched between the anode and cathode is a thin electrolyte membrane that looks like plastic wrap you'd find in your kitchen. It permits the positively charged protons to pass through from the anode to the cathode but blocks the negatively charged electrons which are forced to flow through an external circuit to form an electric current. When the electric current returns from doing work, such as powering an electric motor, it reacts with oxygen and the hydrogen ions at the cathode to form water and heat. That means no smog-forming emissions or greenhouse gasses!
The PEM actually dates back to 1839 when English physicist William Robert Grove first demonstrated his "gas voltaic battery."*

Not very hard and even this says the Hydrogen will recombine with the Oxygen because of electrolysis using Platinum splits the Hydrogen protons and electrons. Just as the text say ::COUGH:: and as I said, hook up an air tube running to a "T" connector on your air pump and let it flow out your air stone. It should re-combine to the O2 in the tube by the time it reaches the stone. U got supplemented Hydrogen now. Now you have a fresh UNLIMITED supply of Hydrogen being mixed with the O2 that your plant should be up taking. When these two are lit (heated), the bi-product is water. In the example above Heat is the bi-product of the atoms re-joining however I am sure when mixed in the line and by the time it exits the stone, or mix it at the end and it will recombine on its way up in a bubble, you will not be pissing water through your air stone.

and just to respond to your comment on "IF I EAT HYDROGEN WILL I GROW", "The number of covalent bonds that are normally formed by hydrogen, carbon, nitrogen and oxygen (the four atoms found in molecules of protein)"... so in a Way YES YOU WILL GROW, as long as you are working out and have a balanced diet. But then again, we are way more complex... but in the end it's just as important as Carbon and Oxygen.


----------



## diemdepyro (Jan 4, 2009)

people have been using hydrogen peroxide for years.


----------



## mindphuk (Jan 4, 2009)

diemdepyro said:


> people have been using hydrogen peroxide for years.


Yes, but that is to kill of organic baddies and to hopefully increase dissolved O2 in the water. If you notice the whole purpose is to increase O2 at the roots, not H2, since oxygen is the limiting factor in plant respiration and H2 or H+ is not utilized directly by the plant. 
I have challenged oscarmiya to show me a plant metabolic equation that uses hydrogen on the left side of the equation and all I get in response is a google explanation of electrolysis. 



oscarmiya said:


> The SAME amount of Hydrogen is needed of Carbon to make a Glucose Sugar Molecule! There should be plenty of Carbon in the air but for some reason when we supplement it, the plants grow better as well.


There ISN"T plenty of carbon in the air. If you look at the left side of the equation, CO2 is certainly needed, and through experimentation, we have determined that cannabis can take in as much as 1500ppm. So with room air at about 300ppm, we know CO2 is a limiting factor. 
I am still waiting for you to show me where in any part of the Calvin Cylcle that H2 or H+ is necessary on the left side of any equation. In fact, I have already shown that H+ is actually produced from the H2O molecule, so supplying additional hydrogen will not make the cycle any more efficient since it has all of the hydrogen it can possible need from water.


Can we put this discussion on hold until we can get a few more science folks here to confirm either one of our claims?


----------



## oscarmiya (Jan 5, 2009)

mindphuk said:


> Yes, but that is to kill of organic baddies and to hopefully increase dissolved O2 in the water. If you notice the whole purpose is to increase O2 at the roots, not H2, since oxygen is the limiting factor in plant respiration and H2 or H+ is not utilized directly by the plant.
> I have challenged oscarmiya to show me a plant metabolic equation that uses hydrogen on the left side of the equation and all I get in response is a google explanation of electrolysis.
> 
> There ISN"T plenty of carbon in the air. If you look at the left side of the equation, CO2 is certainly needed, and through experimentation, we have determined that cannabis can take in as much as 1500ppm. So with room air at about 300ppm, we know CO2 is a limiting factor.
> ...


No we can't put this on hold. Read up on Browns Gas. Here is a small snippit from brownsgas.com...

*HHO = 67% hydrogen and 33% oxygen (Still water but as a gas)

Brown's Gas = HHO but in a different proportion (patented by Prof. Yull Brown) 

Other related names: Hydroxy/ watergas/ rhode's gas/ oxyhydrogen/ di-hydroxy/ green gas/ klein gas/ aquygen/ knalgas 

During a Brown's Gas mon-atomic hydrogen (H) and mon-atomic oxygen (O) flame, no energy has to be added because the molecules are already in their simplest and highest energy atomic form. This means that "perfect" Brown's Gas can have 3.8 times the possible 'heat' energy that an "ordinary" H2 and O2 flame has (442.4 Kcal/115.7 Kcal). *

Its the SAME thing as WATER!!!!!! Just in Gas form and in a slightly higher proportion... PERFECT FOR RUNNING THROUGH your AIRLINE!!! Right now you add TONS of Oxygen to water so the roots do not Suffocate in all the Hydrogen (cellular respiration). There is PLENTY of Oxygen in the water as well, isn't there? Should be a ration 1 Oxygen:2 Hydrogen correct? BUT since Oxygen is combined with Hydrogen Atoms to complete the charge, it needs more Oxygen to breath and metabolize correctly. Now if your feeding the same thing to your plant through the air line in a higher proportion, Wouldn't your plant STILL uptake the Oxygen attached to the Gaseous 2H20??? POSSIBLY UP TAKING MORE HYDROGEN to SPEED up growth?

Doesn't this SEEM clear that there is direct correlation of Hydrogen to Oxygen? This tells me that the plant can uptake Oxygen without Hydrogen attached HOWEVER it can NOT uptake Hydrogen without Oxygen to complete its charge. Now what I am saying is this. If 2 Hydrogen attached to one Oxygen is "Too much" for the plant to breath and a 100g Air pump in a 5g bucket is supplying MORE than enough Oxygen to the roots in order to utilize the 2 Hydrogen attached to Each Oxygen cell then How bout we give it the SAME thing as water, in a GAS FORM, released through your air stone/mixed with some of the O2 in the tube to create a MORE enriched environment for the roots?

Isn't 2H2O the same thing as H20, just in gas form? If you do not believe me, look here




I'm not saying the plant uptakes H2 or a positively charged Hydrogen atom. I am saying that in Electrolysis, your separating Hydrogen atoms from Oxygen. When the Hydrogen is exposed to Oxygen directly after Electrolysis, the Hydrogen Re-binds to the Oxygen in a higher concentration, however proportioned just as water. Where as 6 CO2 + _*6 H2O*_ + photons &#8594; C6H12O6(aq) + 6 O2(g) equals 1 sugar... there is a possibility that a "supercharged" water molecule can be up taken by the plant to boost growth or cellular structure. It would split the molecule the exact same way using the same amount of energy but yet collect twice as much Hydrogen in the process.... To help you understand where I am coming from more... Underlined a couple Key words in the following paragraph.

*Plants consume CO2 in the process of photosynthesis and convert it to sugar. Oxygen is a waste product of this reaction, in that water is split to form hydrogen and oxygen. The plant uses the hydrogen to produce ATP. This process is only occuring in the day when there is light. However, at all times, the plant is respiring, just like people. They need oxygen for the metabolic process and produce CO2 as a waste product.
*

ATP is a nucleotide that contains a large amount of chemical energy stored in its high-energy phosphate bonds. It releases energy when it is broken down (hydrolyzed) into ADP (or Adenosine Diphosphate). The energy is used for many metabolic processes. Hence, ATP is considered as the universal energy currency for metabolism. 

ATP = C10*H16*N5O13P3


----------



## oscarmiya (Jan 5, 2009)

Why were on this whole molecular BS... 

Using Photolysis, you can separate Hydrogen from Oxygen, allowing the Hydrogen to bind to an Acceptor. Photolysis can be performed in nature by UVB, and UVC lights due to the wave lengths.

It is kind of known or seems to be a consensus that Adding a reptile UVB light increases trichome production. There is still no proof as to why, just people saying the plant is protecting itself. Just like our skins, it may be considered "Adapting" but we are having to adapt because something is changing in our body, the skin.. i mean is 70% water. Could this be because the UVB lights are Photolysising the Hydrogen from Oxygen, letting the Hydrogen bind to something else, possibly that other something that speeds up Trichome production? Too much light and you rob too much Hydrogen from the plant and cause harm- kinda like we'd get skin cancer?


----------



## mindphuk (Jan 5, 2009)

oscarmiya said:


> No we can't put this on hold. Read up on Browns Gas. Here is a small snippit from brownsgas.com...
> 
> *HHO = 67% hydrogen and 33% oxygen (Still water but as a gas)
> 
> ...


So you want to run a highly flammable gas along your air line? 2H2 + O2= H2O + energy from combustion.



> Right now you add TONS of Oxygen to water so the roots do not Suffocate in all the Hydrogen (cellular respiration). There is PLENTY of Oxygen in the water as well, isn't there? Should be a ration 1 Oxygen:2 Hydrogen correct?


Nope, you forgot about dissolved oxygen (DO). Depending on the water temperature, it can hold a certain amount of elemental oxygen (O2). It is this that the plants roots use in respiration. That's why if your rez temps get too high, you can starve the roots of oxygen even though you are still aerating. 



> BUT since Oxygen is combined with Hydrogen Atoms to complete the charge, it needs more Oxygen to breath and metabolize correctly. Now if your feeding the same thing to your plant through the air line in a higher proportion, Wouldn't your plant STILL uptake the Oxygen attached to the Gaseous 2H20??? POSSIBLY UP TAKING MORE HYDROGEN to SPEED up growth?
> Doesn't this SEEM clear that there is direct correlation of Hydrogen to Oxygen? This tells me that the plant can uptake Oxygen without Hydrogen attached HOWEVER it can NOT uptake Hydrogen without Oxygen to complete its charge. Now what I am saying is this. If 2 Hydrogen attached to one Oxygen is "Too much" for the plant to breath and a 100g Air pump in a 5g bucket is supplying MORE than enough Oxygen to the roots in order to utilize the 2 Hydrogen attached to Each Oxygen cell then How bout we give it the SAME thing as water, in a GAS FORM, released through your air stone/mixed with some of the O2 in the tube to create a MORE enriched environment for the roots?


Finding a way to increase DO in water is good but has nothing to do with hydrogen. 


> Isn't 2H2O the same thing as H20, just in gas form? If you do not believe me, look here I'm not saying the plant uptakes H2 or a positively charged Hydrogen atom. I am saying that in Electrolysis, your separating Hydrogen atoms from Oxygen. When the Hydrogen is exposed to Oxygen directly after Electrolysis, the Hydrogen Re-binds to the Oxygen in a higher concentration, however proportioned just as water.


I lost you here. First off, 2H2O is just 2 water molecules, nothing special. Water in gas form is called water vapor. Brown's gas or anything similar is not water. It is oxyhydrogen, a gas composed of two seperate molecules oxygen and hydrogen. 
The electrolysis equation is 2H2O &#8594; 2H2 + O2 Correct? When that hydrogen is exposed to oxygen again, it just reverses the equation and you get 2H2+ O2(g) &#8594; 2H2O or 2 molecules of water, the same amount you needed to start with. I don't see where you are getting this 'higher concentration' idea from. 



> Where as 6 CO2 + _6 H2O_ + photons &#8594; C6H12O6(aq) + 6 O2(g) equals 1 sugar... there is a possibility that a "supercharged" water molecule can be up taken by the plant to boost growth or cellular structure. It would split the molecule the exact same way using the same amount of energy but yet collect twice as much Hydrogen in the process.... To help you understand where I am coming from more... Underlined a couple Key words in the following paragraph.


There is no supercharged water on the left side of the equation. Photosynthesis can only use water molecules, not Deuterium Oxide (heavy water), not H2O2 (peroxide) or anything other than H2O. Show me the chemical makeup of this supercharged water molecule. So far, all you have shown is oxyhydrogen which at the most will increase dissolved oxygen but at the expense of creating a flammable gas. It would be easier to just use pure O2 through an airstone rather than air which has only 21% O2. 


> *Plants consume CO2 in the process of photosynthesis and convert it to sugar. Oxygen is a waste product of this reaction, in that water is split to form hydrogen and oxygen. The plant uses the hydrogen to produce ATP. This process is only occuring in the day when there is light. However, at all times, the plant is respiring, just like people. They need oxygen for the metabolic process and produce CO2 as a waste product.
> *
> ATP is a nucleotide that contains a large amount of chemical energy stored in its high-energy phosphate bonds. It releases energy when it is broken down (hydrolyzed) into ADP (or Adenosine Diphosphate). The energy is used for many metabolic processes. Hence, ATP is considered as the universal energy currency for metabolism.
> 
> ...


So far you have yet to show me the chemical makeup of this supercharged water molecule. Also, I have already shown that 2 H+ ions are produced during the Calvin Cycle. You also have to demonstrate that plant metabolism is limited in some way by lack of hydrogen. I already showed by using the photosynthesis equations how water, light and CO2 are limiting factors but oxygen and hydrogen are of ample supply and are in fact products of the first light-dependent reaction. Anything produced on the right side of the equation is by definition not a limiting factor in plant growth. Since H+ and O2 is produced in the light-dependent reactions, neither of them are necessary to 'feed' the plant. 
This is all basic biochemistry. I understand your enthusiasm about finding a possible way to increase plant production but unfortunately I don't think you are onto anything. We already know everything that plants need- water, nutrients, light and CO2. They also need O2 to respire to create the energy necessary to transport nutes and water into and up the roots. Free hydrogen, either elemental or ionic is nowhere to be found except as a product of one step in photosynthesis. Even supplying a plant with more hydrogen somehow wouldn't increase efficiency anywhere since it isn't directly utilized by the plant.


----------



## oscarmiya (Jan 5, 2009)

Man.. believe what you want. Your still not understanding what I am saying and I am way to tired of typing a bunch of shit to try and make you understand. Next week I plan to build me a little electrolysis and I will experiment myself.

With that said, this is my very last attempt to try and help you understand this.

If you hold a lighter to your ass your Fart will start on fire. Keep your bowl more than a couple inches away from your air stone _(or where ever your mixing with Oxygen)_ when the electrolysis is on and you wont have any worries. By the time it hits open air it will be dispersed, "evaporated" if you will, in the air. it will be similar to a puddle evaporating on a hot day or boiling a pot of water, same reaction. Just adding a little more moisture to the Humidity!

Your whole thing on Dissolved Oxygen is true but completely null to this conversation. My Theory is based off you know what the hell your doing and have your Res at a proper 68 degrees. Do I have to even say that? Are you trying to get under my skin? 

If a plant up takes H2O as a whole, then MAYBE its possible 2H2O, which in all form SHOULD be accepted by the plant to Up take and split apart to be used, since it has just as many Oxygen to Hydrogen in its make up as 2 H2O Molecules do. 

Again, 
*H2 + 0xygen* = H20
*H2O + H2O* = separate water molecules who's charges are already completed... (add a bunch more and you got a puddle)
*H2 + H2 + O2 = 2H2O*.. A single O2, which the plant breaks down normally to breath BUT now... here comes the "supercharged" part... there would be 4 Hydrogen to accompany the Oxygen in a *SINGLE *molecule instead of only 2.

Does this still make no sense to you?


----------



## oscarmiya (Jan 5, 2009)

mindphuk said:


> This is all basic biochemistry. I understand your enthusiasm about finding a possible way to increase plant production but unfortunately I don't think you are onto anything. We already know everything that plants need- water, nutrients, light and CO2. They also need O2 to respire to create the energy necessary to transport nutes and water into and up the roots. Free hydrogen, either elemental or ionic is nowhere to be found except as a product of one step in photosynthesis. Even supplying a plant with more hydrogen somehow wouldn't increase efficiency anywhere since it isn't directly utilized by the plant.


Ok I just read this, lol. You obviously don't understand the importance Hydrogen plays, as seen how so much of the plant material, broken down, consists of Hydrogen as well as Carbon.

Water, light, and Co2 are needed yes... but again, this is PAST whats needed to INCREASE growth. Why supplement CO2 if 300ppm occurring in the air is all it needed? For the same damn reason you should add more Hydrogen to a single molecule balanced with Oxygen. Its not CO2 that the plant uses, its the Carbon, the Oxygen is bound to enable the plant to process/uptake the carbon and later split it up accordingly to what it needs in Photosynthesis while Oxygen is being released back into air as the bi-product. Maybe the plants can live in 1500ppm of CO2, Maybe there only utilizing 400 ppm of that because there isn't enough Hydrogen to keep up with production. I'm trying to think past the "normal" because no matter what you say, there is plenty of factual evidence showing that Hydrogen plays a huge role in plant development and that is one key element we NEVER talk about adding more of. In my theory, its not the straight Hydrogen the plant uses rather a correct balance of Oxygen to Hydrogen combined in molecular form... which I believe 2H2O is. The same way it breaks oxygen from CO2 into Carbon, it breaks oxygen from H2O into Hydrogen.. 

Just to add a little more. Has anyone ever heard of how adding a electrical current can stimulate plant growth? Possibly for the same reason Electrolysis may work. The current was separating some of the Hydrogen atoms from Oxygen in the soil, after they where out of the current, they re-binded making H2O2- a stronger more potent version of H2O the plant CAN then use. This could seriously explain
A.) Why plants respond/produce differently when exposed to UV lights. (UV lights induce Photolysis, which is pretty much like Electrolysis)
B.) Why applying an electrical current around your garden increases growth. (Really just Electrolysis working here. Not much energy is needed to Separate Oxygen from Hydrogen.)

Go read this... http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?sec=health&res=9E04E7DD1338F93AA35757C0A963948260 The current they talk about is the Hydrogen atoms and is the SAME reason you can power a LED with a lemon.

As much as you have frustrated me with not understanding... You have made me understand even more. This has to work.


----------



## mindphuk (Jan 5, 2009)

oscarmiya said:


> If a plant up takes H2O as a whole, then MAYBE its possible 2H2O, which in all form SHOULD be accepted by the plant to Up take and split apart to be used, since it has just as many Oxygen to Hydrogen in its make up as 2 H2O Molecules do.
> 
> Again,
> *H2 + 0xygen* = H20
> ...


yes I understand what you are trying to tell me but I'm telling you why it doesn't matter. There is no H2 or H+ on the left side of the equation of any biochemical process that a plant uses (well, H+ is used in an intermediate step of carbon fixation but I already showed those 2H+ ions come off of water molecules).

I still don't see why you seem to treat 2H2O special. It is just the formula for 2 water molecules. 
BTW, there your first 'equation', *H2 + 0xygen* = H20 isn't accurate. 
You need two molecules of the diatomic hydrogen gas, combined with one molecule of the diatomic oxygen gas to produce two molecules of water like you demonstrate in the second equation *H2 + H2 + O2 = 2H2O* 
However, that equation, is traditionally written 2H2 + O2 &#8594; 2H20 + energy.
The amount of energy released is tremendous, 572 kJ to be exact. It's an exothermic or combustion reaction, the same that occurred in the Hindenburg and the Space Shuttle Challenger.

So even if somehow 2H2O is different than just 2 H2O molecules, where are you getting the idea that 2H2O is utilized or broken down by the plant to get it's O2? That's why I commented on dissolved O2 since that is where roots get their O2 in DWC, or just in air pockets in other media. In aeroponics it roots respire O2 direct from the air like we do. Roots don't even use H2O molecules to obtain their O2 for respiration, they surely won't do anything to your 2H2O.



oscarmiya said:


> Ok I just read this, lol. You obviously don't understand the importance Hydrogen plays, as seen how so much of the plant material, broken down, consists of Hydrogen as well as Carbon.


Please point me to the post that shows I don't understand the importance of hydrogen in making up the sugars and starches the plant needs. There's no need to be insulting my intelligence. 

The only thing we are disagreeing on is whether or not hydrogen is a limited element that by increasing availability (by whatever means) will help increase growth. You seem to think it will, I say it won't. I have asked for you to show me which chemical process in the plant that extra hydrogen is used. Every equations clearly show the plant can only utilize the hydrogen from water. No super water or any other source of hydrogen is used or needed by plants.
QED

BTW, I have a medical degree and am well versed in biochemistry. I am not as familiar with plants as much as animals, but the principles are the same. In fact, many of the processes are identical, like respiration; and others are the exact opposite, i.e. photosynthesis makes sugars from water, CO2 and light energy producing oxygen and water as waste, where respiration takes in oxygen to combine with water and carbohydrates to make energy and creates CO2 and water as waste. 



> Water, light, and Co2 are needed yes... but again, this is PAST whats needed to INCREASE growth. Why supplement CO2 if 300ppm occurring in the air is all it needed? For the same damn reason you should add more Hydrogen to a single molecule balanced with Oxygen. Its not CO2 that the plant uses, its the Carbon, the Oxygen is bound to enable the plant to process/uptake the carbon and later split it up accordingly to what it needs in Photosynthesis while Oxygen is being released back into air as the bi-product. Maybe the plants can live in 1500ppm of CO2, Maybe there only utilizing 400 ppm of that because there isn't enough Hydrogen to keep up with production. I'm trying to think past the "normal" because no matter what you say, there is plenty of factual evidence showing that Hydrogen plays a huge role in plant development and that is one key element we NEVER talk about adding more of. In my theory, its not the straight Hydrogen the plant uses rather a correct balance of Oxygen to Hydrogen combined in molecular form... which I believe 2H2O is. The same way it breaks oxygen from CO2 into Carbon, it breaks oxygen from H2O into Hydrogen..


Well our plants can use up to 1500ppm of CO2 in optimum heat and light because that's the number that has been experimentally shown to be the max. Supplementing more than that won't help. Other plants may be different, some up to 2000ppm. The suspected reason is because back when plants were evolving, the conditions on earth where quite different. Temperatures and CO2 levels where higher. The theory is that most plants evolved to be efficient at those levels. Just because the earth's current CO2 levels are lower today doesn't change the plant's genetic potential to utilize more. However, because 1500ppm is closer to optimal, 3-400ppm in room air is a limiting factor since CO2 is on the left side of the equation. Increasing light and CO2 will allow the plant to drink more water if it is available. If water isn't available, the it becomes the limiting factor. If we don't have enough light, it is the limiting factor. Now show me the equation where hydrogen, unbound from water, is needed and will be a limiting factor. 

Light, water and CO2 are on the left side of the photosynthesis equation, that's why they all can be considered limiting elements. Too little of any one of them will slow progress. Water is almost never a limiting factor in hydro unless your pump breaks. Since water isn't limiting, adding additional hydrogen in any form, 2H2O or just more water won't help. I can't say it any clearer than that. 


> As much as you have frustrated me with not understanding... You have made me understand even more.


Ditto
I just gave myself a mini-refresher on plant biochemistry over the last day.

The reason I mentioned to put this on hold until we can get some chemists or botanists in here is because you and I are just going around in circles. Our posts are just getting repetitive.


----------



## born2killspam (Jan 6, 2009)

I really have to read over this thread more thoroughly, but as I understand it, the reason hydro thrives at a lower pH than soil is because of the relative lack of a permanent rhizosphere housing primarily bacteria.. Bacteria typically don't like acidic conditions, but they do often create them in their immediate vicinity, so the pH will actually be lower right adjacent to the roots where these things congregate..
So really a plant in healthy soil will think its more acidic than you measure.. (Hopefully similar to hydro pH goals..)
Typical hydro (to put it bluntly) is all about replacing nature.. Most ppl strive for near sterility, and add enzymes to do what the beasties do, but whether its sterile, or if hydro is managed naturally, the water supply provides a much larger area for bioavailability conversions to occur, and the mobility of water ensures there is never a lack of fresh bioavailable compounds immediately at the root..
Ideally the resevoir is the rhizosphere..


----------



## born2killspam (Jan 6, 2009)

Mindphuk, this might interest you.. Its a pretty damn indepth breakdown of pigments and photosynthesis rxns..

(Actually, the forum won't accept a 1.2MB pdf.. Let me know if you want it,,)


----------



## mindphuk (Jan 6, 2009)

born2killspam said:


> Mindphuk, this might interest you.. Its a pretty damn indepth breakdown of pigments and photosynthesis rxns..
> 
> (Actually, the forum won't accept a 1.2MB pdf.. Let me know if you want it,,)


Thanks. Nice, very detailed. Much more like a good science textbook versus the typically summarized information I am finding on the web. I haven't read it all, just skimmed but I found the evolution section particularly interesting. The part about the earliest examples of photosynthesis used by cyanobacteria and their use of hydrogen sulfide (H2S) until various forms evolved to be able to utilize water as the electron donor to drive the light reaction.


----------



## oscarmiya (Jan 6, 2009)

Lol, hey now, why would it not interest me as well? Whats the pdf about born2killspam?? I think I'm interested...


----------



## born2killspam (Jan 6, 2009)

Its interesting to everybody I guess, but the text really assumes you're comfortable with university chemistry.. I tried to attach it to the message, but the forum doesn't allow the file.. Anybody who wants it, PM me an email address..


----------



## born2killspam (Jan 6, 2009)

> The part about the earliest examples of photosynthesis used by cyanobacteria and their use of hydrogen sulfide (H2S) until various forms evolved to be able to utilize water as the electron donor to drive the light reaction.


What I found most interesting was the information about the negative effects of too much light..


----------



## oscarmiya (Jan 6, 2009)

mindphuk said:


> Thanks. Nice, very detailed. Much more like a good science textbook versus the typically summarized information I am finding on the web. I haven't read it all, just skimmed but I found the evolution section particularly interesting. The part about the earliest examples of photosynthesis used by cyanobacteria and their use of hydrogen sulfide (H2S) until various forms evolved to be able to utilize water as the electron donor to drive the light reaction.


So just by your response here, I am assuming the text says early plant life could uptake H2S and use it?? Does this mean that plants CAN absorb other compounds than just H20 to receive its hydrogen? Which is what I have been saying. As long as the plant can break down the Molecule with the energy given (Light) which should be enough. I thought of another way to word this, which is more clear to me... so hopefully you and all others as well.

Notice the left side of the Photosynthesis equation is C02 + H20 + energy... NOT CH2O3 + energy. The plant breaks down the CO2 separately from the H2O. When it has free'd and collected 6 Carbon from O2 and 6 Hydrogen from a single Oxygen- releasing the O2 in Carbon as Bi-product and using the single Oxygen atom from the H2O, does the plant then combine the 6C, the 6H12 and O6 it has collected to create the glucose molecule. If the plant has enough energy to split a O2 charged with Carbon it should be able to split 2 sets of H2 charged to 02, Giving it twice as much Hydrogen with 1 compounding uptake, hypothetically it would increase the surface area of the roots, so to speak, in example- allowing less consumption of H2O and more consumption of other key nutrients for a plant to grow(which brings me back to my theory on why the Potential for Hydrogen [pH] plays a direct role in how much nutrients your plant can uptake).. Now the plant is still going to need Pure Oxygen assuming it cannot split O2 by itself to get enough pure Oxygen to complete its molecular compounds. The reason we need to give the plant more PURE Oxygen as well is because now there is way more Hydrogen to Pure Oxygen. Remember I mentioned a BALANCE in my Original post. Solution: During electrolysis you are separating H2 from O (pure oxygen). The negative side of the Direct Current applied will attract the O and H2 on the Positive side. It would be very easy to hook up an air tube on each side of the + and - terminals to capture and supplement as it bubbles and feed to the plants roots. The H2 from the positive side would mix with your air pump line to make 2H2O before being fed to the roots to uptake via your air stone. The Pure oxygen from the Negative side would be fed on a separate airline directly in your water for the roots to absorb as needed. Your plant needs a compound that consists of an Oxidizer and a Fuel, balanced in a 2:1 Combined Hydrogen (H2 [thats the 2 in the ratio]) Oxygen ratio, in order to separate and be used by the plant. If these are proportioned correctly, the plant should still be able to harness the hydrogen hence why the molecular compound H2O2 (Hydrogen Peroxide) is not up taken or "recognized" by your plants- Too much of an Oxidizer charged with too little of a Fuel.


That to me answers
A.) Why UV light helps bud production. Through Photolysis, pretty much same thing as Electrolysis just in light form, although from very short waves of light (UV) instead of direct current. (This *could *be due to buds demanding a lot more Hydrogen than what the plant can keep up with. Think of using electrolysis or photolysis as a way of working for your plant. You are helping out quite a bit by using a supplemented energy source, instead of the plants energy from the light, to break common elements and spoon feed them to your baby.)

B.) Why electrical currents applied to a garden will increase end yield. The problem with scientists or people experimenting with this is, the limited amount of Direct Current you can apply to your plant before hurting the actual plant. A direct current could flow through a plant, just as it does humans, to reach the roots of the plant and aid the plants natural process of splitting the H2 from the O directly at root level to be absorbed in its simplest and most usable form to the plant. Ultimately increasing efficiency of the plant. I'm not sure if the scientists who experimented with this thought that they were aiding in the Energy part of the Photosynthesis equation or what. It's not like when we put a Direct Current through our bodies it gives us a Tan like the UV emitted light from the Sun does, which is pretty much the same concept.


Does that make any more sense?


----------



## mindphuk (Jan 6, 2009)

oscarmiya said:


> Lol, hey now, why would it not interest me as well? Whats the pdf about born2killspam?? I think I'm interested...


For everybody-
http://www.scribd.com/doc/9811357/Plant-Biochem


----------



## oscarmiya (Jan 6, 2009)

Does my last post make any more sense to anyone?


----------



## born2killspam (Jan 6, 2009)

Its a very fragile system.. Read the second paragraph in Box 4.4 on pg 81.. Its not enough to harvest energy, you need to harvest it, transport/use it productively, and leave the system in a healthy state to do it again..
Plants can and do process undesirable compounds, its just not good for them.. The text covers this a bit..
EM fields are hypothesized to weaken the H-bonds in water, making it easier to diffuse through cell walls etc.. Kind of like warming up the oil in your car during winter..
This stuff is complex.. You can't just look at it from a distance and expect to understand it and better than a DNA molecule.. Every single reaction needs to be studied..
And nobody currently understands it fully.. If we did then we'd have artificial photosynthesis.. (That would be a BIG Nobel winner btw)..


----------



## oscarmiya (Jan 7, 2009)

born2killspam said:


> Its a very fragile system.. Read the second paragraph in Box 4.4 on pg 81.. Its not enough to harvest energy, you need to harvest it, transport/use it productively, and leave the system in a healthy state to do it again..
> 
> *I don't really see what your getting at in this paragraph and the reference to Box 4.4. Your not going to harm your plant by giving it both 2H2O with Pure O. You should be actually taking a step away from the plant to split the energy. Just as a professional Athlete will breath Pure Oxygen (O) before/during a performance.*
> 
> ...


....And... Cant you use a solar panel that harness's energy from the sun and converts it to usable energy then power electrolysis to perform the first part of the photosynthesis equation? The plant still performs the second part of combining the collected elements. I am just saying we could Help perform the first part for the plant to help it put more energy else where... except why use solar power when we have a steady never ending source of energy (Direct Current of course with a DC Converter) in our house? Utilizing Chlorophyll and the photosystems reaction center, Photosynthesis occurs and the plant uses its energy. After/during Photosynthesis Redox (oxidation/reduction) is performed by the Metallic elements found in your Nutrients. In order to create Artificial Photosynthesis, we would first have to understand the DNA of plants but in my theory, I am not attempting to make any artificial photosynthesis occur. I am simply using my household current to split H2 from O, recombine with twice as much Hydrogen than a normal water molecule but still in a form usable, DURING photosynthesis, to the plant so long as we also provide the plant with extra Pure Oxygen. The plant will not use the O2 from 2H2O rather than respire it off, similar to CO2.


----------



## born2killspam (Jan 7, 2009)

Your athlete analogy is flawed.. we breath O2 with the rest of the air, there is no chemical difference.. Also, water is the electron donor.. If you break that bond beforehand, those electrons will be locked up tight..
I don't know exactly what the limitations are, but 2 water molecules are in fact processed in the main reaction.. There are equilibriums that need to be respected..


----------



## oscarmiya (Jan 7, 2009)

born2killspam said:


> Your athlete analogy is flawed.. we breath O2 with the rest of the air, there is no chemical difference.. Also, water is the electron donor.. If you break that bond beforehand, those electrons will be locked up tight..
> I don't know exactly what the limitations are, but 2 water molecules are in fact processed in the main reaction.. There are equilibriums that need to be respected..


If the plant break O2 from Carbon, it should be able to break O2 from 2H2. Everything has to be balanced, including pure Oxygen.

But my point in Professional Athletes is this:
Ordinarily, the haemoglobin in human arterial blood is about 97% saturated with oxygen at rest, yielding a total oxygen concentration of approximately 200 millilitres of oxygen per litre of blood. If an athlete were to breathe in 100%, pure oxygen, the amount of oxygen bound to hemoglobin would rise by only 3%, or 6ml. 

However, remember that in longer-duration events those 100ml of oxygen would be a drop in the bucket and very unlikely to determine overall success. For example, an élite athlete running a 10k race in 28 minutes flat could easily be consuming oxygen at a rate of more than 5,000ml per minute, which would add up to more than 140,000ml for the whole race. Those 100ml would amount to no more than seven-hundredths of one percent of the needed oxygen!

Thus, pre-exercise oxygen has been studied in athletes like 800m sprinters, 200m swimmers and weight lifters, and generally the results have been positive. That is, breathing in pure oxygen before the start of a high-power exertion seemed to shorten the time required to cover a fixed distance or lift a set number of weights.


----------

