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

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..

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,,)

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,,)

Click to expand...

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.

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

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..

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.

Click to expand...

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

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.

Click to expand...

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?

oscarmiya said:

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

Click to expand...

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

Does my last post make any more sense to anyone?

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)..

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.

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..

My point exactly! The plant SHOULD recognize the 2H2O2, still be able to break the O2 away and be left with 2 sets of H2 to "harvest". Supplementing the Pure Oxygen from the electrolysis water Reservoir as well and feeding directly to plants water Reservoir should also dramatically help your plant.

The reason EM fields are hypothesized to weaken H-bonds is because obviously they cannot apply enough current (energy) to efficiently break the bond completely, before harming the plant. My theory states that a seperate Res. tank is where the electrolysis is done and then tube fed into the Plants Res... this allows no current to be applied to the plant or around the plant yet efficiently break the H bond. Feed the H2 through the air pump line, this creates 2H2O... Feed the Pure Oxygen through another air tube straight to the plants res. The plant respires the O2, just as it does for Co2, in turn it now got 2 Hydrogen atoms and a breath of fresh air. It still needs pure Oxygen, which I also explain how to Supplement to the roots.

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)..

It is complex but only as complex as you make it. I am not looking at this from a distance. I am looking at this from a Factual standpoint. One doesn't NEED to understand the DNA if its known that a Plant needs Carbon, Hydrogen, and Pure Oxygen to grow. Since DNA is not entirely understood, let me break it down why height and growth rate is probably not hereditary. First if Height was hereditary, we would not be able to Veg a Mary Jane plant to ridiculous heights. If growth rate was hereditary a bigger light (more energy) would probably not matter that much. By experiment we have noted that 1500ppm CO2 is ideal before it becomes toxic to the plant. We have also noted that a 600w light produced about the same as a 1000w light in a given 4x4 grow room. Of course there is going to be a limit to these factors when the other completing Molecule on the left side of the equation is left at "normal" conditions. I am saying "supercharge" the hydrogen uptake with 2H2O so the plant gets 2 sets hydrogens for that molecular split instead of 1. The plant should have no problem up taking Oxygen in its purest form that you would be feeding it. MAYBE then CO2 PPM could be 3000, maybe nutrient uptake is now twice as fast, and 1500w in a 4x4 area (if kept cool) may be completely used by the plant.

Its just funny how everything on the left side of the Photosynthesis equation is directly related to growth AND is supplemented in larger than need quantities yet some here seem to assume this somehow means Hydrogen(as long as it has Oxygen attached to it, in the correct ration as water) and Pure Oxygen can not be supp'd... I don't understand the train of thought here. Just because this has not been done does not mean it is not possible. Many tried to create a Light bulb from electricity before Thomas Edison did. He was just the first one to do it successfully and patent it.

Click to expand...

....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.

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..

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..

Click to expand...

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.