The real meat of this method might just be using our high horsepower light (HID,T5's, Strong led's) 8-10 hours a day and using low wattage Martian light 4-6 hours a day and getting results as if you ran your high horsepower light 12/12..:rastasmoke:
Printable View
The real meat of this method might just be using our high horsepower light (HID,T5's, Strong led's) 8-10 hours a day and using low wattage Martian light 4-6 hours a day and getting results as if you ran your high horsepower light 12/12..:rastasmoke:
i am a total noob when it comes to this stuff, but it seemed like this just summed up the whole thread! this stuff is very fascinating. thanks for sharing and letting us less educated on the subject tag along! you guys have truly peaked my curiosity to botany. it's definitely something i want to put effort in to studying and i hope to contribute to the community in the future!Quote:
Originally Posted by Mother
-shake
edit: i thought this was a different thread, one of the LED light ones. either way, this still sums up the goal, well, of what we are all trying to achieve in general. and i guess it just so happnes the martian method is the latest and greatest.?
I think I'd follow the recommendations for cfls and use 5500 to veg and 2700 for flowering. And if I read right, after you get into flowering you can go to a higher color temp?Quote:
Originally Posted by Dogznova
660nm red's and I'm not sure about how I'll try to get far red, but I'll know more about how led's and cfl's all balance out if I can get a spectrometer cobbled together, the spectragraph works great. I think so looking at the different cfl's and SEEing the difference i think is helping me understand all this, but I'm enjoying learning what I can from these grow logs.
Truthfully, I want to be the first person to grow from diffused lasers :D
That's our plan right now (add more blue light as we go). But I also think as the K temp goes up, our high horsepower light (blue light source) time on will come down.. JMOQuote:
Originally Posted by farredeyed
Ya don't leve us in the dark on this. I'm sure we will all want to try this spectrometer.:thumbsup:Quote:
Originally Posted by farredeyed
Sounds cool but is the price right...Quote:
Originally Posted by farredeyed
also, if you havnt guessed I'm pre-amature, and not afraid to be corrected I want to make sure I understand the concepts at work before I waste a bunch of time/$$. Sorry if my commenting is distracting from the grow, I know alot more about glassblowing than I do growing.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dogznova
Quote:
Originally Posted by farredeyed
Truthfully, I want to be the first person to grow from diffused lasers
Well, there will be no ordering of $2000.00 expensive lasers, but I have some people collecting optical drives for me. Most dvd drives have red lasers in them and there have been a few burners out that sported blue lasers (pioneer or panasonic early 16x not sure), I'm sure the whole thing will be fun, not so sure it will be lucrativeQuote:
Sounds cool but is the price right...
this is all way off topic tho... I need to start my own crackpot theory thread
farred, not that they are cheap or commonplace yet, but blu-ray (and hd-dvd for that matter) players/burners use blue lasers. okay, blue violet, at 405nm, where as a dvd uses a red laser, at 650nm. just a thought. sorry to hijack, start a thread farred!
-shake
i'm interested in your spectograph (?) project too!
HERE is the link to my thread for making a spectrometer for anyone wanting to jump in on that. I'm still stoked on this martian method tho, being it is what got me interested in the spectrums of lighting in the first place ;) Mother, I'm still curious if you saw my last post pertaining to the lighting schedule, and about those last pics.. In the center pic the fans look like they only have one or two leaves on them are they pruned to let more light through the canopy or what am I seeing there?
edit: i messed up the link
It all depends! What spectrums are you talking about? Different color spectrums operate at different rates, even within the ranges of Red and Far Red that you're talking about. Phytochrome is most sensitive at ~660/735, so the farther you get away from that, the less stimulated phytochrome is by the same wattage of light, so the effect on the plant's clock is less. You'd also have to consider intensity at some point. You're asking what the timing is without cosidering the rate of the spectrum. Both are very important aspects because it seems to be that it takes a certain amount of biologically-active phychrome Pr to be present for a certain amount of time for flowering to occur. The spectrum affects the rate, so to maintain the same (rate x time) product, you'd need to adjust your timing accordingly. You're on the right track, though, by putting more Far Red than Red, but for me understanding the relationship is Far more important than knowing the numbers. :DQuote:
Originally Posted by farredeyed
I'm very curious what kind of Martian night would be good for an autoflowerer. Great question.Quote:
Originally Posted by farredeyed
I think that you have still got a different impression than I got. :D Red and Far Red absolutely do affect the plant's perception of night. That's what I've been meaning when I'm talking about the plant's "clock". It's the plant's perception of how fast the night is actually happening. Red makes it slower, Far Red makes it faster, but not necessarily at the same rate. I don't know what the numbers are, that's why I have this grow log! :D
Sal has them, and they're in for publishing, so he can't share them yet. In the mean time, I started this log to try and guess. :thumbsup:
I was assuming the vales of 660 and 735 for red and far red I had put them in the post to clarify but then i took them out, and the orange line, just to 'clean up' the post
But I also kind of assumed that the plants day/night clock is only regulated by blue, and feeding red untill you can't anymore and either using far red to delay hitting that point or using cycles of red and then far red to 'feed' and 'reset' the phytochrome for feeding would alow for more feeding time in a 24hr period to get to the end result faster without throwing her back into veg
Anywho.. Thanks for grow logging I can't wait to see the outcome did you answer the leaf question? heh, i forgot already :)
It all depends! What spectrums are you talking about? Different color spectrums operate at different rates, even within the ranges of Red and Far Red that you're talking about. Phytochrome is most sensitive at ~660/735, so the farther you get away from that, the less stimulated phytochrome is by the same wattage of light, so the effect on the plant's clock is less. You'd also have to consider intensity at some point. You're asking what the timing is without cosidering the rate of the spectrum. Both are very important aspects because it seems to be that it takes a certain amount of biologically-active phychrome Pr to be present for a certain amount of time for flowering to occur. The spectrum affects the rate, so to maintain the same (rate x time) product, you'd need to adjust your timing accordingly. You're on the right track, though, by putting more Far Red than Red, but for me understanding the relationship is Far more important than knowing the numbers. :DQuote:
Originally Posted by farredeyed
I'm very curious what kind of Martian night would be good for an autoflowerer. Great question.Quote:
Originally Posted by farredeyed
I think that you have still got a different impression than I got. :D Red and Far Red absolutely do affect the plant's perception of night. That's what I've been meaning when I'm talking about the plant's "clock". It's the plant's perception of how fast the night is actually happening. Red makes it slower, Far Red makes it faster, but not necessarily at the same rate. I don't know what the numbers are, that's why I have this grow log! :D
Sal has them, and they're in for publishing, so he can't share them yet. In the mean time, I started this log to try and guess. :thumbsup:
About the leaves, I have no idea. I haven't really asked too many questions of the plant considering the crazy lighting that I've given it. :D It's in some sort of veg/flower limbo and I think they're starting to lean toward flowering, so I think I'm getting close on the timing schedule.
this was on that USDA webpage too, I got my weird alternating red/far red schedule idea from some of what i read on that page.Quote:
It's in some sort of veg/flower limbo and I think they're starting to lean toward flowering
"On April 9, 1952, the loose-knit team of scientists came up with another magnificently simple find. Seed hit with red light germinated unless it was then hit with far-red; but if red again ensued, it would germinate. Incredibly, all that mattered was which color came last even if the seed was struck by 100 alternating cycles of red and far-red.
That summer, the researchers confirmed the same switchability in flowering. Test plants flowered only if far-red light ended the sequence." - "Tripping the Light Switch Fantastic" was published in the September 1991 issue of Agricultural Research magazine.
That makes sense why you had that schedule in your mind, but the government has pulled a fast one on you (are you in the least bit surprised?)Quote:
Originally Posted by farredeyed
When they say "That summer, the researchers confirmed the same switchability in flowering." they're misleading you. It's a similar switchability, probably based on the same mechanisms (phytochrome) but with different results. If you check out some Red/Far Red studies on Google scholar, you'll see they have similar findings about the effects of Red and Far Red with one, very important difference: this part does not hold true with live plants: "Incredibly, all that mattered was which color came last even if the seed was struck by 100 alternating cycles of red and far-red." In studies with live plants, the more back-and-forth that happens between Red and Far Red during the night, the less likely the plant is to flower.
My take on why this is (take with several grains of salt :D):
If we assume (and I am in fact ONLY ASSUMING THIS IS TRUE) that Red is a little more effective than Far Red at manipulating the clock, you can see why both the proportion of R:FR and total amount of Red and Far Red are important to whether or not flowering will occur.
I base my assumption of Red and Far Red efficacy on the fact that a red incandescent bulb emits more Far Red than Red light (look at a spectral graph), but is still slower than total darkness (look at my and Dogz RedInc all-night tests). It is quite possible this assumption is not correct, but it makes sense in my mind and seems to line up with the evidence that I see.
The gov't was looking at it like a "switch" (hence you being led to believe that's the way it works) but it's more like a clock. The Red slows the clock down, and the Far Red speeds it back up. However, the Far Red doesn't speed it back up quite as much as Red slows it down, so with more and more switching means more and more Red light (in an absolute sense) which is being counterbalanced by more and more Far Red (also in an absolute sense) that doesn't have the same efficacy of Red light, so the night, overall, gets slower and slower with more switching back and forth. At some point, it becomes too slow to sustain flowering.
The reason they would see better results with Far Red being the last color used is because it makes the overall ratio of R:FR closer to what it should be for the whole night with a diminishing ratio as more switching occurs.
Example (assuming 15 mins of illumination each):
R-FR-R = 30 mins Red, 15 mins Far Red, 2:1 ratio
R-FR-R-FR = 30 mins Red, 30 mins Far Red, 1:1 ratio
R-FR-R-FR-R = 45 mins Red, 30 mins Far Red, 3:2 ratio
R-FR-R-FR-R-FR = 45 mins Red, 45 mins Far Red, 1:1 ratio
R-FR-R-FR-R-FR-R = 60 mins Red, 45 mins Far Red, 4:3 ratio
etc.
So after any number of switches that ends on Far Red, you always end with a 1:1 ratio, but if Red slows more than Far Red speeds, the overall effect is slower, and the more switches you have, the slower it gets.
That's my best guess. :thumbsup:
I'd say i think i finally see the light :D that makes sense of almost all of it.
Ya that post is good.. But the second paragraph says something about the plants being faster. I'm not sure if I read that correctly or not. But I have grown 3 times using a Procyon 100 and my plants were slower by about 2-3 weeks every time and we tried using 14 hours of dark (no go). There is know far red with that light at all, So now I see why the plants were slower using that led light. As far as the second paragraph goes all I know is using RED light in what normally would be the plants 12 hour dark time also slows the plants clock down i.e.(using red CFL's only in Martian nights). When far red is added to the mix i.e.(red INC.'s bulbs) the plants clock speeds up but not as much as (NID). The trick is going to be using far red light "only" during some of the plant dark period to speed back up the clock that was slowed down using red light in the Martian nights.. Did that make sense. LOL. I would think we will need to run far red light "only" about half of the amount of on time that red and far red light is being used in the Martian nights, just to keep the plants clock on time. again JMO:thumbsup:
Ok, if that's where you're at, it's untested, and unproven but here's my idea to get far red only, on the cheap...Quote:
The trick is going to be using far red light "only"
Infrared IR Laser Illuminator Circuit Build Instructions Schematic
scratch the batteries, use an old little ac/dc transformer power pack with a suitable voltage and sufficient current output. scratch the optics he picks, they dont spread the beam enough, try 10x gem scope or find an old photocopier and pick through its parts, old dvd burners that don't work so well anymore.. there are plenty of places to get free or close to free lens's and the laser he picks is too high in the IR range, a CD burner or the cd burning laser from a cd/dvd/multi unit burner has in ir laser with a 780nm frequency that gives off a very dim red color (to the human eye, don't look directly at it!) is very available and easily sourceable. My only speculation about the method here is, is the bandwidth from the 780nm wide enough to be in range to effect the Pfr.
playing with lasers can be really dangerous tho, if anyone out there is experimenting with this stuff like I am, please wear eye protection. If you power up a cdrom laser and think it isnt doing anything look at it through a digital camcorder or cellphone camera, don't pick it up and look into it.
This might work also..... Reptile lights are Infrared. If you remember sal said Infrared could be the same as far red (post #70 of this tread). This is something worth the Google IMO. Local fish and pet stores should have all kinds of reptile bulbs. Google this (Infrared Ceramic Heat Emitters) no light just infrared. Worth a try ..
Far red with darkness happens every day outdoors I think. It's proven and tested.:thumbsup: Green house effect is one.Quote:
Originally Posted by farredeyed
well, i mean just using lasers, this far red light biz is pretty well proven and seems to be being pretty well testedQuote:
Far red with darkness happens every day outdoors I think. It's proven and tested. Green house effect is one.
Here is week 7 pic's. This is the same flower as before but with a group shot. The plants are starting to ripen up pretty good now that we turned off the Martian Lights. Somewhere sal was talking about finishing up his flowers on just red INC.'s only (no other light in the 24 hour day). I wonder if that would help ripen our flowers faster. The plants are still about a week behind or so (from using red cfl's only during the Martian nights). The second pic is a cropped shot from the first pic. This time the pic's were taken using my sisters digital camera.
Hey Dog, looks like your plants are coming along better than mine, but you're treating yours way nicer. ;)
Mine are finally starting to flower once again. The timing is currently at:
10 hours daylight
3 hours Martian night
10 hours SID
1 hour Martian night
which would put the time factor for the light spectrum I'm using right around 2.0. Why 2.0? Because I'm replacing 2 hours of total darkness with 4 hours of "night light". The plants need a full four hours under the night spectrum I'm using in order to make up for only 2 hours of total darkness, so the "time clock" of the plants is running only half as fast when the Martian lights are on. But on the flip side, I'm getting four hours of night photosynthesis in trade for two hours of day photosynthesis. I'd definitely get more if my Red was not 660 nm, the peak for Pr sensitivity.
The Martian night lights I'm using are:
52 watts of 660 nm Red (672 individual 5mm LEDs, which are not terribly efficient)
50 watts of Red Incandescent light
I also swapped the two 26 watt 55/6500k CFLs back for two 42w 2700k ones because the heat is less of a factor now.
Hopefully that helps provide at least some information that will help us figure out the time factor of each of the spectrums.
The plants have been quite stretchy recently, which I expected because of the high levels of both Red and Far Red during early flowering. Sal has warned that Far Red during early flowering promotes stem elongation whereas Red inhibits it, and tests by Dogznova have also confirmed this.
It broke my heart to do it, but I had to top about 4-5 inches off the newer HDF plant because it was already getting too tall for the cabinet, and it's less than a week in actual flowering conditions. Hopefully the stretch slows down so I don't have to do the same thing to the Vanilla Moon. We'll see!
I know I could just alter the spectrum and schedule to prevent it, but my goal is more to learn what happens than to make anything specific happen. At some point, when I've gotten what I need to out of these plants, I'll try a real crop with a real, adapting, Martian spectrum.
I'll also have pictures soon. I'm not lazy, I'm very busy. :D
I take it that this was on the fallowing schedule:Quote:
Originally Posted by Mother
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mother
Before I try and catch up on reading, I wanted to make sure to comment on these pictures mother posted.
They tell two main things:
1. The stem elongation indicates that there is too much Far Red (or not enough Red) in the spectrum for the first (stretch) phase of flowering. (I mentioned that I don't use much Far Red during early flowering, to avoid adding too much stretch (internode elongation).
2. The dark cycles equivalent SID time is less than 12 hours and the plant is revegging/vegging.
~3. The single pinnation (fingerred) leaves indicate that you're closer to flowering (1 fingerred leaves) than vegging (5 or more fingerred leaves).
I use morphological indicators, like stretch, to help me sellect the spectrum I wish to use (for a given stage of plant developement, ~morphology). THEN, once I have the kind of grow habit I want (just below stretching), I let the spectrum dictate the proper schedule to use in order to get the equivalent of 12 hours of SID.
I would definitely increase the equivalent SID time some more.
If you leave the Spectrum alone, you will at least have a fast growth rate to produce morphology in the new growth to help you better gauge the plants responces.
Now if I can make enough time to read up to where you're all at, I might be able to tell you something more useful.
Is it working again?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mother
Welcome back, Ma.
Weezard
Welcome back Weez!
It seems that the log ends after the 18th of December now, so I guess everything after that disappeared?
Right after the forums became unavailable, I switched my lighting to:
6 hours everything on
7 hours Red LED and Red Incandescent
10 hours darkness
1 hour Red LED and Red Incandescent
That seemed to sit the plants right down so they didn't grow any taller, but I'm pretty sure it doesn't allow for much new root growth, and since roots decay over time, the plants don't have much chance of reaching their potential.
Here are current pictures. The first is HDF, the second is cheese, the third is vanilla moon and the last is bubba kush. They're all abused looking because they've all been abused :) but they're also coming along ok, considering their treatment.
The HDF should be ready in a week or so, judging by the trichomes.
After these plants are done, I'm switching to hydro and starting with a new batch. :thumbsup:
Weez: I have no previous experience with hydro, so I will be in need of your assistance as my first hydro experiment is a four-plant DWC bucket that's going in this spot. It's up and running but my pH keeps rising fast, like .7 points overnight (meaning going from 5.5 to 6.2), every night, and I'm trying to figure out why or if that's normal... ?
If you are using hydrotron without pre-conditioning it first with an "acid bath", yes it's "normal".Quote:
Originally Posted by Mother
Hydrotron needs to be thouroughly rinsed and then soaked in low PH water for 24 hours or so.
I let it sit for a week. Then re-rinse and I still get PH creep for the first 2 weeks
PITA? You bet,
I have 50 pounds of the crap on-hand and have switched to coco coir in the net pots with a 1" layer of Hydrotron and Rockwool chips in the bottom.
Also found that a few 4" lengths of cotton string dangling from the bottom of the pots will keep them moist as the water level drops and add strength n support to the roots when I switch 'em to a fresh bucket-o-nutes.
[attachment=o212662]
[attachment=o212661]
Seems to work, ya?
We've all been hanging out at ICMag while Cdot was down.
KNNA is there, trying to bring them up to speed regarding LEDs.
It's an uphill climb.
Good to be back here in the 21st century.:thumbsup:
Aloha,
Weezard
I AM using hydroton without having given it an acid bath. The guys at the hydro strore said hydroton was the best media, and didn't say anything about soaking it... I have less and less confidence in their advice every time I ask for it. They also said that no fungicide (like Botanicare Hydroguard) was necessary because of the constant aeration of DWC. Is that correct? Right now my mix is:
1/4 strength Pure Blend Pro Grow
1/4 strength Maxicrop
full strength Hygrozyme
full strength Liquid Karma
pH down as necessary to reach 5.5
Does this sound reasonable?
So 1" of hydroton in the bottom then fill with coco coir? Do I need to condition the coir as well? Just a rinse, or a soak, or a treatment?
Thanks for the advice, and sorry if I ask too many questions!
I bet a lot of people worked their asses off to get this site back running, and although they'll probably not hear it, I appreciate their hard work!
I was wondering where everyone was hanging out. I googled some of your names, but I couldn't find anything for you or sal or dogz, so I just hung out waiting for this site to resurrect itself.
Sal n Dogz never showed up at IC Mag, just Knna and most of the real growers.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mother
LED-wise, you didn't miss much.
Aloha, Ma.
Weezard
For some reason they didn't send email confirms to Rauber nor later to myself, so we couldn't post at IC Mag.Quote:
Originally Posted by Weezard
Weezard, my partner Rauber ran across your post there:
And He'd appreciate it if you didn't make that kind of claim again (it isn't true, regardless of what someone might of thought they were contributing).Quote:
Originally Posted by Weezard
My partner objects to others being given credit for 20 plus years of HIS work, not to mention he was particularly disturbed that he was being likenned to, identified as, confused or associated with that individual.
To put it bluntly, he finds that person particularly abusive, and doesn't want any association with himself, our organization (Temporal Photonics), and especially our AD work, with that person.
I'm very sorry to have to make a post like this, but my partner is insisting, and I think it's better that I do it, than if he expressed it personally in his current mood. :mad:
With that said, hopefully the issue will be forgotten.
Thanks, Sal.
Aloha,Quote:
Originally Posted by salmayo
Weezard
Under conventional (THE OLD) timing concepts, you're flowering under a 14/10 schedule, but by AD definitions you're using a 6/18 schedule and more specifically a 6/(7/10/1) schedule, or less specifically a 6/(10/8) schedule.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mother
Congratulations are definitely in order. :thumbsup:
Now consider that the slower growth rate can be attributed to a SID equivalent time similar to 10/14 or something more extreme in that direction away from 12/12 to something more likely to induce dormancy/senility/ceasence.
So I hate to say it, but you need to consider whether or not you got the AD moving faster than you thought and overshot your equivalent SID time beyond 12 hours SID.
The root mass factor is there, but it takes some time for the plant to slow down due to root growth imbalance.
The good news is, you can go back the other way on the timer, and you now know you can get it to flower in the zone.
You could trade some Blue for SID time, but that would only add a small amount of Blue with Red time. Whereas if you trade AD for SID you will get more AD without changing the Blue (root) factor, giving a better AD verses SID comparison result.
Also, the more SID you exchange to AD, the more photosynthetic energy you can deliver to the plants.
Congratulations again mother. :thumbsup:
I was hoping you had gotten there during the interrum this thread was down.
The Perfect LED Grow Light thread is still down unfortunately, I hope they saved that Big Monster.
Good to see all you guys back. :D
Take Care, Sal.
A mild mannerred correction (nothing condemming, not our intentions) posted at that thread would make my working conditions a lot less stressful.
If you wouldn't mind.
It'd be greatly appreciated.
Thanks again, I now Rauber will be relieved.
Good to see you back so soon. :)
Gotta run. See ya soon.
Take Care, Sal.
Hmmm.
I thought my editing rights evaporated for old posts with each new post
Quote:
Originally Posted by salmayo
Thanks and thanks for all the guidance!Quote:
Originally Posted by salmayo
I had a sneaking suspicion that was the case. The plants' growth has been slowing and at this point it seems almost stagnant. Basically, I've been shorting my plants a third of the AD light they could handle! I hadn't put a lot of attention into thinking about their senescence both because this board has been down and I've been busy with school, but that makes good sense!Quote:
Originally Posted by salmayo
I'll take four hours of SID and turn it into two more hours of AD, making it a roughly 6/12/6 (but really a 6/11/6/1) cycle. Although that's a big change, I think it will be OK because I previously figured out that my combo of red LEDs and Inc produced a time factor of about 2, so that should appear to the plant to be 6/12. If it's too aggressive I can back it off, and if it's not too aggressive, I can make it so and see where the tipping point is, because I just can't leave well enough alone if there are questions to be answered! :DQuote:
Originally Posted by salmayo
Weez: I can't believe I didn't even read the instructions on the bag. I'm the kind of person that usually reads the instructions first! I don't think I'll have the problems of my 'ton getting away from me, as I deal with soil(less) now and in my situation, that's way more messy than a little 'ton anyway, so it will be a nice change. I also would like media that I don't have to discard (for others to find...) if I can avoid it, so hydroton it is!
The nutes I use come well recommended, but I will probably experiment myself to see what results they bring me personally. Every grow setup is different, so nutes that boost for some are less effective for others, and I want to find out what works best for mine.
What kind of water do you add your CalMag to? Why I'm asking is my tap water is around 600-700 ppm after going through the filter (which removes all kinds of unwanted things, but does not remove minerals). I know I don't need CalMag for lack of minerals in my water, but I don't know if the minerals are beneficial either. I haven't had any apparent mineral deficiencies in my soilless plants, I just wonder if it the same for hydro...
And you got nothing but respect from me, god knows an edit button makes all the difference sometimes. ;) I hope Friday is Good Friday.
WEEZ-
Like I said, we never got email confirmations to post on IC Mag, so I assumed that you could only post a typo reference later, but that edit's even better.
My partner is very pleased with it, and even gave me the go ahead to do some basic math breakdowns, to give mother a nudge at an interval halving projection on which way to go, to confirm the sensence (reversal) trend I indicated in the last post to her.
Thanks for that Weezard. Mush Appreciated!
(That should have been "Much Appreciated", but that little Freudian brainfart slip says so much on so many levels, I just had to leave it!)
MOTHER-
Mother I'll get right on that, but that cache'd posts for this thread that were lost lost right before (or when) the thread came back seem to be destroying some information I assumed would still be here and doesn't seem to be coming back. So I'm gonna try to hustle and get an archive of this stuff at linked over from my 24/12 thread to a 4/20 thread for your log here (it's yours after all). So I'm probably be bussy with that all day.
But, just so you know Mother, you are now considerred an OFFICIAL member of our Beta Testers group and will be getting full credit for your work in our publications. And you are officially the FIRST Internet Beta Tester we have, since our other Beta Testers are were not allowed to post on the Internet (BOY ARE THEY ENVIOUS). We'll be featuring a review of your thread at our upcoming local Beta meeting, basically bringing everyone up to speed on where we are at with public disclosure and whatnot (stuff you already know).
:thumbsup:
So I'll be back ASAP, but I really should have archived that stuff before and now I really gotta get on it. Hopefully I'll be able to find some cache'd stuff like my 4/20 (4/(10/10)) posts that didn't seem to make it back up.
See ya soon. Till then...
Take Care, Sal.
(THANKS AGAIN WEEZ, AND CONGRATULATIONS MOTHER!!!) :thumbsup:
Cool it's back. "CONGRATULATIONS MOTHER" :clap:
Mahalo !Quote:
Originally Posted by Mother
Got choke folks prayin' for us, I'm optimistic.
Aloha,
Weezard
Aloha Sal,
If you don't have the 4/10/10 etc. posts handy.
I'm pretty sure I had the good sense to save the e-mail with real info.
Let me rummage around here and see what I find.
Ah! here's one:
"Remember you're all studing genetics verses environment here, so it is very important to separate the two, when interpreting results.
I hope you realize, that in spite of the fact that We're watching you repeat what we've done (for the sake of our education on How you think, we're studing YOU studying the plant, and there are no wrong answers in this respect of OUR interpretting YOU and your psyche's), your journey here is identical in our eyes to as if you were the first growers trying to grow indoors under artificial lights and the only place you had to start from was from your only know 14/10 Outdoor references. Technology for us in our sad waiting game of economics has become a time machine allowing us to watch (our own and others) histories unfold (through you) for the first time (again... and again).
You started at 12/12 real time, coming from 14/10 SID time (just like they did coming from 14/10 SOD time originally, and not to far off Temporally), asking the same historical question again (as did we), "What will give us the same results as 14/10 SOD (or 12/12 SID)?" But now, just as then, the questions answer is qualitative and existists in mind's eye and the question becomes (just as it did then), "What will give us the same results THAT FEELs as 14/10 SOD (or 12/12 SID) (to us???)?"
Not to worry, but just so you know where some of this comes from:
AND NOW HERE COMES DA PAIN!!! I hate to torture your minds with this, but few think as we do...
When interpreting results from your work (as we do with both it and it relevance to you), try to avoid the assumption that these Techno Environmentally triggerred results MAY GIVE WHAT YOU CONSIDER CONFLICTING RESULTS - IF you assume ("to make an" ass/u/me), that the results are indivisibly linked through a single mechanism (genetic, regulatory or whatever), when in fact it is perhaps just as likely that these individual responces occur in parallel under NATURAL environmental stimuli, but are also separable if triggerred under Artifical laboratory (completely unnatural) environmental stimuli (such as an unnaturally divided spectral stimuli, which is definition of Artificial Darkness's functionallity).
BUT!!! Rather than strain you way through GrandMaster mental gymnastics, take instead the simple tool:
You see that things are related, one to another.
Now simply consider more than two things in this. (Once you relate two things, you can relate other aspects to the first two (if only in character of action, rather than dependence on some action).
AND!!! Before this spirals out of control with sensory overload, remember the saving grace of deduction. Removing those things that are not significant, leaves those things that are.
Determining something can be eliminated from consideration is a thing of joy for brain strainers. Or as Forest Gump put it, "Which is good, like my Momma always says, THAT'S JUST ONE MORE THING NOT TO WORRY ABOUT.
So, don't worry.
If the hairs are light colorred due to strain genetics, don't worry. And especially, if you don't care about the hair color verse things that are more important QUALITIES to you personally, THEN especially don't worry.
Let me worry (I used to be the best worrier on this horrid crash site of a planet). I'll fritter away the Darkness on wether or not spectrum responsive reccessive genetics or regulation that affect pigmentation in the plants and have multiply interdependent and/or independent environmental triggering (they do - remember that THC is a pigment and pigment synthesis is therefore at the core of most investigations in such matters, but also remember that it's all in the trends between this and that).
Just go with the flow (trends). Let us worry about the who came first, the Martian or the Migrain.
And that comes from your friendly neighborhood would be psycho analysis.
P.S. - Take two bingers, and call just call it a morning. (Dr. Feelgood)
-----------------------------------------------------------
420 AD, sounds like 4/(10/10) to me... ...but due to relativity... ...it's ALL Ancient History (AH - Ah Ha) you see. (AD, ND, AH, SID, SOD... ...even the abbreviations are turning into an epic.)
Mother - I'd add more AD, rather than exchange for ND, but that's just me (starting and looking back on a 0/24 perspective going in the other direction, not 12/12).
Do what YOU ARE going to do, that's what we're here to see, and you guys give great SHOW! And I promise the last half hour of this flick is worth it, I've seen more times than I can count and it never gets old.
The fact that you are getting flowering at all (+- an hours or so of real time SID equivalency), DOES NOT agree with the pseudoscience of the established yet untested assumptions on photoperiodism in vascular plants - this is were the mandate of throwing out the old and using the new in REAL SCIENCE prevails over assumption. For it is the assumption of Empirical Science (Real Science) that we can be mistaken, and the power of Empirical Science to document (admit) and learn from failure (accept).
I only wish there were more of a mandate to publish failures, but failures are less in demand than the more sensational "successes", and admittedly humans tend to be rather shy about their so called failures. And so we find ourselves with successes based on missassumption, and lacking failures pointing towards the Holy Grail of TRUTH (for this is the quest of all true science, not success).
Thanks goodness we fail to succeed, how else could we hope to defeat the barriors of assumption and find ourselves were Truth may reveal itself to us, if we can simply stand our ground long enough for it to reveal itself - SM.
Keep up the work and the good results, which is your fine honing of the skills needed to handle what is coming...
Techno Shock is denial, denial is based on assumption. Assumption is the bug. Denial is the symptom. And, SHOCK is needless sufferred, if at all.
Thanks you all for your effort, it may not lead us to the answers We want, but I sure could hurt (anything but Our heads).
Take Care, Sal. (You're getting there!)
***************"
Got choke!
Which ones do ya need and how do ya wannem?
Regards Weeze