Calling out to DreadedHermie for a game of "stoner chess"

[Weezard]

You musta missed the bubble-bucket part...That'd be a pretty pathetic root-mass display--half-inch roots in a sun-baked saucer.....


Actually, that was addressing;

("I set that on a saucer with a splash of water in it, and the plant seems to be wicking it up okay so far."
"I guess the only question is: can I develop sufficient hydro roots before drowning the plant in mucky soil?")


I remember that third pic. You'd captioned it, "This lady had to quit the dance early because her shoes got too tight" or something like that. It stuck in my mind :tin foil hat: cause I wondered why you couldn't use some little diagonal cutters to open up some Ausgange for the larger roots...

Was too late by the time I discovered it, the cut was deep, the damage done.


Ooops...gotta run...but about castling: is there a "normal" response to an opponent's castle in terms of which side I might castle to? Do players like to be castled face-to-face, or catty-corner?

Some never castle at all.
But, to do so too early, allows an opponent the advantage of directing his attack.

I somehow picked up the impression there's a general advantage to castling queenside (which would just figure, cause you've gotta move one additional piece outta the way). Or is it situational, depending on how the opponent's got his pieces deployed?

Situational.

And I've seen players castle when they were "behind in time".
It loses the game .
Because; "Time trumps position"
You end up, poised to strike, but one move short.
Frustrating.

Lesson here?
Grab some time, then use it to castle to the side that gives your opponent the most problems.
And castle late.
It usually signals transition from the opening, to midgame.

I castled early, because your queen move forced it.
You now have the advantage of directing your attack and I gave up my time advantage.
The way I read this game, I have superior position, but the tempo is about even now.
Not to worry, I'll chase your queen around and gain back a time advantage with any luck.

So, decided onna move?

Aloha,

Wee 'Zard

[DreadedHermie]

Needed that info about castling to make an informed ponder. Gotta run errands ATM. Move later, after reflection. And yes. I foresee harassment coming to my queen. imp:

[DreadedHermie]

Yoicks...my internet connection is intermittent.

P - QN4

[Weezard]

Yoicks...my internet connection is intermittent.

P - QN4

B - Q5.
3rd move's a charm.

W.

[DreadedHermie]

Glad this is Stoner Chess. My last move looked like part of a daring plan before. :stoned: B - QN2

[Weezard]

Glad this is Stoner Chess. My last move looked like part of a daring plan before. :stoned: B - QN2

P- KR3
The queen must flee.

Wee

[DreadedHermie]

Nice post @ 1479, btw.

The poetic outburst could probably be set to a Steely Dan type melody and stand up quite respectably.

Just started a new DWC project to test the claim that roots from separate cannabis plants, compete for space, water, and food, underground.

I'm arbitrarily assigning extra validity to that study involving reflected light from the different colored mulches. Probably, because I feel like I've seen the phenomenon in action and just 'didn't have a name to put to it.' I remember your description of vegetation along a stone wall doing particularly well, possibly because of IR radiation, and wonder if the color of the wall or other nearby objects might have contributed to what you observed.

As this relates to your experiment, I think the reflected light from contiguous plants (6 inna tub, etc.) will signal each plant that she's in a competitive environment. I'd expect the plants in groups to stretch first, and to devote less initial energy to root development because of perceived "crowding" upstairs, not below.

You could maybe mitigate this effect by keeping the 'green part' of the grouped plants as short/small as possible. Maybe light them with a wavelength that won't reflect "green" or (730nm, or whatever...)imp:

But if ya got everything evened out "on top" I'd kinda like to think roots don't mind crowding, as long as there's a good circulation of nutrients. (But a "normal" comparison won't show it, is what I been trying to say... )

[Weezard]

Nice post @ 1479, btw.

The poetic outburst could probably be set to a Steely Dan type melody and stand up quite respectably.


Thanks!
Jus' comes bubblin' up sometimes.
I try to filter out 96% of it.
The crap that does escape, just tickles the hell out of me when I stumble across it later, even hours later.
Most of the time, I don't remember writing it, and usually can not repeat it verbatum from memory when I do.

I think I might be chaneling an exceptionally funny Tuvan throat warbler.


I'm arbitrarily assigning extra validity to that study involving reflected light from the different colored mulches. Probably, because I feel like I've seen the phenomenon in action and just 'didn't have a name to put to it.' I remember your description of vegetation along a stone wall doing particularly well, possibly because of IR radiation, and wonder if the color of the wall or other nearby objects might have contributed to what you observed.

Mais oui!
Color, texture, and composition all affect what is reflected, what is absorbed, and what is re-radiated, from IR through UV.
In udder words, what da plant, she see.


As this relates to your experiment, I think the reflected light from contiguous plants (6 inna tub, etc.) will signal each plant that she's in a competitive environment. I'd expect the plants in groups to stretch first, and to devote less initial energy to root development because of perceived "crowding" upstairs, not below.

Hmmm, under sunlight, or full-spectrum, I'd agree.
But with no green, or yellow to relect, seems the li'l buggahs would be un-aware of each other above ground.
I do plan to put them in bondage to help with crowding and the competition for light.

You could maybe mitigate this effect by keeping the 'green part' of the grouped plants as short/small as possible. Maybe light them with a wavelength that won't reflect "green" or (730nm, or whatever...)imp:

Oh, didn't see this.
My point exactly. Jus red, an' blue.

But if ya got everything evened out "on top" I'd kinda like to think roots don't mind crowding, as long as there's a good circulation of nutrients. (But a "normal" comparison won't show it, is what I been trying to say... )

You make good points.
But, by now, you must be aware that I'm forced to leave "normal" comparisons to normal MeHums. yah?:tin foil hat:

What I'm tracking here is inhibitory chemicals produced by plants roots that prevent them from growing close enough to crowd each other for sunlight, and nutrients.
That is factual.

The part that I'm investigating is whether plants recognize siblings.
Are they immune to their own strain's "chemical fence" ?
Are some inhibitory compounds specifically targeted for say, climbing vines?
Are these compounds one of the the reasons that some weeds hurt yields and some do not?
(And, that the "bad" weeds/"good" weeds are plant kine, specific.)

I mean, why sleep, when I can sit up thinking 'bout dese kine t'ings?

Oh, yeah! 'syour move.

Pensive Leezard

[DreadedHermie]

Duh. Moved and forgot to document it... Q - KR4.

Didn't mean to accuse you of a dumbed-down experiment--you mentioned a bed grower and I thought you might be collaborating with somebody. Sometimes it's amusing to play things looser, in terms of experimental controls--just change a parameter and try to observe its effects--as opposed to the more formal process of formulating a hypothesis, and watching for results in a more narrow range that directly relate to your ponderings.

And not to imply that bed-growing implies a lack of anything...I've seen it used in commercial horticulture with beds so huge that the tables would support power tillers to break up the resulting root mass. It seemed to me like the plants ignored each other's roots in this environment, and that they acted as they would when grown outside (which was certainly the intent with that setup). I was just a flunky on these things, though. Jes' a trabajador, not da hefe. Many years ago. Wouldn't have known what to look for.

But my thought last night (right before I started drooling on myself) was that there might be some 'recognition' of "electrical" activity in nearby roots related to ionic exchanges. I guess this is just semantics; chemical changes are "electrical" at some level. Though maybe you're looking for a combination of effects that ultimately produces an identifiable "chemical signature."

From a Darwinian perspective, one might expect more mutual inhibition between closely related strains than between specimens that might provide an advantageous genetic diversity. But that's just of the toppa my head; you may have debunked this already.

Then there's the question of: "Is a male plant more welcome next to a female than, say, another female plant?" Maybe they got some underwater pheromone perfume or suppin? Jus' throwing some thoughts out there...:hippy:

[Weezard]

Duh. Moved and forgot to document it... Q - KR4.

Didn't mean to accuse you of a dumbed-down experiment--you mentioned a bed grower and I thought you might be collaborating with somebody.

Wouldn't mind if ya did.
Not a linear thinker, or tinker.

Sometimes it's amusing to play things looser, in terms of experimental controls--just change a parameter and try to observe its effects--as opposed to the more formal process of formulating a hypothesis, and watching for results in a more narrow range that directly relate to your ponderings.

And, of course, "Anything worth doing..."

And not to imply that bed-growing implies a lack of anything...I've seen it used in commercial horticulture with beds so huge that the tables would support power tillers to break up the resulting root mass. It seemed to me like the plants ignored each other's roots in this environment, and that they acted as they would when grown outside (which was certainly the intent with that setup). I was just a flunky on these things, though. Jes' a trabajador, not da hefe. Many years ago. Wouldn't have known what to look for.

P - QN4.
Them kids was pre-spaced and hand thinned, most likely.
I do have a small clump of seeds inna ground here.

'bout 7 seedlings inna cluster.
Lookin' like a featherduster.
Topside, dey all nice and sweet.
But inna mud, dey fight, wit' feet?

Ah dunno yet, pulled up a seat.
To see who suffers sad defeat,
an' which one be da bes' athlete.

But my thought last night (right before I started drooling on myself) was that there might be some 'recognition' of "electrical" activity in nearby roots related to ionic exchanges. I guess this is just semantics; chemical changes are "electrical" at some level. Though maybe you're looking for a combination of effects that ultimately produces an identifiable "chemical signature."

Grand idea! 6 of 1....

From a Darwinian perspective, one might expect more mutual inhibition between closely related strains than between specimens that might provide an advantageous genetic diversity. But that's just of the toppa my head; you may have debunked this already.

Had not even thought of that.
The plot thickens.

Then there's the question of: "Is a male plant more welcome next to a female than, say, another female plant?" Maybe they got some underwater pheromone perfume or suppin? Jus' throwing some thoughts out there...:hippy:

Zackary!
Pheromones, scent, ethylene, etc., above and below.
From tippy-top to stinky toe.


My space, and mind are quite limited, so I'm ju's lookin' at wroot wrestling for now.

Workin' fo' da wholly chao!

Weeze