Hey Dog, I got my estimated time factor at 5.2 because there's a lot more 660 light than there is red incandescent, so I believe it weights the factor more.

For example, if I had one red 660 LED and 10 red incandescent bulbs, it should be a different overall time factor than if I had one red incandescent bulb and 10 660 LEDs. That's because there's a lot more of a given type of light, so it pushes the overall time factor in that direction. At least this is the assumption that I'm working with, and given what else I know about how light works, I think it's a reasonable one. Just multiplying the factors together (2x5.5) ignores how much of each type of light is present.

I run all of the lights during the PAL time: CFLs, LEDs and red incandescents. The only thing that happens on the switch from PAL to PAD is the CFLs turn off. Then on the change from PAD to SID, everything else turns off. Then on the change from SID to PAL, everything turns on, and so the cycle goes.
Mother Reviewed by Mother on . Second Martian Method attempt This thread is my second attempt at using the "Martian Method" or "Artificial Darkness" lighting technique developed by SalMayo and associates. For full disclosures and disclaimers, see my first attempt: http://boards.cannabis.com/grow-log/165934-first-attempt-24-hour-martian-method.html#post1945600 but to summarize: I didn't invent this lighting technique nor do I claim to fully understand it. I'm just testing it to see for myself what it can do. This time I'm going with one Heavy Duty Rating: 5