theory of magnifying light...???

[turtle420]

Turtle I made fiber optic cable and it does have an IR coating of sorts under the buffer (outer coating) it is either Med Na or High Na or so it was called but is not sodium and gives you a crazy rash if you touch it. Very unstable and must be heated to liquify. It is cured under 600 watt flouresent bulbs the size of a permanent marker. I was going to try growing under these lights but the engineer told me they produce harmfull RF waves so I did not. not only that but the little buggers get damn hot. They are pricey aswell for a ballast setup. all glass bulbs no metal. prob need a certain ingition temp. The thing about the cable is it really does not produce light out of the sides and just really out of the ends unless reflected back thru the buffer which is made of like kevlar or nylon. The nylon is nasty shit to work with.

As far as the glass goes Lumens are decreased every layer of glass they travel through. Light waves can also be streched making a strange or unbalanced spectrum. What that means is beyond me right now, but it sounds like a groovey experiment.

One love
c

Thanks for the reply Karmaxul, I hadn't read it.

Interesting info on the little bulbs...

turtle420 Reviewed by turtle420 on 03-18-2006. theory of magnifying light...??? One day i was sitting outside smoking a bowl with a magnifying glass and something came to me. Light is released in a concentrated, brighter beam when it is passed through the glass. I wondered if a custom made glass window with the right curvature, not as convexed as the magnifying glass, could increase the power of a light bulb. This means you can concentrate light directly on your plant. It would recieve almost all the lumens that the light emits. Basically light isnt lost; the plant Rating: 5

[sheist]

BTW i forgot to mention that my plant didn't grow 4" - i was high n lying lol

[karmaxul]

You are only as good as your word. No offense

[sheist]

Yeah I kno, I slipped up.. forgot to make that post, found out when i ran into it

[MASTER BLASTER]

Thanks for the response turtle. I fully believe Zandor's paper...but still being a hard head I just wonder where he gets the numbers. He writes that paint reflects 86% of available light, and mylar reflects 96%...is this a universal constant? I sound argumentative...I'm not smart enough about any of this to be a know it all..just askin. I suppose its not even that great of a diff when you get down to it, but painting for me is so much easier and covers so well, as well as being washable and smells pretty. Thanks guys.

if you get white paint look for some with a fine metalic flake in it

[Chris Seekins]

Why would you get metalic flake in it?

A even distibution is ideal in my book

[oldsanclem]

http://www.radford.edu/~wkovarik/env.../3.solar2.html
1 watt = 1 watt ,1 lumen, etc
minus, surface, space, reflection,

[rodekyll]

http://www.radford.edu/~wkovarik/env.../3.solar2.html
1 watt = 1 watt ,1 lumen, etc
minus, surface, space, reflection,

Are you saying that in theory, one watt of power = 1 lumen?