An experiment in regards to stray light and light cycle interuption...

[Methyl3]

night-time film exposures can be shot in as little as 15 seconds (moonlight, clear night) or 20-30 minutes (just starlight) that's not a lot of light, the light at night renders few colors and contains little "usefull" light for plant growth. This perhaps explains the "effect" of night-light has on things; There are a few flowers that only bloom at night, but that is regulated by hormones, not the light directly.

Thats the whole point of this experiment. Is it an omittance of particular wavelengths or is it an intensity variable. So far no one that I have come across has been able to scientificallt explain why on perfect, bright moon lit nights, the MJ plant does not revert back to a veg state. There are some nights I can clearly see that someone is whereing a red, blue green etc shirt. If certain frequencies are omitted then what could possibly br causing this? is it frequency dependent? Is it as you hypothesized that various spectrums are omitted? Or is it that the frequencies aren't omitted, but not in adequate intensity?


The fact that it only takes a few seconds to get a light reading is why I am asking for help from various people around the world or atleast different regions in the US.

Methyl3 Reviewed by Methyl3 on 07-13-2006. An experiment in regards to stray light and light cycle interuption... I am going to be conducting a little experiment over the next few months. The basis for my experiment will be how much light is needed in order to interupt, stress and revert the flowering plants back into veg growth. The reason I am doing this is because I always see posters asking about absolute darkness and flowering. i have also seen it stated in various books that grow area MUST be kept completely dark. Is COMPLETE darkness needed or is it just another optimization factor that is Rating: 5

[4x5]

Well what I'm getting at is that the " light" present at night, is simply not sufficeint for growth, from an intensity stand point; not to mention the exact moment of 'reverting' to veg state will surely be hard to "pin-down" your study seems to require more than a simple life cycle. Here, get an electronic flash, fire it once just at 1 plant, twice at another, three times at the next, all in darkness obvoiusly. any change within 2 days would certainly rule out wavelegth (since the stress would effectively pause growth), modern electronic flashes are between 5500-7000k at upto 50k lumens (whats in my camera box) (more than enough to cause 'stress') next set of plants test with a lantern type light turn it on and leave it for a few more hours each night, that would put the margin of error at upto 3-7days, but you'd figure out how much "ambient" light causes veg. Of course these ideas can be "tailored" to your experiment. :stoned: or just leave it in veg at 18/6 and flower of 12/12 and grow bug fat buds :stoned:

[HARDDON]

I have found that even breif periods of full blown HPS / MH lighting does not retard the growth of flower.

It takes a few days, not a few moments.

[kingjustin]

Methyl, my email is [email protected].

So far my first gen. seedlings have developed with fair predictability. When it came time to shoot out a second set of leaves, however, the growth process was extremely slow. I've still got a ways to go, but I think this could be the forerunner to a very interesting plant.

[kingjustin]

I also noted that the plants that had a very irregular light cycle seem to stretch more towards the "soft white" CFL's I have instead of the cool whites.

[GrowinGreen23]

If you were to get this up and running with many people giving results, you would have to have abotu 2 groups for each par because you want to have that rule out any possible environmental factors not associated with the experiment. If two people esting the same thing come out with the same/similar result then you know only the light or time had a factor in the results

GG23

[Binzhoubum]

Seems like everyone involved in the experiment would have to be growing the same strain as well as well as using the same exact equipment---i.e., the same pots, the same ferts, the same soil, the same type of lights, etc...

The only difference can be the schedule right?

Maybe I am reading this wrong, but in order for an experiment to work you have to control ALL variables other than the one you are testing.

Sorry, if I am being redundant or this is not helpful at all... :smokin:

[Methyl3]

Seems like everyone involved in the experiment would have to be growing the same strain as well as well as using the same exact equipment---i.e., the same pots, the same ferts, the same soil, the same type of lights, etc...

The only difference can be the schedule right?

Maybe I am reading this wrong, but in order for an experiment to work you have to control ALL variables other than the one you are testing.

Sorry, if I am being redundant or this is not helpful at all... :smokin:

This is why this type of accurate experimentation will take several gens unless one has physical/legal room to have a large grow. As with conducting most studies you cannot control all things at once. Sometimes yo have to systematically eliminate certain variables and then proceed to the next step. The need for an identical/parallel study, in concertion with what I am doing, is not something that can have adequate quality control.

Having been a Research & Development chemist for several years, I have a proficient understanding of method development and experimentaion setup. Since we are diecting this towards photo interuption and floral reversion I do not feel we need to control things such as exact same pots, same water etc. I say this because we know that they are not the known stimuli for floral reversion. Keep in mind though that in the controlled enviroment that I provide these things will be constant. I just do not feel that it woould be a prerequisite if a comparable study is conducted at another time by someone else.

I think the best info outside contributors could provide would be the light sampling that I ask for. Other than that, the actual stimuli's will be provided by myself and I will ask for feedback prior to each one being conducted for constructive feedback.

PS KingJustin - I am not sure I will be able to use your data for my purposes at this time, but it could prove usefull at a later time once we have established a good set point:thumbsup: . Please send all corespondance to: [email protected] Please do not email me till you have an accumulation of info since I will be saving these and tons of little emails could prove more problematic in regards to organizing.

[Methyl3]

If you were to get this up and running with many people giving results, you would have to have abotu 2 groups for each par because you want to have that rule out any possible environmental factors not associated with the experiment. If two people esting the same thing come out with the same/similar result then you know only the light or time had a factor in the results

GG23

In order to get satellite experiements going I must first establish a hypothesis and obtain a baseline first. I do not expect for everyone to be conducting their own interuption experiments and supplying me with data....not at this juncture anyways. I will conduct experimentation and provide supporting evidence one way or the other. It will be at this time that we will have to eliminate other variables and this is where other people can do some work off of the established baseline. :thumbsup: