Growers NEED to tell the truth on this one!!

[Useful Idiot]

UI a single light source in a square box acts very differently then a bunch of them strung across the ceiling of a warehouse.
This is not my opinion and cannot be discredited by you or anyone else. I have answered your question repeatedly.
Do you understand?

Ummmmm....damn bro??

 

[Bullfrog44]

Good vibes fabvariousk, I love that you stuck to your guns. I believe I have contributed what I believe to known, and so have you. I think the OP can take what he wants from what both are saying, and apply it to his or her grow room. Nobody had any name calling and both sides were argued with conviction. Good thread, glad I could be part of it.

 

[fabvariousk]

bro.
You asked a question science has answered.
When I gave you the answer you treated it like it was a guess.
Sorry if you did not understand my explanation of the answer.

 

[ganjaments]

The inverse square rule always applies.

This is clearly false once you start reflecting photons (which just happens to be the business you are in). Otherwise, how do you explain fiber optics?

 

[Bullfrog44]

lol, we are talking about grow lights not fiber, lol. Yes light can be directed into a single source, such as a lazer.

 

[ganjaments]

lol, we are talking about grow rooms and tents so reflectorized that they are analogous enough to fiber optics for us to draw some parallels.

 

[ganjaments]

Just so we are crystal clear about what position everybody is taking, take the following scenario.

1k light in 4x4 tent at 3 different heights, 1ft, 2ft, and 3ft.... You get 1lb at 1ft.

If you think the inverse square rule applies to growing cannabis, you must agree that at 2ft you will get 4oz, and 1.8oz at 3ft.


P.S.
There are alot of growers on this board who have actually run this exact scenario, and I DARE you to find a single one who experienced ANYWHERE NEAR 88% yield decrease by raising the light from 1ft to 3ft.


edit:
please read this thread

 

[Bullfrog44]

You would also have to assume that every watt taken from the plant has an equal effect on yield. Your only constant in your experiment is not a constant at all.

 

[RetroGrow]

I have noticed that when keeping the light (s) right on top of the plants, at a distance where heat is not a factor, they suffer from light burn on the tops. So I no longer keep them so close and the plants seem happier with tops showing no light burn.

 

[budleydoright]

The Inverse Square law applies to waves, pretty much all of them. an 8 foot swell has 4X the force of a 4 ft. a 20mph wind exerts 4x the force as a 10 mph wind, all sound waves and light waves as well.

I don't however believe that the line source effect that you are describing as a bunch of sources strung together applies here. while of course there are benefits where the light waves meet, there are ineffeciencies as well.
The sources can not be placed close enough together to influence pattern control as with the line source effect.
This works well with soundwaves. If 6 speakers are aligned in a vertical pattern, with the center of the voice coil 1/2 a wavelength from the lowest frequency of that particular bandpass. the speakers will lose their omnidirectional tendencies and will project all of their energy forward in an cardiod pattern. this will increase the intensity at longer distances and negate the theory a little.

Don't see how it can apply here though.